Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

WAR ECHOES.

WHERE GENERALS DIFFER. VUSTRAI.fAN AND N.Z. CABLE ASSOCIATION. /Received this dav at 9.30 a.m.) LONDON. Nov 29. Two volumes entitled “Sir Douglas Haig,” by G. A. 11. Dewar, and l.ieul. Col. John G. Bnrastu.i have been given wide attention by 'be London press. General Repington, in the “Daily Telegraph” points out frankly the controversial diameter of the work. Dewar lays about him a whip composed of barbed wire and scorpions and does not let anyone off. least of all. Lloyd George, liepington summarised many questions dealing wtli political errors of war time statesmen, which the public should expect Air Lloyd George to answer on the first possible occasion. Thus, why the War Cabinet early in 1917 .accepted Nivcib s crack brained plan of campaign, and subordinated Haig to Nivelle. It .s a fact that the French prediction • f a German attack in March 1918 was wrong as to the place, date and time. On the other hand was the British headquarters correct. Did the Mar Cabinet send Haig a warning discouraging hh telegram ol August 1918. after he not Eocli. had planned the final oilensive in which Australian troops figur'd i.i the Somme area, and which Lmlcndorff admitted was Germany’s day of doom. Was Haig’s reference to " shortage of men deleted from despatches even after the war, in order to ihimd the War Cabinet from criticism. General Repington likewise controverts the French command because the French “at no time were able to rnakoj good the full lesponsil.hiti they assumed during the German offensive of March, 1918.” Sidebotham in the ‘ Ihiih Chronicle says Dewar points out the actual plans of‘the final victories of the war were not Foch’s, but the British After the. victory on Bth Aug., F«.ch wanted Haig to attack lloye. Haig insisted on attacking further north. Ibe brilliant British victory at Bapanine followed. There' were other instances m which the British were right end the I'icncb wrong. It is useful to 1 ave some corrective disparagement of the Bntisi arinv of which many Flinch writers are guilty, but it >s no: the right wav to correct by ruining down the work of the French. S.debotlmm also justifies the War C-ibi.u-. s telegram to Haig declaring the victories between Aug. and Nov. we," almost as cos ly as the defeats I -'tween March, and June. 1918.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HOG19221130.2.21.2

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Hokitika Guardian, 30 November 1922, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
389

WAR ECHOES. Hokitika Guardian, 30 November 1922, Page 3

WAR ECHOES. Hokitika Guardian, 30 November 1922, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert