Within this assessment I will be responding to the question ‘Does General Douglas Haig deserve his reputation as the “Butcher of the Somme?” as a plentiful amount of historians criticise him for why multitudinous soldiers died during the battle of the Somme, essentially due to his poor battle plan, but alongside every event there is two sides to what has happened. The battle of the Somme arose because the British and French armies were required to relive German pressure off the French town of Verdun as well as gaining an expansion of territory. Haig was chosen to plan and prepare the battle but we can tell from before the battle he was already reluctant of his own plans and predicted that there would be heavy losses: ‘The nation must be taught to bear losses. No amount of skill on the part of the higher commanders, no training however good on the part of the office and men, no superiority of arms and ammunition, however great, will enable victories to be won without the sacrifice of men’s lives. The nation must be prepared to see heavy casualty lists.’ This source was written by Haig himself and demonstrates that Haig was ‘prepared to see heavy casualty lists’ and expected the nation to feel the same showing us that he was not self-assured of his own battle plan and was already pretty sure that something would go wrong. He could have changed the battle plan to be more in the soldiers favour but instead he just continued and this led a numerous number of men to their deaths. This source was written to convince the British public that Haig was going to do everything in he could in his power to keep as many men as he could alive but he couldn’t’... ... middle of paper ... ...ig thought how he thought he was ‘chosen by God to serve his country’ even though Haig thought he was doing it for the right reason this bears to similarities with modern day terrorists as they also use the excuse that they were chosen by God to serve their country. In conclusion I believe General Douglas Haig was not a butcher but was under constant pressure from his peers, which led him to try and always keep people confidence up even if it meant lying to them. Haig was only trying to do the right thing and also trying to please God as he was a God fearing man and believed that he was chosen by God. Even though I find Haig wasn’t a butcher I do not agree with his strategies and believe that he could have found a better Battle plan to compliment the British men’s efforts. By Zeynab Hassanali Works Cited Great Battles of World War 1 (1989) by Anthony Livesey
With careful planning, co-operation, good leadership and courage, Currie managed to bring out the characteristics of a well thought out success at Vimy Ridge in April of 1917 (Dancocks, 1985). Sir Arthur Currie’s responsibility was to command the 1st Canadian Division (Hyatt, 1987). He pushed his troops to undergo rigorous training and to prepare themselves by using a life-size course, with every trench marked by tape and a flag (Dancocks, 1985). Currie designed very accurate maps and he had a small-scale plasticine model built so that it could be studied by all soldiers. Arthur Currie insisted that his division’s knowledge of the enemy was excellent (Dancocks, 1985).
tells us that Haig believed that it was the only way to win. I feel
To set the stage for this battle, we must first understand what the British were thinking at the time. The British had not ...
Throughout the battle, you see numerous Army Values and Warrior Ethos being used. “I will never leave a fallen comrade”, was the etho used the most, to reach the separated platoon. The battle also shows that not all tactical orders are effective, but as a leader you must never second guess yourself.
of that what Haig did was infact what he was supposed to do at the
At the beginning of the war, the preconceptions of each side show exactly why Britain was destined for failure. On the American team,
as facts go - Haig was that far away. The rest of the source is
Keegan chooses the three well documented campaigns of Agincourt in 1415, Waterloo in 1815, and Somme in 1916 to answer the question of his thesis: To find out how men who are faced with the threat of single-missile and multiple-missile weapons control their fears, fix their wounds, and face their death. In his words he is seeking “to catch a glimpse of the face of battle.”
As the British charge up Bunker Hill for the first time, their spirits high, they are soon slaughtered by the Continental Army’s superior position. British soldiers near death or already dead are scattered around the battle field; soon many more will soon meet the same fate. This is what the beginning of the Battle of Bunker Hill looked like. It was the Continental Army’s first major victory, even though the British had captured the battle field. Looking at the causalities the real victor of this glories battle is easily distinguished, did the British General Gage want to win that much that he sent many men to their demise to win?
"War Memories: Plotting the Battle of Britain." Letter. 9 Dec. 2003. N.p.: n.p., n.d. N. pag. BBC WW2 People's War.
O'Neill, William L. World War II: A Student Companion. New York: Oxford UP, 1999. Print.
...ng the grenade and killing the man. Without killing the enemy soldier, O’Brien could’ve been to blame for losing many of his comrades, and maybe even his own life. A true war hero wouldn’t be hesitant to take out an enemy to protect their comrades. They’d react instantly and do their job. “His jaw was in his throat, his upper lip and teeth were gone…” (Pg 118) A typical war hero would keep their focus on the war and their comrades. Even though fear runs through every man, a war hero would fight through the fear and do their task at hand to save their comrades and their own life. Hesitating on the battlefield can cost many lives, even their own life.
Warfare was in a state of transition. Older commanders and generals in the French and British militaries were very cavalry and infantry focused. These commanders believed that cavalry, infantry, and artillery would assure victory in any circumstance, against any foe. They clung to the static tactics of the bygone World War I era. World War I had been fought primarily on French soil, and the military as well as the government never wanted that to happen again, therefore they wanted to reinforce their main border against any future German. Little did they know that only twenty two years later they would be bested by German forces in a way that would shock the world. This research will be analyzing many important assumptions, oversights,...
O’Neill, William L. World War II A Student Companion. 1 ed. William H. Chafe. New York, New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
For the first page of this article I agree with Haigh completely, but the second and third pages of the article made me think about the aspects he talked about a little bit more. The beginning paragraphs of this article are extremely agreeable to me and the first point he talks about is agreeable as well. Although the rest of the