Douglas Haig

Balti said:
JohnMaddocksAxe said:
General Douglas Haig at The Somme

Haig was initially very confident that his plan would work and prclaimed that victory was inevitable

However, the plan that finally emerged seemed to have had only limited goals

There was to be a hugely expensive artillery barrage at a cost previously unheard of.

The second part of the plan was to advance and capture by British soldiers of these positions, and, thirdly, a grand charge through these positions by Haig’s beloved, but outdated, cavalry.

Tactics and strategy that Haig had previously used in smaller battles, including cavalry charges, were to be proved woefully inadequate on this larger scale.

There was huge disagreement with Haig's plan, from Sir Henry Rawlinson, Lloyd George and other observers, all of whom expressed severe doubts about his tactics in this arena.

Haig then began to express considerable doubts about the professional skills of the soldiers of the New Army

However, Haig believed that the opposition would be so shattered by his forces' huge bombardment and concentrated brute force and effort that they would just roll over and the infantry would simply have to walk over No Man’s Land and occupy the German trenches.

The plan relied on shear brute force

Haig and the British Generals promised their leaders and troops man that nothing could survive this and their plan was foolproof, regardless of the cost.

It was the heaviest and most expensive artillery bombardment in history at the time.

Prior to the signal, word reached some troops that the barbed wire in front of German trenches had not been destroyed by the bombardment. The Generals, however, when informed of these accusations, just commanded the men to be silent and spread the word that the troops were talking nonsense.

When word reached the generals that the first waves of men were failing, instead of reviewing their plans and methods, they cast doubt on the ability and professionalism of the troops and continued to send more men over the top whilst sending for more reinforcements.

History judges the British Generals to have relied on outdated concepts and to have attempted to shift the blame for their failings onto the troops, suggesting that they had not executed their plans as ordered.

or to summarise - we lost the battle but won the war.

Fair point, well made
 
Gelsons Dad said:
Prestwich_Blue said:
An utterly pointless post and a complete insult to the brave men like my grandfather that fought in that battle.

Get over yourself.
I think you should leave it to those of us who have served to decide whether or not this is an insult.
Don't be stupid. By that logic only people who have played professional football should be able to comment on here then. You remind me of that bit in Fawlty Towers when Basil said "I served in Korea. I've killed men." and Sybil said "You were in the catering corps. You poisoned them."
 
Bigga said:
Didsbury Dave said:
Yes, and let's hear your metaphor...


Almost a half hour of silence. Goes to show you can cast stones, but the glass house you live in can shatter, pal.

If you were on here yesterday, and early this morning, you will have read a number of things I posted on a few threads, quite a lot of things, "structured arguments" as you put it. Search for them. If you cannot find them, ask around. I am not going to recapitulate everything I said yesterday, or the day before, or the day before that.
 
Redmond6 said:
i got told a story about Sven and Ball last summer.

Sven gets job, sees Ball in canteen, wanders over to chat, asks what he's up to, "i've been here for 6 months but contract is up but i want a new one"

Sven "what do you want?"

Ball "3 years"

sven; "i'll get it done"

now this is two people who didn't give a fcuk about City, it was another pay day for them.

Again what is with this this obsession with Sven?

I recall at the time Sven did a one on one training session with Ball prior to granting the contract which given we only had 2 left backs and one (Garrido) had only just arrived was a fairly prudent move. The statement that these two people didn't give a fuck about City is stupid and crass. At the time I am sure both were eager to do well personally for both themselves and the club.

I understand that in order to make Hughes look good everyone and everything has to be pissed on to make the stink of his management to date bearable but I would never accuse Hughes of not trying his best or wanting what he believes is best for the club. Its a shame that others cannot give the same courtesy to our previous managers.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Gelsons Dad said:
Get over yourself.
I think you should leave it to those of us who have served to decide whether or not this is an insult.
Don't be stupid. By that logic only people who have played professional football should be able to comment on here then. You remind me of that bit in Fawlty Towers when Basil said "I served in Korea. I've killed men." and Sybil said "You were in the catering corps. You poisoned them."

Grow up.

If using significant historical events as a metaphor equates to insulting those involved in said events we should all stop talking right know.

I can assure you I wasn't in the catering corps either.
 
Gelsons Dad said:
Prestwich_Blue said:
Don't be stupid. By that logic only people who have played professional football should be able to comment on here then. You remind me of that bit in Fawlty Towers when Basil said "I served in Korea. I've killed men." and Sybil said "You were in the catering corps. You poisoned them."

Grow up.

If using significant historical events as a metaphor equates to insulting those involved in said events we should all stop talking right know.

I can assure you I wasn't in the catering corps either.
Alright perhaps it was a little OTT but my grandfather described the horrors of that battle to me very vividly and I've never forgotten it. I still think it was inappropriate to compare young men who went over the top in appalling conditions to face the probability of death or maiming to the pampered footballers of today. All we ask of them is to put in a bit of effort for 90 minutes.
 
Brucie Bonus said:
If you were on here yesterday, and early this morning, you will have read a number of things I posted on a few threads, quite a lot of things, "structured arguments" as you put it. Search for them. If you cannot find them, ask around. I am not going to recapitulate everything I said yesterday, or the day before, or the day before that.

Well, I wasn't on here yesterday, early this morning, nor the the previous days in reference to anything you've posted. It's not MY job to see if you're correct about anything. You chose to quote me, therefore pulling me into a debate with YOU. I didn't mention you at all. So, if you WANT me to search for your answers, you have another thing coming.

I asked YOU for direct response. If YOU cannot, at least, quote yourself as to anything remotely connected to the points referred to, on this thread, it's best to cease dialogue and avoid yourself looking increasing stupid.

Isn't it...?
 
Matty said:
So, what you're saying is, if we want to prevent the opposition from getting into our box we should use barbed wire? Or have I missed something?

Nope, barbed wire it is plus a machine gun nest on each post and that is the defence sorted.

We'll still f**king lose mind.
 
Bigga said:
Brucie Bonus said:
If you were on here yesterday, and early this morning, you will have read a number of things I posted on a few threads, quite a lot of things, "structured arguments" as you put it. Search for them. If you cannot find them, ask around. I am not going to recapitulate everything I said yesterday, or the day before, or the day before that.

Well, I wasn't on here yesterday, early this morning, nor the the previous days in reference to anything you've posted. It's not MY job to see if you're correct about anything. You chose to quote me, therefore pulling me into a debate with YOU. I didn't mention you at all. So, if you WANT me to search for your answers, you have another thing coming.

I asked YOU for direct response. If YOU cannot, at least, quote yourself as to anything remotely connected to the points referred to, on this thread, it's best to cease dialogue and avoid yourself looking increasing stupid.

Isn't it...?

Whatever you say, Bigga.
 
So is what you are saying that we have a German in the ranks and should shoot him at dawn....I guess its a pitty all the French guys left we could throw a couple of them in too!
 
Brucie Bonus said:
Bigga said:
Well, I wasn't on here yesterday, early this morning, nor the the previous days in reference to anything you've posted. It's not MY job to see if you're correct about anything. You chose to quote me, therefore pulling me into a debate with YOU. I didn't mention you at all. So, if you WANT me to search for your answers, you have another thing coming.

I asked YOU for direct response. If YOU cannot, at least, quote yourself as to anything remotely connected to the points referred to, on this thread, it's best to cease dialogue and avoid yourself looking increasing stupid.

Isn't it...?

Whatever you say, Bigga.

I'll refer you back to the threads you've apparently posted on and see if I've had a discussion with you. Or even, if I've posted on a thread concerning your point, in relation. When you've found anything to promote your point, I'll apologise(something I don't do much unless I'm completely wrong).

Until then, I'll stay my corner and know I'm right.

Whatever I say, indeed.
 
Bigga said:
Brucie Bonus said:
Whatever you say, Bigga.

I'll refer you back to the threads you've apparently posted on and see if I've had a discussion with you. Or even, if I've posted on a thread concerning your point, in relation. When you've found anything to promote your point, I'll apologise(something I don't do much unless I'm completely wrong).

Until then, I'll stay my corner and know I'm right.

Whatever I say, indeed.

I think you'll need to stand on the stool in your corner for it to be a fair fight...;- )
 
BillyShears said:
I think you'll need to stand on the stool in your corner for it to be a fair fight...;- )

Awww... Not being beaten up enough in the other thread, that you look for more? In fact, you haven't had an entertaining fight for a while, have you? You want me to be responding so you can do your fantasy "Chase me, chase me! Ooo, I could crush a grape!" routine...

Nah, pal. This is your only response in this thread.
 
Bigga said:
BillyShears said:
I think you'll need to stand on the stool in your corner for it to be a fair fight...;- )

Awww... Not being beaten up enough in the other thread, that you look for more? In fact, you haven't had an entertaining fight for a while, have you? You want me to be responding so you can do your fantasy "Chase me, chase me! Ooo, I could crush a grape!" routine...

Nah, pal. This is your only response in this thread.

Jesus, lighten up pal...

I don't have the alpha-male, napoleonic syndrome, which you are clearly still suffering from hence the "Not being beatun up enough in the other thread" line...

Ooh, how will I sleep tonight knowing BIGGA thinks he got the better of me, and is now taking his toys (sorry, opinions) away to play with someone else...
 
BobKowalski said:
Matty said:
So, what you're saying is, if we want to prevent the opposition from getting into our box we should use barbed wire? Or have I missed something?

Nope, barbed wire it is plus a machine gun nest on each post and that is the defence sorted.

We'll still f**king lose mind.
Would you trust Dunne with a machine gun??????
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top