Most heinous British war crime?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tubey said:
Their deaths preserved the way of life we enjoy now, just as those in WW2 did. That's why I'm very thankful that nuclear stalemate has resulted in no such conflict again, so that so many young lives aren't lost, no matter how just the cause.

I'll always maintain that to demean the sacrifice of those in WW1 as "unnecessary" does them a massive disservice and displays a total lack of understanding of the political and technological situation during that age.
Click to expand...
Mate you can talk forever but your use of the word necessary was poor judgement on your part.
 
Whistlin' Dixie said:
I'd have thought their deaths unavoidable due to being continually ordered to run over 500m of open land while in the sights of several machine-gun nests....Even after the high command knew that the creeping barrage was a non-starter after the first few assaults.

But that's me.

Necessary....yeah, alright.
Click to expand...

Yes, and that occurred early in the war, when they simply knew no better. Yes, it took time to adjust, but if you actually took the time to understand how that position arose, you would understand it - they arrived on the battlefield, found themselves totally unprepared for how defensive war had become, used old tactics no longer relevant and didn't have a clue how to adjust, and were just determined to hold the stalemate and try to breach them, which we tried with Ypres, Somme - and eventually achieved it at Amiens which started the 100 Day Offensive.

Without consistently adapting and trying to breach the Germans, we possibly never would. The generals had to do it.
 
Tubey said:
Was it hell. At least I'm not trying to demean the sacrifice of those men by saying it was pointless.

If the word "necessary" is good enough for a world renowned historian, it's more than good enough for me.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the phrase "Unavoidable" is more appropriate?
 
Tubey said:
Yes, and that occurred early in the war, when they simply knew no better.
Click to expand...

Mate - It occurred at the Somme. 1916. The war was two years - or halfway - in. That battle lasted 141 days and tactics differed only slightly for the british from start to end.

It was still gung ho charges from the British, while the germans adapted and varied to suit.
 
Whistlin' Dixie said:
Absolutely.

Haig is the biggest war criminal of the lot. He was told and retold, and still didn't deviate from his plan. And he sent poor sods suffering from shell-shock (What today's known as PTSD) to the wall.

Animal.
Click to expand...
Yes, at a time when they didn't even know, or care what shell shock was. There is still footage of these poor men...I nearly said of the ones who were "lucky" to be sent to institutions. Heartbreaking.
 
Whistlin' Dixie said:
Mate - It occurred at the Somme. 1916. The war was two years - or halfway - in. That battle lasted 141 days and tactics differed only slightly for the british from start to end.

It was still gung ho charges from the British, while the germans adapted and varied to suit.
Click to expand...

No, the Germans followed the Schlieffen Plan, which was an offensive tactic. They adapted when they were stalled by defensive tactics. Even then, at Amiens for example, the Germans constantly attacked and tried to break the stalemate for the entire four years, because neither side knew any different. The machine gun was a game changer, and neither side knew what to do about it in defensive situations. They knew it was catastrophic, and they did change tactics with night time sorties and so on, but ultimately they couldn't just stop doing anything because they had to maintain the stalemate on that line.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top