Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Wars and ConflictsΒ  permalink

My Family At War Dan Snow

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by markmop (U602706) on Tuesday, 4th November 2008

  I felt very sorry for Dan and the anguish that he felt for the actions of the Somme.
  
  Certainly 60,000 were killed/injured on the 1st day, but Dunkirk and Singapore were worst defeats.
  
  The Somme campaign was a success at a heavy cost, but actually less cost than the March 1918 campain by Germany.
  
  The Somme attack worked generally, ground been taken and held by the end of the offensive.
  
  The attack didn't gain the great ambitious gains hope for or the knock out blow that was imagined. Yet until summer 1918 no attack by any side achieved all it was hoped for.
  
  The attack did mean Verdun and France survived.
  
  The battle failed because of the delay between barrage and assualt. THAT WHERE BREAK THROUGH WERE MADE THE SPEED OF TROOPS AND COMMUNICATION IN TECHNOLOGICAL TERS WERE NOT AS ADVANCED AS the defensive use of machine guns< deep bunkers and trench systems>
  
  SO IT IS A SHAME THAT MANY MEN DIED, BUT it was not the worst day of the British ary and the generals used the tactics and technoly they could, but this led to the need for tanks and rolling barrages that finally led to the break throughs of 1918.
  
  It too simplistic to say the generals sent men to the slaughter. Remember almost as many Germans died in the offensive and general military thought is attackers can suffer up to 3 times the causaulties to defenders.
  
  Mark
  Both my grandads fought in the Western Front, one invalided home by shrapnel and the other dieing a surviving soilder in WW2 having fought from 1939-45

  Link to this forum: My Family At War Dan Snow

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by LairigGhru (U5452625) on Wednesday, 5th November 2008

  I don't think many people would agree with your view.
  
  The Battle of the Somme lasted for four months, and more than 24,000 of our men died on 1st July alone (the opening day). That date was the worst day in the history of the British Army.

  Link to this forum: My Family At War Dan Snow

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by giraffe47 (U4048491) on Wednesday, 5th November 2008

  I think July 1st was the worst ever day, but it was the beginning of a very steep learning curve for the 'new' soldiers who made up the Army from then on. Yes, more were lost in other battles, and all sides lost thousands on some days, but for losses in one day of one battle, especially such losses for so little progress, was the worst ever day for the British.
  
  I do not think it would be possible to over-exagerate the shock effect, the sheer 'how did we get it so badly wrong' horror of the Army after that day, which led to some drastic shake-ups.
  
  They DID learn, albeit slowly, but they eventually learned well, and by 1918 were the best in the World at attacking trenches.
  

  Link to this forum: My Family At War Dan Snow

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by LairigGhru (U5452625) on Wednesday, 5th November 2008

  Apologies for accidentally giving wrong information earlier. A prog I just watched stated that the death toll on 1 July 1916 was more than 19,000.
  
  I was working from memory.

  Link to this forum: My Family At War Dan Snow

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by DL (U1683040) on Tuesday, 11th November 2008

  Mark,
  I think the action which Dan Snow was struggling to get his head round was his great-Grandfather's comments, and the ease with which he blamed his (now dead) troops. The facts about the 1st day on the Somme are that the tactics used were badly flawed, I mean come on -"Walk towards the enemy"? However, General Snow put the reason for failure down as "lack of offensive spirit". In other words, he blamed the frontline troops for a tactical failure. Dan Snow did find it hard to face, and even he would agree that his ancestor's comments were a prime, irrefutable example of the old cliche - Lions, led by donkeys.

  Link to this forum: My Family At War Dan Snow

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Tuesday, 11th November 2008

  Some of the "donkeys" were pretty smart donkeys, though - I doubt very much if a Plumer,a Smith-Dorrien (or even a Birdwood or a Monash) would have planned to fight the Somme campaign the way Rawlinson & Haig actually carried it out.

  Link to this forum: My Family At War Dan Snow

  Report message6

• Message 7

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by Is_Richo_in_yet (U1776441) on Wednesday, 21st January 2009

  I can think of a lot of people who would.

  Link to this forum: My Family At War Dan Snow

  Report message7

• Message 8

  , in reply to message 7.

  Posted by Spruggles (U13892773) on Sunday, 5th April 2009

  I think a step backwards is required when you contemplate the Somme. It's all too easy to sit in an armchair and review it without due cosideration of the contemporary issues. First, the Army and Haig in particular was subject to a vast amount of political pressure. At the final conference before the battle the other senior officers were asked their opinion. Not one, with the exception of Rawlinson spoke against the ensuing battle and he 'pretty soon shut up'. I think that markmop's overview is just about right. As G. B. Shaw once said 'Anyone can be right after the event, the tragedy is that so few of us ever are.'

  Link to this forum: My Family At War Dan Snow

  Report message8

• Message 9

  , in reply to message 8.

  Posted by Mutatis_Mutandis (U8620894) on Sunday, 5th April 2009

  It is always easier to be right after the fact. However, there were contemporary commentators, who had both the opportunity to comment before the fact on the British attacks plans and relevant experience to base their opinion on: Their French allies.
  
  And as far as I know, most French commentators were very critical of the tactical concepts and battle plans prepared by the British army at the Somme. A legacy of Anglo-French distrust may have biased them, but they also had genuine tactical objections. Of course the French generals were not really any smarter, and had made the same mistakes in earlier battles, but they were really exasperated to see that the British were repeating them. (And they would be furious to observe, in 1918, that the Americans repeated them all over again!)
  
  The reluctance of the Allies to appoint a single supreme commander contributed greatly to the number of avoidable mistakes and unnecessarily lost lives.
  

  Link to this forum: My Family At War Dan Snow

  Report message9

Back to top