Just a thought (That’s all) What if...And one question

Question.
The British invaded with three columns, why was the larger part of the Zulu army, used to attack the column at Isandlwana, when the other two columns moving into Zululand would have been a greater threat to the Zulu Kingdom than a column that a stopped and set-up camp not far from the boarder.

What If. ???
If the number of Zulus than attacked Isandlwana had joined forces with those that attacked Pearson’s Column at Inyezane it would have been over in minutes, they could have moved on to R.D, which would have been completely overwhelmed and caught totally off guard.
R.D then could have been under the control of he Zulu’s if they had used a retaining army of a few thousand this would have cut off all supply lines to the rest of the columns.

The Zulu Army would now have had an abundance of ammunition and rifles.

The other two columns could now be prevented from joining up either by moving back towards Isandlwana and waiting until the column was on the move and attack while in the open. Either way the same issue stands they would have been beaten due to overwhelming numbers.

Now were left with Wood’s column, supply lines cut two columns wiped out + R.D
What could he have done and where would he have gone. .

Some goods points there impi. Needs some thought

Impi. There are many things that Cetshwayo could have done. But he knew only to well from white advisors, such as John Dunn, that the British had incessant resources overseas to reinforce their army in Southern Africa until it was finally victorious. Therefore, the longer the war lasted and the more extensive its geographical area, the less chance the Zulu would have of winning the war. If Cetshwayo were able to menace the borders of Natal, the British would be pressured into concluding a peace favourable to the Zulu before reinforcements could arrive. So there was no objective in wiping out the whole of the British columns. His main aim was to push the British back across the boarder.

E.H

Elizabeth. If this was the case, why were the soldiers at Isandlwana killed to a man. We here a lot about Cetshwayo suing for peace but I don't think he wanted peace at all. He always seem to use this when his armies were getting beaten. His other excuse was he knew nothing about it and indunas had taken matters into the own hands. R.D being a good example. Here's a question.
If he wanted peace so much why did he not just let the British invade Zululand without putting up any defence instead of massing his armies near the boarders where the British were crossing.

There is a story from the Boer War which may be relevant. After the british were defeated at Talana and retreated in disarray to Ladysmith a young Veld Kornet names Louis Botha said come let us race down to Durban and capture it. Then we can stop the British landing more reinforcements and they will have to sue for peace. There was an old general a friend of President Kruger who admonished him for being greedy. He said when God offers a finger never try and take the arm. He advised the Boers to lay siege to Ladysmith. This was a fatal strategic decision as it was inevitable that the British would eventually break the siege and by sheer weight of numbers defeat the Boers. Perhaps a more decisive action as advised by the young Louis Botha may have been a better choice. Perhaps the same applied to Chetswayo. Maybe a more aggressive foray into the undefended colony of Natal would have achieved more. I went for Father's day lunch at Howick Falls on Sunday and was intrigued to find part of the laager that the citizens of Howick threw up after Islandwana still preserved. SO even the Natal Midlands felt threatened after Chelmsford's failure at Islandwana.