You want to talk about stupidity, and institutional failure? We are
approaching the 100th anniversary of the worst example in history: World
War I. All wars include shocking examples of stupidity and out-of-control
egos. During the U.S. Civil War, a Union general delayed an attack in order
to make one of his colleagues look bad, thereby sacrificing hundreds of
lives and nearly losing the battle in the cause of self-promotion and army
politics. The Second World War was larger and more brutal than WWI, but I
think no war in history -- no event in history -- has ever been more stupid
in its origin, the way it was fought, or the way it was settled at
Versailles.

Here is something I wrote about it, years ago --

Professionals who are entrusted with the most important jobs imaginable
sometimes turn out to be fools and bunglers. This is true even in
enlightened, modern society when survival is at stake. The most horrifying
example is the British general staff during the First World War. The Battle
of the Somme and other wasteful attacks were considered folly at the time
they were underway; not only in hindsight. The men and officers in the
field knew they were being sacrificed for no reason. Political leaders
including Lloyd-George and Winston Churchill knew it too. People understood
there were alternatives. The innovative younger officers fought a battle in
late 1917 at Cambrai with newer tactics and tanks. This was a victory, even
though the conservative general who was supposed to cooperate delayed his
follow-up attack by one hour, nearly sabotaging the plan. It was the only
battle which was celebrated during the war with church bells in London.
Unfortunately, the general staff soon stepped in, reasserted its power, and
lost all the ground that had been won. Churchill later wrote:

"Accusing as I do without exception all the great allied offensives of
1915, 1916 and 1917 as needless and wrongly conceived operations of
infinite cost, I am bound to reply to the question, What else could be
done? And I answer it, pointing to the Battle of Cambrai. 'This could have
been done.' This in many variants, this in larger and better forms ought to
have been done, and would have been done if only the Generals had not been
content to fight machine-gun bullets with the breasts of gallant men, and
think that that was waging war."

- The World Crisis 1911 - 1918, quoted in J. Laffin, "British Butchers and
Bunglers of World War One" (Bramley Books, 1988), p. 133

There is proof of what Churchill said. The number of British soldiers
killed in WWI was 956,703. WWII was longer, more savage and widespread, but
only 449,700 British soldiers and civilians were killed. This was partly
due to improvements in medical care, and partly because the British were
not directly engaged on front lines for much of 1940 and '41. But I think
mainly it was the product of better military leadership, by Churchill
himself and by his generals.

- Jed

Reply via email to