Shock, Horror

[Guest woodyudet]

"The Somme offensive which Haig called off in early November 1916 and led to the worse Britsh Army casualty loss in its history has recently been recorded as an offensive which broke the back of the German Army"

I don't think it was recent - it was a qoute by Rupprecht from the 1920s i believe.

Worse casualties of the British Army ... well its hardly surprising given that at 144 days its the longest continous engagement in the history of the british army. What do you expect?

Casualty *rates* in the open fighting of 1914 and 1918 are actually higher.

WW2 - there's plenty of attritional defensive battles - Kursk, Hurtgen forest, Stalingrad. Luckily for the British army, most of them happened in the east and it was millions of russian dead who broke the back of the german army...

[Guest Ian Bowbrick]

Who would you like to see on their (WFA) website page?

No one has come up with any alternatives.................

I did.

Gwyn

So did I

Michael D.R.

One of you suggested T Atkins and the other a slide show - I was refering to something more specific. However this is a relatively minor issue in the overall fabric - who gives a stuff whether Haig got a fourth class or first class honours - I don't care if he dressed up in ladies clothes at the weekend and called himself Daphne - he is on the WFA website for his role in WW1, love it or hate it.

Reading through this thread again I am not surprised that people are put off from posting on or joining this forum, as those who are regulars at Kew well know and I am referring to a very well known and recognised author on WW1

Ian Bowbrick

[Guest woodyudet]

"It is a question of having a Plan B. There does not seem to be much evidence that this was the case in the Great War. "

Given logistics and communications, its very difficult to have a plan B. If the entente decides policy in 1915, you spend 3 months accumulating supplies and equipment you can't exactly stop after 1 day and do something else from a practical point of view let alone a political one both domestically and re. other allies.

I would suggest that Tannenberg, 14th July 1916 or the switching of direction of the Michael offensive would count as 'plan B' on an operational level

[PhilB]

All right Woody, I`ve given quotes from famous contemporaries who were anti-Haig. It`s only fair that you give a list of famous contemporaries who were pro-Haig (and didn`t have axes to grind!). And I`ll shut up - no more comments.

Gwyn:- Since you "rather object to the implied condemnation", you must have inferred it, otherwise, you wouldn`t have reacted! But once again, I`ll shut up - no more comment. Enough is enough. Phil B

PS Thanks for a lively debate, though!

PPS No reason why Haig shouldn`t be on the front though, just because he`s controversial.

[Dragon]

One of you suggested T Atkins and the other a slide show - I was refering to something more specific.

This is what I actually suggested and a slide show was only one idea, thinking laterally:

Given the seemingly impossible choice of the face of the WFA’s index page, my suggestion would be a weekly or daily changing image, or even a slide show during the visit, so that all aspects of the war are represented in time.

I do not see why it should be dissed as an unspecific idea. It does at least address the original question.

I can think at at least two forum members' websites where this device is successfully employed.

Gwyn

[Max]

I`ve given quotes from famous contemporaries who were anti-Haig. It`s only fair that you give a list of famous contemporaries who were pro-Haig (and didn`t have axes to grind!). And I`ll shut up - no more comments.

Instead of using famous contemporaries to illustrate your point why don't you illustrate your point yourself. How would you have moved a well dug in, well equipped and motivated enemy off their ar*$s? No hindsight, just original thought, because as the situation at the time was unique you would have nothing else to refer back to. This is the situation that Haig found himself in. I am not much of a fan of Haig, more from a dislike of his personality than anything else. BUT he was a man who literally had the weight of the empire on his shoulders and regardless of what you think of him he led it to ultimate victory.

As far as I am concerned the WFA have every right to put anyone they want on the home page of their website, Jordon if they like. It is purely a matter for their members and if they have a problem with it I am sure they will let the proper authorities know.

Andy

As for Woodyudet, I think you are right, not much between them.

Grant = drunk/lucky/very average

Haig = average

Montgomery = average but learned from his previous experience.

[DirtyDick]

I'm no expert on Haig but from what I've learnt I wouldn't necessarily vote him my No.1 leader and as for the WFA front page......probably not.

Vote 1 'Pompey' Elliott for the WFA front page is what I say!!

(Without doubt and most unashamedly from an Aussie point of view that is).

Tim L.

Could anyone tell me why he was nicknamed 'Pompey' - did he originally come from 'Porsmuff' in 'Ampshire?

Richard

[Auimfo]

Richard,

Brigadier General Harold Edward Elliott, CB, CMG, DSO, DCM, VD, had the nickname 'Pompey' bestowed on him by men of the 15th Brigade in Egypt during 1915. It was taken from a well-known Australian Rules footballer, Fred 'Pompey' Elliott who had been the captain/coach of Carlton 1908-1911. Where Fred got the nickname, I have absolutely no idea.

Harold Elliott was always revered by his men who thought of him as a 'soldier's general' who always put their welfare at the forefront of any order. It was perhaps his constant remonstrations against military protocol and poor leadership that cost him any chance of great recognition and advancement.

This fact and the pain of knowing what horrors he had asked his men to endure in addition to a turbulent political career after the war all played a part in contributing to his depression and ultimate suicide in 1931.

In my 'acknowledged biased' opinion he was one of the finest generals of the war and had the potential to become one of it's greatest leaders but unfortunately was never granted that opportunity.

Tim L.

If you're interested in reading more on Pompey there's quite a bit of info on the web or an excellent biography

Pompey Elliott

by Ross McMullin

Scribe Publications, Melbourne

2002.

[Howard]

A picture of Haig on the WFA site is quite relevant, he took part in the war.

If we had a picture of a shell hole, no-one would argue about the merits of the hole.

Howard

[Martin Hornby]

I have only just become aware of this threat on the Discussion Room. It is most pleasing to see that a picture of Douglas Haig should provoke such interest.

Michelle and I regularly choose different pictures for the front page of the WFA website.

I choose the current one of Douglas Haig for the simple reason that to my mind it was a good photograph.

On 4th August we will change it to a photograph that will commemorate the start of the war.

Martin Hornby

Joint W.F.A. Website Editor

[burlington]

I have only just become aware of this threat on the Discussion Room. It is most pleasing to see that a picture of Douglas Haig should provoke such interest.

Martin

I am glad that you were not offended by my original posting of this item.

The picture really did impact on me when I saw it. Perhaps it was the size combined with the topic item.

Maybe, for any one opening graphic theme, a montage of related images might reduce the initial impact and at the same time give a wider breadth to it.

Regards

Martin

[Guest DNH]

Not being an individual member of the WFA I don't quite know whether it is any of my business, however the discussion has been interesting and shall I say lively?

I think there are very valid reasons for putting Haig on there:

1) he served in positions of great responsibility in the BEF from first day to last on the Western Front, so if he doesn't have a place on the WFA website, who does?

2)only three British generals have been in command and defeated the main army of the main enemy in a European continental war - Duke of Marlborough, Duke of Wellington and Haig. That is some company.

As for some of the criticisms of Haig:

1) At least do Churchill's quote the justice of finishing his sentence off; I don't remember the exact words but there was a big 'but' and the remainder went something like 'but we never found his equal or his better'. If you don't want to finish his sentence off then at least remember that Churchill thought Gallipoli a good idea.

2) Our friend Lloyd George was a barrister and a politician. Were there ever two professions more oft given to arguing for causes rather than expressing an impartial, balanced opinion? The index entry on Haig in LG's War Memoirs runs to a couple of pages of pure vitriol. Despite the complaint about Haig and Robertson being immune to outbreaks of military genius, LG also managed to claim being bamboozled by these same two over the Passchendaele offensive! Extraordinary.

3) Nobody in British military history faced the same challenges as Haig in trying to evict millions of heavily armed, well trained Germans from well constructed defensive positions in North Eastern France and Belgium. He was, until 1917 at least, also the junior partner in an Alliance. Monty certainly never did. To compare the two is unfair on both. Possibly the most valid comparison is Marshall Zhukov having to evict millions of heavily armed Germans from Russia with the political pressures coming from Stalin rather than an alliance (perhaps there's another thread there, comparing the demands of Stalin with those of Joffre... ) - and we all know how few casualties were suffered on the eastern front.

4) If Haig must take the blame for the losses and apparent lack of strategic success in 1916-17 on the grounds that he was in charge and therefore responsible, he surely must take the credit for the staggering series of victories from August 1918, unparalleled in British military history. You can't blame him one year then give the credit the next to Monash, Foch, Currie, Rawlinson, Byng, Horne, Plumer or whoever subordinate commander.

5) Heavy casualties were not unique to the British experience in 1916-17. There were heavy casualties in the BEF in 1914-15 under French whilst Haig commanded a Corps, there were extremely heavy casualties in the much vaunted Storm Troops in the German Spring Offensive, the French suffered very heavy casualties under Joffre, Nivelle and Petain. Yet none of these actually won the war. Even the war winning, mobile, rapid advances of the hundred days offensive in 1918 was costly. Perhaps we should not be so appalled about the undoubtedly heavy casualties incurred winning the war, but grateful that we did not sustain many thousands more losing it?

But for the conspiracy theorists, with dark stories of royal patronage behind Haig, perhaps the real reason for Haig appearing on the WFA website can be found in the list of VPs of the WFA, where you will find a certain Earl Haig listed! Only kidding...

Cheers

DNH