Klik på en miniature for at gå til Google Books
Indlæser... The American Army and the First World War (Armies of the Great War) (udgave 2014)af David Woodward (Forfatter)
Work InformationThe American Army and the First World War (Armies of the Great War) af David Woodward Ingen Indlæser...
Bliv medlem af LibraryThing for at finde ud af, om du vil kunne lide denne bog. Der er ingen diskussionstråde på Snak om denne bog. ingen anmeldelser | tilføj en anmeldelse
Belongs to Series
This is a definitive history of the American army's role and performance during the First World War. Drawing from a rich pool of archival sources, David Woodward sheds new light on key themes such as the mobilisation of US forces, the interdependence of military diplomacy, coalition war-making, the combat effectiveness of the AEF and the leadership of its commander John J. Pershing. He shows us how, in spite of a flawed combat doctrine, logistical breakdowns and American industry's failure to provide modern weaponry, the Doughboys were nonetheless able to wage a costly battle at Meuse-Argonne and play a decisive role in ending the war. The book gives voice to the common soldier through firsthand war diaries, letters, and memoirs, allowing us to reimagine their first encounters with regimented military life, their transport across the sub-infested Atlantic to Europe, and their experiences both in and behind the trenches. No library descriptions found. |
Current DiscussionsIngenPopulære omslag
Google Books — Indlæser... GenrerMelvil Decimal System (DDC)940.4History and Geography Europe Europe Military History Of World War ILC-klassificeringVurderingGennemsnit:
Er det dig?Bliv LibraryThing-forfatter. |
This book also spends a great deal of time on how the Entente did itself no favors in regards to American participation in terms of trying to procure American manpower as direct replacements. I can see no practical way this could have worked and can only imagine the outcry when the British military started to execute American citizens for desertion and cowardice, as you know they would have done. It would have made a lot more sense for American troops to be fed in as divisions and then aggregated into American corps and armies as the force structure grew and one probably would have wound up with an American field army in roughly the same amount of time. Perhaps not as large, but also not the shambling giant with feet of clay that was always on the verge of crumbling due to the slapdash way by which it was created. Entente bad faith rendered this option pretty much dead on arrival. An underlying reality here is that if this had been a Franco-American alliance there would have been a lot less strife, considering the lingering Anglo-American rivalry.
One then gets to the person of "Black Jack" Pershing, who one has to be critical of for his intransigence and inflexibility on so many issues but who, at the same time, looks like an indispensable man for having done as much as anyone to will a modern American field force into being. If he could have concentrated more on being a field commander and less on being a policy maker this would probably have helped matters, but that then gets back to Wilson's fecklessness in terms living up to his job as commander in chief, or at least picking a Secretary of War who could better deputize. Peyton March getting the job of Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army remains mostly unsung as the man who arguably saved the day. I still believe that the psychological impact of Pershing losing most of his family in a tragic house fire gets underrated.
Finally, vis-a-vis the chaos of the Meuse-Argonne Offensive, one thing this book doesn't play up enough is how much the "Spanish" Flu impacted operations. Many of those so-called stragglers appear to have been falling-down sick if you accept modern scholarship on the topic; something that the Army medical corps downplayed due to their failure to cope with that crisis. See Carol Byerly's "Fever of War" as food for thought. ( )