MILITARY HISTORY ONLINE

User:  
Password:  
 
 General History
Page 93 of 114 (Page:  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92    93    94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114 )
Message
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
10/7/2023 8:20:56 AM
Hey MHO'ers,

Perhaps Lord Tennyson''s greatest poem, A line used by Sir Robert Scott in his death tent!
"Made weak by time & fate! "To strive, to seek, to find and not to yield!" From his poem Ulysses! What a poem! What a line! What say you? Could someone post the whole poem!??

Checking 10-7, in today in history, we see these events, comments or ad your own topics from today's history? Thanks!

1571 The Christian Navy defeats the Ottoman Turkish Navy in the Battle of Lepanto! Anyone have the scoop on what type of ships & technology was used in this naval fight?? What significance did it have on the area?

1765, the colonies stamp act congress meets! Did the colonies have legitimate complaints! What say you??

1780 the Patriots defeat Loyalists at the Battle of Kings Mountain! Was this a turning point in the Revolutionary War in the south? Any good websites on it, or comments??

1949 The German Democratic Republic is formed was it a true democracy!? What say you?? We notice Democratic Republic is used by other Communist Regimes, like Vietnam, Korea, China, ect!? Are they misnomers?? Comments as to why?? Anyone?

Seize the day!
MD

Also on 2001 in answer in part to 9-11 attacks the Afghan War starts! What's your perception on this?? Anyone?

PS. Thanks for your responses!


BTW, Thanks George, for your informative post on the fortified towers of Kingston, Ontario. The website has some nice videos that explain these kind fortifications well!
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
10/7/2023 8:25:08 AM
I moved Georges post to the new page for easy viewing, & continued discussion, these forts in a way do look like they originated from Middle Age Europe? What say you??

Quote:
Quote:
Guys,

Why are there round fortresses across Canada, mostly out east, built in the 1800's, or before? They almost look like silos with rifle or canon portholes, Londonderry, Halifax, & other prominent towns in Canada have them? The Carleton Martello Tower, Over looking St. Johns, Canada, is another example? Were they Influenced by warfare or threats from the south of them!?? Why such un-usual round shapes? They almost appear to be like huge round blockhouses? Were they very effective? Can anyone enlighten us on this mystery??

What was there purpose? Anyone?
MD

Any pics or websites welcome??


MD, I think that you are speaking of all of the Martello towers. These mini-forts were built in many parts of the British Empire. As you have noted there are many of them to be found across Canada.

This is the Murney Tower (an example of a Martello) that may be found in Kingston, about one hour from my home.



The Murney Tower was built in 1846 in response to the tension between Britain and the US over the Oregon Territory. There was concern that war could break out as President James Polk was blustering about seizing all of the Oregon territory with no thought of a compromise to set a border at the 49th parallel. So yes, some of these Martellos were built to provide protection for troops from invaders from the south. There were three more Martello towers built in the Kingston area alone.

Below is a website that describes the Murney Martello and it shows the interior of this tower. I have toured the Murney and it is tight but a group of soldiers has a 360 degree view from the different viewing ports. The article does indicate that the original Martello towers that may be seen in other parts of the Empire did not have a roof. The top level was a gun platform. But a building without a roof doesn't make sense in the type of climate found in Canada.

[Read More]

By 1860 these towers were of little use and many fell into disrepair. The Murney Tower was a reclamation project itself.

I had to investigate to find out why these gun towers are all called Martello and it seems that the Corsicans erected imposing towers on their coastline and they were equipped with warning bells. The hammer that was used to strike the bell was called a "martello". I presume that the British thought that the Corsican towers were a good idea.

Corsican ruin of a Martello




The tower below sits on the Plains of Abraham at Québec City. This is the site of the famous battle of 1759 in which James Wolfe defeated Montcalm and defeated the French in North America. The British built this Martello in 1808.



Cheers,

George




BTW nice pics.
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
10/7/2023 8:28:53 AM
MD, there are Martellos in the US too and not all built by the British.

This one is the Walbach Tower built in New Hampshire in 1812



George
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
10/7/2023 3:51:58 PM
Quote:
1765, the colonies stamp act congress meets! Did the colonies have legitimate complaints! What say you??


There are two sides to the story. The cost to the provision of protective services to the colonies had been and continued to be high. Britain had removed the threat to the colonies represented by French troops and FN allies to the 13 colonies. At considerable expense, the French had been expelled by 1763.

Britain had hoped to keep settlers out of the Ohio Valley to provide a homeland for FN allies but that proved to be difficult and the influx of white settlers placed those settlers at odds with the indigenous population. When the warrior Chief Pontiac rebelled in 1763, there was considerable cost to quelling the uprising. Maintenance of a standing army and support for colonial militia was damaging the British economy.

And so the British Parliament determined that direct taxation of all of the British colonies in North America would be appropriate. They decided that nearly all documents and playing cards would have to be marked with a stamp of government approval and at a cost. That was the Stamp Act.

Many of the colonies argued that this tax was levied without approval of their legislative councils and more to the point, the colonies did not have elected members of Parliament to represent them. The question that I have had is whether the colonists would have acquiesced to the Stamp Act had they had Parliamentary legislation even if those representatives were unsuccessful in preventing the enactment of the Stamp Act. The colonists especially in Massachusetts seemed to have been a rather independent lot who were resentful that their relationship with the British Parliament had been altered and established conventions ignored. So would they have rebelled anyway?

Also many of the colonies did have a representative in London though it was not elected representation. I believe that Ben Franklin was the agent who represented Pennsylvania, Georgia, New Jersey and Massachusetts although not all at the same time. And in February 1766, Franklin attended the House of Commons in London and made representation against the Stamp Act. Apparently, he was quite a persuasive man because one month later, Parliament repealed the act.

I think that Britain and the crown had not appreciated that their colonies across the Atlantic were establishing different cultures and perhaps viewed their relationship with the crown differently. The crown assumed that the colonies existed to provide raw material and material goods for the mother country. They were under the control and guidance of the crown and the government departments created to administer to the colonies. The colonies perhaps felt that their constitutional rights as British subjects were violated when taxes were imposed when the colonies had no representation.

However, they had never had such representation though some colonies, the charter colonies operated with a great deal of independence from the crown. Other colonies were Royal colonies and these colonies were administered directly by the crown. The third type of colony was a proprietary colony in which land grants were given to individuals or consortiums. They were allowed to govern as they saw fit though under the direction of the crown. So many colonies were comfortable as quasi-independent states.

The problem was that many of the proprietary and charter colonies had failed, compelling the crown to step in and to govern them as Royal Colonies. That meant more direct control.

So did the colonies have legitimate complaints? I think that they did and I also think that the British crown and Parliament came to realize that. The bigger question is whether any of these taxes and the Coercive Acts were sufficient grounds to warrant armed insurrection. That question I still wonder about.

Of note there were other British colonies in North America that gave scant attention to the Stamp Act. Nova Scotia, as an example, was full of New Englanders. They were in the majority though not evenly spread in all areas of the colony. One would expect that these people would respond to taxation much as the other New England colonies had. But they did not. There was some localized protest but nothing of the scale seen in Massachusetts.

The Nova Scotia legislature did not blink an eye and in fact on the King's birthday they had the obligatory and sincere salute to the monarch. The governor of Nova Scotia was able to report that the Stamp Act was implemented with no obstruction at all despite a minor disturbance in a town called Liverpool. Perhaps with wishful thinking, the New England colonies reported every small incident of discontent in NS as the signal that they fully supported civil disobedience. However, unlike the situation in many New England colonies, the government agent responsible for the administration of the Stamp Act was allowed to go about his business. There were a few instances whereby the man was called names but he did not have his person or property assaulted as happened in parts of New England.

A newspaper in NS, the Nova Scotia Gazette maintained its sales and it appeared with the stamps on the paper. Vessels departing from Nova Scotia ports did so with paperwork stamped. Some ran into problems when they made port in a New England town. Upon seeing NS paperwork with a stamp they wanted to search the ships for more items that may be stamped, presumably to burn them.

New England newspapers published editorials that assured readers that the Nova Scotians had been so severely cowed by British troops that they were afraid to rebel against the tax. They could not accept that some British subjects were not overly concerned with the tax. New England papers suggested that military force had been used to quell discontent in NS. Nothing could be further from the truth. Nova Scotians, whether New Englanders, Scots, English or German simply went about their businesses.

Of course, ships returning to port in NS from other New England ports arrived without stamps on their documents. No-one in a New England port was going to stamp anything to comply with the law. That could have been problematic for the returning ship's master but Nova Scotia authorities just decided to ignore the infractions and did not charge anyone.

With the act repealed both the 13 colonies and the rest of the British colonies including Nova Scotia were very happy. Nova Scotians sent letters of thanks to the King for the action. But there would continue to be some tension between NS and the 13 colonies as the more rebellious colonies could not understand why Nova Scotian New Englanders were so passive.



An article published on JStor titled, "The Stamp Act in Nova Scotia".

[Read More]

Cheers,

George

EDIT: Photo of the one penny stamp that had to appear on newspapers and other documents. Newspapers for example could only print on paper purchased with the stamp on it.







Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
10/7/2023 3:59:24 PM
Quote:
MD, there are Martellos in the US too and not all built by the British.

This one is the Walbach Tower built in New Hampshire in 1812



George




Wow George,

Check out that WWI or older vintage Ironclad in the background! Wonder what USN naval port would be in New Hampshire??

I'll have to check it out next time I'm in that state!?

Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
10/7/2023 4:54:09 PM
MD the Martello in New Hampshire is near Portsmouth. The Portsmouth harbour was protected by Fort Constitution and the tower was built to cover the rear of the fort.

George
OpanaPointer
St. Louis MO USA
Posts: 1968
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
10/7/2023 5:03:04 PM
Ironclad?
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4806
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
10/7/2023 8:20:13 PM
Quote:
Perhaps Lord Tennyson''s greatest poem, A line used by Sir Robert Scott in his death tent!
"Made weak by time & fate! "To strive, to seek, to find and not to yield!" From his poem Ulysses! What a poem! What a line! What say you? Could someone post the whole poem!??

I am NOT going to be the person who inflicts 70 lines of blank verse on an unsuspecting MHO audience! But I may offer some comments on Tennyson and his poetry!

Tennyson was, of course, Poet Laureate to Queen Victoria. “Ulysses”, on the other hand, was a poem of Tennyson’s youth, written in 1833 at age 24 – before Victoria was even considered for the throne. Some read the poem as a response to the death of his very close friend Arthur Hallam, and that could be so. Some see it as an acceptance of the need to continue despite loss and change. Some see it as an elegy/lament for lost values (whether they be values of the Romantic Age or of the Georgian period, combined with the need to continue. I read it without too heavy a demand on historical context; I think historical framework(s) diminish the poem somewhat. I’m not a great Tennyson fan, to be honest. But there as aspects of his writing I love, and certain poems – “Ulysses” among them – I still enjoy thoroughly.

Cheers
Brian G

A comment on poetic values, just for the hell of it. As with nearly all poets, but with Tennyson in particular, I would advise reading the poem aloud. Don’t be afraid to put some drama into your reading. Makes all the difference, in my experience. In “Morte d’Arthur”, the final book of Tennyson’s “Idyls of the King”, there is a simple line: “So all day long the noise of battle rolled”. Perfect iambic pentameter, as is “To strive, to seek, to find and not to yield”. In the former line, all those long vowels help create the battle sound the line describes. In the latter, the regularity of the meter and those ten single syllable words automatically forces an accent on the “not” of “not to yield”. Both lines are brilliant, just because they are well-crafted and work both structurally and vocally.

Sorry. It just kinda spilled over.
B
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
10/9/2023 10:58:14 AM
Hi Brian,

Thanks for your take on Lord Tennyson's poetry. I guess my point on that particular line from Ulysses was that Sir Robert Scott thought enough of it, to post it on his death bed, of Ice to express, how he felt about his noble endeavor, living life to the fullest, to be the 1st to the pole!? What say you? Noble? Or not!?

Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
10/9/2023 11:01:20 AM
Today,

10-8-1871 the Great Chicago fire wipes out the city! Supposedly started by a cow! Has your city suffered from a great fire? Early on fire departments were left wanting!? Comments?

Tomorrow, 10-9 in history, the following occurred!

1635 Roger Williams banished to Rhode Island from Massachusetts Colony because of religious differences! Talk about freedom of religion!? Do you think religion is to involved in government!? What say you??

1888 the Washington Monument is dedicated! Why does it have2 types of bricks!? Anyone?

1940 Beatle John Lennon is born, why would anyone kill a musician like him?? Comments?

Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
morris crumley
Dunwoody GA USA
Posts: 3309
Joined: 2007
This day in World History! Continued
10/9/2023 9:47:11 PM
About that monument......the civil war broke out when they were about a third of the way up and construction funding was stopped..as was the work. When it started back up post-bellum, the stone was from a different quarry location and did not match.

So, as fate, or God would have it, a monument to one of our most important founders shows very clearly the divide that engulfed the country.

Respects, Morris
----------------------------------
"You are a $70, red-wool, pure quill military genius, or the biggest damn fool in northern Mexico."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
10/10/2023 8:41:03 AM
Quote:
1635 Roger Williams banished to Rhode Island from Massachusetts Colony because of religious differences! Talk about freedom of religion!? Do you think religion is to involved in government!? What say you??


It's interesting to note how different colonies operated in North America. The type of colony could allow a great deal of autonomy if it was a proprietary colony or even a charter colony. Royal colonies were administered more directly by the crown.

And there were variations within the types of colonies. I don't fully understand the relationship between Rhode Island and the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Perhaps someone with greater knowledge than I will explain it.

Both were charter colonies and had the right to make laws so long as those laws comported with the laws of England. They could have representative government within the colony but the colonists could establish the degree of representation that they wanted.

It seems that as the Massachusett's Bay Company established itself as a Quaker colony, it practiced discrimination against other faiths. Roger Williams protested that and he protested the treatment of the indigenous people. Williams felt that they should be fairly compensated for their land.

His protests led to a judgement by the Massachusett's courts and he was banished.

He went to the Rhode Island area which (as I understand it) was originally part of the Massachusett's Bay area guaranteed in the charter. When Rhode Island received its charter, the deputies named in the charter included Williams.and while a Quaker himself, he and others practiced religious tolerance and indeed, people from other faiths migrated to RH to avoid discrimination. That include Jews and Roman Catholics.

When I was reading a bit about Williams, I was surprised to learn that he insisted upon paying the indigenous people for their land.

Rhode Island was described as a progressive colony. The cultures in the different British colonies certainly weren't homogeneous.

Cheers,

George

Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
10/10/2023 8:28:17 PM
Again,

On 10-10 these events happened!?

1970 Fiji gained independence from Great Britain! Back in history the Fijians had competitions with Tonga, the losers would get eaten! Seriously!? Comments?

1979 NHL Wayne Gretsky gets his 1st goal NHL goal! Was he the greatest offensive scorer in NHL history!? Anyone?

1845, the US Naval Academy is formed! When do you think the USN finally caught the RN!?

10-12, is Columbus Day! Take a Viking to lunch!? ☺

MD

Any new events for this time frame?? Anyone?

BTW George good reply & post on Roger Williams!
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
10/10/2023 8:36:08 PM
Quote:
Ironclad?




Hi OP,

I meant to say Dreadnought! A WWI era term for battleship?☺

MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
OpanaPointer
St. Louis MO USA
Posts: 1968
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
10/11/2023 1:11:25 AM
The first All Big Gun heavy warship was ... USS Michigan. It wasn't finished before Dreadnought however, so pride of place goes to the Brits.
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6498
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
10/12/2023 1:49:09 AM
1917 : Passchendaele. The New Zealanders mount an attack which is murderously repulsed, and their division is massacred. This is the worst day in New Zealand’s history.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
OpanaPointer
St. Louis MO USA
Posts: 1968
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
10/12/2023 7:51:34 AM
To absent friends.
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
10/12/2023 8:33:51 AM
Quote:
1917 : Passchendaele. The New Zealanders mount an attack which is murderously repulsed, and their division is massacred. This is the worst day in New Zealand’s history.

Regards, Phil


Quite astonishing to account for the losses of British and Commonwealth soldiers during 3rd Ypres. The Passchendaele ridge just wasn't worth the expense of life.

Cheers,

George
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued!
10/12/2023 10:00:45 AM


BTW, about the Kiwi's worse day, just curious were they lead by Kiwi officers?
What do you think went so horribly wrong in the attack??

What say you?? Anyone?

New posts 10-11 to 10-13 comments, anyone? 10-11, below!?

1531 The Swiss Reformation is in full swing, remember William Tell, the dude with the crossbow!? Or was he just fabricated??

1899 the Boer War between Great Britain & the Afrikaners begins, who instigated this war, who was the good guy, in this war?? Anyone with websites or comments??

2002 George W Bush is given Carte Blanche with regards to War with Iraq, because of 9-11!? What resulted because of this? What say you??

& on 10-12, the USS Cole was attacked by suicide bombers 17 sailors were killed!? How could this happen to a USN warship! Where is security? Anyone??

Also of course it's Columbus Day, A bit presumptuous? Comments on who really discovered the new world??

& tomorrow10-13, A few other notable events, listed below, comments??

1792 the cornerstone laid for the White house!With the Patriots attack on Toronto aside. Why would the British later try to burn it down!? Very uncivilized! Don't you think? Anyone??

1925 Margaret Thatcher is born, was she a good PM for the UK!? Why did many Irish not like her?? What's your take on how she was as a PM leader of Great Britain? including her part in the Falklands War??

1943 Italy declares war on Germany!? Say what?? I thought these 2 were the ultimate Axis buddies!? Comments, anyone!?

1946 the 4th French Republic becomes fact! What were the 1st 3?? Comments?

1972 a Uguayrian Soccer Team crashed in the Andes Mountains! How were they able to survive for months in inhospitable, lifeless terrain!? Anyone?? Wasn't there also a book or movie on it??

1988 the shroud of Turin is found by radio carbon dating, not to be Christ's burial shroud!? Just how does Radio Carbon Dating work?? Could someone post a website on how it works? Or post on it?? Anyone?

Seize the day!?
Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
morris crumley
Dunwoody GA USA
Posts: 3309
Joined: 2007
This day in World History! Continued!
10/12/2023 12:37:32 PM

That 1988 carbon dating result is now very much in doubt by numerous peer-reviewed studies. Having set aside certain protocols to do the testing, they then violated most of them. We don`t know if it is or not the burial shroud of Jesus, but the 1988 testing has been itself debunked.

In addition, in 2000 years, including our current time, no one has been able to duplicate or suggest how the image on the shroud was done. If it is a fake, surely, centuries later it could be done by others.

Respects, Morris
----------------------------------
"You are a $70, red-wool, pure quill military genius, or the biggest damn fool in northern Mexico."
DT509er
Santa Rosa CA USA
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued!
10/12/2023 12:45:18 PM
Quote:
1943 Italy declares war on Germany!? Say what?? I thought these 2 were the ultimate Axis buddies!? Comments, anyone!?

Seize the day!?
Regards,
MD


Well, that declaration didn't help one bit.

The fight in Italy was a slugging match with the Germans pouring death from high-atop the mountains and passes of, while the Allies down in the valleys fought against extremely demanding obstacles taking those passes, peaks, and river crossings. Italy, much like Buna was not so much about maneuver, strike, and advance, it was pound them with everything we have both ways. The slow, continuous attrition of casualties and advancement made both battles all about keeping the supply line of replacements, ammo and weaponry fed into the killing machine. Add in the seasonal environments both had, man, what foul battles they were.

Good thing the 82nd Airborne never made that planned jump for Gallant II into Rome, it would have made Avellino look pathetic and could have had negative implications for future airborne operations on the US side similar to Hitlers reaction after Crete 1941.

Dan
----------------------------------
"American parachutists-devils in baggy pants..." German officer, Italy 1944. “If your experiment needs statistics, you ought to have done a better experiment.” Lord Ernest Rutherford
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued!
10/12/2023 1:50:29 PM
Quote:
BTW, about the Kiwi's worse day, just curious were they lead by Kiwi officers?
What do you think went so horribly wrong in the attack??


I believe that both ANZAC Corps were commanded by a British officer. I don't know whether New Zealanders commanded the NZ divisions and whether Australians commanded Australian divisions. But there was nothing unusual in WW1 to see British officers in command of Commonwealth divisions. Many made valuable contributions and without British officer input, Commonwealth armies would have been hard pressed to find native born command and divisional staffs. Australian, NZ and Canada all needed British input.

If the Canadian experience is similar to that of Australia and NZ, the number of senior officers in the Corps who were natives of the country did increase. Sometimes Canadians loved their British officers and sometimes they did not. It was a learning experience for both the British officers and the Canadian officers and men who worked with them. For example, when the Canadian Corps was commanded by General Julian Byng they called themselves, "Byng's Boys". They liked the man and he grew to like them even though he wondered why he had been sent to command Canadians, having written back to high command, "Why am I sent to the Canadians? I don't even know a Canadian." As I said, it took time to develop a rapport. Truthfully, I don't know whether the situation was the same for the New Zealanders.

As for the battle, I can say that the New Zealanders had already been in battle for quite some time before the attack on October 12. They had taken Gravenstafel Spur on October 4. This spur is one of several high points that had to be taken before the Passchendaele Ridge could be attacked.

Despite slogging through the heavy mud and rain that characterized much of the combat in the fall of 1917, the New Zealanders took the spur. They were aided by an effective artillery shoot. But the Germans had packed the forward trenches and so there were many casualties before the battle was over. The NZ division took over 1000 casualties and 500 of those had been killed or mortally wounded.

General Haig was convinced that the Germans were weakening and teetering on the brink of a major defeat and retreat and so he wanted to exploit the Oct. 4 success.

In the deep, deep mud, tired troops struggled to form into position. Artillery guns couldn't get forward in time and so the artillery shoot that preceded the attack did not take out the barbed wire. The British and Australians went forward this time on Oct. 9 and the attack failed. Casualties were heavy again.

Haig was undeterred and did not allow his British and ANZAC forces to rest and regroup. He ordered another attack mounted. This was a large operation involving 13 divisions in 6 Corps. Major-General John Monash (Australian and one of the finest generals on the British side in WW1) led the 4th Australian division. I do not know who led the NZ division. Perhaps someone will tell me.

The Australians were supposed to take Passchendaele while the New Zealanders would take Bellevue Spur. The pictures of the mud of Passchendaele are well known. And the troops attacked through the mire on October 12.

It was a costly affair due to the lack of preparation time and the god awful mud. Wire still blocked the way. Artillery batteries had not had sufficient time to move the guns into position and the artillery shoot had not been well planned due to lack of time. In a best case scenario, artillery spotters would have identified the targets and gunners would be zeroed in on those targets. This did not happen on Oct. 12. There was a creeping barrage planned that was not delivered effectively at 5:30 AM.

The attack bogged down in the mud. The attack began in a drizzle which quickly became a driving rain storm. The Australians on the right did manage to take a few pill boxes but most troops had to take shelter in shell holes. German soldiers moved forward and infiltrated the Australian and NZ positions.

Another order came to attack again at 3 PM but someone came to his senses and this attack was cancelled. Troops had to fall back to their start positions but there were many wounded suffering in the the shell holes. A truce was arranged with the Germans and over the next two days, stretcher bearers worked hard to get them out.

The New Zealanders took 2700 casualties. 950 of those were either dead or mortally wounded. 843 are listed as killed in battle but whether they died in ambulances en route to hospitals or at the time of combat is unknown. For New Zealand, Oct. 12 stands as their blackest day.

The Canadian Corps moved in to replace the ANZAC Corps on Oct. 18 though it was a week from that day before the New Zealanders were pulled back. Even at that, New Zealand gunners remained to support the Canadians in their upcoming battle for Passchendaele Ridge. Haig was still determined that it had to be taken.

An article on the NZ division published in New Zealand history

[Read More]

Hell on earth. Passchendaele






George


George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued!
10/12/2023 2:14:24 PM
Quote:
1792 the cornerstone laid for the White house!With the Patriots attack on Toronto aside. Why would the British later try to burn it down!? Very uncivilized! Don't you think? Anyone??


While no strangers to using fire to make their point, the British also had been severely provoked by Americans using the same tactics.

April 27, 1813. York (now Toronto) was the capital of Upper Canada and when the Americans raided on that day, they pillaged and burned. They did restrict themselves to government buildings though they were quite angry as the retreating British had blown up the magazine and killed 55 while wounding 265. Their General Zebulon Pike was one of the dead. And so the Americans did engage in some theft though I do not recall whether they burned private homes. I do not think so.

Dec. 10, 1813. The campaign on the Niagara Peninsula had been a failure and the Americans had found themselves confined to former British Fort George overlooking Lake Ontario where the Niagara River deposits its waters. They decided to leave Upper Canada but not before torching an adjacent village, Niagara-on-the-Lake which was the former capital of Upper Canada. They burned all but three homes and drove about 400 people out into the snow, leaving them homeless. Some took refuge in the lighthouse which the Americans left alone for some reason. Of note, the American officer, Gen. McClure who had ordered the town to be torched was dismissed from the service because he gave orders to do it. That is odd since, McClure argued that he was under orders for Sec. of War, John Armstrong.

Dec. 18, 1813. In retaliation the British crossed the Niagara and took the American Fort Niagara and proceeded to advance south, burning everything that they could see. They destroyed Lewiston, Youngstown, Manchester, Tuscarora and the small military post and surrounding settlement of Fort Schlosser before returning home.

Dec. 29, 1813. The British returned to complete the job. Landing at Black Rock, they headed south and burned the town of Buffalo. The British had announced to the Americans that the only reason that they were doing this was because the Americans had destroyed Niagara-on-the-Lake.

Having secured the old Northwest and Fort Detroit, the Americans sent raids into Upper Canada to burn the homes of Loyalists that they did not like and to set fire to mills and grain storage facilities. It was argued that this was retribution for Buffalo.

As said, the British have used the torch in other conflicts including the 1759 battles that drove the French out of most of North America. In this case, I would say that the burning of Washington government buildings including the Presidential home was retributive justice.

Uncivilized? Indeed, for both sides. Have we learned anything? See Ukraine, Israel and Gaza.

Cheers,

George

Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued!
10/12/2023 2:52:20 PM
Quote:
Quote:
BTW, about the Kiwi's worse day, just curious were they lead by Kiwi officers?
What do you think went so horribly wrong in the attack??


I believe that both ANZAC Corps were commanded by a British officer. I don't know whether New Zealanders commanded the NZ divisions and whether Australians commanded Australian divisions. But there was nothing unusual in WW1 to see British officers in command of Commonwealth divisions. Many made valuable contributions and without British officer input, Commonwealth armies would have been hard pressed to find native born command and divisional staffs. Australian, NZ and Canada all needed British input.

If the Canadian experience is similar to that of Australia and NZ, the number of senior officers in the Corps who were natives of the country did increase. Sometimes Canadians loved their British officers and sometimes they did not. It was a learning experience for both the British officers and the Canadian officers and men who worked with them. For example, when the Canadian Corps was commanded by General Julian Byng they called themselves, "Byng's Boys". They liked the man and he grew to like them even though he wondered why he had been sent to command Canadians, having written back to high command, "Why am I sent to the Canadians? I don't even know a Canadian." As I said, it took time to develop a rapport. Truthfully, I don't know whether the situation was the same for the New Zealanders.

As for the battle, I can say that the New Zealanders had already been in battle for quite some time before the attack on October 12. They had taken Gravenstafel Spur on October 4. This spur is one of several high points that had to be taken before the Passchendaele Ridge could be attacked.

Despite slogging through the heavy mud and rain that characterized much of the combat in the fall of 1917, the New Zealanders took the spur. They were aided by an effective artillery shoot. But the Germans had packed the forward trenches and so there were many casualties before the battle was over. The NZ division took over 1000 casualties and 500 of those had been killed or mortally wounded.

General Haig was convinced that the Germans were weakening and teetering on the brink of a major defeat and retreat and so he wanted to exploit the Oct. 4 success.

In the deep, deep mud, tired troops struggled to form into position. Artillery guns couldn't get forward in time and so the artillery shoot that preceded the attack did not take out the barbed wire. The British and Australians went forward this time on Oct. 9 and the attack failed. Casualties were heavy again.

Haig was undeterred and did not allow his British and ANZAC forces to rest and regroup. He ordered another attack mounted. This was a large operation involving 13 divisions in 6 Corps. Major-General John Monash (Australian and one of the finest generals on the British side in WW1) led the 4th Australian division. I do not know who led the NZ division. Perhaps someone will tell me.

The Australians were supposed to take Passchendaele while the New Zealanders would take Bellevue Spur. The pictures of the mud of Passchendaele are well known. And the troops attacked through the mire on October 12.

It was a costly affair due to the lack of preparation time and the god awful mud. Wire still blocked the way. Artillery batteries had not had sufficient time to move the guns into position and the artillery shoot had not been well planned due to lack of time. In a best case scenario, artillery spotters would have identified the targets and gunners would be zeroed in on those targets. This did not happen on Oct. 12. There was a creeping barrage planned was not delivered effectively at 5:30 AM.

The attack bogged down in the mud. The attack began in a drizzle which quickly became a driving rain storm. The Australians on the right did manage to take a few pill boxes but most troops had to take shelter in shell holes. German soldiers moved forward and infiltrated the Australian and NZ positions.

Another order came to attack again at 3 PM but someone came to his senses and this attack was cancelled. Troops had to fall back to their start positions but there were many wounded suffering the the shell holes. A truce was arranged with the Germans and over the next two days, stretcher bearers worked hard to get them out.

The New Zealanders took 2700 casualties. 950 of those were either dead or mortally wounded. 843 are listed as killed in battle but whether they died in ambulances en route to hospitals or at the time of combat is unknown. For New Zealand, Oct. 12 stands as their blackest day.

The Canadian Corps moved in to replace the ANZAC Corps on Oct. 18 though it was a week from that day before the New Zealanders were pulled back. Even at that, New Zealand gunners remained to support the Canadians in their upcoming battle for Passchendaele Ridge. Haig was still determined that it had to be taken.

An article on the NZ division published in New Zealand history

[Read More]

Hell on earth. Passcendaele






George





Hi George,

Some major history sources, including History Net, UK essays, other historians ,& authors, suggest Haig was one of the worst WWI generals! His outdated use of Cavalry & not updating his tactics, lead to his title, "the Butcher of the Somme! Eventually he improved his performance in battle tactics, but his casualty rate & stubbornness, & his casualty numbers speak for themselves! Perhaps he should have been the 1st to charge out of the trenches & lead the charge into German maxim machine guns!

Wonder if he would have been so quick to attack then!?
What say you?? Anyone?
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6498
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued!
10/12/2023 3:34:50 PM
Thanks for that excellent contribution about Passchendaele, George.

The New Zealand Division was thoroughly Kiwi from top to bottom, commanded by Russel, who had been born in NZ in the 1860s.

It enjoyed a degree of Dominion independence, and was answerable to Kiwi politicians.

Only the week before it had been very successful in the Broodseinde fighting.

This is a good example of initial success being followed by dismal failure.

There were only one million people in New Zealand at that time, and their loss of life that day rivalled that of Canada at Dieppe a quarter of a century later.

Dave,

Haig is a controversial character, rather similar in reputation to Grant in the Civil War.

He was a war winner, but the cost of his approach was appallingly high. That was the nature of that war. He had been under fire, and he possessed moral and physical courage.

He is not an easy man to like, but he didn’t care, which is to his credit in that profession.

Editing: A British officer, General Godley, was in command of the ANZACs, and this makes my earlier statement about the NZ division being under entirely Kiwi command a blunder by me. The division was indeed commanded by a New Zealander, but the Corps to which it belonged was under the command of a British general. I must check my narrative.
This action that I’m writing about was also thrown together too quickly, just like my post, with fatal results . The Canadians took over the job, planned it meticulously, deployed sufficient and properly sited artillery, and succeeded where others had failed. George, you’re needed 😂.

Regards, Phil

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
10/13/2023 8:55:42 AM
Today in world history!

10-13, A few other notable events, not commented on yet, below, comments??

1925 Margaret Thatcher is born, was she a good PM for the UK!? Why did many Irish not like her?? What's your take on how she was as a PM leader of Great Britain? including her part in the Falklands War?

1946 the 4th French Republic becomes fact! What were the 1st 3?? Comments?

1972 a Uguayrian Soccer Team crashed in the Andes Mountains! How were they able to survive for months in inhospitable, lifeless terrain!? Anyone?? Wasn't there also a book or movie on it??

Checking tomorrow, 10-14 in history, in 1066 the battle of Hastings, decides in part, the future of England!
Saxons verse Normans, How did the invaders win??did they use better tactics? Anyone?

1644 William Penn founds the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania! Just what is a Commonwealth compared to just a state or colony? What say you?? How many states are also Commonwealths?? Anyone?

1806 Napoleon wins the Battle of Jena! Did he have a method to win most battles in this timeframe?? What was his strategy? It seems in future battles other commanders like RE Lee used it?? Comments??

1926 Winnie the Pooh, is created! My kids have always like this classic! Now it's my Grand Kids who are being introduced!? History repeating itself!? ☺

1944 the Desert Fox Erwin Rommel is forced to take his own life! Why did Hitler kill off his best generals? (88 of them) was he his own worst enemy?? Was he somewhat mad!? Did he have both orrs in the water? Was he dealing with A full deck? Was he all there?? Were his lights on but nobody was home? What kind of fruitcake was he? Anyone?????

1947 test pilot, Chuck Yeager breaks the sound barrier! Could some one explain the science behind this?? Comments?

1964 MLK Jr is very active in Civil Rights using peaceful means! Why even today has this been unsuccessful? Just what is the drawback to delaying equality? Specifically, if you could pinpoint it? Just what group is holding equality back??? What say you?? Comments anyone??

Regards,
MD


BTW, Phil, I can see where Grant & Haig were alike in their relentless attacking, but US Grant won more battles, & then the war itself!
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
10/13/2023 9:15:51 AM
Quote:
BTW, Phil, I can see where Grant & Haig were alike in their relentless attacking, but US Grant won more battles, & then the war itself!


Better explain that one Dave. The US civil was a seminal moment in US history. It was bloody and resulted in 600,000 deaths. That's considerable but it pales in comparison to the human cost and the numbers participating in WW1. Arguably and probably logically, the US Civil War had much greater impact on the US people and culture than did WW1.

The civil war was an industrialized war but by 1914 the scale of industrialization had increased greatly and WW1 involved millions of soldiers from many nations. It could be interesting to compare and contrast the two conflicts. I just see WW1 as an immense conflict the likes of which had not been experienced before.

And like him or not, Douglas Haig was in command when the British Empire won many of its greatest battles and the war if we consider that the terms of the armistice and the peace treaty were dictated to Germany. When the final 100 days ended the conflict on Nov. 11, 1918, Haig was in command of the British forces.

Cheers,

George
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
10/13/2023 9:36:01 AM
George,

No one called Grant the worst commander of the Civil War, unlike Haig, who has multiple times been cited as such, for his part in WWI. Sure he was on the winning side, but unlike Grant was he solely singled as responsible for the victory!? prior to meeting up with Robert E. Lee, Grant won almost all of his battles! & his persistence even wore down Marse Robert! The Civil War may have not been a world war but to the US it was one of the costly-ous, & most important! The US President at the time had nothing but praise for Grant, unlike the British leadership on Haig!? Yes the perspectives are different!

Peace,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6498
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
10/13/2023 10:16:04 AM
Haig the worst commander in The Great War, Dave ?

That’s a bit of a stretch: some have argued the opposite, that he was one of the best: again, that’s a bit of a stretch, too !

Montgomery made a rather cutting comment, which I’ll try and paraphrase “ Haig was competent according to his lights. They were dim .”

That’s a bit harsh, but it was heartfelt.

Could Monty have coped with the burden that Haig shouldered ? I have my doubts. He was never faced with anything like the sheer scale of might that the Germans unleashed against the British and Dominion forces in France and Belgium in WW1.

Even the Battle of the Bulge at the end of 1944 looks small when compared with what hit Haig’s armies in March 1918.

Grant is such an intriguing character. I would love to discuss comparisons with Haig. And, for that matter, it’s tempting to think of Napoleon Buonaparte and try and rate him, too. Especially since there’s a big movie coming out about him imminently. Can’t wait !

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
10/13/2023 12:23:09 PM
Quote:
George,

No one called Grant the worst commander of the Civil War, unlike Haig, who has multiple times been cited as such, for his part in WWI. Sure he was on the winning side, but unlike Grant was he solely singled as responsible for the victory!? prior to meeting up with Robert E. Lee, Grant won almost all of his battles! & his persistence even wore down Marse Robert! The Civil War may have not been a world war but to the US it was one of the costly-ous, & most important! The US President at the time had nothing but praise for Grant, unlike the British leadership on Haig!? Yes the perspectives are different!

Peace,
MD



Not sure that I get your point, MD. I acknowledge the significance of the civil war to the US but Haig was fighting a war of much larger proportions. Indeed, your civil war is important to US citizens. To an extent, I feel that you are still dealing with some of the issues that led to the war and with the aftermath.

But it would be difficult to suggest that Grant was fighting an opponent with the same potential to do harm as the German forces were able to do. Haig was in a struggle with a well tuned fighting machine in the German army with a complex array of weapons that its armaments industry could provide.

I don't see much purpose in trying to compare these two men or their accomplishments. Certainly, Haig has his detractors. But he also has supporters who remind us of the monumental task that he faced during WW1.

I believe the Ulysses S. Grant also has his detractors. I note that Grant was called, "The Butcher" by some because of the high casualties taken in his battles. Now that sounds very Haig-like to me.

Again, how is it possible to suggest that Grant was superior to Haig when they were fighting in completely different wars with quite different challenges?

Not trying to be combative, MD. I just don't get your point.

Cheers,

George
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
10/13/2023 12:41:46 PM
Not sure I get yours either? Guess it's just better to move on?

Peace,
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
10/13/2023 3:22:18 PM
Quote:
Not sure I get yours either? Guess it's just better to move on?

Peace,



Mine is simple. We cannot simply say that Grant was a better general than Haig. They weren't playing on the same playing field nor did they have the same level of responsibility.

Ok, I won't beat it to death. Peace back, MD

George
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
10/13/2023 7:51:46 PM

Again checking, 10-14 in history, 1066 the battle of Hastings, decides in part, the future of England! Saxons verse Normans, How did the invaders win?? Anyone?

1644 William Penn founds the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania! Just what is a Commonwealth compared to just a state or colony? What say you?? How many states are also Commonwealths?? Anyone?

1806 Napoleon wins the Battle of Jena! Did he have a method to win most battles in this timeframe?? What was his strategy? It seems in future battles other commanders like RE Lee used it?? Comments??

1926 Winnie the Pooh, is created! My kids have always like this classic! Now it's my Grand Kids who are being introduced!? History repeating itself!? ☺

1944 the Desert Fox Erwin Rommel is forced to take his own life! Why did Hitler kill off his best generals? (88 of them) was he his own worst enemy?? Was he somewhat mad!? Did he have both orrs in the water? Was he dealing with A full deck? Was he all there?? Were his lights on but nobody was home? What kind of fruitcake was he? Anyone?????

1947 test pilot, Chuck Yeager breaks the sound barrier! Could some one explain the science behind this?? Comments?

1964 MLK Jr is very active in Civil Rights using peaceful means! Why even today has this been unsuccessful? Just what is the drawback to delaying equality? Specifically, if you could pinpoint it? Just what group is holding equality back??? What say you?? Comments anyone??

Regards,
MD

G, Mine is simple to, try fighting Robert E Lee, no one beat him until Grant! & the CW casualties are astounding! But, I'll let it go, peace!

Also I noted we omitted discussing, 1 month ago in this day in history, 9-15-1940, what's known as Eagle Day, when in 13 hrs, the RAF fighters shot down 175 Luftwaffe planes! Causing Hitler to abandon operation Sea Lion, the invasion of Great Britain! It was Britains finest hour! Anyone have the factors in this astonishing victory!? I believe 2 waves of over 400 German bombers attacked the London Area!? Any comments??
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
10/14/2023 8:39:38 AM
Quote:
1644 William Penn founds the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania! Just what is a Commonwealth compared to just a state or colony? What say you?? How many states are also Commonwealths?? Anyone?


Pennsylvania was in a class of colony called proprietary. New York and New Jersey started as proprietary and then became Royal colonies.

The British chose to administer the colonies in different ways and at times would grant massive land masses to a favoured individual or family. The British king owed money to the Penn family and when the senior Penn went to his reward, the King paid off his debt by granting land in the new world to the Penns. As heir to the Penn fortunes, William became the proprietary ruler of the area that would be known as Pennsylvania.

King Charles II was trying to solidify his right to the throne and he chose to pay debts and reward friends with tracts in the New World.

The Lord ruler of a proprietary colony was granted the right to select the governor. Penn appointed himself and a large governing council. There was also an elected assembly with restricted powers.

The British government actually did not like this class of colony as too much control had been handed over to the proprietor. Several proprietary colonies later became Royal colonies which offered the British more direct control.

When the 13 colonies rebelled and became independent, Pennsylvania ceased to be a proprietary colony. That did not fit the concept that the rebels were looking for. And so a Commonwealth was born which meant that the people within considered themselves to be sovereign and that the central government could not interfere with that sovereignty. It seems to me that the concept of states' rights was bred right into the genesis of the nation. Please correct me if that sounds overly simplistic.

So I don't think that Penn called his colony a Commonwealth. The word did appear in the first constitution of Pennsylvania in 1776 and in that document the writers called the rebellious colony a commonwealth and a state. Perhaps they perceived that there would be a difference in the way that they were governed. Pennsylvania didn't become a state until 1787 though.

I don't believe that calling oneself a Commonwealth within the US governing system grants any Commonwealth state any more power or rights than any other state. Again please correct me if I am all wet.

The Commonwealth of Nations is a collection of independent and sovereign states formerly part of the British Empire who ostensibly share similar values and goals. They are part of this Commonwealth freely and may depart at any time. Sovereignty is a central concept within Commonwealths.

Cheers,

George

Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6498
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
10/14/2023 9:01:32 AM
George and Dave,

Interesting word, “ Commonwealth “.

Oliver Cromwell used it to describe the English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish populations he ruled over as “Lord Protector”, after the defeated King Charles 1 had been beheaded.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6498
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
10/14/2023 9:30:09 AM
Dave,

Reverting to our discussion about generalship and reputation, one of the things that strikes me as remarkable is the ability that some commanders have to levy an appalling toll in lives and blood from their soldiers, and yet retain their obedience and even their devotion.

Lee was undoubtedly such a commander. His men suffered dreadful casualties, but he remains one of the most beloved generals in history.

Grant, who likewise exposed his troops to slaughter on a shocking scale, was accepted rather than loved.

Frederick the Great of Prussia put his soldiers into massacres in the Seven Years War, and made a remark “ so long as they’re more frightened of their sergeant majors than they are of the enemy, it’ll be alright ! “

If I’ve got that wrong, Trevor, please put me right.

Napoleon was certainly able to get his soldiers to adore him, but, good grief, he squandered their lives in tens of thousands !

Haig was remote and not in the least bit showy, but he did work hard after the war to make sure that the veterans were cared for.

Any suggestions as to outstanding “ charismatic “ military leaders?

I’m wondering about Charles XII of Sweden.

Regards, Phil

----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
OpanaPointer
St. Louis MO USA
Posts: 1968
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
10/14/2023 11:00:57 AM
Jimmy Doolittle. Pappy Boyington, first to mind.
DT509er
Santa Rosa CA USA
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
10/14/2023 12:37:34 PM
Major General Terry de la Mesa Allen led the Big Red One, 1st Infantry Division into combat in Oran, Algeria and Sicily; in Africa the 1st was widely dispersed and under the "command" of others but consolidated back together as a division for the push into Tunis. Relieved of his command in Sicily by General Bradley who stated at one point; "the whole division (1st) had assumed Allen's cavalier attitude", which was true but his men believed in his leadership, aggressiveness and care of them.

Two years later in the US, General Allen took over command of the 104th Infantry Division Werewolves. Training the men hard in night combat techniques and enforcing his officer corps to care for the men at all expense, the 104th with General Allen leading the way again, sailed directly from New York to France and would engage in approximately 200 days of combat under Allens leadership and mantra of; "find 'em, fix 'em, fight 'em".

The 1st & 104th men were devoted to him and he to them; it took some harsh leadership after Allen departed to get the 1st back in line with proper military protocol. General Allen was a hard driving leader and irascible with stuffy command but he cared deeply for his men, his and their record of combat exemplify's a strong, caring bond of General and soldier.

Two other leaders whose men then and decades later of those who served in this unit speak highly of both, 82nd Airborne General's James "Jumpin Jim" Gavin and Matthew Ridgeway.

Dan
----------------------------------
"American parachutists-devils in baggy pants..." German officer, Italy 1944. “If your experiment needs statistics, you ought to have done a better experiment.” Lord Ernest Rutherford
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6498
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
10/14/2023 1:16:26 PM
With today being the 957th anniversary of the Battle of Hastings, it might be appropriate to speculate as to the leadership qualities that granted William of Normandy one of the most decisive victories in history.

His opponent, the English King Harold Godwinson, was no push over and reputedly exercised charismatic command.

It was, so we’ve been told, a desperately hard fought battle.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
scoucer
Berlin  Germany
Posts: 3269
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
10/14/2023 3:40:51 PM
Quote:


Frederick the Great of Prussia put his soldiers into massacres in the Seven Years War, and made a remark “ so long as they’re more frightened of their sergeant majors than they are of the enemy, it’ll be alright ! “

If I’ve got that wrong, Trevor, please put me right.


Regards, Phil


No, that was his father - the "Soldaten King". A violent, ignorant bully who Frederich hated, Frederichś mother hated, the entire family hated and basically everybody else.

His troops idolised him. He was "Our Fritz" and he shared all their sufferings also frequently picking up regimental flags and leading counter charges, and personally fighting his way out of tough spots. And few generals in history cared for his wounded and invalids as he did. They would joke about "Fritz"s Lullaby" as he would practice his flute while they were bedding down.

They would, however, cheer when they came under the command of Prinz Heinrich, Frederichś younger brother who was not a big risktaker like his brother and so thought they had better chances of surviving.

Trevor
----------------------------------
`Hey don´t the wars come easy and don´t the peace come hard`- Buffy Sainte-Marie Some swim with the stream. Some swim against the stream. Me - I´m stuck somewhere in the woods and can´t even find the stupid stream.
Page 93 of 114 (Page:  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92    93    94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114 )

© 2024 - MilitaryHistoryOnline.com LLC