US Military in the First Would War

[barryqwalsh]

Enter America

Voices of the First World War


Dan Snow hears the recollections of US soldiers who were sent to fight in France in 1918, and looks at the reactions of British and German soldiers to their arrival. They had received formidable physical training, but were naturally regarded as naïve by the battle-hardened 'old sweats' who'd served on the front for several years. But at the Battle of Bellau Wood, the Americans fought as tenaciously as any veteran unit, and helped to turn the tide of the war.



Audio

BBC Radio 4 - Voices of the First World War, Enter America

 

[DJT for Life]

They used the Americans as back-ups to their incompetent troops.

They tried to fight a war sitting on their asses instead of attacking.

The Europeans had no clue. Americans distinguished themselves
when they got out in the open and could attack with speed and flanking
movements.

Ike made a similar mistake at the start of WWII by placing American
troops under British command and watching them get slaughtered
at Kasserine Pass. FDR should have relieved him right then and there.

 

[Syriusly]

They used the Americans as back-ups to their incompetent troops.

They tried to fight a war sitting on their asses instead of attacking.

The Europeans had no clue. Americans distinguished themselves
when they got out in the open and could attack with speed and flanking
movements.

Ike made a similar mistake at the start of WWII by placing American
troops under British command and watching them get slaughtered
at Kasserine Pass. FDR should have relieved him right then and there.

They tried to fight a war sitting on their asses instead of attacking..[/QUOTE]

Wow- you are pretty brave.

You know- calling all of those now dead troops incompetent- and just sitting on their asses.

France lost over 1,000,000 men killed in combat.
Most of those were killed in stupid, fruitless and brave attacks on fortified positions held with machine guns and artillery.

World War 1 was a bloodbath and a demonstration of the power of modern weaponry. A war that shouldn't have happened. A war America didn't need to participate in.

Americans did turn the tide of the war- both sides had lost so many men, and what troops that were still alive were exhausted, and not prime- that fresh American troops- and supplies turned the war- but remember American troops fought with French tanks, airplanes and artillery- and had British and French support in virtually every battle. Our troops didn't do it by themselves.

 

[barryqwalsh]

Voices of the First World War

There are other interesting episodes in this radio program.


BBC Radio 4 - Voices of the First World War - Available now

 

[DJT for Life]

They used the Americans as back-ups to their incompetent troops.

They tried to fight a war sitting on their asses instead of attacking.

The Europeans had no clue. Americans distinguished themselves
when they got out in the open and could attack with speed and flanking
movements.

Ike made a similar mistake at the start of WWII by placing American
troops under British command and watching them get slaughtered
at Kasserine Pass. FDR should have relieved him right then and there.

They tried to fight a war sitting on their asses instead of attacking..

Wow- you are pretty brave.

You know- calling all of those now dead troops incompetent- and just sitting on their asses.

France lost over 1,000,000 men killed in combat.
Most of those were killed in stupid, fruitless and brave attacks on fortified positions held with machine guns and artillery.

World War 1 was a bloodbath and a demonstration of the power of modern weaponry. A war that shouldn't have happened. A war America didn't need to participate in.

Americans did turn the tide of the war- both sides had lost so many men, and what troops that were still alive were exhausted, and not prime- that fresh American troops- and supplies turned the war- but remember American troops fought with French tanks, airplanes and artillery- and had British and French support in virtually every battle. Our troops didn't do it by themselves.[/QUOTE]

That's what I wrote.

They were in a war that they didn't know how to fight and when America
got there...they used Americans in the same manner that they were having
theirs killed by the bushel.

None of those Europeans had any innovative sense. They just used the same-o, same-o with different weapons.

Remember, the only reason why America was successful going up San Juan
and Kettle Hill during the Spanish-American War was those stupid German
advisors, installed their machine guns, for the Spanish, in trenches 20 yards
or more from the crest of the hills. Once the Americans made it half way
up the hill, they were under the German/Spanish guns and couldn't be hit.

If the Germans would have placed those guns at the crest of the hill, the
Americans would have been butchered going up the hill, and that war
would have had a different outcome.

Pershing led the American 9th and 10th Cavalries up those hills. He remembered and he was brilliant. Just like Daniel Morgan from the
Revolutionary War outfoxed Tarleton at Cowpens and set the stage for
the American victory in the revolution. It ain't a crime to employ new strategy

 

[Syriusly]

They used the Americans as back-ups to their incompetent troops.

They tried to fight a war sitting on their asses instead of attacking.

The Europeans had no clue. Americans distinguished themselves
when they got out in the open and could attack with speed and flanking
movements.

Ike made a similar mistake at the start of WWII by placing American
troops under British command and watching them get slaughtered
at Kasserine Pass. FDR should have relieved him right then and there.

They tried to fight a war sitting on their asses instead of attacking..

Wow- you are pretty brave.

You know- calling all of those now dead troops incompetent- and just sitting on their asses.

France lost over 1,000,000 men killed in combat.
Most of those were killed in stupid, fruitless and brave attacks on fortified positions held with machine guns and artillery.

World War 1 was a bloodbath and a demonstration of the power of modern weaponry. A war that shouldn't have happened. A war America didn't need to participate in.

Americans did turn the tide of the war- both sides had lost so many men, and what troops that were still alive were exhausted, and not prime- that fresh American troops- and supplies turned the war- but remember American troops fought with French tanks, airplanes and artillery- and had British and French support in virtually every battle. Our troops didn't do it by themselves.

That's what I wrote.

They were in a war that they didn't know how to fight and when America
got there...they used Americans in the same manner that they were having
theirs killed by the bushel.

None of those Europeans had any innovative sense. They just used the same-o, same-o with different weapons.

Remember, the only reason why America was successful going up San Juan
and Kettle Hill during the Spanish-American War was those stupid German
advisors, installed their machine guns, for the Spanish, in trenches 20 yards
or more from the crest of the hills. Once the Americans made it half way
up the hill, they were under the German/Spanish guns and couldn't be hit.

If the Germans would have placed those guns at the crest of the hill, the
Americans would have been butchered going up the hill, and that war
would have had a different outcome.

Pershing led the American 9th and 10th Cavalries up those hills. He remembered and he was brilliant. Just like Daniel Morgan from the
Revolutionary War outfoxed Tarleton at Cowpens and set the stage for
the American victory in the revolution. It ain't a crime to employ new strategy[/QUOTE]


You called the troops incompetent- everyone other than Americans and lazy.

You are wrong.