Originally Posted by spidge I read this quite a while ago when I had the "Haig Hates" and would like Paul's comments. Many scars here too for the Australians and others. http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/comment/ypres3.html I am afraid that this point of view is not one I subscribe to; the article is also full of factual errors, mis-spellings and poor interpretation. Thanks Paul. I am not as involved in WW1 as WW2 however I am aware of the many inconsistencies and differing points of view during fighting on the Western front which affected Australians. Could you please elaborate on the above, excluding the mis-spellings as this sadly seems to be a neglected part of many "educated" people these days. Your point of view is not in question as we all have those however I would be interested in the "factual errors" and "poor interpretation" you feel is included in the paper. Cheers Geoff
Hi Geoff, in many ways I have to 'debate' this sort of thing for a living; I come to the internet to get away from that to a certain extent, and to be honest I have had my fingers burnt too many times on-line to get into another debate about generalship in WW1. You asked me to have a look at that article, I did and gave you my opinion of it. It's tone and direction is at odds with many of my Australian colleagues who publish on this subject. That's all I feel I need to say, to be honest.
Geoff, If it helps, here're are some of the factual errors that I noticed at first glance (I haven't read the article in any depth, this is just what jumped out when I "scan read" the first half or so of it).., ...all troops left for the front line through the Menin Gate... (depends really on the location of front that was being approached - in many cases, the Menin Gate was too exposed and so other exits, such a the Lille Gate or Dixmude "gate" were utilised) ...Their new positions, the Hindenburg line, were a defence in depth of three lines, the third being beyond the range of the British guns. ...(The Hindenburg line didn't extend into Belgian Flanders - the 3 Flanders Lines (Flandern,Albrecht & Wilhelm - or simply "Flandern I, II,and III") were never more than 7 miles beyond the British frontline) ...It was no coincidence that they four days before the battle was due to begin thye had carried out a tactical retreat from their front line back to the Passchendaele ridge... ( a thinly held frontline with a defence in depth further back was a common tactic at this stage of the war. A tactical retreat was considered (to the 3rd line) and proposed by Ludendorff prior to the battle (a retreat to the 1st line was more seriously considered), but this was never utilised as the German rear defences were incomplete (and it was decided that retention of territory was of high importance). The idea was to contain the "battle zone" between the 2nd and 3rd Flanders Lines, but, as mentioned, the 3rd was incomplete) ...(Tyne Cot was so called because British soldiers from the Tyne thought that a barn west of the Broodseinde-Passchendaele Road, looked like a local cottage, or cot.)... ( this is a commonly believed misconception - chances are it was simply named after a river, like so many other features in the vicinity. There is a chance that the Northumberland Hussars had something to do with the naming back in 1914, but this is only a slim chance) ...German artillery was also better than the British, it had a longer range and was more accurate and with better shells that were more likely to explode!... (By this stage, shortages in Germany had begun to take effect. Inferior "ersatz" materials and construction had come into regular use and wear and tear of guns was beginning to take effect. Whereas British artillery was improving, German was deteriorating) ...They also had the secret weapon of mustard gas... ... after its first use in a barrage on July 26th., (It was actually first used near Nieupoort on 10th July (during "Operation Strandfest") and, by 3rd Ypres, wasn't much of a "secret" weapon - especially after the whole town of Ypres was saturated on the night of 12th/13th July) Dave.
Geoff, If it helps, here're are some of the factual errors that I noticed at first glance (I haven't read the article in any depth, this is just what jumped out when I "scan read" the first half or so of it).., ...all troops left for the front line through the Menin Gate... ...Their new positions, the Hindenburg line, were a defence in depth of three lines, the third being beyond the range of the British guns. ... ...It was no coincidence that they four days before the battle was due to begin thye had carried out a tactical retreat from their front line back to the Passchendaele ridge... ...(Tyne Cot was so called because British soldiers from the Tyne thought that a barn west of the Broodseinde-Passchendaele Road, looked like a local cottage, or cot.)... ...German artillery was also better than the British, it had a longer range and was more accurate and with better shells that were more likely to explode!... ...They also had the secret weapon of mustard gas... ... after its first use in a barrage on July 26th., Dave. Thanks Dave. WW1 is in my head however the nitty gritty details are not. When you read something you believe it to be accurate especially if you do not have the time or the knowledge to extensively correlate the information on the subject matter. While this is a WW2 forum we all can be educated (put on the right track) and learn something new. Collectively there is so much incorrect information on the net, whether by error, ignorance or intent from hand me down stories, film, poor research, attempts to purposely alter true history of events etc. These forums bring these out into the open. Thanks again for taking the time to advise. Geoff
Geoff. Just to be fair, I've just added some notes to the quotes that I pulled from the article, basically explaining why I think that they're factual errors. Dave
Geoff. Just to be fair, I've just added some notes to the quotes that I pulled from the article, basically explaining why I think that they're factual errors. Dave Thank you Dave.
