WW 1: How/Why did Germany lose it

I can't wait herr Friedrich! Of course the 1000 calories obviously did not apply to some...von hindenburg for instance

 

Hey!
This is GOOD!

 

I guess there has hardly ever been a war in which leading politicians & generals were malnourished...

 

Well, during the summer of 1918 German infantry divisions had pproximately 12.000-15.000 men, British 13.000-16.000, French 12.000-15.000 men and American divisions 27.000-31.000 men...

And the line of the front ran from Ypres and Oestende to the Swiss border almost equal as it had done for the last three years. In the north, there were 57 German divisions facing 40 British and 2 American divisions. In the region Meuse-Argonne there were 31 French and 13 American divisions against only 20 German. The latter American force, the I American Army had about 2.700 guns, while the Germans didn't even have a thousand...

As for the German reserves, they were mostly ill-trained units formed of drafted youth of the generation 1900, 1901, 1902 and 1903!

 

All in all, there is not so much to debate. The Allied had almost double as many men in arms and spent even more than double as much money. In the end, the result was logical, it just needed unnecessary long time.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong.......but, even if Germany would not have answered Russia's military mobilization with a declaration of war and Germany would have dismissed the "Schliffen Plan" wasn't there a treaty combining France, Britain and Russia called the "Triple Entente?" I mean, even if Germany had left Britain and Russia alone wouldn't they have had to deal with them eventually.......and yes! I know that French intervention went along after Germany had declared war against Russia but (in my opinion) I doubt if Russia would have interveened on France's behalf had the shoe been on the other foot due to Russia's poor state (notwithstanding its high sense of nationalism)......no wonder they got out of it in 1915????

 

The Triple Entente was a rather loose agreement, without German invasion of Belgium, its is perfectly possible that GB would have stayed out.

 

I listened through last night a CD "Great generals of 20th century" by Flagtower.

Don´t know how detailed and right it is on WW1 but I thought they had it on WW2 generals. So I thought I might make additions/questions on some matters.

26 March 1918: The Allied hold a conference at Doulenns on the unity of command, and decide to appoint a supreme commander;Foch is appointed on 29th March.

So to have one common commander was one key factor?!!

http://homepage.tinet.ie/~tipperaryfame/wwar1005.htm


------

According to the CD the German troops during their spring attack started looting (?) and this caused major problems (?)

The spring attack sounds quite good to begin with:

By the end of the first day of the attack, 21,000 British soldiers had been taken prisoner and the Germans had made great advances through the lines of the Fifth Army. Senior British military commanders lost control of the situation.

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/german_spring_offensive_of_1918.htm

The first few days of the attack were such an overwhelming success, that William II declared March 24th to be a national holiday. Many in Germany assumed that the war was all but over.

However, the Germans experienced one major problem. Their advance had been a major success. But their troops deliberately carried few things except weapons to assist their mobility. The speed of their advance put their supply lines under huge strain.

“We are going like Hell – on and on, day and night. Our baggage is somewhere in the rear and we don’t expect to see it again.” Captain Rudolf Binding.

..the 18th Army found that it ran out of supplies as it advanced. Horses, that should have been used in the advance on Amiens, were killed for their meat...

..such was their hunger and desperation for food that looting took place and the discipline that had started with the attack on March 21st soon disappeared. The advance all but stopped in Albert and the attack on Amiens imploded. Luderndorff could not have planned for this and he did not know what to do. Senior German officers based with Luderndorff feared that he was at a point of exhaustion and they feared for his mental health...

-----

As well on the CD it is claimed that the German forces were sent in two directions, Paris and the coastal cities, which made it even harder for the troops to win the battles. It mentions that they should have gone for Amiens (?!)

-----

Opinions on these?



BTW, here´s a site with "living" maps on the situation on the fronts:

http://www.richthofen.com/ww1sum/

[ 27. December 2003, 12:47 PM: Message edited by: Kai-Petri ]

 

This is true - as German troops overran the British 5th Army's supply depots they would often stop and simply gorge themselves on captured food, drink and alcohol. There was a quote of a German officer who went as far to say (albeit ironically) that the Spring Offensive was halted not by a lack of German fighting spirit, but by excess of Scotch drinking spirit.

 

I know a Finnish offensive would have halted anyway....

 

I would think so. But even more important was that the man they chose was the right one.

I think this refers to the fact that many German small units started attacking Allied supply depots instead of military targets. This way the Germans obtained fresh rations, coffee, meat and things they hadn't seen in four years. But the Allies obviously had no lack of food and were not deprived of their frontline ammunition depots and storages, so they could immediately attack the Germans while they were eating...

[ 06. January 2004, 10:17 AM: Message edited by: General der Infanterie Friedrich H ]

 

Yes, Friedrich,

as well as I could only wonder what would have happened in WW2 if they did not take this advice into consideration and put Ike to lead the whole operation in the west...Overlord by 1948???

 

That may have been true, Kai. A central, unified command with a person which had to manage consent between two general staffs, Allies, politicians, etc. was of big help to the Allied war effort.

That was why the OKW was created in Germany and Hitler made a relative good job at it. But if Hitler wouldn't have been a darwinist he would have looked for co-operation between all the armed forces, civilian authorities and allies instead of encouraging them to fight each other...

 

*BUMP*

(Let's get this thing going again! Lots of good posts, still lots of opinions out there....mine coming soon!)

DUCE