Why did Russia lose the Crimean War?

>Ottoman Christians.

It's just a matter of perspective breh, nothing personnal

French have my thanks. Best European country.

Not really perspective, most fucked up shitholes today can trace the roots of the troubles to the British Empire.

why are the French so based?

>Russian army
>73,000 killed in battle/died of wounds
>377,000 died from non-combat causes

Even by 19th century standards that doesn't seem right. In the ACW the ratio of combat to non-combat deaths was 1:2, not upwards of 1:5. Even their opponents in the same war had ratios of 1:2 to 1:4.

>and Sardinia
spotted the Italian who wants to feel relevant

>They'd have easily defeated the Turks
Maybe by application of their tremendously superior manpower and economy, but it wouldn't be easy. When the Russians invaded Ottoman territory without anyone else helping the Turks, they were quickly repulsed because the Russian army was a mess. The Russian invasion of the Caucasus was stopped dead by Turkish-allied local guerrillas, and their invasion of the Balkans failed so hard that they lost 50,000 men and were not only chased out of the Balkans, but lost some of their own territory to the Turks. Half of the army they invaded with would be beaten in detail by Omar Pasha, and the other half (40,000 men) would lay siege to Calafat, suffer thousands of disease deaths, and promptly leave having accomplished nothing.

The ACW was fought in a developed area, with plentiful railroads, where the winter wasn't as cold as Crimea.

Both the USA and the CSA are considerably wealthier per capita than the Russian empire, which meant that the standards of care available are considerably better.

Middle east was 20% christian in 1900 retard

it's 15% now!

And the Ottomans ruled the Balkans.

Malaria and other diseases were still pretty common in America at that time. And I believe that Military medicine got a huge boost during and after the Crimean war

The Turks were just as impoverished as the Russians and fought on the same ground, and their proportion of disease deaths was lower.

As a Brit I greatly enjoy how salty people get on this board

stay mad

Of course you do

Do you also enjoy losing all your colonies and then the shitskin colonials moving to your homeland?

I'm glad they're being outbred by paki's

>their proportion of disease deaths was lower.

only because their proportion of (massive amounts of) combat deaths was higher

Crimea has a Mediterranean climate, the same as Italy or Greece. That winter was considered "harsh" only because idiot Anglos didn't realize it gets colder in winter and brought summer gear with them.

As an American who greatly sympathizes for the UK, I don't see why people get angered over Britain when it was perhaps the best country that ever happened to this world and its history.

People who hate Britain are literally subhumans.

>Americans with a Brit fetish
Literally the most cucked people on Earth.

>defending our bitch
the english are our dogs, our slaves, who are obsessed with the idea that they're somehow our equals and that we give a shit about them in some sort of "special relationship". We don't, except for people like you, and one day the English are going to learn that they mean exactly nothing to us.

It is every American's fetish to be cucks for Britain.

>actually being disrespectful to the parent nation
Someone needs a timeout.

I know absolutely nothing about it but I'm just going to assume it's yet a-fucking-nother "russia fields a huge army of completely untrained serfs who could not care less about their country because they are treated like human garbage their entire lives, barely equips them, and gives no consideration to supply and logistics" episode

This pic is incredibly smug and Brits deserve death for this.

Nobody is falling for your false flag, Nigel.

Because when you fight with osmans, brits and french 3 years, and then austria and prussia say that if you dont stop war they will join your enemy's, its fucking hard to start new military campaign instead of conversation about peace

Although, the Crimean War is not exactly something to be proud over. British forces performed pathetically in the war due to legendarily incompetent leadership. The only saving grace was the elan of the men themselves prevent them from routing when their headship failed them repeatedly.

A better question is why did the Ottomans do so relatively well in this war compared to their non-stop disasters in the rest of the 19th century and the pre-WW1 20th century?

Probably because they only had to carry a quarter of the fighting

Show one(1) battle where the Ottomans did well without heavy allied support

I love and hate the Anglo at the same time.
Most of the hate comes from the 20th century European politics admittedly, how could these pieces of shit ruin our good thing, that fat pig Churchill is the embodiment of all that is wrong with Britain today. I have no doubt that he would have done the same even if we showed you what Bongistan looks like today

The US is just as perfidious as Albion, if not more in some caes

I don't even think it's just the US or Britain. Any nation that gains superpower status dicks over other countries as a matter of course.

Like father, Like son.

World would be, without doubts, better without both.

t. butthurt frog that wants people to overlook them allying with the Ottomans too

>muh balance of power

They feared the thin red line

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_War#Danube_campaign

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Calafat
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Silistra
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Kars