My views on Haig, product of his nation. French had similar problems. Germans tried various systems and indeed came up with Storm Troops which were highly effective.But the plus point for Haig is that he commanded the British army on to victory, which I suggest is a sign of success. Stalin, another who achieved victory with awful losses.
Haig's predecessor Sir John French was invited to give the Cabinet a"second opinion" of Haig's strategy, although in the event he had fewpositive suggestions to make and seemed to the Cabinet Secretary Maurice Hankey to be full of "hatred, envy and malice". The Cabinet Minister Jan Christiaan Smuts was sent to France to take discreet soundings among the Army Commanders to see whether any of them were willing to replace Haig - none of themwere. Lloyd George was later to be accused (in the famous Maurice Debate in the House of Commons) of hoarding troops in the UK at this time tomake it harder for Haig to launch offensives, thus allegedlycontributing to the debacle of March 1918.
Biggus, you stand accused of three counts of heresy. Heresy by thought, heresy by deed, heresy by word and heresy by inaction…four counts. Confess, or we will poke you with the soft cushions! Come on, so many history buffs, we need a real military loser. The man who was able to turn any numerical or strategic advantage he had into a liability…a man so incompetent he was able to snatch defeat from the very jaws of certain victory. A man whose name would live in infamy for generations to come. The man for the moment.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests