Shut Up Baldrick!
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The possessive s and plurals.
Orac
What a shame that you didn't study English as hard as you seem to have studied History.
And I studied it at University in December, and you are incorrect.
The German's were incredibly
The German's were incredibly
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Back to the fold in the map
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
ORAC/PN. You are both correct, there were a multitude of long and short term causes, not the least of which was Germany's assertion that they too had the right to a place in the sun. Although ORAC chooses to suggest an author to lend weight to his argument the are lots of others who would question his choice - rightly so, just as all the others should be questioned and not taken a face value. CB sends
Quote:
Equally the British had started in 1911 to increase its Army through recruitment of a Territorial Force.
The TF was formed in 1908 "from" the old Volunteer Force and neither were intended for other than home defence. Far from increasing the size of the army, both Regular, TF and Special Reserve recruiting and retention were on a slow downward path caused by many factors including poor army pay and a slow improvement in the lot and education of the working class man.
GB was in a very defensive posture ["what I have I hold"] and there was great reluctance to embark on a continental war, knowing that our forces were, although professional, very limited, and conscription unthinkable.
Whoever else started it, we did not. Whoever else lost it, we did not.
Sound familiar?
Equally the British had started in 1911 to increase its Army through recruitment of a Territorial Force.
The TF was formed in 1908 "from" the old Volunteer Force and neither were intended for other than home defence. Far from increasing the size of the army, both Regular, TF and Special Reserve recruiting and retention were on a slow downward path caused by many factors including poor army pay and a slow improvement in the lot and education of the working class man.
GB was in a very defensive posture ["what I have I hold"] and there was great reluctance to embark on a continental war, knowing that our forces were, although professional, very limited, and conscription unthinkable.
Whoever else started it, we did not. Whoever else lost it, we did not.
Sound familiar?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Although ORAC chooses to suggest an author to lend weight to his argument the are lots of others who would question his choice - rightly so
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: N. Spain
Age: 79
Posts: 1,311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
airpolice
Which bit didn't you understand?
Orac
Quote:
And I studied it at
University in December, and you are incorrect.
The German's were
incredibly
What a shame that you didn't study English as hard as you seem to have
studied History.
Quote:
And I studied it at
University in December, and you are incorrect.
The German's were
incredibly
What a shame that you didn't study English as hard as you seem to have
studied History.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Another Planet.
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Try reading "Losing Small Wars" and see how the "Donkeys" are still leading the "Lions" in our current misguided efforts, latterly Iraq and currently A'stan.
And above them are the "Dinosaurs" at Mod, responsible for even more cockups including strategy and wasting money on procurement of crap kit.
Gove should have kept his ghastly mouth firmly shut on the topic, especially as quoting Blackadder only serves to highlight that series' satirical take on how conflicts were run through the ages.
If Gove is so smart, how come the "Free Schools" now in trouble were signed through on his watch? Maybe more concentration on education and less on how the Establisment's arrogance is punctured and brought low by a TV series, would show him to be a man of intelligence and not a newspaper headline chaser like the rest of the Commons' shysters!
And above them are the "Dinosaurs" at Mod, responsible for even more cockups including strategy and wasting money on procurement of crap kit.
Gove should have kept his ghastly mouth firmly shut on the topic, especially as quoting Blackadder only serves to highlight that series' satirical take on how conflicts were run through the ages.
If Gove is so smart, how come the "Free Schools" now in trouble were signed through on his watch? Maybe more concentration on education and less on how the Establisment's arrogance is punctured and brought low by a TV series, would show him to be a man of intelligence and not a newspaper headline chaser like the rest of the Commons' shysters!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,048
Received 2,920 Likes
on
1,249 Posts
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find it frustrating that things are so, black and white, simplified. The first lot wasn't a simple, single, event. there was a shed load of history behind it, not least the Franco Prussian War and Bismark's unification. The holes in the cheese lined up and we did what we do best; made a fist of it. Oh to be a 1SL or CIGS under democratically elected (dependent) Government.
How many lessons did we learn from the 2nd Boer War and America's Civil War? I suspect very little as we didn't understand the significance of what we were looking at. Cue the 2nd lot.
How many lessons did we learn from the 2nd Boer War and America's Civil War? I suspect very little as we didn't understand the significance of what we were looking at. Cue the 2nd lot.
Whilst not wishing to characterise all journalists as low life scum bags,Michael Gove was a journalist before becoming a Tory MP - happy to put most politicians in this category.
Gove has an English degree (one up from a Desmond),has never worked in or studied education.In my opinion, he is not only eminently qualified to give an opinion on the conduct of the reat War,he is also (evidently) a gifted educationalist,huzaaaaah!
Gove has an English degree (one up from a Desmond),has never worked in or studied education.In my opinion, he is not only eminently qualified to give an opinion on the conduct of the reat War,he is also (evidently) a gifted educationalist,huzaaaaah!
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: A sweet spot
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And above them are the "Dinosaurs" at Mod, responsible for even more cockups including strategy and wasting money on procurement of crap kit.
The dinosaurs were the cadets that were going through the system when I was a flt cdr. During that period there was a huge push to graduate aircrew virtually no matter what their failings, on the grounds that flying training would rub off the rough edges. From that time they rose through the ranks having done both operational and staff tours. Most of the decision making is, and has always been, done by the much lauded 2-winged master race. So, for blame for crap decision making try looking in the mirror.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gove's problem is that he can't ever, ever shut up and pass by on the other side
I suspect he starts arguing when he sees himself in the mirror in the morning
Kids these days know more about WWI than we did in the 50's & 60's - they support the Poppy Appeal and are always ready to listen to veterans - they CAN tell the difference between a comedian and Baldrick
I suspect he starts arguing when he sees himself in the mirror in the morning
Kids these days know more about WWI than we did in the 50's & 60's - they support the Poppy Appeal and are always ready to listen to veterans - they CAN tell the difference between a comedian and Baldrick
About the Great War
My grandmother's first husband, father of her first daughter (my oldest aunt, RIP) lived with her in the northern part of Serbia (Vojvodina region) when the Austro_Serbian bit of the Great War began in earnest. When Serbia were at last beaten, a number of men like him were conscripted by the Austrian Army (Austro-Hungarian Army?) who needed more troops to fight the Russians.
He ended up serving on the Eastern Front. He was in a battle where gas was used. He died of it. As my aunt told it, he was at home in the village when he finally died, but he had arrived in terrible shape after being discharged.
That gas be some nasty stuff.
My grandmother was now a widow (in a village that is no longer is found on maps of that part of the world). She ended up, in 1919, taking her five year old daughter to Trieste (grandma was one of the few people in her village who could read and write), getting on a ship (steerage class) and heading to America. A distant relative had wired her money for the passage from the US.
She hit New York, went past the Statue of Liberty and to Ellis Island, and ended up on a train to Western Pennsylvania, settling a bit north of Pittsburgh. Steel country.
There she met my grandfather, another immigrant from over there. They married, had two kids (my father and his sister, the younger aunt who is still alive) and did OK until he died of pneumonia in 1938 (before penicillain was available).
Grandma had a hard life, but she was a tough cookie. She raised her kids to be Americans, no hyphen, and made them learn good English and use it. (Her English remained heavily accented her whole life, per my aunt's telling of her childhood). She was strict about them doing well in school. (The Viet Namese emigres from after VN war that I have met are strikingly similar, in the patterns and priorities, to my grandma.)
Where I am and who I am is due, in part, to The Great War. It had a profound ripple effect, eh?
Jan Bloch, a Polish industrialist, published in 1898 a lengthy analysis of modern fire arms and warfare. His analysis on the state of arms versus armies was pretty much spot on. (A small group of us had to read, and present on, this massive work of his while I was at staff college). The summary in Wikipedia gets it about right. (I wonder if Bloch lived long enough to read Rommel's book about WW I infantry fighting, called "Infantry Attacks").
Lessons learned? Right. 
It's 2014. Gas, for example, is still being used, as it was between Iraq and Iran, and most recently in Syria. Iran used, it is reported, human wave / mass infantry attacks during their war with Iraq.
The Great Powers still pursue their ends, and occasionaly used armed force to do it.
Nothing new under the sun.
ORAC, you source intrigues me, I'll need to have a look. One of Bismarck's talents lay in his diplomatic intrigues and deals. One of his aphorisms was, roughly, "where there are five powers, make sure you arrange to be on the side of the three, not of the two." He had some success in achieving that after the Franco Prussian war of 1870-71. By the time Kaiser Willie the Deuce (Dunce??) got involved in power politics, the Kaiser and his various governments were unable to apply that dictum, which led to the strategic imperative often cited about having to get France put down quickly to deal with Russia and avoid a two front war.
He ended up serving on the Eastern Front. He was in a battle where gas was used. He died of it. As my aunt told it, he was at home in the village when he finally died, but he had arrived in terrible shape after being discharged.
That gas be some nasty stuff. My grandmother was now a widow (in a village that is no longer is found on maps of that part of the world). She ended up, in 1919, taking her five year old daughter to Trieste (grandma was one of the few people in her village who could read and write), getting on a ship (steerage class) and heading to America. A distant relative had wired her money for the passage from the US.
She hit New York, went past the Statue of Liberty and to Ellis Island, and ended up on a train to Western Pennsylvania, settling a bit north of Pittsburgh. Steel country.
There she met my grandfather, another immigrant from over there. They married, had two kids (my father and his sister, the younger aunt who is still alive) and did OK until he died of pneumonia in 1938 (before penicillain was available).
Grandma had a hard life, but she was a tough cookie. She raised her kids to be Americans, no hyphen, and made them learn good English and use it. (Her English remained heavily accented her whole life, per my aunt's telling of her childhood). She was strict about them doing well in school. (The Viet Namese emigres from after VN war that I have met are strikingly similar, in the patterns and priorities, to my grandma.)
Where I am and who I am is due, in part, to The Great War. It had a profound ripple effect, eh?
Jan Bloch, a Polish industrialist, published in 1898 a lengthy analysis of modern fire arms and warfare. His analysis on the state of arms versus armies was pretty much spot on. (A small group of us had to read, and present on, this massive work of his while I was at staff college). The summary in Wikipedia gets it about right. (I wonder if Bloch lived long enough to read Rommel's book about WW I infantry fighting, called "Infantry Attacks").
Bloch argued that: New arms technology (e.g. smokeless gunpowder, improved rifle design, Maxims) had rendered maneuvers over open ground, such as bayonet and cavalry charges, obsolete. Bloch concluded that a war between the Great powers would be a war of entrenchment and that rapid attacks and decisive victories were likewise a thing of the past.
He calculated that entrenched men would enjoy a fourfold advantage over infantry advancing across open ground.
Industrial societies would have to settle the resultant stalemate by committing armies numbering in the millions, as opposed to the tens of thousands of preceding wars.
An enormous battlefront would develop. A war of this type could not be resolved quickly.
The war would become a duel of industrial might, a matter of total economic attrition. Severe economic and social dislocations would result in the imminent risk of famine, disease, the "break-up of the whole social organization" and revolutions from below.
He calculated that entrenched men would enjoy a fourfold advantage over infantry advancing across open ground.
Industrial societies would have to settle the resultant stalemate by committing armies numbering in the millions, as opposed to the tens of thousands of preceding wars.
An enormous battlefront would develop. A war of this type could not be resolved quickly.
The war would become a duel of industrial might, a matter of total economic attrition. Severe economic and social dislocations would result in the imminent risk of famine, disease, the "break-up of the whole social organization" and revolutions from below.
It's 2014. Gas, for example, is still being used, as it was between Iraq and Iran, and most recently in Syria. Iran used, it is reported, human wave / mass infantry attacks during their war with Iraq.
The Great Powers still pursue their ends, and occasionaly used armed force to do it.
Nothing new under the sun.
ORAC, you source intrigues me, I'll need to have a look. One of Bismarck's talents lay in his diplomatic intrigues and deals. One of his aphorisms was, roughly, "where there are five powers, make sure you arrange to be on the side of the three, not of the two." He had some success in achieving that after the Franco Prussian war of 1870-71. By the time Kaiser Willie the Deuce (Dunce??) got involved in power politics, the Kaiser and his various governments were unable to apply that dictum, which led to the strategic imperative often cited about having to get France put down quickly to deal with Russia and avoid a two front war.
