General Haig was one of the greatest generals that ever lived and the people who speak bad about him are not considering the times and conditions he was faced with.
I agree with those who say he was a great Field Marshal. The truth is that the British army won the First World War, not the French or Americans, and it was Haig who was ultimately responsible for this enormous success.
@rafflesman dumbass. Without the French buliding itself white in 1915 and 1916 the British wouldn't be able to field a complete conscripted army. When we put together a few of our own offensives it was a diaster. The entire Allied War effort was a diaster only through our combo of equal British, French and American aid and a German collaspe did we win.
Stupid people ignorant of the fact that this man won the greatest military victory in the histroy of the British army.
Yet people moan about him for high casualty figures!
You don't see the Germans French or Russians moianing about their casualty figures which were much bigger than the British empire losses.
You can imagine then that stupid dicks who moan about Haig wasting lives they would be the ones shot for cowardice because they have no patriotism to their country & would run away.
Haig showed poor judgement both of defensive and offensive tactics. He underestimated the defensive capabilities of the enemy, even stating that ‘the machine gun was an overrated weapon’. And used insufficient high explosive munitions over an obscenely large front during the Somme, which largely accounts for its failure. The belief that the infantry were incapable of advancing other than in a straight line was his. He would have been removed but for his cultivated patronage of George V.
Effective attrition tactics require the application of concentrated force at key points to secure breakthrough. In WW1 that could only be achieved through high explosive artillery bombardments followed by a tactical advance. Tanks had the equivalence of medieval siege machines that could provide cover for advancing troops but lacked capability for sweeping flanking manoeuvres. Much of the impetus for mechanization and the airforce had come from Churchill, who practically invented the Tank.
He. like the other generals did not care about the man. They knew the power of machinegun against troops. It was stupid to attac. Much better defend and wait for tanks. He maybe thought only his honour and he was rewarded well. His soldiers just died. But he was no the only one.
I would invite all the detractors of Haig to suggest a way of fighting that would have not cost us so many casualties.
if 1 man dies .. is that not as bad as 10 men dying ? is it no worse than 100 men dying ?.. what is an acceptable figure in your eyes?.. Also please bear in mind that the Germans fared no better .. in fact they lost 1 million troops at Verdun. It is all so easy for us to judge in hindsight.
I just did .. and up until your insightful comment I was unaware of his presence.. thank you for pointing that out. I would still defend Haig even so,because he did listen to Currie on more than one occasion regarding actual assaults.
Currie was more a corp commander more than a Field Marshall, He commanded a force not even 5% of that of Haig and his battle plans were no where near the size of Haigs, If Currie had full control I'm sure nothing much would of changed. I'm not taking anything away from Currie, that fine Canadian brought about revolutionary ways to break the deadlock but to compare his job with that of Haig's isn't really that comparable.
1. Avoid sending large numbers of troops over no-man's land in broad daylight.
2. The night before an attack - Send a recon party to check the wire is NOT still intact.
3. Act on intelligence reports.
3. Instruct the troops that if a machine gun opens up - drop to the ground and shoot at the position. Also get the artillery to 'blast' the machine gun area.
There were no instructions for coming under fire from MACHINE GUNS other than 'press on the attack'.
Haig had hindsight - after the first dissasterous attach where 1,000's of troops were mown down by machineguns, he should have learned a lesson. Instead he used the same tatics time after time.
@walksfarcm FYI, after the First day of the Somme, which was partially a French operation at the Request of French government, the British army did adopt new tactics. Haig also encouraged the more flexible leadership system.
It is noted that Haig as he enocouraged autonomy at lower levels did interfere, usually for the worse. However he did start to truly get the knack by late 17.
Haig himself was an effective corp commander taking the job he was never trained for
Murderrer!!! Why didnt we have the wisdom of the russians. The world would of been a better place if the windsors, the kaiser and the french officer class went the same way as the romanovs.
He was first in his class at staff college, thought of as among the best generals by his own peers. Even the Kaiser said that Haig was one of the best Generals.
HAIG was a piece of shit with an oversized ego - sent tens of thousands of men to their graves unnecessarily. That arrogant, cowardly bastard should be remembered as a war criminal!!!
General Haig was an old and VERY BAD General who loved (and i wouldnt be surprised if he lost his virginity) to his CAVALRY !!!!! OMG !!!! JEEZZZZ DUDE EVERYTHING HAD TO REVOLVE AROUND HIS DAMN HORSES !!!!
@rahimraj The Cavalry was less than 3% of the British Army by 1916 and under Haig's direction the British Army would become the most mechanized in the world, supported by the world's largest Airforce, the first ever Armoured Vechicles/Tanks were used, the Artillery grew by 520% and the amount of engineers grew by 2,212%. That hardly represents a man obsessed with Cavalry. He wasn't a great general but he was far from single-minded.
If he was a good man he was also a poor General. Why did he order that the British troops must 'walk' across nomans land at the battle of the Somme? Why also was his only tactic to attack in large numbers?
xyzkerry: What you say is nonsense! Haig did NOT issue an order that British troops at the Somme advance at walking pace. How they advanced in various sectors of the line was decided at a local level.
In his 'Tactical Notes' Rawlinson laid down no single speed nor any particular formation to be used to cross no man's land; unit commanders were given a wide latitude to conduct the advance as they thought most appropriate, given the particular circumstances of their part of the battlefield.
The majority of the 80 battalions which went over the top in the first wave - 53 - had in any case crept out into no man's land, close to the German lines before zero hour, and then rushed the German trenches.
It is well documented that Haig assumed there would be no survivors after the massive bombardment prior to the attack and ordered the troops to 'WALK' across no mans land. This dispite reports that the Germans were in deep bunkers. Only the Lancashire Regiment 'crept' out of their trench 5 minutes before the bombardment ceased and were told to expect 5% casulties from their own guns. They were one of the few Regiments to achieve their goals.
General Haig was one of the greatest generals that ever lived and the people who speak bad about him are not considering the times and conditions he was faced with.
paulypaulification 2 months ago
@paulypaulification You can't justify the tactic he used at The Somme.....
TheConfederate1863 1 month ago
I agree with those who say he was a great Field Marshal. The truth is that the British army won the First World War, not the French or Americans, and it was Haig who was ultimately responsible for this enormous success.
rafflesman 2 months ago
@rafflesman dumbass. Without the French buliding itself white in 1915 and 1916 the British wouldn't be able to field a complete conscripted army. When we put together a few of our own offensives it was a diaster. The entire Allied War effort was a diaster only through our combo of equal British, French and American aid and a German collaspe did we win.
12Aggiefan 2 months ago
Stupid people ignorant of the fact that this man won the greatest military victory in the histroy of the British army.
Yet people moan about him for high casualty figures!
You don't see the Germans French or Russians moianing about their casualty figures which were much bigger than the British empire losses.
You can imagine then that stupid dicks who moan about Haig wasting lives they would be the ones shot for cowardice because they have no patriotism to their country & would run away.
TheBritishLegions 3 months ago
Easily the greatest Scots general of all time -- no Scotsman before or since has killed so many Englishmen.
69Bluntsmoka420 9 months ago
@69Bluntsmoka420 Not very nice is it mate
GymmFFreak89 3 months ago
Haig showed poor judgement both of defensive and offensive tactics. He underestimated the defensive capabilities of the enemy, even stating that ‘the machine gun was an overrated weapon’. And used insufficient high explosive munitions over an obscenely large front during the Somme, which largely accounts for its failure. The belief that the infantry were incapable of advancing other than in a straight line was his. He would have been removed but for his cultivated patronage of George V.
johnsammyanfal 11 months ago
Effective attrition tactics require the application of concentrated force at key points to secure breakthrough. In WW1 that could only be achieved through high explosive artillery bombardments followed by a tactical advance. Tanks had the equivalence of medieval siege machines that could provide cover for advancing troops but lacked capability for sweeping flanking manoeuvres. Much of the impetus for mechanization and the airforce had come from Churchill, who practically invented the Tank.
johnsammyanfal 11 months ago
This man is a war criminal who scracifed tens of thoushands of British lives on day for nothing. May he rot in hell.
12Aggiefan 1 year ago
@12Aggiefan You couldn't have done better dumb ass, General Haig was perhaps the greatest general of all time!!!
paulypaulification 2 months ago
@paulypaulification Spoken like a truth American idiot.
12Aggiefan 2 months ago
@12Aggiefan Like a truth American Idiot? You can't even spell dumb ass!!! Go fuck yourself!!!
paulypaulification 2 months ago
Watch the 'Blackadder-field marshall Haig' video from mikaaneikelpaa. That says it all concerning Haig!
xyzkerry 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Shut up Maxam your full of shit
Soldiers are there to be used and so they were, even though it was at a great cost on both sides.
seanowain 3 years ago
He. like the other generals did not care about the man. They knew the power of machinegun against troops. It was stupid to attac. Much better defend and wait for tanks. He maybe thought only his honour and he was rewarded well. His soldiers just died. But he was no the only one.
road6849 3 years ago
I would invite all the detractors of Haig to suggest a way of fighting that would have not cost us so many casualties.
if 1 man dies .. is that not as bad as 10 men dying ? is it no worse than 100 men dying ?.. what is an acceptable figure in your eyes?.. Also please bear in mind that the Germans fared no better .. in fact they lost 1 million troops at Verdun. It is all so easy for us to judge in hindsight.
Phoennix3 3 years ago
I don't know, why don't you ask Sir Arthur Currie?
lifterlegandpoker 3 years ago
I just did .. and up until your insightful comment I was unaware of his presence.. thank you for pointing that out. I would still defend Haig even so,because he did listen to Currie on more than one occasion regarding actual assaults.
Phoennix3 3 years ago
Well I'm glad to have enlightened you on the subject :)
lifterlegandpoker 3 years ago
Currie was more a corp commander more than a Field Marshall, He commanded a force not even 5% of that of Haig and his battle plans were no where near the size of Haigs, If Currie had full control I'm sure nothing much would of changed. I'm not taking anything away from Currie, that fine Canadian brought about revolutionary ways to break the deadlock but to compare his job with that of Haig's isn't really that comparable.
jimladx23 2 years ago
@jimladx23 currie didnt bring anything revolutionary, the tactics already existed.
billybob7ful 1 year ago
well the germans lost so many troops defending thereselves at verdun if im right......ur not suppose to lose that many men if attacking
goodefence 3 years ago
The Germans defending at Verdun lol
jimladx23 2 years ago
To answer your question:
1. Avoid sending large numbers of troops over no-man's land in broad daylight.
2. The night before an attack - Send a recon party to check the wire is NOT still intact.
3. Act on intelligence reports.
3. Instruct the troops that if a machine gun opens up - drop to the ground and shoot at the position. Also get the artillery to 'blast' the machine gun area.
There were no instructions for coming under fire from MACHINE GUNS other than 'press on the attack'.
xyzkerry 2 years ago
Haig had hindsight - after the first dissasterous attach where 1,000's of troops were mown down by machineguns, he should have learned a lesson. Instead he used the same tatics time after time.
walksfarcm 2 years ago
@walksfarcm FYI, after the First day of the Somme, which was partially a French operation at the Request of French government, the British army did adopt new tactics. Haig also encouraged the more flexible leadership system.
It is noted that Haig as he enocouraged autonomy at lower levels did interfere, usually for the worse. However he did start to truly get the knack by late 17.
Haig himself was an effective corp commander taking the job he was never trained for
fp470 2 years ago
Today this "man" would have been tried for war crimes against his own men.
maxam60 3 years ago 3
Murderrer!!! Why didnt we have the wisdom of the russians. The world would of been a better place if the windsors, the kaiser and the french officer class went the same way as the romanovs.
123Ivansharpe 3 years ago 2
He was first in his class at staff college, thought of as among the best generals by his own peers. Even the Kaiser said that Haig was one of the best Generals.
ColonelWright 3 years ago
the bucher of somme
scruff783 3 years ago
HAIG was a piece of shit with an oversized ego - sent tens of thousands of men to their graves unnecessarily. That arrogant, cowardly bastard should be remembered as a war criminal!!!
cropduster7 3 years ago
General Haig was an old and VERY BAD General who loved (and i wouldnt be surprised if he lost his virginity) to his CAVALRY !!!!! OMG !!!! JEEZZZZ DUDE EVERYTHING HAD TO REVOLVE AROUND HIS DAMN HORSES !!!!
rahimraj 4 years ago
@rahimraj The Cavalry was less than 3% of the British Army by 1916 and under Haig's direction the British Army would become the most mechanized in the world, supported by the world's largest Airforce, the first ever Armoured Vechicles/Tanks were used, the Artillery grew by 520% and the amount of engineers grew by 2,212%. That hardly represents a man obsessed with Cavalry. He wasn't a great general but he was far from single-minded.
11nytram11 1 year ago
If he was a good man he was also a poor General. Why did he order that the British troops must 'walk' across nomans land at the battle of the Somme? Why also was his only tactic to attack in large numbers?
xyzkerry 4 years ago
xyzkerry: What you say is nonsense! Haig did NOT issue an order that British troops at the Somme advance at walking pace. How they advanced in various sectors of the line was decided at a local level.
emzcool 4 years ago
In his 'Tactical Notes' Rawlinson laid down no single speed nor any particular formation to be used to cross no man's land; unit commanders were given a wide latitude to conduct the advance as they thought most appropriate, given the particular circumstances of their part of the battlefield.
emzcool 4 years ago
The majority of the 80 battalions which went over the top in the first wave - 53 - had in any case crept out into no man's land, close to the German lines before zero hour, and then rushed the German trenches.
emzcool 4 years ago
If this is so why so many casulties? You'll be telling us next it was a Victory!
xyzkerry 3 years ago
Well we won.
So it was a victory really.
nathan47576 3 years ago
The battle of the Somme was NO victory. 60,000 British casualties on the first day? Some of the Pals battalions suffered 95% casualties!
xyzkerry 3 years ago
It won us the war though.
Sounds like a victory to me.
nathan47576 3 years ago
How can a Battle that went so badly wrong, be considered to have 'won us the war'?
xyzkerry 3 years ago
It is well documented that Haig assumed there would be no survivors after the massive bombardment prior to the attack and ordered the troops to 'WALK' across no mans land. This dispite reports that the Germans were in deep bunkers. Only the Lancashire Regiment 'crept' out of their trench 5 minutes before the bombardment ceased and were told to expect 5% casulties from their own guns. They were one of the few Regiments to achieve their goals.
xyzkerry 3 years ago
Didn't help that most of the shells were duds, if and I say if, those shells hadn't of been duds the Somme offensive might of won us the war by 1917.
jimladx23 2 years ago
A good man , misunderstood, liked his treacle sponge pudding, stickler for routine.
Rawlinson16 4 years ago