Why Is World War 1 Ineffective

653 Words3 Pages
Affective or Not, Here Comes Germany The allies won World War One, but the leadership was not effective. In my essay I will be talking about three major battles. First I will be talking about the battle of Somme, led by the poor leadership of Sir Douglas Haig. Second I will be talking about Passchendaele, also led by Haig and “the bloody learning curve”. In my third paragraph I will talk about Vimy Ridge, lead by the great General Arthur Currie and his success with Canada. I will be giving examples of why I think that allied leadership during World War One was ineffective. In 1916, at the beginning of the war was the battle of Somme. The battle was fought in Somme, France. Douglas Haig was leading the British, and was a very stubborn leader. Haig’s tactics were for the British to simply walk over to the German trenches. After the first day there were 60 000 casualties. Haig being the stubborn leader that he was did not change the tactics at all after losing all these men. Other then the fact that the British had an awful tactic, they did not have the right weaponry. Haig was a strong believer in Calvary, and was skeptical of the newer machinery. When the British walked across no mans land the Germans just mowed them down with their machine guns. At the end of this battle there was 400 000…show more content…
Vimy Ridge was fought at the Vimy Glide, Lead by Byng and Arthur Currie. This was a divining moment for Canadian military history; it was the first time all four of the Canadian divisions fought together. The battle took a a lot of planning from Currie and Byng. They made the troops practice in possible scenarios of what battle would be like. Unlike Haig, Currie gave all the troops detailed maps. Curries tactic was straightforward assault to the German line. All four of the Canadian divisions would attack in a line. This worked and was a Canadian
Open Document