General Haig Study Guide

In Interpretations of American History, a collaborative team of four editors (Francis G. Couvares, Martha Saxton, Gerald N. Grob, and George Athan Billias) seek to educate any student of history on the various perspectives on any one said historical issue. The editors sum up the entire book with “These volumes reflect our understanding that history is an act of interpretation. ” Essentially, this book offers a multitude of benefits for those who wish to further study history, but at the same time the reader must take everything said with a grain of salt.

The First Battle of the Marne was the first major battle of World War I. Fought in September of 1914, the battle marked the end of the German advance toward Paris and the beginning of trench warfare. The battle exhibited a number of firsts in the history of warfare, motorized movement of troops and interception of radio communications. It indicated that the war would not be a quick victory for Germany (Klein, 2014). Joseph Joffre, the French Commander in Chief, exhibited ingenuity and leadership to yield a significant victory while the Helmuth von Moltke the younger, the German chief of staff, demonstrated a failure of mission command resulting in defeat.

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 world is full of rich culture, diversity and experiences unique to each individual. When determining the validity of historic accounts we must factor in that particular historian’s point of view, which should be characterized by ethnicity, idealogy, theoretical or methodological preference. With these factors views of the past often vary from person to person. In this essay I will be discussing the four different stages that shaped the writing of American history over the last 400 years.

W.D. Howells uses irony to illuminate the difference of perspective and conflict of interest between Editha and George. Editha is so busy trying to fix what she believes is wrong with George; she does not recognize the flaws in her own thinking. She secretly sees George as less than he is because of his peaceful nature, and she does not imagine that George is aware of her low regard of him. Editha uses three reasons to support her advocacy for the war, first, that to fight in the war will be glorious. Second, that the war is ordained by God, and third, that to fight for the country is to show devotion or loyalty. Similarly, war advocates have used these same reasons to rally the citizens to battle in past wartimes.

Have you ever been faced with making decisions that have the likely possibility to affect the world? What about dealing with decisions that put your values and beliefs in question? What if I told you General Arnold faced many of these decisions during his career. Any routine conversation involving General Henry H. “Hap” Arnold usually leans toward events like his famous “Wing Dings”. He was a visionary and ethical leader that transformed the U.S Army Air Force and birthed what is the modern day U.S. Air Force. He was the inventor of the dining in or out but his creative tendencies didn’t stop there. From learning to fly with the Wright brothers to the dropping of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, Hap was present and ensured that his voice and leadership were both heard and seen. He left an impression on our Air Force that still stands to this day.

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

Therefore, Payne’s critique entails different layers. First, it is clearly a criticism of a scholarship that selectively focuses on famous leaders and the most dramatic events. As such, it is a critique of a historical narrative that provides only a glimpse of what the

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.

General Douglas Macarthur was one of the most well known military figures in the history of the United States. He gave his farewell speech to congress on 19th April 1951 and went into retirement after 52 years of service in the United States army. He was given the chance to address his final message to the US government. This analysis carefully examines his ethics, goals, strategies, strengths and weaknesses. The speech is very famous and highly popular among the American audience. Therefore, we will take into account all factors to critically evaluate the speech and find out what makes it important.

There are a number of qualities that quantify good leaderships and good leaders. According to Kouzes and Posner in their book The Leadership Challenge, all successful leaders have (5) practices in common. They “Model the Way”, “Inspire a shared vision”, “Challenge the process”, “enable others to act” and “encourage the heart”(15). Never is there a more important time to have exemplary leadership, than in a time of war. Both the American Civil War and World War II showed what was possible through good leadership. From abolishing slavery and preserving the Union, to fighting tyranny and oppression abroad, both events in American history had a profound impact on all those involved. The impact would most certainly be different if not for the leadership of Colonel Lawrence Chamberlain of the Union Army during the Civil War and General George S. Patton during World War II. Both leaders possessed the 5 practices essential for god leadership, yet both leaders to different approaches to accomplish their goals.

I think his point of view was neutral, mainly because the use of historical facts to describe each character. In this essay he covered both general’s strong points and how the difference in their upbringing influenced their

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

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

His view of war is that both sides play a role to create the war so both societies have to hold part of of the blame. In the viewpoint of a civilian we find that we are unaware of the fact the government, one of our social institutions, has to agreed to go to war with another country.