Battle of the Somme

[Smitty-48]

The central fallacy in the villification of the Somme Offensive, is that if somehow they had not launched the Somme Offensive, everything would have been hunky dory and they wouldn't be suffering heavy casualties, but the reality was, there was no solace in the defense, the French were not attacking at Verdun, they were defending, and they suffered 162,000 killed, 175,000 wounded, so, in the end, unless you're prepared to capitulate and cede Paris to the Germans; damned if you do damnded if you don't.

Whether it was the German's at Verdun, or the British at the Somme, both sides were simply trying to win. the. war. As just sitting there and not trying to win the war, was not actually sparing anybody casualties, casualties were the price of doing business, it was simply a question of what purpose were you expending them downrange for, winning or losing? Inevitably, both sides chose winning.

[Smitty-48]

If you must blame someone for the Somme Offensive, blame Churchill, and Asquith, because it was Churchill who was threatening to resign from the Cabinet over Belgian Neutrality, and it was Asquith who was trying to prevent the Tories from taking the Parliament if Churchill crossed the floor, and it was entering the war over Belgian Neutrality, to keep Churchill in the Cabinet and so the Liberals in power, which leads straight to the Somme Offensive two years later.

Once you're in the fucking war, don't come crying about Haig later, Haig was just doing his job, trying to win the fucking war, which he had been handed from on high.

Do you blame Bill Westmoreland for Vietnam? Do you blame Tommy Franks for Iraq? You can say that they were not up to the job, but what exactly would anyone else have done? Would Bill Sherman have been able to win in Vietnam? Would George Patton have been able to win in Iraq? Not bloody likely.

Haig at least, actually won the fucking war. When Sir Arthur Currie and Sir John Monash lead the allies to victory with their Canadian and Australian Shock Troops, Haig is in command, Haig is the victorious General, who won the First World War, and a win, is a win.

The Hundred Days Offensive, led by the Canadians and Australians, commanded by Douglas Haig, is the greatest military victory in the history of the British Army, Haig is in fact right up there, with Wellington and Wolfe.

Napoleon Bonaparte may have been the greatest military genius in history, but Napoleon certainly got a whole lot of Frenchman killed, and you'll also note; he lost the fucking war, ergo; Haig > Bonaparte.

If you want to blame someone for the wars, blame the Liberal politicians, as it was Asquith who caused the Second Franco-Prussian War to escalate to a First World War, and it was Lloyd-George, Clemenceau, and Wilson, who imposed the Treaty of Versailles.

[jbird4049]

Funny, it is has become a cliche of a cliche. I think, for me, the war is an example of stupidity.

It is also two worlds, one destroyed, and the other created, by folly. One could forgive the destruction. But how does one forgive the creation? The actions done after the war led to the next war, to our current wars, in some ways. It could be seen at the time what would likely happen.