|
|
dalek
Tavern Dweller
|
posted October 24, 2005 12:08 PM |
|
|
This is what i think about the war it's the great war world war one
The first waves of troops
On 21 August 1914, a squadron of 120 cavalrymen belonging to the 4th Dragoon Guards were sent forward to reconnoitre the land ahead of the advancing British Expeditionary Force.
The first wave of troops of the BEF had landed on the continent up to a week before, yet no contact had been made with the enemy. However, as British forces advanced deeper into France and then Belgium, unmistakable reports were being received from civilians that large numbers of German troops were advancing through Brussels towards the Belgium town of Mons.
Among the cavalrymen that day was a 16-year-old boy, Benjamin Clouting, the son of a groom working on a large estate in Sussex. Ben had grown up around the stables and had learned to ride from an early age. A boyhood interest in all things military, and a love for horses, brought Ben to the attention of several army officers who visited the big house. One of the officers, Adrian Carton de Wiart, who was later to win the Victoria Cross in the war, encouraged the young boy to enlist and so in August 1913, Ben joined up despite being just 15 years old.
'...he was about to be involved in the first engagement undertaken by British soldiers on continental Europe since the Battle of Waterloo...'
One year later, he was still well underage when the war broke out. Nevertheless, he was a fully trained cavalryman and was allowed to travel to France, although only after adamantly refusing to be left behind in England. Now, three weeks after war had been declared, he found himself riding, on a warm summer evening, in an advance guard towards thousands of enemy soldiers.
Unbeknown to him, he was about to be involved in the first engagement undertaken by British soldiers on continental Europe since the Battle of Waterloo, 99 years earlier. In an interview given shortly before he died in 1990, Ben recalled the first contact with the enemy and the opening shot - the first of billions fired in the four-year war.
Early signs in Europe
In Blackadder Goes Forth, Baldrick opined that the war began when 'Archie Duke shot an ostrich because he was hungry'. His garbled version of the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary reflects popular opinion: that the issues were not worth the ensuing bloodbath. Most modern scholars would not agree. Germany and Austria-Hungary (the Central Powers) are seen, at the very least, as creating the conditions for conflict. Some go much further, blaming Germany for planning and waging a deliberate war of aggression.
'Europe was divided into two armed camps: the Entente Powers and the Central Powers...'
Under Kaiser Wilhelm II, Germany moved from a policy of maintaining the status quo to a more aggressive stance. He decided against renewing a treaty with Russia, effectively opting for the Austrian alliance. Germany's western and eastern neighbours, France and Russia, signed an alliance in 1894 united by fear and resentment of Berlin. In 1898, Germany began to build up its navy, although this could only alarm the world's most powerful maritime nation, Britain. Recognising a major threat to her security, Britain abandoned the policy of holding aloof from entanglements with continental powers. Within ten years, Britain had concluded agreements, albeit limited, with her two major colonial rivals, France and Russia. Europe was divided into two armed camps: the Entente Powers and the Central Powers, and their populations began to see war not merely as inevitable but even welcome.
In the summer of 1914 the Germans were prepared, at the very least, to run the risk of causing a large-scale war. The crumbling Austro-Hungarian Empire decided, after the assassination on 28 June, to take action against Serbia, which was suspected of being behind the murder. The German government issued the so-called 'blank cheque' on 5-6 July, offering unconditional support to the Austrians, despite the risk of war with Russia. Germany, painted into a diplomatic corner by Wilhelm's bellicosity, saw this as a way of breaking up the Entente, for France and Britain might refuse to support Russia. Moreover, a wish to unite the nation behind the government may have been a motive. So might desire to strike against Russia before it had finished rebuilding its military strength after its defeat by Japan in 1905.
Marginal submarines
In 1914, the submarine was seen as a weapon of marginal importance. On the contrary, influenced by the legacy of Nelson and the theories of the American thinker AT Mahan, it was widely believed that a conflict between Britain and Germany would begin with a new Trafalgar: a decisive clash between British and German battleships.
Yet, it was to be the fragile Unterseeboot (U-Boat) rather than the mighty dreadnought that was to mount the most dangerous challenge to British maritime security during World War One. Just as was to occur later, in World War Two, U-Boat attacks on merchant shipping in the Atlantic brought Britain to the point of defeat. The Allies eventually prevailed, but at a heavy cost in lives.
'... the major threat was posed not by capital ships but by much cheaper weapons.'
When war came in 1914, both sides fought shy of an Armageddon of the battlefleets, not least because of the grave consequences of losing such a clash. It was not until May 1916 that a major fleet action occurred.
The Battle of Jutland was tactically indecisive, but nevertheless an important strategic victory for the Royal Navy, because the Germans returned to port and never again made a serious attempt to challenge the British Grand Fleet. There was a deep irony here. The build up of the German battlefleet had been a primary cause of the rise of tension between Berlin and London before the war. In reality, the major threat was posed not by capital ships but by much cheaper weapons.
Battle of the Somme: 1 July - 13 November 1916
Intended to be a decisive breakthrough, the Battle of the Somme instead became a byword for futile and indiscriminate slaughter, with General Haig's tactics remaining controversial even today.
The British planned to attack on a 24km (15 mile) front between Serre, north of the Ancre, and Curlu, north of the Somme. Five French divisions would attack an 13km (eight mile) front south of the Somme, between Curlu and Peronne. To ensure a rapid advance, Allied artillery pounded German lines for a week before the attack, firing 1.6 million shells. British commanders were so confident they ordered their troops to walk slowly towards the German lines. Once they had been seized, cavalry units would pour through to pursue the fleeing Germans.
However, unconcealed preparations for the assault and the week-long bombardment gave the Germans clear warning. Happy to remain on French soil, German trenches were heavily fortified and, furthermore, many of the British shells failed to explode. When the bombardment began, the Germans simply moved underground and waited. Around 7.30am on 1 July, whistles blew to signal the start of the attack. With the shelling over, the Germans left their bunkers and set up their positions.
As the 11 British divisions walked towards the German lines, the machine guns started and the slaughter began. Although a few units managed to reach German trenches, they could not exploit their gains and were driven back. By the end of the day, the British had suffered 60,000 casualties, of whom 20,000 were dead: their largest single loss. Sixty per cent of all officers involved on the first day were killed.
It was a baptism of fire for Britain's new volunteer armies. Many 'Pals' Battalions, comprising men from the same town, had enlisted together to serve together. They suffered catastrophic losses: whole units died together and for weeks after the initial assault, local newspapers would be filled with lists of dead, wounded and missing.
The French advance was considerably more successful. They had more guns and faced weaker defences, yet were unable to exploit their gains without British backup and had to fall back to earlier positions.
With the 'decisive breakthrough' now a decisive failure, Haig accepted that advances would be more limited and concentrated on the southern sector. The British took the German positions there on 14 July, but once more could not follow through. The next two months saw bloody stalemate, with the Allies gaining little ground. On 15 September Haig renewed the offensive, using tanks for the first time. However, lightly armed, small in number and often subject to mechanical failure, they made little impact.
Torrential rains in October turned the battlegrounds into a muddy quagmire and in mid-November the battle ended, with the Allies having advanced only 8km (five miles). The British suffered around 420,000 casualties, the French 195,000 and the Germans around 650,000. Only in the sense of relieving the French at Verdun can the British have claimed any measure of success.
That was the great war now known as world war one
____________
Exterminate!!
|
|
dalek
Tavern Dweller
|
posted October 24, 2005 12:13 PM |
|
|
This is the second great war
Battle of the Somme: 1 July - 13 November 1916
Intended to be a decisive breakthrough, the Battle of the Somme instead became a byword for futile and indiscriminate slaughter, with General Haig's tactics remaining controversial even today.
The British planned to attack on a 24km (15 mile) front between Serre, north of the Ancre, and Curlu, north of the Somme. Five French divisions would attack an 13km (eight mile) front south of the Somme, between Curlu and Peronne. To ensure a rapid advance, Allied artillery pounded German lines for a week before the attack, firing 1.6 million shells. British commanders were so confident they ordered their troops to walk slowly towards the German lines. Once they had been seized, cavalry units would pour through to pursue the fleeing Germans.
However, unconcealed preparations for the assault and the week-long bombardment gave the Germans clear warning. Happy to remain on French soil, German trenches were heavily fortified and, furthermore, many of the British shells failed to explode. When the bombardment began, the Germans simply moved underground and waited. Around 7.30am on 1 July, whistles blew to signal the start of the attack. With the shelling over, the Germans left their bunkers and set up their positions.
As the 11 British divisions walked towards the German lines, the machine guns started and the slaughter began. Although a few units managed to reach German trenches, they could not exploit their gains and were driven back. By the end of the day, the British had suffered 60,000 casualties, of whom 20,000 were dead: their largest single loss. Sixty per cent of all officers involved on the first day were killed.
It was a baptism of fire for Britain's new volunteer armies. Many 'Pals' Battalions, comprising men from the same town, had enlisted together to serve together. They suffered catastrophic losses: whole units died together and for weeks after the initial assault, local newspapers would be filled with lists of dead, wounded and missing.
The French advance was considerably more successful. They had more guns and faced weaker defences, yet were unable to exploit their gains without British backup and had to fall back to earlier positions.
With the 'decisive breakthrough' now a decisive failure, Haig accepted that advances would be more limited and concentrated on the southern sector. The British took the German positions there on 14 July, but once more could not follow through. The next two months saw bloody stalemate, with the Allies gaining little ground. On 15 September Haig renewed the offensive, using tanks for the first time. However, lightly armed, small in number and often subject to mechanical failure, they made little impact.
Torrential rains in October turned the battlegrounds into a muddy quagmire and in mid-November the battle ended, with the Allies having advanced only 8km (five miles). The British suffered around 420,000 casualties, the French 195,000 and the Germans around 650,000. Only in the sense of relieving the French at Verdun can the British have claimed any measure of success.
Russia's exit
Russia's exit from World War One, in 1917, must have made an eventual victory for Germany seem quite likely to German leaders, and vindicated their nurturing of Russian dissidents. From the very early months of World War One, the German government had been in touch with exiled Russian revolutionaries, many of them Bolsheviks, in the hopes that they could be used to undermine the Russian war effort against Germany.
'A sealed train passed through Germany ... with the conspirators hidden on board ...'
This didn't pay off in the first years of the war, but - although the Germans were in no way implicated - the February revolution in 1917 that eventually toppled the Russian tsarist regime raised German hopes that Russia would soon withdraw from the war. These hopes were soon dashed, as the new, provisional liberal government in Russia decided to continue to fight against Germany and the Central Powers.
Towards the end of March, however, the German foreign office and the High Command agreed to send one of the exiled Bolshevik leaders, Vladimir Lenin, plus 31 other émigrés opposed both to the tsarists and the liberals, back to Russia from Switzerland.
This was in the hopes that they would topple the Provisional Government and sue to bring an end to Russia's involvement in the war. A sealed train passed through Germany during the night of 10 to 11 April, with the conspirators hidden on board, and within a few months the policy appeared to be crowned with spectacular success.
Widespread war weariness among the general population of Russia was the major cause of the October Revolution of that year; this brought the Bolsheviks to power, and almost the first act of the new government was to publish its peace proposals on 8 November. The fighting on the Eastern Front ended within a few weeks, and a peace conference began its deliberations at Brest Litovsk on 22 December 1917.
The negotiations were lengthy and fractious and it was not until 3 March 1918 that the instruments were finally signed. Russia lost control of the Baltic States, Poland, Finland, the East Anatolian provinces, and the districts of Erdehan, Kars and Batum.
Ukraine became a theoretically independent state under German military occupation. Russia lost about one million square kilometers, and 50 million inhabitants, in a treaty negotiated on the theoretical basis of a peace without annexations and reparations.
Führerprinzip
How good was Hitler as a military commander? Was he, as his former subordinates claimed after World War Two ended, a meddlesome amateur who kept them from conducting the war properly? What were his strengths and weaknesses, his goals and methods? The answers to these questions reveal a man who was indeed responsible for Germany's downfall, though not entirely in the way that his generals claimed.
'Hitler was ... determined to command personally.'
Hitler was, first and foremost, determined to command personally. According to his so-called Leader Principle (Führerprinzip), ultimate authority rested with him and extended downward. At each level, the superior was to give the orders, the subordinates to follow them to the letter. In practice the command relationships were more subtle and complex, especially at the lower levels, but Hitler did have the final say on any subject in which he took a direct interest, including the details of military operations, that is, the actual direction of armies in the field.
Moreover, as time went on he took over positions that gave him ever more direct control. From leader (Führer) of the German state in 1934, he went on to become commander-in-chief of the armed forces in 1938, then commander-in-chief of the army in 1941. Hitler wanted to be the Feldherr, the generalissimo, exercising direct control of the armies himself, in much the same sense that Wellington commanded at Waterloo, albeit at a distance.
Blitz
Blitz, the German word for 'lightning', was applied by the British press to the tempest of heavy and frequent bombing raids carried out over Britain in 1940 and 1941. This concentrated direct bombing of industrial targets and civilian centres began on 7 September 1940, with heavy raids on London.
The scale of the attack rapidly escalated. In that month alone, the German Air Force dropped 5,300 tons of high explosives on the capital in just 24 nights. In their efforts to 'soften up' the British population and to destroy morale before the planned invasion, German planes extended their targets to include the major coastal ports and centres of production and supply.
The infamous raid of November 14 1940 on Coventry brought a still worse twist to the campaign. 500 German bombers dropped 500 tons of explosives and nearly 900 incendiary bombs on the city in ten hours of unrelenting bombardment, a tactic later emulated on an even greater scale by the RAF in their attacks on German cities.
The British population had been warned in September 1939 that air attacks on cities were likely and civil defence preparations had been started some time before, both on a national and a local level. Simple corrugated steel Anderson shelters, covered over by earth, were dug into gardens up and down the country. Larger civic shelters built of brick and concrete were erected in British towns and a blackout was rigorously enforced after darkness.
the night raids became so frequent that they were practically continuous. Many people who were tired of repeatedly interrupting their sleep to go back and forth to the street shelters, virtually took up residence in a shelter. This gave rise to a new spirit of solidarity and community.
Londoners took what seemed to them an obvious and sensible solution to the problem and moved down in their thousands into the tube stations. At first, this was actively discouraged by the government. However, this popular action held sway and it was a common sight for a traveller on the Underground in wartime London to pass through a station crowded with the sleeping bodies of men, women and children and their belongings.
The main air offensive against British cities diminished after May 1941, with the change of direction of the German war machine towards Russia. However, sporadic and lethal raids, using increasingly larger bombs, continued for several more years.
Introduction
The rescue of 7,000 Jews from Nazi-occupied Denmark in January 1943 has passed from history into legend. With the help of the Danish civil service and police, and the encouragement of King Christian X, almost the entire Jewish population was smuggled out of the country overnight, to neutral Sweden, without alerting the occupying forces.
'... Hungary resisted Nazi demands to hand over Jews ...'
It was the most daring of all such actions to save Jews from Nazi persecution through the years of World War Two, but great risks were also taken elsewhere. In 1941, in occupied Holland, for example, Communist trade unionists held protest strikes - ending with the deportation of leading demonstrators.
Even some pro-German states took a stand. Fascist Hungary resisted Nazi demands to hand over Jews until the country was invaded in 1944. Italy had anti-Semitic laws, but nevertheless defended French Jews in south-eastern France, which was occupied by the Italian army, and thus saved thousands of lives.
The last example is the most relevant to the tragic French experience, whose consequences are yet to be resolved. More than 60 years after a collaborationist French government helped deport 75,721 Jewish refugees and French citizens to Nazi death camps, the national conscience has still not fully come to terms with the betrayal of a community persecuted by French anti-Semitic laws.
Some people say this is not important but i say that it is enjoy!
____________
Exterminate!!
|
|
Guitarguy
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Rockoon.
|
posted October 24, 2005 12:28 PM |
|
|
Dalek,
Care to properly cite all of that information?
-Guitarguy
____________
|
|
Russ
Promising
Supreme Hero
blah, blah, blah
|
posted October 24, 2005 06:40 PM |
|
|
|
Just out of curiosity... how the f*ck is any of this related???
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
posted October 24, 2005 06:40 PM |
|
|
Vlaad,
I think you do not want to listen. You want to point fingers. If you wish to do so then that is what you will do. I cannot make you listen. All I am talking about is getting us out of Iraq. I never agreed for my country to go there in the beginning. I don't agree that they are there now. I worry about their sovereignty because we went there against our own peoples' wishes. There is a constant war going on here in the states. We are doing everything we can to get our troops out of that country but the President has an iron grip over our government. I understand if you hate Americans. Perhaps we haven't done enough to stop our President from invading Iraq.
Dalek,
I have a thread for your two very good world war posts. This thread is about Iraq, not our previous world wars. Please copy/paste them into the appropriate thread or creat a new one that you prefer. Please look here:
 http://heroescommunity.com/viewthread.php3?TID=11217
____________
Roses Are Red And So Am I
|
|
vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted October 24, 2005 07:52 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I think you do not want to listen. You want to point fingers. If you wish to do so then that is what you will do. I cannot make you listen. All I am talking about is getting us out of Iraq. I never agreed for my country to go there in the beginning. I don't agree that they are there now. I worry about their sovereignty because we went there against our own peoples' wishes. There is a constant war going on here in the states. We are doing everything we can to get our troops out of that country but the President has an iron grip over our government. [...] Perhaps we haven't done enough to stop our President from invading Iraq.
Jake, YOU VOTED for that president.
Quote:
I understand if you hate Americans
Give me a break. I just strongly disagree with your foreign policy.
____________
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
|
posted October 24, 2005 10:57 PM |
|
|
Then . . .
I will pay for the sins of my country's President according to your logic. So be it.
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I
|
|
arachnid
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted October 25, 2005 01:30 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I will pay for the sins of my country's President according to your logic. So be it.
Unfortunatly Britain is guilty as well, so we have a body count of 2000+ american soldiers,near 100 british soldiers, 3500 iraq police and military, Between 26690 and 30051 civilian iraqis. Why couldnt we of done the job right in afghanistan first?
____________
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
|
posted November 15, 2005 06:33 PM |
|
Edited By: Consis on 15 Nov 2005
|
Madonna's Anti-War Uselessness
Quote:
2003's "American Life," trumpeted the star's opposition to the Iraq war, complete with a violent video that included a spoof of President Bush. It drew the usual cries of outrage from her detractors, but for the first time in her two-decade career, sales were lackluster.
"Of course I was disappointed," she says, the bitterness still present in her voice and her eyes. "I sort of knew it already, but if you're an entertainer, you're not allowed to have an opinion. ... if you go against the grain, you will be punished. I thought there would be a lot of people who agreed with me."
This absolutely killed me with laughter. For cryin out loud Madonna what did you expect? You gave your full support to General Wesley Clark while mass-producing anti-war propaganda! I mean come on! Whether it be pro or con . . . propaganda by any other name would smell as sweet.
And by the same token, it's a very sweeping and broad generalization to say that 'entertainers aren't allowed to have opinions'. That is unequivically not true. That's only true for you because of the reputation you've made for yourself. There are plenty of other entertainers who are well respected for their political views mostly because of who they are as a person, not because they are entertainers. For example: Bruce Springstein, Paul McCartney, Phil Collins, Aretha Franklin, and a recently emerging Cindy Lauper. Those are only a few examples of respectable entertainers whose political opinions are very much 'allowed'.
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
posted November 20, 2005 07:11 PM |
|
|
The Fight Is On
We might soon have our Iraq-withdrawal debate in the House of Representatives.
I once told Redhawk, "We are doing everything we can to bring our troops home." Now it seems our goal is so close I can taste it. Redhawk, I hope you read this, know that your country loves you, and wants you to come home with honor. You are in my prayers.
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I
|
|
fortress_fan
Disgraceful
|
|
posted November 22, 2005 01:07 PM |
|
|
Evryone who says that it was right to atack Iraq, have wrong!
The folish president just want oil! He's a greedly idiot who deserves a bullet in hes patetic head!
Why did he atack Afganistan first? He wanted to build a pipeline to transport naturalgas!
The reasons he atacked Iraq is the same! Sadam was an evil dictator, but if Bush realy have cared aboat the people, he should don't have ány frendly relations with Saudi-arabia! In Saudi-arabia, they have an evil mosleem clan who rules evrything as dictators!
|
|
morgan_le_fey
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 25, 2005 04:00 AM |
|
|
Your right to some degree fortress...except bush never got any oil...not exactly. He got vice president dick cheneys old company haliburton the contract to rebuilt the pipelines saddam destroyed. as far as oil America is in worse shape than ever after president bushes actions..gasoline prices here in america are up 50% over when bush took office.
As for the saudi royal family, how they treat their own people is not for us to say..we americans have always had a good business relationship with them..saudi citizens as i understand it have free education free health care and no taxes and other beneifits...i dont know what these bad things you talk about are..but thats a heck of a lot more benefits than we americans get
morgan le fey
____________
|
|
Russ
Promising
Supreme Hero
blah, blah, blah
|
|
posted November 25, 2005 04:07 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Your right to some degree fortress...except bush never got any oil...
He failed to get the oil just like he failed pretty much everything else he tried (well, except for maybe making his daughters - he did a good job there, they look very cute). It was pretty clear to everyone except for him and his administration that he wouldn't get it and that Iraq would end up being another Vietnam. As soon as he leaves they'll overthrow his puppet, start a civil war and go back to the middle ages. Or there will be another Saddam. In either case, he won't get any oil.
1) Enter "failure" on google
2) Hit "I am feeling lucky"
3) Laugh
|
|
Phoenix72
Hired Hero
|
|
posted December 19, 2005 07:36 AM |
|
|
Thank GOD(ALLAH), very great numbers of humans exists even in united states thinking like you. Of course america did not attack ıraq for humanist reasons (I must say no country in the world do this ) because governments do attacks for economic or etc reasons) everybody knows or must know the reason was OOOİİİLLL. Nothing less nothing more.. United states is (still) the most powerful country in the world and of course wants to use this power. (İf you do not use your army what do they do?). I am a Turk and once upon a time ottoman empire was the strongest country in the world. We did same mistakes exactly like US (attacked lots of countries counquered them and we paid for these mistakes very heavily and maybe we are still paying for. So I must say GOD(ALLAH) exists and he never loves attackers(for money related reasons)
NOTE : Forgive me for bad english .
____________
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
|
posted December 19, 2005 02:10 PM |
|
|
Phoenix72,
Your english is good. Hamsi128 is also from Turkey.
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I
|
|
dejn
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted December 20, 2005 01:23 AM |
|
|
|
USA shouldn't be in Iraq at all. Can't they see that it will lead to other difficulties? In the end, the US will have enemies all around the world...
|
|
Phoenix72
Hired Hero
|
|
posted December 20, 2005 06:53 AM |
|
|
Thank you Consis. I estimated hamsi must be from Turkey. Because hamsi is a fish name form black sea region(their special food and economic resource ).Hamsi is important for them as sulfur is important to build dragons.
____________
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
|
posted February 26, 2006 08:47 PM |
|
|
Civil War . . . may come soon.
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I
|
|
friendofgunnar
Honorable
Legendary Hero
able to speed up time
|
|
posted June 08, 2006 10:48 AM |
|
|
Zarqawi snuffed out!
yeah baby!
You see, american bombs are good for something every once in awhile. 
|
|
Aquaman333
Famous Hero
of the seven seas
|
|
posted June 09, 2006 12:21 AM |
|
|
Finally.
That is one big blow to terrorist activity in the Middle East. I've been waiting for the newscast I heard a few hours ago for years.
____________
"Brian, look! There's a message in my Alphabits! It says,
"OOOOOOO!"."
"Peter, those are Cheerios."-Family Guy
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
