Replies

Thanks Bubba Ho-Tep.

Comprising the main Allied attack on the Western Front during 1916, the Battle of the Somme is famous chiefly on account of the loss of 58,000 British troops (one third of them killed) on the first day of the battle, 1 July 1916, which to this day remains a one-day record. The attack was launched upon a 30 kilometre front, from north of the Somme river between Arras and Albert, and ran from 1 July until 18 November, at which point it was called off.

The offensive was planned late in 1915 and was intended as a joint French-British attack. The French Commander in Chief, Joffre, conceived the idea as a battle of attrition, the aim being to drain the German forces of reserves, although territorial gain was a secondary aim.

The plan was agreed upon by the new British Commander in Chief, Sir Douglas Haig, although Haig would have preferred an offensive among the open ground of Flanders. [http://www.firstworldwar.com/battles/somme.htm]

An Allied myth that persists to this day is that the Germans were "running out of men" -- basically British and French propaganda that was nevertheless believed by both the civilian populations (who otherwise might have balked by 1916) and all the way up the chain of command. The Somme Offensive was just feeding the flower of British manpower into the German guns until the BEF was wrecked. Call-ups for more men -- because the Germans were running out of men -- went not only to Canada, but throughout the British Empire.

The British and French used that "running out of men" argument to bring Italy and Romania into the war -- Romania lasted about four weeks, Italy seemed to make headway, then experienced the same kind of counterattacks suffered by the other Allies, and they were driven back to their start line and beyond, and hollered for help. The British had to shift manpower into the Italian front, the reverse of what they wanted or expected.

In the 1890s the German military thinkers had realized that, if another war broke out, the likelihood was that they'd be fighting on at least two fronts and outnumbered something like 4:1, and both of those turned out to be spot on. To prepare against this eventuality, they'd modernized field guns and built them in what was then incredible numbers; one-man weapons were improved and standardized, and instead of sending men to the front laden with food and utensils, sent them with burdens of ammo, overwhelming superior enemy numbers with firepower, and cycling their troops out of the battle line for rest, meals, and sleep.

Only when the US entered the war did Germany casualty rates rise to the levels suffered by the Allies; the collapse of the Russian Empire led to a massive reinforcement of the west, but morale sagged as the years of war went on, and the very successful tactics looked too much like "paying for the same real estate twice".

A quick look at the rapidity of mobilization and rearmament of Germany leading into World War II -- and the huge army the country managed to raise -- shows that German losses had quite obviously not been nearly as bad as their adversaries'.

Google image search Battle of the Somme

Yeah, many of the main battles that were supposedly “won” by the allies, the Germans lost less men.

The BEF was decimated fairly early in the war.

It’s a wonder, how after the abattoirs of Battle of the Somme and similar battles, the tremendous losses the Bits and French took in “The Great War”, they ever alowed themselves to be dragged in another world war...

“the collapse of the Russian Empire led to a massive reinforcement of the west”

The Germans were never able to capitalize on the victory over Russia, because they feared the troops had become too radicalized through fraternization. At the time of the German surrender they still had 1 million troops in Russia.