History hit WWI

[vetran]

History Hit on WWI seems to align with the modern views expressed in the book Mud, Blood & Poppycock. Not the history as portrayed in Black Adder.

[vwdan]

Interesting watch - I've spent a bit of time around The Somme and Belgium. I can see the points he's making, but I think it comes over a bit "well, actually" - especially his use of population percentages to disprove the bloodiest war concept. We lost nearly 900,000 people in WWI, estimates around 1/10th of that for the Civil Wars and around 1/2 that for World War II.

I do broadly agree with a lot of his points though, lots of the received wisdom is fundamentally wrong. At the same time, the sheer scale is just unbelivably staggering and I think it's the way things that happen that shocked.

People expect lots of deaths in a protracted campaign with lots of fighting. Losing nigh on 60,000 people in one day though....we haven't lost close to that in most entire wars prior to that.

Most of the rest is pretty, true though. Some of the tactics are really interesting, and it's fascinating how they evolved - for example, I didn't realise the level of preperation and things like the creeping barrage

[northernladuk]

Not the history as portrayed in Black Adder.

What?!? Next you are going to tell me there wasn't a real Cardinal Chunder during the reign of Elizabeth the 1st. Mind blown.

[JustKeepSwimming]

I always thought WW1 had it's reputation because it was pointless 'We are going to war with you because a piece of paper says we have to'. Pretty much all other wars have a clear purpose, might not agree with them, but there is some rational reason behind them.

Two myths got me. First being that many enjoyed war, makes sense when you think about it (and knowing a small percentage actually see true combat). The second being the treaty was too harsh, damn well fell for Nazi propaganda!

[vetran]

Interesting watch - I've spent a bit of time around The Somme and Belgium. I can see the points he's making, but I think it comes over a bit "well, actually" - especially his use of population percentages to disprove the bloodiest war concept. We lost nearly 900,000 people in WWI, estimates around 1/10th of that for the Civil Wars and around 1/2 that for World War II.

I do broadly agree with a lot of his points though, lots of the received wisdom is fundamentally wrong. At the same time, the sheer scale is just unbelivably staggering and I think it's the way things that happen that shocked.

People expect lots of deaths in a protracted campaign with lots of fighting. Losing nigh on 60,000 people in one day though....we haven't lost close to that in most entire wars prior to that.

Most of the rest is pretty, true though. Some of the tactics are really interesting, and it's fascinating how they evolved - for example, I didn't realise the level of preperation and things like the creeping barrage

I see your point about the percentage of population but conversely how do you decide how fatal the war was compared to earlier times when there were far lower populations.

If Cain versus Abel has 1 fatality but that is 25% of the population which is more useful in an historical sense.

Deaths by percentage serving is definitely useful. a much larger proportion of commissioned officers died suggesting the 'donkeys' took more chances pushing General General Hague's liquor cabinet closer to Berlin.

The one thing that really got me when I first heard it was the 3 days a month in the trenches. I had been raised to understand it was months of living in squalor next to the dead in mud soaked trenches without relief. The Black adder version of WWI.

No Cardinal chunder? There was public vomiting in Roman times. I also had more than one friend that used to drink too much then visit the loo, use a too finger flush and come back slightly more sober. So why no Cardinal Chunder? Seems like a wonderful invention.

The creeping barrage was used in various forms until very recently. It was very effective.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrag...in_World_War_I

Undermining is as old as sieges and WWI many deaths and breakthroughs were achieved by it. Fascinating stuff.

[northernladuk]

No Cardinal chunder? There was public vomiting in Roman times. I also had more than one friend that used to drink too much then visit the loo, use a too finger flush and come back slightly more sober. So why no Cardinal Chunder? Seems like a wonderful invention.

[vetran]

interestingly enough I had Turnip for tea last night.

[northernladuk]

interestingly enough I had Turnip for tea last night.

Hee hee. I love the references to the classic shows. Every so often, when the situation dictates, I throw them out when with the family and it's totally lost on them Fow him to the fwoor centurian, biggus dicus has a wife you know, he's not the messiah he's a very naughty boy. All wasted. FML.

[vetran]

Hee hee. I love the references to the classic shows. Every so often, when the situation dictates, I throw them out when with the family and it's totally lost on them Fow him to the fwoor centurian, biggus dicus has a wife you know, he's not the messiah he's a very naughty boy. All wasted. FML.

Its your job to educate them!

https://www.quotes.net/show-quote/9862

[SueEllen]

History Hit on WWI seems to align with the modern views expressed in the book Mud, Blood & Poppycock. Not the history as portrayed in Black Adder.

Can't believe I'm watching the same stuff as you on the internet.