The First World War
Discussion
Derek Smith said:
WWI was still the subject of discussion after WWII. It had, it would appear, a greater influence on their mindset.
I suspect that would probably be the case for the many.At least if you lost a father, a brother or a son in WW2, you could to some extent console yourself with the fact that they gave their lives to help rid the world of a great evil.
The deaths in WW1 just all seem so dreadfully pointless and futile. Millions dead and maimed just for politicians to play stupid power games.
Pesty said:
Was only talking about this last night. I know his service number. I think the records are held at knew gardens but not online.
The surviving service records (70% were destroyed during The Blitz) are all digitised and available on Ancestry. They were on microfilm but were digitised as they were so popular, no one can see the paper originals and even the microfilm won't get handed out nowadays.There's a chance you won't find him, but The National Archives at Kew do hold the War Diaries (WO 95 series) so if you know his Battalion you can check the war diary and find out what was going on at the time.
You might also find his pension record on Ancestry, I was very lucky to find my great-grandfather's one as he was pensioned out the army a few months before dying in the flu pandemic.
Ayahuasca said:
...explaining that he died 'for freedom and honour'.
The old lie: Dulce et decorum est...Here's some footage of a young man suffering 'shell shock'. Normally, it wasn't really understood, but some fellow (in Devon I think) came up with a new way to treat it that had some success. The footage shows the improvement in the young man.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7Jll9_EiyA
I fully respect all men and women who fought in this war. Often with no choice - I know that I would probably go to pieces at the first barrage, but these boys just got on with it, and charged machine guns when told to. Unbelievable.
The first chapter in a book called, 'The Aftermath' deals with the still on-going clean up in France from WW1 shells. There's a special section of the armed forces that are gradually clearing dangerous areas - at current rate of clearance, it's due to be completed in the next 50 years or so.
There is also a fascinating book with a first hand account of an Australian soldier on the Western Front. The name of it eludes me at the moment, but will try and find it.
One day I will go over there to visit the cemeteries and ossuaries. Just to 'remember'. There but for the grace of god...
Edited by Tonsko on Friday 11th October 23:04
My father was en route to being christened towards the end of WWI when a chap from the Merchant Navy approached my Gran to tell her that her eldest boy, James, had been torpedoed off the coast of the US but had been picked up by a British ship, HMS Russell. My Dad was going to be Albert Eric Smith but, given the good news, became Albert Eric Russell Smith, Russ to everyone. Unknown to everyone, HMS Russell had already been sunk, probably by the same submarine, taking my uncle Jim with it.
During WWII my Gran forbade the RN from putting two of her sons in the same ship. That's the way everyone said it: she forbade them. Knowing my Gran, a fabulous old girl, I believe that she went to the Admiralty and just told them. So they were spread around a bit.
Two sons were on two different battleships.
Both ships were sunk in the Indian Ocean on the same day by Japanese bombers.
One son, the next eldest, was sunk by gunfire against his merchant ship, this somewhere out east as his crew were mainly 'Laskars'. It caught fire and he jumped into the sea and inhaled oil and had major respiratory problems. He opened a pub in Portsmouth some years later and then was killed in the bombing of Portsmouth in the early part of the war.
Mt Gran got another telegram.
My Dad, the youngest of 18 (that survived to be a toddler) had 10 sisters. Those that were married chose sailors - we lived near the London docks. Every daughter was widowed, more than on more than once. Two I know of lost a husband in WWI and in WWII, although they might have died in the post WWI epidemic, but were still in the navy. It wasn't really talked about.
My Gran used to sit with all her sons, daughters-in-law, daughters and sons-in-law (men outnumbered by women at a ration of about 4:1 - I never questioned it at the time) on Remembrance Day and go through the photographs that she kept in a little tin (which was buried with her) of the kids she'd lost and all the men were in uniform.
My family were left in their politics as they felt that the wars, and in particular WWI, were forced on 'the people'. Despite them all being anti-fascist they all believed there were ways other than war to take out Hitler.
I remember my Gran saying something along the lines of those who sent the young to war to die in the trenches (although none of my family were in the army apart from my father) did not have the courage to join them.
There seems little doubt that, on both sides, WWI was entered into with little real thought as to the consequences.
I don't think any of us realise what families went through during and after WWI. My uncles, and those aunts worth listening to, all thought that WWI was merely the continuation of WWI but was by no means inevitable. The all but universal, according to modern history, worship of Churchill was not followed by my family. They all saw Churchill as one of those who saw wars and the deaths of the plebs, as part of life's rich tapestry. And probably a way of keeping the population in check.
WWI was a failure of politicians, and everyone else had to pay the price. My gran was very bitter.
It's not until I look back that I realise what a gem my gran was and how much my father, and his siblings, had to put up with through absolutely no fault of their own. And it didn't end after the war.
During WWII my Gran forbade the RN from putting two of her sons in the same ship. That's the way everyone said it: she forbade them. Knowing my Gran, a fabulous old girl, I believe that she went to the Admiralty and just told them. So they were spread around a bit.
Two sons were on two different battleships.
Both ships were sunk in the Indian Ocean on the same day by Japanese bombers.
One son, the next eldest, was sunk by gunfire against his merchant ship, this somewhere out east as his crew were mainly 'Laskars'. It caught fire and he jumped into the sea and inhaled oil and had major respiratory problems. He opened a pub in Portsmouth some years later and then was killed in the bombing of Portsmouth in the early part of the war.
Mt Gran got another telegram.
My Dad, the youngest of 18 (that survived to be a toddler) had 10 sisters. Those that were married chose sailors - we lived near the London docks. Every daughter was widowed, more than on more than once. Two I know of lost a husband in WWI and in WWII, although they might have died in the post WWI epidemic, but were still in the navy. It wasn't really talked about.
My Gran used to sit with all her sons, daughters-in-law, daughters and sons-in-law (men outnumbered by women at a ration of about 4:1 - I never questioned it at the time) on Remembrance Day and go through the photographs that she kept in a little tin (which was buried with her) of the kids she'd lost and all the men were in uniform.
My family were left in their politics as they felt that the wars, and in particular WWI, were forced on 'the people'. Despite them all being anti-fascist they all believed there were ways other than war to take out Hitler.
I remember my Gran saying something along the lines of those who sent the young to war to die in the trenches (although none of my family were in the army apart from my father) did not have the courage to join them.
There seems little doubt that, on both sides, WWI was entered into with little real thought as to the consequences.
I don't think any of us realise what families went through during and after WWI. My uncles, and those aunts worth listening to, all thought that WWI was merely the continuation of WWI but was by no means inevitable. The all but universal, according to modern history, worship of Churchill was not followed by my family. They all saw Churchill as one of those who saw wars and the deaths of the plebs, as part of life's rich tapestry. And probably a way of keeping the population in check.
WWI was a failure of politicians, and everyone else had to pay the price. My gran was very bitter.
It's not until I look back that I realise what a gem my gran was and how much my father, and his siblings, had to put up with through absolutely no fault of their own. And it didn't end after the war.
Negative Creep said:
tubbystu said:
Kermit power said:
Millions dead and maimed just for politicians & Queen Victoria's extended family to play stupid power games.
Lots of treaties, jealously and scores to be settled but no one expected what happened, no one looked to Serbia they were (western gov) blindsided and happless to the unfolding events.
I'm a Cadet Force Adult Volunteer - for the last month I've been teaching my platoon about regimental history - we are affiliated with the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers. Last week was the Gallipoli landings and the Lancashire Fusiliers famous "six VCs before breakfast". I had the cadets stood up initially - asking some of them to sit down after a few minutes. Before long there were only three left standing - they were the lucky ones, the ones who survived the Gallipoli campaign. Very sobering for them, and for me.
"So strong, in fact, were the defences of 'W' Beach that the Ottomans may well have considered them impregnable, and it is my firm conviction that no finer feat of arms has ever been achieved by the British Soldier – or any other soldier – than the storming of these beaches from open boats on the morning of 25 April." - General Sir Ian Hamilton
SD.
"So strong, in fact, were the defences of 'W' Beach that the Ottomans may well have considered them impregnable, and it is my firm conviction that no finer feat of arms has ever been achieved by the British Soldier – or any other soldier – than the storming of these beaches from open boats on the morning of 25 April." - General Sir Ian Hamilton
SD.
Wills2 said:
Negative Creep said:
tubbystu said:
Kermit power said:
Millions dead and maimed just for politicians & Queen Victoria's extended family to play stupid power games.
Lots of treaties, jealously and scores to be settled but no one expected what happened, no one looked to Serbia they were (western gov) blindsided and happless to the unfolding events.
ninja-lewis said:
Wacky Racer said:
Lions led by Donkeys.
A myth created long afterwards by amateur 'historians' such as Alan Clark and generally refuted by proper academics these days.Too many Ruperts, not enough braincells is how it comes across.
ninja-lewis said:
Wacky Racer said:
Lions led by Donkeys.
A myth created long afterwards by amateur 'historians' such as Alan Clark and generally refuted by proper academics these days.My first lesson with a history teacher at a new school involved him telling us that everything he would tell us was wrong. He knew this because everything he was told when he was being taught had been disproved.
The role of historian is to refute accepted wisdom.
The letters that were sent from the front, the stories of the soldiers, and the statistics show that outrageous mistakes were made, and made more than once.
A friend of my father's was highly critical of a policy that was used throughout the war of establishing front line positions in that were impossible to defend. The Germans would move onto high ground and their artillery would pummel the allied lines.
Someone else has already mentioned the order to walk towards the German lines rather than run.
Read Covenant with Death, by Harris. My father's friend was interviewed by the author. It is a well researched book and one entirely from the point of view of the soldier. It shows the inept battle management and planning. The particular bit that my father's friend was most critical of was that all soldiers knew that the barbed wire was still in place yet the soldiers were sent forwards to be funnelled into the gap which was covered by a number of machine guns. To get through he had to climb over a pile of bodies. All easily avoided.
One wonders what the academics might have done if they had been ordered to go over the top.
There was much that was inept. There was also, and this was quite marked, an attitude to casualties that was, nowadays, actionable.
To suggest that no one knew is firstly no defence as they should have done. Trench warfare was already an established tactic, although not on the scale of WWI. Secondly, even when trench warfare was shown to be the way forward, tactics remained expensive in the sense of loss of life and munitions.
The Somme is a case in point. The planning was poor with little appreciation of the problems with little or no sensible targets. They stuck with the idea of releasing the cavalry as the strategy despite the evidence of 18 months of warfare.
History writers will challenge what has been written before. This is the only way they can make a name for themselves. In a few years time a group of academics will come to the conclusion that the leaders of the armies in WWI were all but retarded.
From what I know, and have read, the soldiers were aware of the poor tactics. They knew as it was obvious.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff