Douglas Haig Deserve To Be Called The Butcher Of The Somme Analysis

Some people have the view that British generals such as Haig were useless leaders. Famous sources like ‘O What a lovely War’, ‘Blackadder’ and ‘The Trench’ support this. However from the 1980s many military historians have challenged this interpretation and states that under Haigs leadership, Britain and her allies won the war from encouraging new weapons and military tactics. After Haigs death in 1918, historians blamed him for needless laughter of nearly 750,000 British soldiers on the Western Front and biographers pilloned him for his overconfidence, insensitivity and logical

The British launched The Battle of the Somme to achieve two objectives. The first and most important goal was to relieve pressure on the French Army at Verdun, and the second was to inflict as heavy a loss as possible on the German Armies. The Battle of the Somme had to be fought to save the French Army from the crucifixion of Verdun. The head of the French Army, General Fock, and some leading British commanders did not believe this battle would help, but political masters in London and Paris supported the campaign. For many years The Battle of the Somme received much criticism for the way the battle was fought based on the number of casualties.

The Battle of Fromelles was a horrific battle which didn’t help prevent the Battle of Somme. All the battle had done was make people very scared and worried about the Germans. The people who were majorly effected by this were the French British and Australia. The 5th Australian Division suffered 5,533 casualties, 1,547 61st British Division casualties and little less then 1,000 casualties for the Germans.

Well, to start off with the Battle of Somme was ultimately won by the Germans. This is so because they had the more powerful military. According to documents B and C the Germans won the first day of the Battle. In document C he says “the youth of England bled to death.” Describes machine gunfire. and how “Belt after belt was fired…”. I also think that the German won because the British had started the Battle and whoever starts it usually loses. From the beginning the British did not achieve a breakthrough that penetrated the German lines and, end the war. From my knowledge, the Germans were able to contain the British offensive with locally available reserves, but didn't transfer any troops. Also the British suffered extremely heavy casualties,

The battle of Somme took place during the 1st of July and the 18th of November 1916 in the region Somme department of France, on both banks of the river of Somme. It was during the time of the First World War that Newfoundland was still under the power of the British Empire. Britain declared war on Germany in August of 1914. This was the beginning of Newfoundland's first regiment. There was a great response from Newfoundland with many proud Newfoundlanders ready to serve in the war. There was such a huge demand that from a population of 240,000 that more than 12,000 people joined up for the regiment. When war had been declared an enormous amounts of soldiers were being killed and the rapid progression of military warfare such as tanks, grenades and mines were being introduced promptly in large numbers. In order to end this war, generals came up with the conclusion of making what they called the "Big Push" which was the joining of the British and French troops against enemy Germany. These troops would start the assault at the Somme. This would be the Battle of Somme near Beaumont Hamel that the first Newfoundland Regiment would partake in. On the morning of July 1st thousands of British and French troops marched towards No Man's Land, within half an hour of walking to their destination, the troops were dramatically decreasing in soldiers

The first day of the battle of the Somme was a dreadful scene but a victory for the Germans.According to Document B: George Coppard (British soldier) ,it states that ,” Hundreds of dead,many of the British 37th Brigade..Quite as many died on the enemy wire as on the ground,like a fish caught in the net...The Germans faith in the wire had paid off.” This evidence shows that a lot of the British army had died due to the German’s barbed wire and as a result is was an horrendous scene to look at.Also written in Document C: Ottis Lais(German soldier),it states that,”As the destructive British shell rushed towards our artillery which was firing courageously..the british keep charging forward...Despite the fact that hundreds are already lying dead

Even though both Document 15 and 16 are soldiers describing the Battle of Somme, they both have different views on how they were being treated. For example, in Document 15 Christian Carver states, “Presently one saw great clouds of gas sweeping across and I must say I felt we were looking into hell indeed.” This is a clear description of how the soldiers in the Battle of Somme were being treated. However, not all the soldiers saw it that way. In Document 16, Karl Gorzel had more of a less dramatic view of the Battle. He states, “Anyone who reaches our line is at once polished off in a hand-to-hand bayonet fight, and now our bombs fly with redoubled force into the enemy’s ranks.” This quote seemed like he was the one who was doing the killing where in Document 15 Carver describes the Battle as if he was the one being shot

In the fifteenth document we come across this British soldier describing the battle of the Somme, The young soldier, Christian Creswell Carver writes to his brother about the intensive warfare he faced. He illustrates the war by describing the sounds and views of what he sees on different occasions. He describes the sounds of gunfire over the trees as a noise exactly like a great wave. He depicts the battle as being swallowed up by the great wave and being spit up and washed even further away. He then speaks on the gas attacks he had to endure, describing it as a great cloud that formed into lines and slowly made its way to their trenches.

In 1916, the battle of the Somme began, intending to end the war for the allies. It pitted an unexperienced British army, against a professional German one. It was also, however significant in many ways. Two of the main areas where the battle of the Somme was significant were in its military value, and the reactions it caused, on the home front.

The Battle of the Somme epitomizes the harsh realities of trench warfare for the Allies and represents the negligent battle planning and technological advancements that are associated with the stalemate of World War One. Trench warfare was common across the Western Front, with similar strategies being employed by both opposing sides. Sir Douglas Haig, one of the British coordinators for the Somme offensive is blamed with an offensive strategy destined for failure. The British offensive, an utter failure, resulted in a stalemate, which was common throughout World War One. The British development of the tank, while it eventually ended the horrendous stalemate, was ineffectively used during the Somme.

     In previous courses that I have partaken in it had always been told that Captain James Wolfe was a “mad-man at the end of his wit,” and that his attack at the Anse du Foulon was a “last ditch effort for Wolfe to die with honor on the field of battle.” Indeed James Wolfe had his share of problems. Before being able to rejoice in being promoted to captain of the 4th Foot, he was passed the grave news that his brother Edward, one year his inferior, had died from the inclement conditions at Flanders. However, Wolfe was one of the lucky people who understood death as part of war. Wolfe’s main problem was the way that the military was handled by those in charge. Speaking on the refusal for his leave to Metz to study in artillery, he sent a private letter in which he described his unhappiness with their (his superiors) decision; “They oppose the only method that can be fallen upon to preserve any knowledge of military affairs in the army.” “This is a dreadful mistake and, if obstinately pursued, will disgust a number of good intentions, and preserve that prevailing ignorance of military affairs that has been so fatal to us in all our undertakings …”

In “The Face of Battle,” John Keegan analyzed the experiences of the individuals involved in the battles of the Somme and Waterloo; he thoroughly examined the advancements of industrialization in warfare and battle strategy between 1815 and 1916. The industrialization of modern warfare during the battle of the Somme, while progressive, was very much still in its experimental stages. While the inventions during this time period were later evolved into much more useful products, it seems as though the organized warfare in Waterloo was much more effective; the soldier’s mediocre training for the Somme was obvious in the chaotic events that occurred. While each battle was disastrous in their own ways, industrialization certainly improved means of warfare and the experience that the soldiers had.

Battle of the Bulge was one of the most unforgiving engagements that the United States military has been involved with. Sacrifices on both sides were nearly unfathomable for that time period. In the past 15 years that we have been at war with the Middle East we have lost around 5,000 brothers and sisters in arms. Battle of the bulge was only one month in length and the Allied forces lost over 90,000 troops. War has evolved over the years to include planning and execution, by becoming more precise. Technology and lessons learned have profited our military actions in a sense that lives are no longer wasted. Although there were so many casualties during the battle, more lives could’ve been lost if not for the successful employment of indirect fires to stop German advances.

Having proposed that military history has been failing in its duty, Keegan then continues to demonstrate how it should be done. The battles of Agincourt, Waterloo, and the Somme are the main interests of the book; these battles took place centuries apart and all involved British armies. He examines, in detail, which aspects of war changed or remain constant between the three battles. Keegan brilliantly and

In part one of “The Age of Total War”, Hobsbawm (1994) also argues that the war of 1914-1918 was senseless. It is argued that it is difficult to understand “why sensible statemen had not decided to settle the war by some compromise before it destroyed the world of 1914” (Hobsbawm, 1994, p. 29). He claims that the war was brutal and caused more death and destruction than was necessary. The battlefield of the Western Front was as brutal as it got. A field of blood, guts, mud and the abandoned bodies of brothers and friends was surrounded by the sound of never ending a gun fire, shouts of orders and screaming of men, whilst millions stood in trenches on either side and fired weapons at each other to add to the mass of chaos. Landscapes and towns were destroyed, countries lost up to twenty percent of their men, and those who weren’t lost were often mutated and severe haters of war. Moreover, it is argued that the destruction caused by the war did not end purely with the loss of human life, it