The Somme the battle for the truth

[@wolfpack4694]

My great grandfather was a stretcher bearer in the 16th Irish Division, 7th Royal Irish Fusiliers, and was wounded in both the Somme and Passchendaele, and evacuated in August 1917 never to return to his unit. Survived the war by the grace of God. I’m stunned by the aerial photos showing more craters than on the moon. I don’t know how anyone survived, frankly. If you ever have the chance, pick a unit and read it’s Battalion Diaries, which were written by the Adjutant every day and described the day’s significant events. Amazing reading of daily life.

[@knockshinnoch1950]

This is an EXCELLENT documentary. The level of research and rich detail about various key aspects and elements of the battle and the expertise of the contributors who appear on film is of the highest order. This has to be one of the best, most informative documentaries on the Great War and the Somme in particular that I've encountered anywhere. I hope that at some point you DO manage to complete the funding required to complete the project to your satisfaction with all the final polish and post production etc. My personal relationship with the First World War has changed dramatically over the past 12 months. I retired, took a DNA test and began researching my family tree. My family has always believed that we had no ancestors who fought in the 1914-1918 war. That family myth has been blown wide apart. To date I've discovered over 50 young men from across all branches of both my Maternal and Paternal lines who fought and died in the war. They were from across the British Empire, many had emigrated but returned to fight on the Western Front and every other theatre of war. It has been a humbling experience. Among them is a 2nd Lt who was awarded the Military Cross for his bravery during an action on the Somme. Another was a pipe in the Canadian Army who was awarded a Victoria Cross at the Somme for a truly incredible Boy's Own story of bravery. Both were killed in action. I discovered my father had an uncle of whom he knew nothing. He was killed 2 weeks after his 20th birthday and 2 weeks before the Armistice while fighting in Northern Russia with the Allied forces against the Red Army during the Russian Civil War.His sister, my paternal grandfather never mentioned his name. Tragically 3 brothers were killed in France and Gallipoli, wiping out an entire generation of one branch. Another poor bloke was kicked in the head by a viscous horse while on duty and invalided out of the army and the last to die on active duty succumbed to exposure while on patrol in the Egyptian desert in January 1919. There were also those who were disciplined for being found drunk on duty and subjected to field punishment No1. I felt sympathy with the 5"5" 19 year old who faced this horrific punishment twice before being killed in action 3 days after completing his 2nd humiliation. I feel a sense of pride for each and everyone of these boys and complete anger at their needless loss. No one had ever spoken of them- no photos, no stories, nothing. Discovering their stories has made me reassess the war in a far more direct and personal way. It really brings home just how far the war cut a wide swathe through an entire generation that spanned the entire globe. I never fully appreciated that before. I'm so glad I discovered this family history while both my parents, now in their late 80s, are still with us.

[@dane5896]

How my Grandfather made it through the Somme, is amazing. He served with the Irish Guards Regiment from 1915 to 1919. He was born and raised in Manorhamilton, Co. Leitrim, Ireland. 🍀

[@frankboal6975]

A hero

[@rockyroadblues100]

My Grandfather Irish Guards as well , he made it through the war and then went on to serve in the new Irish Army on the Curragh ,his brother was killed in France in 1916 They were Galway men .

[@claudiachurch4285]

We should never forget his service and bravery

[@tommcguire6472]

I had a relative who was shellshocked at paschendaele, he wss with the connaught rangers. He was from mountbellew galway

[@generalbooger9146]

Amazing anyone got through it. Wasn't Ireland at odds with England then?

[@DAH55100]

I've only just stumbled across this on YT. Despite the missing funding to complete the job to your satisfacion, this is a fine documentary with an impressive cast of commentators delivering solid, well presented content. I remember encountering you on the edge of Hawthorn crater 16+ years ago (with Ian McEwan) when this project existed solely within your fevered imagination. You are one obsessive and self-driven guy. Truly brilliant job mate!

[@mgunny05]

Love the blunt brutal honesty of some of these British gentleman who call it for what it was.

[@IndianaDel1]

A really interesting documentary. You let the subject experts speak for themselves and narrated only enough to link your various interviews. Thank you for posting this.

[@claudiachurch4285]

What a brillant doxumentary, my grandson is studying to be a historian, and he said he learned alot !

[@carausiuscaesar5672]

My great uncle Dan was killed in the Battle of the Somme.His body was not found.His name is on both the Thiepval and Ardrossan memorials.He was in a Scottish regiment.He was not a career soldier.

[@KB4QAA]

Superb film. Best explanation of the battle I've seen. Thanks!

[@GrrMeister]

My father in law was there - Alfred Collington (Royal Garrison Artillery 93rd Garrison) & was injured (lost a leg) in July 1916 - I have with my wife visited Thiepval and other battlefield sites (now accurate with modern GPS) and the site of the loss of his brother 'James Collington' was killed at Richebourg. His grave we visited and paid our respects in 2016 - regard this grave with sorry, but with honour.......

[@jackthebassman1]

This excellent film is new to me but nonetheless extremely informative. Every film adds more detail, thank you so much for posting it.

[@snapperxv]

The best documentary I have seen on this subject, for once a balanced view.

[@constantined9015]

Agree! And the sound is so clear!! I really enjoyed watching that video!!

[@claytonman31]

This is one of the best docs on the somme i've seen with great historians and interviews

[@Dullborn]

Nicely done indeed...I have a hard time getting my head around the size and scope of The Somme and have looked at every documentary I can...this one adds to my understanding immensely...and it was a treat to put faces to some of the names I see on the many books I have read..Thanks again

[@jcharlesbayliss]

Very, very good, your contributors have excellent insights.

[@TheMadGameLoveandWar]

An excellent, honest and passionate film Thanks. Exactly where my book is set, so especially interesting

[@rjglennon2219]

Very informative and sad .thank you for posting.

[@kemalmustafa2076]

Truly Excellent viewing with a world of info! Thanks very much,and may those who gave the extreme sacrifice,Those brave boys! R.I.P

[@robertcampbell9687]

All brave young men lest we forget

[@silver760]

Very good,a truly informative documentary for a change and one that isn't nonstop musical score at irritating volume the entire way thriugh!Thanks for posting!

[@medusashubby804]

You've just gotta Love Peter Hart's passion for the subject AND regarding the waste of human life👍 It comes across in his books too-top man Pete,stay safe mate☮💚🖖

[@adrianh332]

My grandfather joined the Lancashire fusiliers in 1914 while underage, he was discovered and discharged. He joined up again in 1915 in the Staffordshire yeomanry and fought in Palestine and Mesopotamia, had he stayed in his original unit he would undoubtedly have been killed in this battle and I wouldn't be here writing this.

[@ShirleyZhang-bt4dj]

Greetings from New Zealand. Those poor brave men.They went through sheer hell.They were real men.

[@colmmeade1824]

These stories are so so interesting I often wonder have I seen my grand uncle marching past he was in the Dublin fusiliers killed in 1918

[@mauriceupton1474]

Field Marshall Haigh "We are right ✅ behind you lads".....35 miles behind you.

[@fritzvold9968]

wasn't that line from a brit TV "Black Adder" episode?

[@anthonyeaton5153]

@@fritzvold9968 yes that’s where many of you get history of WW1

[@fritzvold9968]

@@anthonyeaton5153 speak 4 yourself troll.

[@alganhar1]

Please explain to me then how over 80 British Generals were killed in action during WWI then please. I will be fascinated to hear how you explain that little issue. That is just those killed in action by the way, not those who died of other causes, or who were only wounded. If they were 35 miles behind the front, they could not have been killed in action now could they?

[@anthonyeaton5153]

@@alganhar1 I suggest you acquire the book Bloody Red Tabs by Frank Davies and Graham Maddox. It tells all you need to know. Many generals left there HQ to visit the front when should have been in their HQ. Adjust your thinking and be prepared to change you mind

[@delbond5977]

Excellent documentary.

[@RealCurrencies]

The Sommes was a matter of donkeys led by absolute total scumbags. Trying to sell Haig and the Masonic officer classes' sacrifice of countless lads is beyond ridiculous and ghoulish. This was a war of the ruling classes against the common people first and foremost.

[@anthonyeaton5153]

Don’t be silly.

[@RealCurrencies]

@@anthonyeaton5153 I'm not silly, the masses and their 'professors', in this case 'history professors' are the silly ones.

[@beenaplumber8379]

I'm pleasantly surprised by this documentary. When I see the word "truth" in a video title, usually that means the video will be extremely slanted. I learned a lot, and I'm really pleased that not once did I hear anything that made me want to get out my BS detector :)

[@douglasherron7534]

Sorry, but K1 (the first Kitchener Army of 100,000) started arriving in France in May 1915 and the first major engagement of K1 divisions was the Battle of Loos (started 25 September 1915).

[@RalphBrooker-gn9iv]

Superb.

[@leedonaldson8914]

Great content, Well Done..

[@104thDIVTimberwolf]

Agreed.

[@johnsimpsonkirkpatrickhist1372]

A very interesting and informative video.

[@chestermicek]

Cliff Notes Version: after British artillery fired off a bunch of duds and a shit-load of noisy shrapnel based explosives, an army of ill-trained British & French tried to walk across an open field toward German positions guarded by deep bunkers, barbed wire, accurately aimed artillery, and deadly accurate machine guns: the attackers were slaughtered, and their generals weren't hung.

[@KB4QAA]

Meanwhile, by the end, the British had mastered artillery operations, they had developed effective combined arms attacks, the potential of tanks was recognized and the Germans had been largely bleed of reserves and began the slow decline and Verdun (and Paris) had been saved from being overrun by the Germans.

[@fritzvold9968]

@@KB4QAA r u saying that even if Paris had been abandoned, the remaining jerry troops in the field wouldn't be able to muster enough full bodied units to occupy much more than the restaurant district anyway?

[@KB4QAA]

@@fritzvold9968 No, I am not saying that. I am referring to that one of the major goals behind the Somme operation was to draw German forces away from the Verdun battle to prevent the loss of Verdun and perhaps subsequently approach to Paris. The Somme battle achieved that. goal. BTW, the secondary goal was attrition of German forces. That was largely achieved as well, as later quoted by one German officer historian.

[@fritzvold9968]

@@KB4QAA or impending slow starvation of CE armies and populations? time was running out with the strengthening British Naval blockade of the continent?

[@KB4QAA]

@@fritzvold9968 Your comments are off-topic and odd. So long.

[@mcsmash4905]

a great documentary cause its full of common sense unlike alot of others which view everything thru the prism of uncontrolled emotions ((not to mention the comment sections where everyone says how they would do it better))

[@colmmeade1824]

Couldn't agree more with your comment

[@snapattack5664]

Bethmann Hollweg proposed peace talks in December 1916. The leaders of the Entente countries however, saw this as a sign of weakness and didn't pursue the possibility. Philip Snowden, Labour said of the british reaction, that, "Europe is not governed by reason" and called the countries which wanted to continue the war "from madness befallen gamblers".

[@bolivar2153]

Yes, well... as far as proposed peace talks go, that one was definitely made with tongue in cheek, wasn't it? How about ... we go back to pre-war borders ...? Ok, we'll give back Belgium and pay for a bit of reconstruction, but ... you know, those Belgiums really don't like us, so we'll put in a Pro-German government there if that's ok? We'd also like our colonies back ... plus a bit extra, you know ... just to even things up a little? Yes, ok ... France can have their bit of land back ... but not Alsace-Lorraine, we want to keep that, so ... yea, the French have to get out of there. Oh, and we're not moving for nothing. We think we should have some reparations for all the time and effort we'll need to expend in leaving ... Did we mention, the pre-wars borders stuff is only for the west, we're gonna keep all the goodies we got in the East, we've got to keep those pesky Russians at bay you know, they might start trouble ... Guys? Guys ... hello ...?

[@TheSmithDorian]

Germany didn't want peace in 1916. In fact they never wanted peace while they thought there was a chance of victory. As is demonstrated by their actions in 1918. On 3rd March 1918 they signed the Brest-Litovsk Treaty with Russia. The war with Russia was over and they had acquired a huge chunk of new territory as part of the deal. The smart thing for Germany to do at that point was to fortify its borders and in West and withdraw back to them. With all its troops and the knowledge it had acquired on the Western Front it could have constructed almost impregnable defenses. Once it had left France and Belgium it's unlikely that there would be enough will left among the Western powers for a hugely costly invasion of Germany. Instead Germany took all its resources and all the troops that were on the Eastern Front and launched attack after attack on France all the way through until July 1918. It was an insane move. The German military leadership were still thinking it was 1914 ..and that all they had to do was get to Paris and everything would stop with Germany being declared the winner. In 1918 there were over 6 million Entente troops in France who weren't simply going to throw their hands in the air because Germany had made breakthrough - even if they had got to Paris. The Spring 1918 Offensives was Germany committing suicide. The pathetically mild terms imposed by the Treaty of Versailles on Germany and the subsequent failure to enforce them was the rest of Europe committing suicide.

[@fritzvold9968]

@@TheSmithDorian and we would not have had a WW2, and i would not have been born [sigh]

[@medusashubby804]

@@bolivar2153😄 AWESOME!

[@medusashubby804]

@@fritzvold9968 I'm glad my maternal grandmother went into the left air raid shelter in 1940 on that night in Walthamstow!If she didn't my mother wouldn't be here,me neither and my beautiful daughter! Makes you think doesn't it🤯

[@DavidSmith-bd8dd]

Mr Corrigan makes it sound easy when not in the line they where on working partys taking supplies up 2 the line out in front of the line on wiring partys so i doubt it was much fun at any time

[@bulldog1066jpd]

Massive respect to the French for giving the land that so many died fighting for to the respective countries involved in individual battles. ❤❤❤

[@elierkes700]

49:39 where is this footage from? Is it real ????

[@bolivar2153]

Yes, it's the Newfoundland Memorial, just south of Beaumont-Hamel. YOu can find out more about it here www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/remembrance/memorials/overseas/first-world-war/france/beaumonthamel

[@20x20Ghost]

why didnt they Hit the dirt!!!??? wouldve atleast had a chance

[@OwnedByBirds]

Sound quality is unfortunately uneven.

[@altinfoil592]

So, we are told that Haig was an innocent victim of the French. I find that very hard to believe. We are told that Haig wanted to attack in Flanders. It is hard to conceive of a worse place for a WW1 attack, as later events would show. Haig wanted a "war of movement". He continued to think in terms of cavalry charges being loosed in the German rear areas after breaking through the German front lines. He did not comprehend the depth of the German lines, nor their deep dugouts, or the lethal effect of well-sited machine guns and massed artillery. He and his staff were, and many remained, willfully ignorant of the conditions into which they sent their soldiers. There is a story of a member of Haig's staff coming to the Passchendael battlefield after that battle, and exclaiming to his driver "Don't tell me we sent men to fight in that!" and his driver responded "Its worse further up". British and German artillery had reduced the battlefield to a toxic, stinking pool of deep mud in which men drowned if they slipped off the duckboards. The fragile system of waterways and ditches that drained the Flanders battle area had been destroyed. In preparation for the Somme attack of July 1, 1916, the British soldiers were told that the German barbed wire would be cut by the British artillery, and that the German forces would be so devastated that the British soldiers need only walk upright across a battle field empty of German soldiers and occupy the German positions. British trench raid parties had reported back that the German wire was not cut, but the British officer corps refused to accept any information that conflicted with their preconceived notions. After the colossal disaster of the first day of the Somme attack, Haig refused to accept that the British tactics were totally misguided. He is said to have hectored his battlefield commanders to continue the suicidal attacks, saying "just one more push" would carry the battle. Under his command, the British forces persisted in the attack for 4 months, with casualties mounting for negligible gain. The British troops entered the Somme battle with a touching faith in the wisdom of their officers. A member of the Newfoundland regiment (which suffered over 90% casualties on July 1st), is said to have returned to their trench after the near-total destruction of the regiment, to ask, innocently "Was the captain pleased?" After the Somme battle, the British troops are said to have called Haig "the butcher".

[@mcsmash4905]

anyone would be called a butcher for that but what else could he do? its easy for us 100 years later to judge any of them , and blindly hating on haig doesnt do anyone any good

[@Digmen1]

Very interesting a different point of view. Its a shame about the audio quality of the guys out on the fields.

[@MikeSmith-ve2qu]

The noise must have been unreal non stop.

[@jakethomason5495]

2,500 meters??

[@rinathecat6199]

It's unimaginable to remember a time when a nation's leaders would send cadres of young people, just beginning their adult lives, into a maelstrom of its own creation. Oh wait.

[@fritzvold9968]

well, you can't blame FDR for that one; or can you?

[@ktex4873]

It is always the bankers. Always. #SmedleyButler

[@kl1970]

Russian hoardes will never be history

[@chrishulk1]

David Lloyd George suspended QC on the delivery of the shells to speed up production. Nice! Does it fly? No but....... Excellent strategy Sir! Treason in my book. 21:06 So that's why Haig was so far away. I often wondered why he was so far away from the action.

[@fritzvold9968]

it was the first modern industrial killing of combatants, and the lines of communication were based on wired telephone lines, which all had to be laid to a single permanent HQ location; is why war historian John Keegan coined "Chateau Battle Command"

[@anthonyeaton5153]

What is the point of having his HQ near the front line. Generals at all levels should be clear if the actions. Their job Is to direct the battle.

[@squeeth2895]

NB the French corps south of the British was XX Corps not XXX Corps.

[@andyc3088]

the guy saying that if they found a wounded man buried and was alive they would apply CPR, it wasn't until the 1950s that CPR became popular as it is now. The other guy saying that the British Tommie had only to stay in the first line for only 4 days and then they were withdrawn that was in an ideal situation and there are many accounts where the Tommie stay in the trench longer.

[@davidsgoliath1628]

Andy C 😸

[@JohnMoore-qv4vn]

What he said was "artificial respiration" which was most assuredly around in 1916.

[@alganhar1]

The times when the soldiers spent longer were generally during major operations by either side. They were,however, the exceptionand not the rule

[@anthonyeaton5153]

That is correct to a degree. Troops stated longer If an attack was expected being planned. A Welsh battalion was out of the trenches for the whole of January 1917

[@shawnyt6368]

No Hollywood movies made about this...one of most insane battles in history. Probably due to the fact the Americans were not in the war effort yet. The Canadians were (as under the British umbrella). Any Americans that joined the British voluntarily had to cross the boarder by train into Canada, and join there.

[@fritzvold9968]

probably due to the fact that more, or less, there was no hollywood yet.

[@polarblairhvac9749]

the audio tech for this film should never get work again too loud then too quiet again and again

[@fritzvold9968]

could be post editing that did it in.

[@kevinsargeant9171]

Company Sergeant Major Ernest Sargeant DCM, severely wounded by a Dum Dum bullet which removed one lung and nicked the other on September 16th near Delville Wood . Remembered seeing a tank then awoke in England- died in 1965

[@g.o.g.survivalgaming]

Imagine the NCO screams over the top and out your stumble into the German machine gun fire friends laying and screaming all this for a mere 100m gain those men and “boys” where true hero’s and it’s sad they don’t get the recognition that a lot of other veterans get. 10th mountain division - climb to glory

[@stevensamuels4041]

For me the Germany where the Heros, 1,5 Million men defended against 3 Million allies

[@randyhavard6084]

Look at David Fletcher, he's great on the Tank Museum's channel

[@ShaunWilliams-i3o]

Im currently visiting my dads great grandfathers grave in thiepval and its unbelievably sombre. The feeling weve all had here has been is something that will last with me for forever . His great grandfather and his 4 brother's all sent to their deaths. 2 of them leaning pregnant wives that turned out they'd never see or hold their first born child. Unthinkable

[@coalcrackercletus988]

I'll never understand how they thought running directly into machine gun fire was a good idea, after the first slaughter there should have been a major change in game plans/strategy

[@mcsmash4905]

it was the only way to do it , the race to the sea was more or less the last attempt before the battles in 1917-18 ,

[@ivornorman9703]

Lions led by donkeys.

[@zettle2345]

at 1:39 the guy says the British did not want a battle at the Somme> 30 seconds earlier, the show had explained that an attack at the Somme, was already planned, for later that same year... the German attack at Verdun, drew all the French reinforcements to curb that attack, and the British, were asked to move the planned attack up in date to relieve the pressure on the French. In less than 2 minutes of the show, the "experts" are already clouding the Truth, with BS and conjecture. not sorry I won't be watching this til it's conclusion.

[@SpectreProductions1]

The British wanted to fight in Flanders (Belgium) .Being the junior partner in a alliance they had to fight where the French wanted .The battle was fought at the point where French and British fronts joined. Ypres in Belgium was considerably closer to the Channel Ports and the British line of supply so that's where Haig wanted to fight ,but by 1915 the British Government was being pressured by France to fight on the Somme

[@robertanthony8597]

Misleading!! The battlefield guide who, at 23:00, describes the commander of the Welsh Division, Major-General Ivor Philipps, as an "amateur soldier" and "politician" is misleading. He fails to say that Philipps was originally a soldier, serving for twenty years with distinction in Burma, India and China. Like other older commanders he was recalled to service in 1914.The disasterous attack on Mametz Wood was based not on Philipps' orders but the XV Corps commander, General Henry Horne. For a more balanced view see the entry on Philipps in the Dictionary of Welsh Biography at yba.llgc.org.uk/en/s8-PHIL-IVO-1861.html.

[@MSS-g7f]

+macsporan That's very debatable. Plumer's victory at Messines in 1917 and Byng's at Vimy put paid to your assertion. 3rd Ypres failed due to weather. The 100 days offensive in 1918 was even more dangerous than the Somme for the squaddie. The war is characterised by three phases: Aug to Nov 1914 = War of Movement; Dec 14 to Mar 18 = Stalemate; Mar 18 to Nov 18 Return to Movement. During the movement phases casualties were double that of the stalemate phase i.e. France lost 23% of her casualties in Aug-Nov 1914 for the whole war. During the whole of the 1917 year it sustained 12%. France lost 22% in 1918. Monash was a Brigadier in 1915 at Gallipoli and made as many mistakes as his contemporary leaders, like a lot of them he learned quickly. You also need to put Monash into the context of being sub-ordinate to Rawlinson and him to Haig in 1918, none of Monash's plans could have been executed without the agreement and support of his superior officers. He is a very admirable figure as he was a) Prussian-Jewish and b) not a professional soldier yet led the Australian Corps at the end of 1918. However, like a lot of Australian myths i.e. only the Anzacs fought hard at Gallipoli, the Monash myth has been building as the Austrailians search for heroes. During the Battle of Amiens the allies lost 66,000 men, the Germans had 25,000 casualties and up to 50,000 taken prisoner (more to do with post-Kaiserschlacht exhaustion). Accounts and statistics vary but either way the butchers bill was enormous even for the all-arms campaigning of late 1918.

[@corneliusprentjie-maker6715]

What abattle. and waste of life. why do we do this?? *Still WHAT a BATTLE? **THANKS FOR THE INFO WELL DONE!

[@diannegooding8733]

At long last. What really happened at the Somme. The fact that the British were building up for an offensive in Flanders when Joffre demanded the Somme so that Hague had to secretly move everything South, more quickly than he wanted too and fight the Somme before he was ready is not given enough prominence nor Hindenburg’s remark after the battle that he knew that Germany could not win the war after the performance of the British at the Somme!

[@diannegooding8733]

Bloody predictive text can’t spell Haig!😊

[@cruzbohy]

Blaming the French for their own commander's blunders

[@Nounismisation]

Very interesting docu. Thanks. But why is everyone saying 'Briddish'?

[@medusashubby804]

Cus that's the way most yanks pronounce it I guess

[@medusashubby804]

37:36;CUT! Right get the cameraman&soundman in..... Ready? and...ACTION!

[@johnreid820]

The bloodiest day in British military history. Yes, but the first day of the battle of Loos (Sept 25, 1915) was the worst day in terms of casualties per Division. Such was the slaughter.

[@anthonyeaton5153]

The Battle if Arras was worse in deaths and wounded than Somme in the terms of the time span

[@kevinsargeant9171]

Another Haigh triumph ......

[@playonkorg]

More then 70.000 on one day......o how proud we are that we think we can decide on someone else's life....and we raise the flag

[@WarblesOnALot]

G'day, Um, at 11 minutes in, no...; Cecil Lewis wasn't flying a *BIPLANE* over the Somme on 1 July 1916, he was in a French-built Morane Parasol Monolane.... At 11:21 you can see the "View from the Cockpit", looking out of a much later (1930s) variation of Morane Parasol's Cockpit, so the Scriptwriter actually outperformed the Talking Head Historian (!) ; they're Tractor-Engined with a single Wing, and the Fuselage hangs under it on a complex of Struts..., affording a superb view of what's underneath, and in 1916 the RFC had a couple of Squadrons worth of them, because the BE-2c was just so bloody awful by comparison, "not at all a fit contrivance, in which to go forth to pursue the King's Enemies....", as they said at the time. Have a good one, ;-p Ciao !

[@WarblesOnALot]

Ahoy ! Regarding the Colophon.... (Latin, for "Final Stroke"...). In 1918, it was not "The British Army" which perfected the "Co-Ordinated Combined-Arms Attack" (ie, Infantry, Artillery, Tanks, Tactical Airpower, Strategic "Behind The Lines Night Bombing", & Aerial Resupply of Spearhead-Advances Via Parachute-Drops....) ; it was the Australian (Civil Engineer, Reserve-Corps) General Monash, who Commanded every British Breakthrough Attack, in 1918, even after 1 of 3 AIF Divisions (All-Volunteers, Oz refused 2 Conscription Referendums, the AIF were the WW-1 version of the Waffen SS - no Conscripts permitted) had been broken up to supply reinforcements to the surviving 2 Divisions which finally came out of the Line in late October, 3 weeks before the Armistice. And, all that despite Monash being a Jew, as well as a Reservist ; back when the British Empire was constitutionally Anti-Semitic (!). Get it *RIGHT* ye Pommie Bastewardz ! ;-p Ciao

[@WarblesOnALot]

Ahoy ! Regarding the Colophon.... (Latin, for "Final Stroke"...). In 1918, it was not "The British Army" which perfected the "Co-Ordinated Combined-Arms Attack" (ie, Infantry, Artillery, Tanks, Tactical Airpower, Strategic "Behind The Lines Night Bombing", & Aerial Resupply of Spearhead-Advances Via Parachute-Drops....) ; it was the Australian (Civil Engineer, Reserve-Corps) General Monash, who Commanded every British Breakthrough Attack, in 1918, even after 1 of 3 AIF Divisions (All-Volunteers, Oz refused 2 Conscription Referendums, the AIF were the WW-1 version of the Waffen SS - no Conscripts permitted) had been broken up to supply reinforcements to the surviving 2 Divisions which finally came out of the Line in late October, 3 weeks before the Armistice. And, all that despite Monash being a Jew, as well as a Reservist ; back when the British Empire was constitutionally Anti-Semitic (!). Get it *RIGHT* ye Pommie Bastewardz ! ;-p Ciao

[@Arcsecant]

War of attrition... Never join a war.

[@coolbreeze2.0-mortemadfasc13]

Blame the French? Dubious.

[@peterslinger3795]

Nobody blames the French. A fkin family war was the absolute problem

[@dane5896]

Wow, 20 to 30 percent killed by friendly fire. 😥🙏

[@RalphBrooker-gn9iv]

Some fine specialists and historians reporting here. You even here frustration and anger at British generalship. A colossal tragedy and folly.

[@82dorrin]

Nice to see a documentary about the Somme that doesn't stop after day one. It went on for months, and in the end was a lot worse for the Germans than for the British. By some estimates they ended up losing more men.

[@AP-nd2yf]

54:55 the young soldier - no idea - not listening to those, who were there ... yes - those were donkey leaders and no - the Germans did not get beaten in the field as he claimed by the British ... it was the French, the Canadians, the Australians etc. combined with the US economic might ...

[@1proplover]

The summing up at the end of this documentary glosses over the crippling losses and repeated wholesale slaughter that went on here. Yes the mistakes were made again and again but ALL under the gaze of Haig. Saying that the British Army learnt is wrong - the battles in 1917 and 1918 around Ypres in particular showed the same lack of understanding and conditions which the men were told to fight in. Again all under the gaze of Haig. General Plumber I believe is one of the very few who comes out with any credit adopting the creeping barrage, bite sized objectives which the troops could then actually secure along with carefully briefing and planning. They were undoubtedly Lions led by Donkeys.

[@stephenp448]

Careful not to over-generalize though. In April 1917, the Canadian Corps took Vimy Ridge in 3 days, using the creeping barrage, revolutionary counter-barrage techniques and careful coordination between infantry, artillery and even airborne observers. The battle was planned over a few months and incorporated the latest tactics and lessons learned by French and British units. The Canadians also succeeded in capturing Hill 70 that August, and Passchendaele Ridge in November. Australian commanders are similarly noted for using revolutionary tactics in the 1917-18 time period. Both nations were, or course, under the umbrella of the British Army.

[@chrisbailey7820]

Sound keeps dropping out.... Brilliant otherwise thank you

[@anthonyeaton5153]

Read Corrigans book Mud Blood and Poppycock. Brilliant.

[@eddy671]

The British army carried out an attack that was like a mass suicide

[@codywinkle3621]

Okay “your gonna need it” is the dumbest thing… how about just bringing all that “needed” stuff over after you have captured the lines….

[@JustMe00257]

Pretty clear that at this stage of the war, too many factors piled up against the offensive troops for them to have any chance of genuine success. Not to mention that everyone was still learning how to wage this modern war and combine arms. 1918 would bring the adequate command and control, tactics and material.

[@alganhar1]

I would disagree with command and control, that was not really solved until the advent of radios small enough to be carried either in the vehicles or on the backs of attacking troops in the interwar years. Communicating with attacking troops was one of the major problems in WWI that was not adequately solved, the second one being a viable replacementfor the Cavalry. Again, that was solved in the interwar years with furtherdevelopmentleadingto faster and more reliable tanks. That being said, you were largely correct. The militaries of 1914 - 1918 essentially had to write the book on modern combined arms warfare from scratch, something that all too many people these days do not comprehend.

[@floppybollox3]

More revisionist propaganda by the sounds of it. Please watch 'The Somme -Lions led by Donkeys' (in the right-hand column) and hear the actual veterans talk about this battle, no one has a better understanding of this fight than them, a completely different story and not single word of praise for Haig. Nuff said!

[@squeeth2895]

Read more, particularly German generals and historians about the cost of the battle to the Germans. A worm's eye view is only one aspect of history. German Strategy and the Path to Verdun: Erich von Falkenhayn and the Development of Attrition, 1870-1916 (2008) Robert T. Foley Haig's Enemy: Crown Prince Rupprecht and Germany's War on the Western Front, (2018) Jonathan Boff

[@squeeth2895]

@Winning Grinn Really? What about the 250,000 ex-soldiers who lined the route to his funeral?

[@KKTR3]

floppybollox3 if you were in the twin towers did you see the whole picture or just the burning floors. Maybe the truth is in between the one and the other. But you can never get away from the casualty in spending blood.

[@bolivar2153]

@Randian Winn How would you go about getting into contact with the enemy without crossing the ground between the two front lines?

[@fritzvold9968]

green combatants tend to have a much loftier view of why they fight at the beginning, but then after a whiff of combat, or more than a sniff, their perspective becomes more limited, and individuals' personal motives and instincts come to the fore, tending to result in a "re-arranging" of priorities? If you have a sampling of interviews from ALL the soldiers who survived, not just the english speaking ones, my guess that the general consensus would be something like: next time, try to choose, with care, what war you are to volunteer for. (i.e. "fools rush in, where wise men fear to tread?")

[@jasonnicholasschwarz7788]

German cemeteries look so unloved and forgotten. Somehow, those guys died twice, once on the battlefield, and then a second time, in the memory of their people. WW1 in Germany practically doesn't exist. Armistice Day 11/11 coincides with the beginning of the carnival season in Germany, wich is allover the media that day every year, no mention of the war though. Very sad.

[@shirleymental4189]

Ah yes, yet another act of strategic genius from Churchill. The man was a duffer and consistent failure. He got lucky in WW2 and we didn't loose, in spite of him not because of him. I'm lost as to this myth of greatness that surrounds him.

[@neddyladdy]

What part of this required you to battle to find the "tuth"

[@generalbooger9146]

Sounds cruel........ but it was a great thing people finally saw the light when it came to General Headquarters, Generals and the disregard for their own guys.

[@mcsmash4905]

its not ˝˝disregard˝ the further up you go the less detailed the picture of the battlefield is , we cant have pearl clutchers leading armies or getting all flowery cause some guy somewhere died , its war people die , high command doesnt give orders for platoons as that one guy said if im not mistaken

[@generalbooger9146]

​@@mcsmash4905 A. I'm talking about Civilians. The Public. B. HQ has the best overall picture of the situation. It's their job. C. Sure people die in War. That manner is another thing. Like the Pal's Etc etc on July 1st..... That was a horrid useless waste of great men.

[@disoriented1]

WW1 is to the British as our Civil War was to we USAers..a painful bloodletting...we lost approximately the same percentage of our population in our Civil War as did the British in World War 1..

[@nigeh5326]

disoriented1 and we Brits lost an even higher proportion of our population in the Civil War than we did in WW1

[@alganhar1]

Erm, no. Our real blood letting was the English Civil War of 1642 - 1651. Of all the wars in British history that one killed a greater proportion of the British population than any other. An estimated 4% of the population ofEngland and Wales died in the English Civil war, compared to 2.21% in WWI

[@medusashubby804]

But let's not forget fellas that in a Civil War your countries casualties are always gonna be high cus it's a CIVIL War(population of 1 country fighting against themselves).A moot point for relating casualties in a multinational WORLD war. ☮💚🖖

[@bp2352]

French Military: We have a plan!!! Everyone else: Yeah so,go sit down and smoke cigarettes!

[@anthonyeaton5153]

The French fought gallantly. It was how they were treated that sapped their morale left in trenches for weeks on end rarely paid or given leave food was bad and the officers ignored them. Be a bit more fair.

[@SossarHatarSverige]

Funny to hear that arrogant youngster talk about defeating The German Army as if the English did it alone. What about USA, France, Belgium, Romania and Russia + colonials, heck even the Portuguese sent troops to the Western Front..exactly. Truth is Germany had the greatest army twice the last century..

[@82dorrin]

"Truth is Germany had the greatest army twice the last century.." And they lost both times. Having the greatest army isn't everything.

[@davidmbeckmann]

Onyx1916 But having the Americans in your pocket is and it pulled them out twice.

[@arrow-lo7jf]

Well in a way they did ! With out Australia and Canada and the other commonwealth Countries and of course France they never would have, as for us ( The USA ) Sorry to burst your bubble but we did not do shit, we fought for 3 months and 4 battles, thats it. To claim we won that war is nonsense, in time we would have made a huge difference, but we will never know that, Plus Pershing was a moron, he was to worried a bout keeping Americans fighting together then winning the war. We would have been better off if we fought with the Canucks, The reason i say this is we fought in 1918 like the Brits, Canucks and Aussies fought in 1914, we were a mess and could have used the other armies experience to keep down our dead which showed we were in diapers still compared to other armies, we were doing frontal attacks when all the other armies already learned that lesson as you can see in this video, why you do not do frontal attacks, at least not in day light. The Canadians had a great record during that war, never lost a battle after the Somme, spear headed every major attack for the British and French, no other army can claim that. So thats why i say we should have fought with the Canadians ! and guess what they are right next door lol and the fact a lot of Americans served in the Canadian Corp any way. and do not get all up tight a bout my comment, it is true, and any American who has did his home work on our contrIbution to WW1 will agree, we just showed up to late to catch on ! Cheers

[@aarontataryn3623]

Thanks for the recognition. Vimy Ridge was the crucible of our nation. The Great War was our finest hour.

[@bnipmnaa]

The americans didn't see combat until *mid-1918*. They didn't 'pull out' anything.

[@82dorrin]

Von Falkenhayn's unyielding defense strategy: If the Germans lost any ground, they were to immediately counter attack and retake it. That ended up about how you'd expect in hindsight. Tens of thousands pf needlessly dead German soldiers, who could have withdrawn to better defensive positions.

[@stevensamuels4041]

Well IT was 3 Million allies agianst , 1,5 Millionen germans ( also undersuply and trops where needed in romania campaign.

[@astolatpere11]

Never let the French make decisions for you. That's my takeaway.

[@medusashubby804]

Never let ANYONE make decisions for you😉

[@northernlight8857]

@@medusashubby804 Is that even possible unless you live at an uninhabited island?

[@juliusraben3526]

Belgium being a british clan state???? First time i hear that (1:35)

[@johanjanssens4530]

"Client State", that man is insulting Belgium ! Thanks to Belgium and the flooding of the Ijzer river, the British would have lost many more "men" !

[@medusashubby804]

Clan state?!?Just a new(wrong) way of looming at it.

[@inthelandwhere1]

Client state

[@Floridad25]

The hell did you do to the sound?

[@kemalmustafa2076]

Wonder how many of these brave boys just got through the Galipolli Disaster,should say The Churchill Disaster rather,only to be killed or mamed in this one? sadly wars will always be,Never in the history of this world was there ever a time when the entire world was at peace, might have been close maybe at one point,but africa was probably acting up with the Zulu"s,which reminds me, Where were the french foreign Legion during all this? maybe they werent formed yet, Another Story,Another Time.

[@celticlofts]

The poor quality of the sound ruins it.. sorry.

[@garysawyer6958]

Wet about the aussies

[@generalbooger9146]

That German flag is handsome.

[@bernardfinucane2061]

It seems popular for British historians to blame the French for Haig's many mistakes at this battle. There was never going to be a big breakthrough anywhere with the tactics the British chose there.

[@mcsmash4905]

yes because the so called ˝˝blame˝˝ doesnt solely rest on the british

[@gregdorl9957]

Isn't amazing the poms always defend their officers.. Haig name THE BUTCHER was well deserved.. Loyd George was right what he said about him..500 casualties was a pin prick for Haig.. the man was a lunatic 😡😡

[@AndersGetherSoerensen]

The British learned something. And thought so they knew everything. But they did not develop their knowledge and therefore they were beaten at the beginning of the 2nd WW. In fact, they were losing. It was the Germans' lack of, or rather changed, strategy that made them have time to reorganize. + help from the USA.

[@alganhar1]

Except you are wrong. Infantry and Artillery tactics in the British Army continued to evolve throughout the war, and even afterwards. By the end of 1916 the British Platoon had become what was known as the Diamond. A Gun section with a single lewis gun, a hand grenade section, a rifle grenade section and a rifle section. By 1918 that had furtherc hanged and diversified, more Lewis guns being added to increase firepower and so on. The British and French *held* the Spring Offensives.Sure, they lost ground, but the Germans captured nothing that was of strategic importance, the British and French Armies remained intact, and the Germans suffered a million casualties they *could not replace*. As for helpfrom the USA, US Units did not start entering the line in significant numbers until June 1918. As for the British beaing beaten at the start of WWII, you know how big the BEF was in 1940? Around 350,000 men. France had over3.5 MILLION in the field. The British and mobile French armies fighting in belgium in 1940 actually gave a good account of themselves. The breakthrough came around Sedan which was a LONG way from the British sector. The German Army Group that poured through that gap cut the mobile armies in Belgium off from the rest of the French Army. The result was that the British and French in Belgium had literally no choice BUT to fall back on the Channel Ports.It was either that or be surrounded and defeated in detail. WHat lost the Battle of France was the utterly atrocious communications from the French High Command who in the days of Radios relied on runners togive orders to their formations because they were afraid of signal intercepts. The result was that it oftentook over 24 hours for an order to reach a French or British unit. You know what happens if it takes you 24 hours to relay an order to a unit fighting an enemy moving as quickly as the German Army did in 1940? You lose the battle....

[@medusashubby804]

@@alganhar1 Well you certainly shut that Anglophobe up m8!😄😊👍

[@frederickanderson1860]

History is a matter of looking into another age and culture that is beyond our own cultural concepts. Historians are never unbiased, when it comes to their sources, the fog of war is never foreseen, despite all the planning and tactics and strategy. The late general Pershing made a turn around like foch about the Versailles treaty, he said the allies should have beaten the German army on the field to the gates of Berlin. That alone made way for the myth of the stab intne back lie for the war of revenge .

[@arrow-lo7jf]

They talked a bout every commonwealth Country but the one who did the most they forgot ! Make it easy for you, they never lost a single battle after the Somme, they spear headed every major attack for the British and French, if you do not know who i am talking a bout then you have no clue a bout WW1.... best General too !

[@joshmarks3954]

The mentioned the Aussies and Canadians did you even watch it?

[@Baskerville22]

It's the height of self-deluded stupidity and ignorance to argue that 57,000 casualties on one day for no territory gain is good generalship, because the lesser losses suffered by the enemy hurt him worse in the long run. Good generalship seeks to hurt the enemy with least damage to your own side. Haig was utterly stupid in his views that the machine gun was over-rated; that the cavalry could provide the break-through and in his complete irresponsibility in sending in attack after attack when he knew that the enemy wire was largely intact. The colonial generals, Monash and Currie were the most able and certainly most careful about the lives of the soldiers under them. Enough of the recent push to paint Haig and his brutal, brainless sort as great captains simply because the Allies ended up winning the war.

[@MSS-g7f]

+Baskerville22 If you read Gordon Corrigans book Mud, Blood and Poppycock you'll see references to the British in the Battle of Normandy in 1944 being even more devastating per capita of participants than the Somme. The Australian Corps suffered 65% casualties - the highest of any Corps unit in WW1, most of those (181,000) coming under Monash's watch in the 100 days offensive. Monash despite his assertions was NOT careful about his casualties. The myth that he and Currie were "better" commanders is not borne out by casualty numbers despite having access to overwhelming superiority in artillery, aircraft, machine guns and tanks against an overextended enemy lacking resources and morale.

[@Baskerville22]

Fin Corrigan The 65% casualties in the Australian forces has much to do with its continuous use by British commanders as front-line attacking troops (what % of British troops were never in the front lines?). The other point that needs to be made is this, and i'd think if you were really interested in objective military history, i'd not have to make it. Haig wasted hundreds of thousands of lives to no purpose. Monash's Australians & Currie's Canadians were used to win battles; win huge territory gains, and finally, break the will of the Germans to fight on. Another thing - Australia had a unique method of recording "casualties" in WW1. If soldier AB was wounded in 1915, then again in 1916 - that was recorded as 2 casualties. If he was killed in 1917, then he accounted for 3 "casualties". Theoretically, 150% "casualties" was possible....so your argument falls down completely. The Death figure is another thing....and the high level of those has more to do with the role the AIF played in winning the War rather than the incompetence or indifference of Monash.

[@Baskerville22]

***** I didn't call Monash "incompetent" or "indifferent". I meant that Monash wasn't incompetent or indifferent to casualties, but that the high level of casualties was due to the overuse of the Australian divisions in attacking roles. I must also state that you are wrong about most Australian troops having been born in the UK. Completely wrong. I don't know the figures but i'd say "very few". After all, the average age was around 21. Are you saying that most of the 300,000 Australian troops had immigrated from the UK to Australia in the 21 years prior to WW1?

[@MSS-g7f]

Baskerville22 You Ask: What % of British troops were never in the front lines?). Professor Richard Holmes estimated it at 20% compared to 80% in WW2. A division in 1914 to early 1918 was 12 infantry battalions of 1,000 men (subsequently reduced to 9 battalions in early '18), add to that the divisional artillery (20 to 30 batteries of various calibre of field guns and howitzers) Machine Gun Sections, Trench Mortars, a Pioneer Battalion, a RAMC detachment. All of these would see front line action or be involved in artillery duels - technically front line. A total division's strength was 18,000 so the numbers stack up. You State: Another thing - Australia had a unique method of recording "casualties" in WW1. If soldier AB was wounded in 1915, then again in 1916 - that was recorded as 2 casualties. If he was killed in 1917, then he accounted for 3 "casualties". All British and Empire forces recorded casualties on the same basis. For example the 16th Irish division sustained 28,000 casualties between March 1916 and April 1918 i.e. that's 200% of front line troops. The 36th Ulster Division had similar attrition rates. The Germans differed as their criteria for a casualty was not those treated at a Casualty Clearing Station but incapacitation. The British used the dressing station criterion. Haig had no choice in July 1916 - under pressure from both Joffre (the French were bleeding white at Verdun), the political will at home was always looking for a quick victory - aren't they always? Haig wanted to attack at the end of August but was hounded by Joffre and Lloyd George etc to attack. One of the principal reasons why up to 1/3 of the shells fired by the British on the Somme were duds was that Lloyd George scrapped quality control as minister of armaments in order to give the impression that he had improved supply. It is pertinent to note that after Flers-Courcelette in September 1916 where tanks were used for the first time - about 30 actually fighting, Haig immediately ordered 1,000 of them. Haig had 1,350 guns of various calibre (3/4 were 18 pounders firing shrapnel) on a 15 mile front. By Messines in 1917 Plumer had 4,000 guns on a 9 mile front - funnily enough the outcomes differ considerably, another example of a learning organisation. Britain was the junior partner in 1916, the French suffered 23% of their total casualties of the war in 1914 - 4 months of fighting - that was out of total wartime casualties of 4.3Million, a million men in 1914 alone. There is no way Haig could withdraw after 1st July's calamity, what was he supposed to do? Run away and apologise to the French for not doing their bit? Strategically it was not an option. On the other hand the tactical necessity in WW1 was always to attack on a broad front. Why? Because on a narrow front you get decimated by enfilading fire i.e. shot at on 3 sides as your salient pushes forward. 1914-18 was always a defenders war, the technology enabled stout defence. By November 1918 the British had 4,000,000 men in the field, the Anzacs had 5 divisions or less than 80,000 men, the Canadians had 4 divisions. Are you seriously suggesting that this 4% of Britain's total fighting strength had such a devastating impact? And that's not accounting for the 1.5M Americans and 4M French on the Western Front in 1918. A battalion had 2 machine guns in 1914 by November 1918 it had between 26 and 30. The British went to war with less than 200 aircraft, by 1918 it was 22,000. If anything the French showed the way: in 1914 artillery accounted for less than 10% of French deployed personnel, by the 100 last days it accounted for 45% of French personnel (source Maj. Gordon Corrigan - no relation). WW1 was essentially a gunners war - 60% of all casualties caused by shells. It must be asked in the end why didn't Lloyd George replace Haig at the end of 1917 i.e. 3rd Ypres? Haig was the best they had. As an example, a battalion on the Western Front would have no individual soldier in the firing line for more than 4 days a month (except for Kaiserschlacht) - this was at Haig's direction. The French mutinied in 1917 at Chemin Des Dames as Nivelle (Joffres replacement) didn't rotate his men, interestingly, Petain did rotate at Verdun. The differing outcomes of each battle are telling. It is also pertinent to note that Lloyd George wanted Haig to report to Nivelle but Haig resisted and won the argument - Nivelle was sacked after Chemin Des Dames.. Yes, Australia and Canada played their part, but they were essentially a tiny cog in an enormous British Empire organisation which was itself a cog in the overall Allied effort, when you include Italian, Japanese, Russian,etc - an Empire organisation that Haig led. They're the strategic, historical facts and no amount of bullshit about how marvellous the CEF and ANZACs were.can alter that.

[@MSS-g7f]

Baskerville22 Anyway if Monash was that sensitive to ANZAC casualties why didn't he resign? Because the imperative is to WIN THE WAR as quickly as possible. I suggest you read Von Clauswitz's "Vom Krieg".

[@altinfoil592]

WW1 is remarkable for the ignorance, incompetence, and even buffoonery of the officer class and politicians. 1916 is notable for France losing control of the mighty Verdun fort complex from simple neglect to man it, maintain it, and enforce reasonable standards of vigilance by those tasked with protecting it. The German forces found it ridiculously easy to take many forts. Once the German attack advanced, the French were forced to devote huge resources of men and materiel to trying to retrieve the situation. French casualties were enormous, and the continued incompetence of their General Staff led the French armies to revolt the following year. 1916 is also infamous for the amazing stupidity and wastage of men by the British in the muddy Somme battlefield, where failed attack was followed by failed attack using the same futile tactics, again and again, until the campaign that kicked off on July 1, 1916, was finally called off in mid-November. For his part, Haig, in my opinion, should go down in history as a strutting buffoon whose main activity seemed to have been to hector his subordinates into continuing silly attacks by lecturing them on "pluck and persistence" being all that was necessary for success. Hundreds of thousands of willing soldiers lost their lives due to the ignorance, ill-preparedness, and wilful blindness of the British High Command, which was more often than not completely clueless about the state of the ground over which they were ordering attacks (Somme, Passchaendale, etc.), and refused as a matter of course to listen to any intelligence or information that came from lower ranks. It was not until some more junior officers on the British General Staff started a more scientific, evidence-based approach to attacks and to determining what tactics led to success that some successful attacks like that of the Canadians on Vimy Ridge (April, 1917) were possible. The creeping barrage, coordination of infantry with artillery, pinpointing the locations of enemy strongpoints and artillery, effective counterbattery fire, spotting aircraft communications to ground command via radio, and the use of tunnels for sheltering attacking troops and giving them ready access to front lines, all were necessary for the success of ground attacks, and almost all of these were lacking from the Allied tactics in 1916. The French and British had previously attacked Vimy Ridge on numerous occasions, suffering some 150,000 casualties using the earlier blunt-force approach of massed infantry attacks. The events at Beaumont Hamel should go down in history as the shameful, unmitigated disaster that it certainly was. The officers, in pure blind arrogance, and wilful ignorance to reports of scouts that the German wire had not been cut by the preparatory barrage, assured the men that the German resistance had been destroyed and the German wire cut. The men were sent off in full daylight to walk into the German fire, and the Newfoundland regiment lost about 90% of its men in very short order. And this is but one example of the futility and stupidity of the British attacks. By 1917, the wastage of men had advanced to the point that Allied Generals were in a panic that they were simply running out of men to occupy the trenches. Even in relatively quiet times, the Allies were suffering casualties of 30,000 per month. This is one of the reasons that the arrival of US troops was so significant - without the Yanks to bulk up the numbers again, the Allied Generals feared the collapse of the Western Front. One salutary effect of the woeful conduct of the war by the British Generals was the destruction of the aura of competence and wisdom that surrounded the British ruling class and the British Army.

[@davidsgoliath1628]

Al Tinfoil France had always tried to be equal with Britain economically and militarily but couldn't thus would take decisions that would get them in bad spots than the rest of the world must come to their rescue. Many times over had the US helped them but them the French alone, I don't see them in a situation where they helped a nation out of humanity's view! Correct me if I'm wrong please.

[@galatzy01]

That's a lot of wishful thinking... Militarily speaking France was more powerful than Britain during the Great War. "but couldn't thus would take decisions that would get them in bad spots than the rest of the world must come to their rescue." Right, like at Gallipoli (1915) or Kut (1915) ? "I don't see them in a situation where they helped a nation out of humanity's view! Correct me if I'm wrong please." Could you give us a true example of another nation doing it ?

[@KB4QAA]

@@davidsgoliath1628 Wow, you've an amazing way to misunderstand fact and history. Your schoolboy bigotry towards the French is quite popular among the ignorant.

[@joshmarks3954]

@@davidsgoliath1628 do you realise the French did that for America in the war of independence? The French Republic was bankrupted in its efforts to free the American colonies from the yolk of British imperialism.

[@cedarwest37]

Not like today battles...WW1...was truly... the WORST of the WORST... from the soilder...who just weeks before...was.a farmer...shop keeper. .. NOW here he is...on the battle field.... WHY...WHY...WHY....I am a farmer..............