On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916.

On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion

Message

Recognition -> On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/1/2016 12:41:50 PM)
Casualties on the first day...19,240 British soldiers killed and 37,000 wounded. The worst day in British military history. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Q8Ijsy2mMM

wings7 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/1/2016 2:03:19 PM)
Martin, thanks for the link! [:)]

wodin -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/1/2016 3:09:37 PM)
After the Somme though the German Army was never the same again. So looking at it as part of Attritional warfare far from the Somme being another disaster it actually did the job.

VPaulus -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/1/2016 4:16:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wodin After the Somme though the German Army was never the same again. So looking at it as part of Attritional warfare far from the Somme being another disaster it actually did the job. At the cost of.... Lions lead by donkeys.

Trugrit -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/1/2016 4:37:08 PM)
Thanks for the Link. Here is an interesting article on the later career of one soldier who was there. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/03/opinion/sunday/how-jrr-tolkien-found-mordor-on-the-western-front.html?ref=opinion&_r=0

warspite1 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/1/2016 4:57:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wodin After the Somme though the German Army was never the same again. So looking at it as part of Attritional warfare far from the Somme being another disaster it actually did the job. quote: At the cost of.... Lions lead by donkeys. warspite1 Indeed wodin. One train of thought is that the Lions led by donkeys idea has been perhaps taken too far. The thinking being that the Generals had little alternative not because they lacked imagination....but because there truly was little practical alternative given the situation and the development of weapons. Anyway, nice thread, and whatever the rights or wrongs, the decisions good or bad, the results were the what they were and those poor boys paid the price. Heroes all of them - and braver in most cases than I know I would be in the same situation [&o]

wodin -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/1/2016 8:14:00 PM)
vpaulus..lions led by donkeys is a myth and just not true.

VPaulus -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/1/2016 11:23:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wodin vpaulus..lions led by donkeys is a myth and just not true. For whom? To a group of English historians? Let me be clear, wodin, by saying that I'm not referring in exclusive to BEF or/and to all his commanding officers. I agree that the expression, like the Lost Generation one, might be exaggerated. But still... Obviously, that's only my opinion and my perception. quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Anyway, nice thread, and whatever the rights or wrongs, the decisions good or bad, the results were the what they were and those poor boys paid the price. Heroes all of them - and braver in most cases than I know I would be in the same situation [&o] Couldn't agree more.

Jagdtiger14 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/2/2016 4:31:00 AM)
Terrible battle for both sides, and completely unnecessary. Yes, they were heroes...all of them, Germans included.

Recognition -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/2/2016 9:03:20 AM)
The offensive on the Somme was to take the pressure off the French ( who were about to break ) at Verdun. The first days losses on the Somme were horrific, and during the slow British advance the coming 2 weeks ( with gains of only about 3 sq miles ) the British suffered another 25,000 casualties in killed and wounded. The Germans were eventually forced to redeploy guns and men from Verdun to reinforce their lines.

warspite1 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/2/2016 9:42:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rush The offensive on the Somme was to take the pressure off the French ( who were about to break ) at Verdun. The first days losses on the Somme were horrific, and during the slow British advance the coming 2 weeks ( with gains of only about 3 sq miles ) the British suffered another 25,000 casualties in killed and wounded. The Germans were eventually forced to redeploy guns and men from Verdun to reinforce their lines. warspite1 Indeed. The operation was very necessary.

loki100 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/2/2016 10:47:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wodin vpaulus..lions led by donkeys is a myth and just not true. I'd agree up to a point. Its clear that at this stage no-one had an easy solution for the combination of sheer number of men and level of defensive firepower apart from attacking in such numbers that enough survived. Equally, although under-mined by technical issues, all sides showed great invention in the use of artillery and were steadily refining the nature of the artillery barrage. But. There is a very valid criticism. The fresh British infantry battalions that were deployed in 1916 were mostly the 1914 volunteers. These were probably the best educated group of recruits the British army had ever had - they were not, like the pre-war regulars, escaping poverty to join up. Many came from highly technical semi-artisanal trades. The British generals could have trusted them to move in small unit actions with light loads etc. Out of a strong desire to both stamp out such independent thought (and a probably lack of acknowledgement that the lower orders were capable of such a thing), they insisted on the most linear tactics and sent men over the top laden with equipment. Its in that sense that the 'lions led by donkeys' narrative has some validity. Its not that the British (or other) high commands were stupid (though some were), its that they had a view of the world that meant trusting their troops was beyond them?

Hattori Hanzo -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/2/2016 12:22:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Trugrit Thanks for the Link. Here is an interesting article on the later career of one soldier who was there. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/03/opinion/sunday/how-jrr-tolkien-found-mordor-on-the-western-front.html?ref=opinion&_r=0 very interesting article, thanks for share it Trugrit [:)]

Jagdtiger14 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/2/2016 1:53:56 PM)
By unnecessary I mean that by the end of 1914 and trench warfare a reality, an end to the war should have been negotiated. Germany was looking to get out of the war and made offers to France and Russia. Wilson tried to negotiate, but didn't realize (or didn't care) his trade policy, supplies, and loans worked against his efforts. Wilson's WWI policy was atrocious from the beginning. The war never should have gotten this far (Somme).

warspite1 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/2/2016 2:49:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14 By unnecessary I mean that by the end of 1914 and trench warfare a reality, an end to the war should have been negotiated. Germany was looking to get out of the war and made offers to France and Russia. Wilson tried to negotiate, but didn't realize (or didn't care) his trade policy, supplies, and loans worked against his efforts. Wilson's WWI policy was atrocious from the beginning. The war never should have gotten this far (Somme). warspite1 Well I don't know how accurate this is, but according to this website, pre-Somme, those offers meant the Allies paying an indemnity and giving colonial concessions. That is not a genuine offer for peace - that is called taking the .... http://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/peace_initiatives

wings7 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/2/2016 4:53:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Well I don't know how accurate this is, but according to this website... http://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/peace_initiatives Robert, this looks like a scholarly World War One web site! The contributors and list are quite impressive! Looks like one (if not the one) of the definitive WWI sites on the net, I will be studying this one for awhile...thanks for the link! [:)]

VPaulus -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/2/2016 5:27:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wings7 quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 Well I don't know how accurate this is, but according to this website... http://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/peace_initiatives Robert, this looks like a scholarly World War One web site! The contributors and list are quite impressive! Looks like one (if not the one) of the definitive WWI sites on the net, I will be studying this one for awhile...thanks for the link! [:)] Also take into consideration the World War I Document Archive. It's a good place for find some (official and non-official) documents related with WWI: https://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/Main_Page Their discussion group is quite interesting: https://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/The_World_War_I_Discussion_List The Great War forum is also a great forum for debating WWI: http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?s=2d2e0b3370919fe5c5147c9637143ebd&act=idx

wings7 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/2/2016 7:15:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VPaulus Also take into consideration the World War I Document Archive. It's a good place for find some (official and non-official) documents related with WWI: https://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/Main_Page Their discussion group is quite interesting: https://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/The_World_War_I_Discussion_List The Great War forum is also a great forum for debating WWI: http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?s=2d2e0b3370919fe5c5147c9637143ebd&act=idx Excellent! Thank you for the links...I now have plenty to study on! [:)]

Jagdtiger14 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/4/2016 1:46:49 AM)
quote: The offensive on the Somme was to take the pressure off the French ( who were about to break ) at Verdun. The first days losses on the Somme were horrific, and during the slow British advance the coming 2 weeks ( with gains of only about 3 sq miles ) the British suffered another 25,000 casualties in killed and wounded. The Germans were eventually forced to redeploy guns and men from Verdun to reinforce their lines. I just read that while the Allies thought this offensive would be to take off pressure from Verdun (actually they were also hoping it would assist the Russians/Rumanians), it actually failed in doing so. The Germans decided to slow their offensive on Verdun before the Anglo-French attack. The Germans still had a sufficient reserve to send divisions east. July 1, by the end of the day, the German defenders had inflicted one of the most stunning defeats on any army. The offensive had been predicted. And (Dr. Robert T. Foley (University of Liverpool)): However, despite these heavy losses, the battle of the Somme can be seen as a German victory. The Entente forces were unable to break through the German defence and were unable to achieve the victory for which they hoped in July. Further, as the British army had, the German army learned valuable lessons from the experience. By the end of the battle, they had developed a more flexible defence in depth that was not dependent on holding forward positions at all costs. This defensive system allowed them to absorb the continued Anglo-French attacks both during the battle of the Somme and in the battles of 1917. Additionally, the battle forced the German high command to face up to at least some of their deficiencies in the technical realm. Paul von Hindenburg and Erich Ludendorff, the team that took command of the German army after the Romanian entry into the war forced Falkenhayn’s resignation, developed an ambitious building program that re-equipped the German army with modern artillery and aircraft. Thus, despite the horrific casualties, the German army emerged from the battle of the Somme an even more formidable foe than before the battle

Jagdtiger14 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/4/2016 2:07:05 AM)
quote: warspite1 Well I don't know how accurate this is, but according to this website, pre-Somme, those offers meant the Allies paying an indemnity and giving colonial concessions. That is not a genuine offer for peace - that is called taking the .... I'm not sure what it is you think might not be accurate? Yes, the German offer was laughable and not serious in my opinion as well. But as opposed to the Allies, at least they made an effort. And if you compare what they wanted vs what happened in 1919... Wilson made himself available to secure some sort of end to the war as early as 1914...he had his idea of "League of Nations". The problem is that both sides thought they could still win...as for the Allies, they thought they had the manpower and resources to win the war...but a lot of the resources were from the US...as well as loans. Wilson sowed his own failure in getting the Allies to the table in that regard. He should have cut them off, or threatened to if they didn't come to the table. As much as I dislike Wilson for other reasons, he was the only hope for some kind of peace early on, and he kept the US out of the war longer than any of the Republicans did or wanted to. Teddy Roosevelt was ready to send 4 divisions of Rough Riders at the outset of the war. Wilson's Republican opponent in 2016 was for mobilizing and getting involved sooner. Wilson had the campaign promise "He kept us out", and most Americans didn't want the war.

warspite1 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/4/2016 6:55:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14 Yes, the German offer was laughable and not serious in my opinion as well. But as opposed to the Allies, at least they made an effort. warspite1 That makes no sense whatsoever. You say 'At least they made an effort' and by definition that makes the Germans better than the Allies as a result - but then admit that that effort was laughable and not serious. How does that work? If it was laughable and not serious then how is that making an effort? There was no effort.

Jagdtiger14 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/4/2016 5:10:47 PM)
quote: warspite1 That makes no sense whatsoever. You say 'At least they made an effort' and by definition that makes the Germans better than the Allies as a result - but then admit that that effort was laughable and not serious. How does that work? If it was laughable and not serious then how is that making an effort? There was no effort. Warspite, can I guess you are not a businessman? In making any offer you begin by staking out a position that is much greater (or far below depending on which side of the table you are on). As it was, the Allied non-response indicates they are not interested in anything other than a continuation of the conflict. If the Allies had come back with an offer of any kind at all...their own laughable and non-serious, at least that would indicate they are willing to discuss the end of the war. Then, through subsequent negotiations through a third party also interested in peace (Wilson/USA) perhaps a common ground could have been found or close to one where the calculation of further lost resources/manpower no longer makes sense. As for the Germans "better as a result" for making the offer, I would say it was very poor for the Allies not to have responded with something, even if it were laughable. All successful negotiations have a starting point, and many of those began as laughable and viewed as not serious. I think it makes the Allies look bad. They also spurned Wilson's efforts...and the US was working with the Allies and seen as one of them by both sides.

warspite1 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/4/2016 5:28:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14 quote: warspite1 That makes no sense whatsoever. You say 'At least they made an effort' and by definition that makes the Germans better than the Allies as a result - but then admit that that effort was laughable and not serious. How does that work? If it was laughable and not serious then how is that making an effort? There was no effort. Warspite, can I guess you are not a businessman? In making any offer you begin by staking out a position that is much greater (or far below depending on which side of the table you are on). As it was, the Allied non-response indicates they are not interested in anything other than a continuation of the conflict. If the Allies had come back with an offer of any kind at all...their own laughable and non-serious, at least that would indicate they are willing to discuss the end of the war. Then, through subsequent negotiations through a third party also interested in peace (Wilson/USA) perhaps a common ground could have been found or close to one where the calculation of further lost resources/manpower no longer makes sense. As for the Germans "better as a result" for making the offer, I would say it was very poor for the Allies not to have responded with something, even if it were laughable. All successful negotiations have a starting point, and many of those began as laughable and viewed as not serious. I think it makes the Allies look bad. They also spurned Wilson's efforts...and the US was working with the Allies and seen as one of them by both sides. warspite1 Okay, this will get us nowhere. I have been in 'business' my whole working life thank-you and I do happen to know that whilst one shouldn't come up with their best offer as an opener, it kind of misses the point if one's opening offer is such a **** take that the other side walks off in disgust because its quite clear there is no will to find a solution. So lets look at this another way shall we? If you are going to play the blame game, try back-solving the problem. By 1916 I don't know how many dead there are on either side - but its millions. Plus all the material damage. Both sides know they are in the right. Both sides know the other side started it. Both sides are afraid of the other and what the future might hold. Right. With that in mind what do you think would have been acceptable to Britain, France, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Russia and Italy? Seriously, what was this golden opportunity that would have ended the war had politicians only been sensible enough to take it? Just to recap what you are saying: So in order not to 'look bad' the Allies now counter with their own offer: "Okay Germany, how about you get the hell out of our countries and a) pay us an indemnity and b) give up your African and Asian possessions". Right there we go. Under your interpretation of events - both sides have now 'made and effort' and as a result history will judge neither side as 'bad'. Now, in the real world where do they go from here?

Orm -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/4/2016 7:27:55 PM)
I have just been pondering on how many lives would have been saved if status quo ante bellum could have been agreed on when the leadership realized that this would not be a short war. Totally unrealistic, of course, since they wanted to earn from what it had cost so far.

ezzler -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/4/2016 11:42:07 PM)
I don't hold too much with the Lions and Donkeys idea. One third of the total force involved at Gettysburg became casualties. Meade had 28% casualties on the defensive. Lee had 37%. I can't recall anyone ever saying Lee or Grant were Donkeys leading Lions. At Waterloo the wounded and dead for the french was around 30% of the total force.

warspite1 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/5/2016 7:11:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Orm I have just been pondering on how many lives would have been saved if status quo ante bellum could have been agreed on when the leadership realized that this would not be a short war. Totally unrealistic, of course, since they wanted to earn from what it had cost so far. warspite1 Indeed - and its not just about "earning" from the war. It's of course about the fact that none of the rising tensions, the fears, the mist-trust, that led to the war, have gone away. France fears Germany. The German attack in 1914 and what it cost the French will only go to confirm those fears (why does anyone think Versailles sought to ensure Germany couldn't do that to the French again?). The Germans remain fearful because they are isolated. They have only one ally - Austria-Hungary with an Empire literally falling apart at the seems. Any peace deal needs to resolve the Balkan mess without AH losing face. And let's not forget the fact that governments have to sell this 'fantastic deal' to their people. You know, the same people they told to fight the war - and die in their thousands; well not the same people obviously, as many of them are aleady dead, having died for nothing. So at a time when the fear of Socialism/Revolution is ever greater, governments of the world have to convince their people that they are the right people to govern. Yeah right - no chance of revolution there then..... As you say, totally unrealistic once the war had started and people - lots of people - began dying. Sadly the time to stop the war (or at least keep it regional) was before it started. Once it began, only the defeat and surrender of one side or the other was going to end it. To think otherwise is imo fantasy.

Jagdtiger14 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/6/2016 1:47:48 AM)
quote: So lets look at this another way shall we? If you are going to play the blame game, try back-solving the problem. By 1916 I don't know how many dead there are on either side - but its millions. Plus all the material damage. Both sides know they are in the right. Both sides know the other side started it. Both sides are afraid of the other and what the future might hold. Right. With that in mind what do you think would have been acceptable to Britain, France, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Russia and Italy? Seriously, what was this golden opportunity that would have ended the war had politicians only been sensible enough to take it? Just to recap what you are saying: So in order not to 'look bad' the Allies now counter with their own offer: "Okay Germany, how about you get the hell out of our countries and a) pay us an indemnity and b) give up your African and Asian possessions". Right there we go. Under your interpretation of events - both sides have now 'made and effort' and as a result history will judge neither side as 'bad'. Now, in the real world where do they go from here? First off, I was discussing the 1914 German and Wilson attempts (post #14). Obviously the longer the war goes on the more difficult negotiations become as you point out above. You are role-playing the Allies...ok...and if they had replied to Germany more or less what you wrote, that would have been fantastic!!! Not for the substance of it, but for the indication that the Allies were interested in peace and ending the war. As for the substance of what you wrote (the Kaiser was an arrogant ass, so not sure how the Germans would have negotiated, but lets say the Kaiser appoints a reasonable person (me[:)])). First, I request someone the Allies trust to act as a good faith 3rd party intermediary that is also interested in peace, and that would be Wilson/US. Before I announce the next round(s) offer(s), I bounce it/them off of Wilson and get his input which adds to the sincerity of subsequent offers, and if the Allies are being unreasonable I could perhaps persuade the US to use its considerable "influence" that I think they have and are not using (resources and loans, and willingness to accept the British blockade)). Now in the second round I come down from the crazy offer, but still above what you are willing to settle for. So lets skip the in between and speed it up: Obviously the Germans have to get the hell out of France and Belgium. That is not even negotiable, and in fact logical to any deal. The initial offers were that the Germans wanted more colonies, the Allies(you) wanted Germany to have none. The middle ground there would be status quo. Middle ground reparations would be zero as well...however if reparations would be a sticking point, then perhaps a reduction in German colonies would be warranted (frankly its my personal 2016 opinion that Germany doesn't need any colonies, but I'm sure the Kaiser would not agree). I read somewhere that most colonies were actually a financial drag...the total German output from its colonies was about 6 million British pounds per year. Not sure if that's accurate since I'm having trouble multiple sourcing it. If that happens to be accurate, then Germany has the colonies more out of national pride than national production.

warspite1 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/6/2016 6:48:07 AM)
Well its a shame you didn't have the ear of the Kaiser in 1914-18 [:)] Personally I do not believe a peace was possible on the basis of the status quo ante bellum. If the US takes a different road, then that may allow some tiny possibility of success, but frankly I think its all a bit pie in the sky. status quo ante bellum is a nice thought because it saves so much misery, so much death that we know for certain comes about. But even if it were possible, what does it actually achieve? It solves nothing. It simply kicks the war can down the road - and does not kick it very far - and the politicians know this. But on a more immediate and practical point, what do the troops do once there is a whiff of peace in the air? Carry on fighting as though nothing is happening? Being asked to go over the top into a hail of machine gun fire when, so the rumours go, they will all be going home tomorrow? I think there is more chance of revolution than an end to the war and I cannot see the Kaiser surviving such a 'peace'....

Capt. Harlock -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/7/2016 3:41:39 AM)
quote: Obviously the Germans have to get the hell out of France and Belgium. That is not even negotiable, and in fact logical to any deal. Define "France". No, I am not being a pedantic jerk. The French government was insistent about recovering Alsace and Lorraine, which Germany would not have agreed to.

warspite1 -> RE: On This Day The Battle of the Somme 100 years ago 1st July 1916. (7/7/2016 5:43:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock quote: Obviously the Germans have to get the hell out of France and Belgium. That is not even negotiable, and in fact logical to any deal. Define "France". No, I am not being a pedantic jerk. The French government was insistent about recovering Alsace and Lorraine, which Germany would not have agreed to. warspite1 No need. For the purposes of this discussion the status quo ante bellum was mentioned by Orm, and Jagdtiger agreed (certainly in regard to financial reparations). I cannot see even a remote possibility of either side agreeing to end the war - a war they have not lost and, in their eyes have not started - if they are going to lose territory or suffer financial penalties. A re-arrangement of borders resulting in the Germans losing Alsace Lorraine or anywhere else (whilst, unlike the French they are occupying enemy soil) makes no sense. The status quo ante bellum means just that - borders as per 3rd August 1914. The point you raise though is pertinent because it shows just how difficult any negotiations were likely to be. There were all sorts of grievances and irritations that each side could raise about previous wars and lost territories that would simply lessen further any chance of a settlement. But as I said above, I think this is all fanciful anyway so I will let Jagdtiger pick up that point if he wishes to do so.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.625