The analysis presented will show how Douglas Haig and David Lloyd George took different approaches to the head-to-head offensive action taken on the First World War. Each viewpoint will highlight the individuals’ temperament, strategic thinking and logic of how each approached the war.
Douglas Haig
Douglas Haig’s viewpoint of war was more traditional. Haig approached the battle of 1915 with ideas he had learned from Staff College, Camberley, between 1896 and 1897. He was taught that war must end in a “decisive offensive” – this was a structured war in stages. He emphasized the decisive offensive was a fundamental of warfare and he de-emphasized the use of technology and firepower. Haig’s emphasis was on the relevance of the human factor; discipline …show more content…
The difficulties the infantry found in taking enemy positions without accurate and heavy artillery support. The uncritical atmosphere that existed at the First Army Headquarters, which were mostly officers who knew Haig and his methods, never questioned or challenged his opinions. Haig did not spend a great deal of time before the war to analysis the use of artillery. He believed that artillery was there to assist the advance of the infantry and lower the enemy’s morale. (Travers 1993) Haig did not realize – or just ignored – the difficulties the infantry would have advancing without artillery support. He believed the problem was a human factor issue and not one of inadequate artillery preparation.
After the war, many years later, Haig gave his critics more ammunition by speaking about the future use of horses during warfare: “I believe that the value of the horse and the opportunity for the horse in the future are likely to be as great as ever. Aeroplanes and tanks are only accessories to the men and the horse, and I feel sure that as time goes on you will find just as much use for the horse—the well-bred horse—as you have ever done in the past.” ("The Cavalry Arm: Lord Haig on Value in War" …show more content…
He felt there was only one way to win in the battlefield and that was with structure, high morale and discipline. In his final dispatch on March 21, 1919, Haig downplayed the extent of the casualties that took place in 1914: “Given, however, the military situation existing in August 1914, our total losses in the war have been no larger than were to be expected. Neither do they compare unfavourably with those of any other of the belligerent nations, so far as figures are available from which comparison can be made.” (First World War n.d.) Haig’s blamed the casualties on other people but he never put the blame on his lack of leadership, foresight and strategic
Douglas Haig
Douglas Haig’s viewpoint of war was more traditional. Haig approached the battle of 1915 with ideas he had learned from Staff College, Camberley, between 1896 and 1897. He was taught that war must end in a “decisive offensive” – this was a structured war in stages. He emphasized the decisive offensive was a fundamental of warfare and he de-emphasized the use of technology and firepower. Haig’s emphasis was on the relevance of the human factor; discipline …show more content…
The difficulties the infantry found in taking enemy positions without accurate and heavy artillery support. The uncritical atmosphere that existed at the First Army Headquarters, which were mostly officers who knew Haig and his methods, never questioned or challenged his opinions. Haig did not spend a great deal of time before the war to analysis the use of artillery. He believed that artillery was there to assist the advance of the infantry and lower the enemy’s morale. (Travers 1993) Haig did not realize – or just ignored – the difficulties the infantry would have advancing without artillery support. He believed the problem was a human factor issue and not one of inadequate artillery preparation.
After the war, many years later, Haig gave his critics more ammunition by speaking about the future use of horses during warfare: “I believe that the value of the horse and the opportunity for the horse in the future are likely to be as great as ever. Aeroplanes and tanks are only accessories to the men and the horse, and I feel sure that as time goes on you will find just as much use for the horse—the well-bred horse—as you have ever done in the past.” ("The Cavalry Arm: Lord Haig on Value in War" …show more content…
He felt there was only one way to win in the battlefield and that was with structure, high morale and discipline. In his final dispatch on March 21, 1919, Haig downplayed the extent of the casualties that took place in 1914: “Given, however, the military situation existing in August 1914, our total losses in the war have been no larger than were to be expected. Neither do they compare unfavourably with those of any other of the belligerent nations, so far as figures are available from which comparison can be made.” (First World War n.d.) Haig’s blamed the casualties on other people but he never put the blame on his lack of leadership, foresight and strategic