100 Years Ago on this day, WWI was brought to an end.

[Jredbaron96]

We'll disagree again. Ludendorff's idea of water flowing to the path of least resistance was a striking and unorthodox insight.

No, it wasn't at all.

To defeat the British and French armies the Germans needed a comprehensive plan of action that would allow them to defeat them in detail. What they got was a generic "attack in the direction of the enemy" that completely failed to properly guide the German armies when they needed it the most. Ludendorff squandered what advantages the Germans had in tactics, numbers and firepower by pursuing pointless tactical gains that ultimately served nothing to actually help the German strategic position.

 

[Jack Hays]

No, it wasn't at all.

To defeat the British and French armies the Germans needed a comprehensive plan of action that would allow them to defeat them in detail. What they got was a generic "attack in the direction of the enemy" that completely failed to properly guide the German armies when they needed it the most. Ludendorff squandered what advantages the Germans had in tactics, numbers and firepower by pursuing pointless tactical gains that ultimately served nothing to actually help the German strategic position.

That is your view. I do not share it. I do not believe victory was achievable by any German commander in 1918. Ludendorff's approach at least was imaginative.

 

[Jredbaron96]

That is your view. I do not share it. I do not believe victory was achievable by any German commander in 1918. Ludendorff's approach at least was imaginative.

It wasn't imaginative, it was stupid.

Let me put it like this: On the third day of Operation Michael, the 23rd of May, the Germans had successful gouged the British 5th Army and Amiens, the nexus of all rail traffic in western France, lay open and thinly defended. If Ludendorff had taken it, he could've separated the British and French and allowed the Germans to destroy both in detail.

Instead, he diverted the German forces to three separate minor targets, diluting their strength and giving them objectives far beyond their reach. When he finally did turn around and try to take it, it was too late.

 

[Jack Hays]

It wasn't imaginative, it was stupid.

Let me put it like this: On the third day of Operation Michael, the 23rd of May, the Germans had successful gouged the British 5th Army and Amiens, the nexus of all rail traffic in western France, lay open and thinly defended. If Ludendorff had taken it, he could've separated the British and French and allowed the Germans to destroy both in detail.

Instead, he diverted the German forces to three separate minor targets, diluting their strength and giving them objectives far beyond their reach. When he finally did turn around and try to take it, it was too late.

Fog of war. Hart liked the approach. So do I.
All the British & French had to do was hang on until American weight tipped the scales. That psychological foundation put victory beyond the Germans' grasp.

 

[Jredbaron96]

Fog of war. Hart liked the approach. So do I.
All the British & French had to do was hang on until American weight tipped the scales. That psychological foundation put victory beyond the Germans' grasp.

Seizing Amiens and destroying the British and French Armies in the field while leaving a wide open gap towards the French hearltand would've been more than enough to convince the French to negotiate.

 

[Jack Hays]

Seizing Amiens and destroying the British and French Armies in the field while leaving a wide open gap towards the French hearltand would've been more than enough to convince the French to negotiate.

I do not believe that was within the capability of German forces.

 

[Bodi]

On the eleventh hour, of the eleventh day, of the eleventh month, the guns fell silent after four years of the most brutal war the world had seen thus far in our history.

A century later, let us commemorate those that gave their lives so that the world may see peace, and do all we can to ensure their sacrifices have not been forgotten.

They didn't give their lives so the world could see peace... they went to war to find glory and so that they didn't miss out...

 

[Bodi]

Isn't that Memorial Day? Many veterans are not dead - thank them for their service.

There are no more WWI veterans... all dead.

 

[Jredbaron96]

I do not believe that was within the capability of German forces.

Destroying the British 5th Army was certainly within the realm of capability for the Germans, and with Amiens seized the British 3rd and 1st Armies could've been pinned against the Channel by the Second and Seventeenth Armies. Without their main rail depot the French 6th Army would not have been in position to block the German Eighteenth and Second Armies.

Now granted, whether or not the Germans would have been smart enough to negotiate an official settlement is another thing, but they could have certainly achieved a battlefield success.

 

[Bodi]

If only they had succeeded. The war to end all wars.

They didn't have enough throwing knives...

 

[Jack Hays]

Destroying the British 5th Army was certainly within the realm of capability for the Germans, and with Amiens seized the British 3rd and 1st Armies could've been pinned against the Channel by the Second and Seventeenth Armies. Without their main rail depot the French 6th Army would not have been in position to block the German Eighteenth and Second Armies.

Now granted, whether or not the Germans would have been smart enough to negotiate an official settlement is another thing, but they could have certainly achieved a battlefield success.

I don't think they had the capacity.

 

[Bodi]

I my view, all the men in that senseless war died for nothing. It was the crime of the century, giving us Hitler and Stalin for desert.

WWI did not give us Hitler and Stalin... it was the failure of governments that did that.

 

[Bodi]

The initial popularity of a war has nothing to do with whether to war is actually necessary.

Well it is popular now too... we get some great movies to entertain us like War Horse, because of that World War.

 

[Jredbaron96]

I don't think they had the capacity.

If you don't have anything to actually refute me other than just stating you don't think they did, then I believe we are done here.

 

[Rexedgar]

WWI did not give us Hitler and Stalin... it was the failure of governments that did that.

Care to get into more detail?

 

[Jack Hays]

If you don't have anything to actually refute me other than just stating you don't think they did, then I believe we are done here.

The claim is neither provable nor refutable. I do not believe the German army of spring 1918 had such a victorious campaign in them. The Germans exhausted their resources and over extended their supply lines. And mutiny was just below the surface.

 

[Nickyjo]

WWI did not give us Hitler and Stalin... it was the failure of governments that did that.

The governments indeed failed by starting and prosecuting the dumb war. As a result of Russia's stupidity, the Czar fell and Lenin took over. The allies excessive punishing of Germany gave rise to Hitler's beefs about the stab in the back. No WWI, no Stalin, no Hitler, no WWII. And for that matter, no colonizing and map-drawing of the Middle East by France and Germany, which gave rise to even more misery.

 

[Bodi]

Care to get into more detail?

I was just countering his point... WWI did not give us those dudes... it was the failure of post war governments that did.

 

[Bodi]

The governments indeed failed by starting and prosecuting the dumb war. As a result of Russia's stupidity, the Czar fell and Lenin took over. The allies excessive punishing of Germany gave rise to Hitler's beefs about the stab in the back. No WWI, no Stalin, no Hitler, no WWII. And for that matter, no colonizing and map-drawing of the Middle East by France and Germany, which gave rise to even more misery.

So the war did not give rise, as you initially said, it was the Allies excessive punishment of Germany that gave rise?

 

[Nickyjo]

So the war did not give rise, as you initially said, it was the Allies excessive punishment of Germany that gave rise?

It was the war that did "give rise" to the unjust treaty and "gave rise" the Allies excessive punishment of Germany and their acceptance of guilt for WWI. What are we quibbling about? No first war, no bad treaty, no punishment of Germany, no Hitler, no WWII. What is your view of WWI?

 

[Bodi]

It was the war that did "give rise" to the unjust treaty and "gave rise" the Allies excessive punishment of Germany and their acceptance of guilt for WWI. No first war, no bad treaty, no punishment of Germany, no Hitler, no WWII.

This is more accurate...

What are we quibbling about?

We are not quibbling... I am raising objections about a trivial matter.

What is your view of WWI?

That it did not give rise to Hitler...

 

[Nickyjo]

I

This is more accurate...



We are not quibbling... I am raising objections about a trivial matter.



That it did not give rise to Hitler...

What do you think did? Seems to me that without the war and the treaty, he had limited appeal.

 

[USViking]

No, a German victory at the Marne doesn't solve their problems at all. Ignoring the fact that even without American troops a victory at the Marne is highly unlikely, neither the Seventh Army or the Ninth Army retain any offensive capability to push any farther. As had been demonstrated numerous times by the time of the Marne, the Germans never were able to effectively follow up their successes because the mobility of their forces were so poor.

So even if the Germans do somehow win (how the manage to assault the main French defensive line when it's beyond the range of German artillery), it leaves them with nothing of real value. They have a breach they can't exploit, flanks they can't defend, and a manpower problem that's now even worse.

Once a continuous front is flanked or breached the entire front is in crisis. This was demonstrated in 1914 (flank) and in May-June 1940 (breach). The 1917 Germans of course did not have the mechanized assets of the 1940 Germans, but they also had less ground to cover to reach Paris, which was the prime objective for more than just symbolic reasons.

Also, the flanking counterattack of the east of the German salient was led by the AEF. It is questionable that the French could have managed such an effective attack on their own.

 

[Bodi]

I

What do you think did? Seems to me that without the war and the treaty, he had limited appeal.

He had no appeal at all... it was his charisma and political ambitions that lead him to power. A guy like Hitler takes advantage of situations but he was going to rise to power regardless... he was anti-democracy, anti-Marxist and anti-Semitic. The USA had issues with Communists and Nazi's post-WWI as well. The issues in Russia were happening long before WWI and the Romanov's downfall was inevitable long before WWI

 

[PoS]

WWI did not give us Hitler and Stalin... it was the failure of governments that did that.

LOL and why do you think the governments failed? Oh yes, because of WW1... duh!