• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

My interpretation of General Haig is that he was a foolish leader and should not have been allowed to become so high up in the army because of his relations with famous people.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Interpretation of General Haig by Adam Pomerenke 9 Thorne My interpretation of General Haig is that he was a foolish leader and should not have been allowed to become so high up in the army because of his relations with famous people. In the battle of the Neuve Chappele Haig was chosen to lead the attack as general. In the battle his basic plan was good but he failed to think it out fully. The Allies bombed the German trenches using 3,000 shells and captured a village in less than an hour. This makes him seem like a good leader but, because of the bombing, they destroyed the telephone wires which meant that he could not contact back to base and the Allies soon ran out of rations and ammunitions. The Germans were ready for the Allies because they could not get reinforcements quick enough and so they lost the village that they had wasted so much ammunition on. I think that Haig's battle plan was good but he did not think it through so if he had waited for a while to go through all of the possible options, the Allies could have lost a lot less lives, ammunitions and rations. ...read more.

Middle

I think that if Haig did not make that decision then the French still would have gone but they would have left some troops behind to help. I think that his decision was quite cowardly and he took the easy way out. He could have thought long and hard about a proper battle plan but, instead left to someone else and this backfired on him. This is similar to when they lost the battle of Loos Haig blamed it on Sir John French. Apart from this time he paid for his lack of work and they lost 60,000 men on the first day alone which was the worst fighting day in history for the British. In conclusion, I think that Haig did have some good qualities, but the number of bad one's outweighed the good. He was quite lazy, because he never did the work and when he did he would not think it through; he was foolish because even though the same battle plan failed each time (bombing the trenches) he would keep on trying it; and he was a bit of a coward because when the going got tough, he would blame it on someone else or leave it to someone else to do it. ...read more.

Conclusion

People also began to think that although they had won the war, society had had not changed for the better which was blamed on Haig. The former Prime Minister wrote a book insulting Haig calling him a useless bungler and a leader who used the same ineffective strategy over and over again and needlessly sending hundreds of thousands of men to their death. The book made people think about Haig and his popularity as well as other people's respect decreased. The final assault on Haig came on television in the 1960's when programmes about the horror of the First World War and the poor leadership of Haig and others. He was, in that time period remembered as someone with no sense of compassion or care for the lives of his men. There was however in this decade some defence for Haig by a man called John Terraine who published a book which said that Haig was not a bloody, senseless and ruthless butcher who did not care for the lives of his men rather, a man who acted responsibly and sensibly. In conclusion, the debate for whether or not Haig was a good leader or not, will continue for a long time and historians will always change their mind about him and the evidence that they have. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Britain 1905-1951 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Britain 1905-1951 essays

  1. General Haig - Butcher or Hero?

    On the battlefield, the tank would have been a very formidable weapon, with impenetrable armour plating, fearsome fire-power and its ability to cover harsh terrain. And it was certainly the answer to barbed wire and other defences put into place by the Germans to slow British advances.

  2. Was General Haig a donkey or a great commander?

    This made even normal communication difficult, but during a battle it became almost impossible for a general to "rearrange his forces in the middle of an action." Therefore it was unlikely that once a battle had started, anything could be done about its outcome.

  1. Haig Fully Deserves His Reputation as 'Bungler and Butcher of the Somme.'Discuss

    heavy casualties among the attackers The realities of war are that people shall lose their lives." This is source is from John Keegan who is a very well respected world war one expert and defends the number of casualties that there were, however it could be argued that numbers he

  2. Were Lions led by donkeys in World war one?

    The source implies that Haig was a good General, and that he won the war, which was what he was asked to do, and that the loss of lives was unavoidable. However, this source may not be very reliable, because of a number of reasons.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work