Please note that NONE of the "usual suspects" are actually addressing any facet of either the history or the mythology of the First World War, I will however.

The first will be the the British Army

A force deserving nothing but contempt from their adversaries in 1914 - only 80,000 strong who were faced with holding off 180,000 to 200,000 men for the first five months of the war. Not only did they survive but they inflicted serious damage on their enemy but delayed them sufficiently to completely derail and destroy the German plan for an early victory in the west in 1914. They did not do it on their own the French and the Belgians played their part - but play their part they did - do not detract or diminish in any way the role that they played.

By 1918 the British, Commonwealth and Empire armies present in France were the ONLY formation capable and willing to take the fight to the enemy, only 21 days after the armies of the "Entente Power", primarily the British, had withstood five successive and prolonged offensives by a German Army reinforced and doubled in size with men transferred from the Eastern Front, the first citizens Army that Britain had ever raised (Ten times the size of the army that Great had in 1914) in 100 days defeated what was generally considered to be the best army in the world. This campaign is still considered to be the most successful offensive campaign ever mounted by the British Army in its entire history.

The expansion, training, deployment and development of tactics could not have been accomplished to achieve those results if the leadership of the British Army had been useless or incompetent.

Anyone wishing to respond to this post please address the points made - not the person posting them.