Leslie Wilmont Spencer IV Jeremy Maxwell His 240 Analysis 2# Kaiser Wilhelm II was both a political and military leader of Germany during World War I. Luigi Cadorna Field Marshal of the Royal Italian Army during World War I. Both Wilhelm and Luigi had different styles of command during World War I. Field Marshal Luigi Cadorna style leadership was callous, barbaric, and draconian. He was forced to resign as Field Marshal in year 1917 due to his incompetence . One of Cadorna’s greatest disasters were the four offensives along the Isonzo River and year 1915 . The reason for these offenses was the fortress of Gorizia, whose capture would permit the Italian armies marched on the city of Trieste and thus continue on to the Liubliana Gap . Unfortunately, all four offensives failed disastrously …show more content…
On October 24 year 1917 combined army of Germans and Austro-Hungarians descended across the Isonzo River at the town of Kobaird. The combined Army made it all the way to the Piave River . Cadorna’s troops were mostly dispersed too far advanced for there to be an adequate defense. This greatly contributed to the battle becoming a disaster along with some other minor details. Cadorna have been on leave for most of October and his immediate subordinate was severely ill at the time. The Italian Army was in such disarray that 275,000 Italian soldiers surrendered . It seemed the Italian Army was on the verge of collapsing. But Italy’s allies Britain and France since over 11 divisions to reinforce the demoralized Italian forces. Both Britain and France aggressively insisted on the dismissal of Field Marshal Cadorna. The British and the French got their wish and Field Marshal
Thus, though the battalion command made fatal decisions, as well as Chosen Company; they had no way of knowing the size and scope of the attack. The officers made their decisions based on what they believed was the best course of action. Unfortunately, some decisions would prove detrimental in the Battle of Wanat as many brave men lost their
Many subordinate officers in 1st AD identified the flaws in the CCA defense, yet there was an inability by these officers to affect the
The sources also prove that this particular battle was a failure for the allies but it helped them in their development as a
Proof #2: Lack of Command Structure and Communications This section will examine how lack of command structure and communications directly attributed to the failure of OPERATION SPRING. This will be achieved through the explanation of the German reinforcement of the St. Martin Road leading to the intended Canadian assembly area of St. Martin, and how the fierce resistance on this road would lead not only to a delay in the intended assault time, but also the killing of the two highest ranking officers of the regiment prior to the
The legend of the ANZAC’s imply that the soldiers during World War One were courageous young men that proved themselves to be heroes. This legend has been greatly associated with the Gallipoli campaign that occurred in 1915-1916. This is despite the fact that a huge amount of the Australians soldiers that fought during the Gallipoli campaign also participated in the battles on the Western Front. It is to a large extent that battles such as Fromelles and Pozieres should feature more prominently in accounts of World War One. The battle of Fromelles is known as the worst 24 hours in Australia’s history.
Even so, while the commander of the unit suggested going around the sides so that the Australians were not in an exposed position, High Command stubbornly ordered them to continue attacking directly uphill. This would not have been as severe a mistake if it was on more forgiving terrain; a statement that is applicable to many of the mistakes made during the campaign. Be that as it may, not much could be done about this. On the other hand, many of the mistakes could have been easily avoided, such as the illogical decisions made by High
To what extent was the Battle for Kokoda a Disaster? To a small extent the Battle of Kokoda was a disaster. While there were some disastrous aspects of the campaign, the overall success of the campaign shows that it was not a disaster, but a victory. During the first part of the campaign, admittedly, the Australians made some mistakes, but some mistakes don’t equal a disaster, especially once the odds turned in their favour in the second part of their campaign.
As Napoleon concentrated on the center, General Kutozov successful set the conditions for his defense to hold long enough, in order to allow his forces to withdrawal from Borodino. Napoleon missed the opportunity to achieve his desired decisive victory at Borodino, thus allowing the Russians to retreat before the French could deliver a decisive
The orders given to the commanders were sometimes unworkable due to the conditions on the ground. In the end though, the strategy used against the Japanese worked. Even though the campaign had been heavily criticised at the time. The allies’ eventual got victory. The campaign also served as a sign of the strengths and weaknesses of the individual soldiers and commanders.
America's Invovlement in World War II Pacific Warfront America's involvement in WWII began with one of the Pacific Ocean Warfront Battles. On December 7, 1941, Japan invaded and bombed the United States naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. This battle was unexpected and destroyed many United States battleships, destroyers, and aircrafts. It also killed and wounded thousands of soldiers and even some civilians. The next day the United States declared war on Japan and entered WWII.
This interrupted the entire plan as the Turks were now informed about the attack and were prepared for
Body: 1st argument in support of position, examples and/or evidence Canadian citizens eagerly volunteered to participate in World War 1. 33,000 men volunteered for the military near Quebec and the Canadian Patriotic Fund launched a fund to support soldier’s families. Despite the soldiers being inexperienced and insufficient for the dangerous Western Front of World War 1. 2nd argument in support of position, examples and/or evidence Despite the poison gas and the disintegration of the allied Franco-Berber troops, the Canadians managed to launch a counterattack on the advancing German troops during the Second Battle of Ypres. The Canadians and Germans fought to the death until the Battle of Frezenburg and Bellewaardre, where the Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry successfully thwarted the final German advance in Ypres.
General Clinton’s inaction after General Washington’s force departure guaranteed the historical unfolding of the Siege of Yorktown. The largest contributor to this British disaster lay in the lacking of an analytical apparatus, which could have effectively processed and utilized British intelligence. General Clinton chose to focus more on salvation in the form of reinforcements from Britain than on the immediate steps he could implement in his intelligence war fighting function to cement victory. This overreliance on an ineffective logistical support chain, combined with poor strategy, toxic leadership, and indecisiveness, resulted in an overly defensive positon. This ineptitude set the stage for the loss of British populace support, costing him the war of attrition.
They were hard to maintain because the amount of soldiers and the food were low and had to raise prices while trading with trading groups. This is relevant because this shows the hard things they went through but still cost the lives lost in the long battles.
Timing was everything. Without the right timing, troops can get confused and mistakes