Centenary of the start of the First World War tomorrow

[superheat6k]

For those on their boats tomorrow, lest we should forget (copied from a post on the PBO forum)...

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/320975/475_WWI_UNESCO.pdf

 

[Seajet]

Chichester Conservancy have requested all boats fly their ensigns at half mast as a show of respect - I will not be on my boat but if I were I would certainly do so; to my Grandad and his chums, Thankyou.

 

[pvb]

OK, I understand that this may be interpreted as controversial, but I'm an OAP and I really think that it's time to move on. The First World War was a tragedy, not really something to celebrate or commemorate. UNESCO may have requested this, but their remit is unclear. I think the request should be ignored.

 

[Uricanejack]

Not wishing to offend anyone.

Franze Ferdinand was shot 100 years ago Tomorrow. To some the first shot of WW1.

The war did not actually start until a month later when Austria sent its ultimatum of 10 demands to Serbia.
Austria Hungary Declared War on Serbia on July 28th after its ultimatum was rejected.
Russia Began Mobilising on July 29th
Germany Began mobilisation on the 30th of July. And sent an ultimatum to Russia.
Germany declared war on Russia August 1st.
Germany Invaded Luxembourg on August 2nd and declared war on France on August 3rd.

Britain’s war began on the 4th of August. When the British Ultimatum to Germany about Belgium’s neutrality was ignored.

On the 4th of august 4 of the 5 main powers of Europe were at war.

 

[Woodlouse]

Not wishing to offend anyone.

Franze Ferdinand was shot 100 years ago Tomorrow. To some the first shot of WW1.

The war did not actually start until a month later when Austria sent its ultimatum of 10 demands to Serbia.
Austria Hungary Declared War on Serbia on July 28th after its ultimatum was rejected.
Russia Began Mobilising on July 29th
Germany Began mobilisation on the 30th of July. And sent an ultimatum to Russia.
Germany declared war on Russia August 1st.
Germany Invaded Luxembourg on August 2nd and declared war on France on August 3rd.

Britain’s war began on the 4th of August. When the British Ultimatum to Germany about Belgium’s neutrality was ignored.

On the 4th of august 4 of the 5 main powers of Europe were at war.

I agree with this. The assassination of the arch duke Ferdinand was the cause of the First World War, it was not the start of it.

 

[Seajet]

World War 1 was, like most wars, evil and unnecessary with the upper class of both sides sending the decent lower classes to slaughter in what might as well have been a game of chess.

I have always thought World War II fairly unique in that it really was good against evil, and had to be fought.

My Grandfather looked after horses at the front in WW1, I can't even bear to think about what he endured.

 

[JumbleDuck]

I agree with this. The assassination of the arch duke Ferdinand was the cause of the First World War, it was not the start of it.

One of AJP Taylor's "How Wars Begin" series is available on iPlayer, at http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p008pxfm/how-wars-begin-5-the-second-world-war. It's on the second world war, not the first, but he addresses the question "When did it begin?" rather than "How did it begin?" with some fascinating evidence, argument and conclusions.

 

[Mariner69]

Not wishing to offend anyone.

Franze Ferdinand was shot 100 years ago Tomorrow. To some the first shot of WW1.

The war did not actually start until a month later when Austria sent its ultimatum of 10 demands to Serbia.
Austria Hungary Declared War on Serbia on July 28th after its ultimatum was rejected.
Russia Began Mobilising on July 29th
Germany Began mobilisation on the 30th of July. And sent an ultimatum to Russia.
Germany declared war on Russia August 1st.
Germany Invaded Luxembourg on August 2nd and declared war on France on August 3rd.

Britain’s war began on the 4th of August. When the British Ultimatum to Germany about Belgium’s neutrality was ignored.

On the 4th of august 4 of the 5 main powers of Europe were at war.

And my Great Uncle was killed on the 7th August 1914.

His brother served throughout the rest of the war in Galipolli and the Somme and features in a brilliant photograph about 9 by 6 foot size on the wall in the Military Academy at Shrivenham, where he is seen sitting on the sandbags of one of the trenches, wearing a sheepskin jacket (true Del Boy style). He and his brother had been a market traders and joined the regular army long before the war on the recommendation of Scotland Yard due to 'misunderstandings'; hence London boys joining the Royal Scots. He put all of his extensive training to great use after the war when he continued to dig trenches in London to lay utilities.

 

[snowleopard]

Chichester Conservancy have requested all boats fly their ensigns at half mast as a show of respect

For that, definitely not June 28. Maybe July 28 but in Britain probably Aug 4th is most appropriate. If you're going to look at the trigger you could equally go back to 1870.

 

[Seajet]

For that, definitely not June 28. Maybe July 28 but in Britain probably Aug 4th is most appropriate.

Well that's what Chichester Conservancy have requested in their weekly Notices To Mariners e-mail.

 

[Woodlouse]

World War 1 was, like most wars, evil and unnecessary with the upper class of both sides sending the decent lower classes to slaughter in what might as well have been a game of chess.

.

I wish you'd stop blowing that trumpet. Statistically you were more likely to die as a general in the First World War than as a private soldier and a junior officer was almost twice as likely to be killed as the men he led. The upper classes sacrificed themselves in such droves during the First World War that the class system afterwards was left almost unrecognisable from the Victorian ideals that reigned before.

 

[Robert Wilson]

Dipped my ensign at noon today. Had a few wee thoughts to myself, ended by saying out loud "We shall remember them".

Done my bit.

 

[JumbleDuck]

I wish you'd stop blowing that trumpet. Statistically you were more likely to die as a general in the First World War than as a private soldier and a junior officer was almost twice as likely to be killed as the men he led. The upper classes sacrificed themselves in such droves during the First World War that the class system afterwards was left almost unrecognisable from the Victorian ideals that reigned before.

78 out of 1257 British generals[1] were killed during WW1: 6.2%

In total there were 956,703 deaths out of 8,689,467[2] who served in the British Army: 11.0%

[1] http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=143753
[2] http://www.1914-1918.net/faq.htm

 

[chinita]

78 out of 1257 British generals[1] were killed during WW1: 6.2%

In total there were 956,703 deaths out of 8,689,467[2] who served in the British Army: 11.0%

[1] http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=143753
[2] http://www.1914-1918.net/faq.htm

Frankly, I am amazed the figure is as high as 6.2%; If I was CGS I would be asking 'WTF are they all doing getting themselves killed, Darling?"

I don't think the strategic plan included wiping out all the Generals merely to satisfy some sort of inverted snobbery.

 

[Seajet]

Frankly, I am amazed the figure is as high as 6.2%; If I was CGS I would be asking 'WTF are they all doing getting themselves killed, Darling?"

I don't think the strategic plan included wiping out all the Generals merely to satisfy some sort of inverted snobbery.

Hardly leading from the front, most of them; it would have saved a generation of good people and rid us of a lot of inbred chinless wonders if the fighting had been restricted solely to the Generals, though they'd have had to use busses to the front or long range weapons...

 

[chinita]

Well, I've just been an gone an done it here in Marina de Lagos.

Never felt so lonely in my life.

Actually, some guy did reply, but I think it was 'cos he was pissed off with the noise I was making.

Uh, oh.......here come the Policia Maritima...............

 

[WilliamUK]

On the whys, wherefores and reasons behind it all... a slightly unconventional, yet compelling perspective.
Personally I always found the Ferdinand cause tricky to swallow.

Sheds some light on some subsequent conflicts too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIpm_8v80hw

 

[Grumpybear]

Hardly leading from the front, most of them; it would have saved a generation of good people and rid us of a lot of inbred chinless wonders if the fighting had been restricted solely to the Generals, though they'd have had to use busses to the front or long range weapons...

If you really bothered to find out about warfare, you would realise that getting your generals killed so they can't influence the outcome of a battle is the best way to lose a war. Dead generals do have a positive impact on soldiers' morale, but even they would rather win than lose, which the British army and its Dominion and Empire comrades eventually did, once their training allowed them to use the weapons, tactics and leadership that had to be built up almost from scratch.

The left wing orthodox myths about WW1 are, as always, built round tiny kernels of truth, but the almost universal pacifism and myopia after 1918 (shared even by Churchill while he was in government) delayed the free world's reaction to Hitler's aggression until it was almost too late, vastly increasing the destruction and death toll entailed in defeating Nazism, and bankrupting Britain all over again. .

 

[Seajet]

Grumpybear & Chinita,

here are Jumbleducks' figures which sound about right to me;

78 out of 1257 British generals[1] were killed during WW1: 6.2%

In total there were 956,703 deaths out of 8,689,467[2] who served in the British Army: 11.0%

[1] http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/fo...owtopic=143753
[2] http://www.1914-1918.net/faq.

I know something of warfare having studied it - not participated - rather a lot. As far as I can make out neither of you were involved in WW1 or 2; my Father volunteered for the second job and we often talk about it.

 

[Grumpybear]

Grumpybear & Chinita,

here are Jumbleducks' figures which sound about right to me;

78 out of 1257 British generals[1] were killed during WW1: 6.2%

In total there were 956,703 deaths out of 8,689,467[2] who served in the British Army: 11.0%

[1] http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/fo...owtopic=143753
[2] http://www.1914-1918.net/faq.

I know something of warfare having studied it - not participated - rather a lot. As far as I can make out neither of you were involved in WW1 or 2; my Father volunteered for the second job and we often talk about it.

I read those statistics the first time, and find nothing to disagree with in them. I too have studied warfare, not just during twenty years in the Navy, and like yours my father also participated in WWII - as an infantryman in North Africa, Italy and NW Europe, including the liberation of Bergen-Belsen. Sadly he died in 1982, but his strongly held views have influenced mine, and I am glad to see that modern historical scholarship is beginning take a more balanced view than that propagated by the surviving first war poets and later mischief makers such as Alan Clark (who eventually admitted to having made up the quotation, allegedly by a German general, about lions and donkeys).

Sadly, in the spirit of modern intellectual argument, people who dare to challenge orthodoxy are subject at times to hate mail - Dan Snow for instance, since he dared to debunk a few of the cherished myths.

That said, I do agree with you that WWI was unnecessary, but since the Germans eventually decided that 1914 was their last chance to settle with Russia before the latter completed its military modernisation, and the two competing alliances were dragged into hostilities, it was in my opinion a sad necessity that Germany be opposed. The future of Europe had the Kaiser and his uniformed thugs been allowed to overrun France, seize its industrial base and challenge Britain to fight or knuckle under doesn't bear thinking about, and it seems that despite all the horrors of the war at least a very substantial minority of those who fought, and possibly a majority, remained convinced that it was worth doing. The turnout for Haig's funeral suggests that many former soldiers retained a respect for him that later generations, not directly involved, did not.