The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #156088   Message #3685824
Posted By: Teribus
15-Dec-14 - 06:00 AM
Thread Name: WWI, was No-Man's Land
Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
" GUEST,Raggytash - 15 Dec 14 - 05:09 AM

Keith, All through your comments here you have stated that all modern Historians support the case that Haig was a superb General and that all previous Historians were either left wing, subversive, has their own axe to grind etc etc."


Really? Are you absolutely sure that you CAN read?

What Keith has said for over one year now is that:

1: The War was necessary for Great Britain
2: That the population of Great Britain understood the reasons for going to war and supported the war effort throughout
3: That in general in comparison to other combatant powers the British Army was well led

Those were Keith's opinions based upon what he has read from the articles, books and documentaries that Commentators and Historians have been writing over the past two or three decades, works written taking advantage of material not available to previous generations of historians.

Now then Raggytash you show either Keith or myself where either of us have said "that Haig was a SUPERB General" - NOTE: If you can't then STFU about it.

Let me see now A.J.P.Taylor former member of the Communist Party, and subsequent to him resigning from it he supports and votes Labour for the rest of his life - Would that not make him "left wing" with regard to British Politics?

Liddell Hart and Fuller in the post-war years were NOT trying to push their theories on military tactics and strategy by arguing that their new ideas were better than those employed previously?

That David Lloyd George waited until after Haig's death to use him as a scapegoat to deflect blame away from himself for some of the most calamitous decisions made during the Great War - Dardanelles, Salonika, sending troops needed on the western front to Italy, placing British Troops under overall French Command subservient to French requirements. For ordering Haig to mount and maintain offensive operations when Haig wanted to halt them?

Winston Spencer Churchill wished to paint Haig in as black a light as possible in order to deflect the public gaze and conversation away from Winston's own failure in Gallipoli?

Are you really trying to tell us that none of the above considerations have to be taken into account Raggytash?