Lest we forget!

Them bones should be collected up and d.n.a tested or atleast buried . Let them dead rest in peace..

I found a large pile of 💩 in a field once it large chunks of undigested food in it which made me pretty sure it was human I looked at it for a couple seconds and walked away happy that I didn't step in it

👞💩

He was part of the Highland infantry ? God rest his soul

@@ddarkon1223 yes the A&S.Thank you.

I hope SOMME peace has come to you.

What a legend

​@EXPOSING.THE.SATURNISTSawesome stories the both of you. The most terrible things spawn the best stories

Bo0ty boo00ty rocking everywhere

Thank God for the Australians whom ensured the Somme and Verdun victories alongside the frogs.

My great grandfather fought in the battle of Normandy as a British medic. he saw things we couldn’t imagine.. he never liked to talk about it but when he did it was always short sentences “y’all are lucky to be in a world of peace.”

Good advice. Next time we'll just let the Nazis take over Europe.

Sticks and stones may break my bones but chains and whips excite me…~Rihanna~

@@AirborneAntlol

Gratitude for what? Killing another man because of different uniform?! People were shamed into the war, just like people were shamed for not wearing masks, during the pandemic. There's no bravery in social shame... And we're talking about 2 armies that fought eachother on foreign soil, and whose kings were first cousins... Sounds more like a family management dispute, rather than fighting for "king and country"....

But it was in vaìn. Monarch's don't care of feeble subjects, they don't die

For them laying down their lives in some of the most terrifying conditions regardless of the cause for their country or leaders. Many of these men were conscripts meaning they did not have a choice, many of them didn't even have training. These battlefields were once peoples' homes. Many of them were fighting for their very way of life. You do not understand what it was like. Nobody will ever know what it was like, except maybe the ones who lived through it. You just be damn sure you dont forget or even dare disrespect the ones who didn't.​@gholamhassani758

From my limited knowledge Nazi germany had the ability to fight a war on 2 fronts but Hitler hamstrung his military commanders with crazy orders…

@@DonFelixGallardo Most of Hitler's commanders suffered from the same delusion. The invasion of the Soviet Union was popular among the higher officer corps. They suffered from the arrogance that led them to believe they could fight a two- or indeed three-front war.

@@davidhoward4715 poor intelligence lead to that decision, although i believe the soviets were in the midst of a military crisis at the time of operation Barbarossa and were unable to supply lots of vehicles with ammo or fuel, and their command structure had been seriously damaged by the purges.

To be fair hitler prolly thought he stomped the brits for at least a little bit longer then what he inevitably did

Hitler was despotic and didn’t trust his generals especially with regard to the eastern front. He took executive control pretty quickly, hard to use the experience you’ve gathered in the First World War when it’s disregarded. Also Hitler was distrustful of Prussian military nobility so had a lot of them replaced/purged before the war got moving, and the replacements weren’t experienced in the same way

Yes, it's the same with most of the old black and white movies - it's to do with the frame rate and the type of film. Its why early movie stars wore dark eye makeup. The earliest type of film was orthochromatic, meaning it was sensitive to blue light and didn’t register some colors normally. Light blue would appear white (many an old silent movie featured white skies), and red and certain shades of green and dark blue would appear black. They didn't ask the soldiers to wear eye makeup, of course, so they look a little odd.

Colorized too

That's the best documentary iv seen in my life

@@kristianhumphreys it’s a great one for sure!

@@Albino_Silverback if I'm ever having a bad time in life, I remind myself at least I'm not a soldier In the trenches of ww1, absolute hell on earth

There was approximately 4 people killed every minute during ww1 and 8 people every minute during ww2

@@doyler102320There was on average 27,000 killed for every day of WW2.

Rbarnett 19,000 were killed on the first day of the Somme. There 57,000 casualties of which thousand went on to fight later.

Absolute madness

@@anthonyeaton5153 That's just British casualty figures for the first day, there are also French and German casualties to add to that figure.

It really should. No one ever talks about how pointless it all was. WW2 is more interesting because good and evil is obvious in the conflict but WW1 was just a bunch of alliances that sent working class men to die in ditches.

Some reasons why it is worth studying- The entire map changed. The fall of the Australian Hungary empire created many of the current countries. The way those country’s borders were decided is part of what caused a lot of the Middle East issues we have today. The way wars are fought changed- For thousands of years, the charging army had an advantage over the entrenched defenders. WW1 changed that. Airplane improvements There were more medical advances than any other 4 year period in history. The entire ruling class lost their legal separations from regular people.

​@@MomentsInTradingAustralian ay?

@@bvyup2112 Where do you study the history of WW1.

@@MomentsInTrading I am sure meant Austrian.

This is SOMME bull shiii - The British Army

Not as bad as WW2.

@@anthonyeaton5153 thats arguable. there were wayy more people on the earth in ww2 than there were in ww1. so proportionately, ww1 claimed more of the world population than ww2 did. (plus ww2 was fought on so many different fronts compared to ww1 which mainly consisted of Western Front, Eastern Front, and Arabian Peninsula and the Italian/austrian mountains.) Despite all this, yes, ww2 claimed way more lives (75 million compared to 25-39 million) but i think life as a soldier was far more horrific. They suffered more months on end in the mud and blood, while in ww2 it was more like missions and semi-fast attacks.

All war, at any time is awful.

@@HankeshonMany battles were attritional in WW2, the Russian front dwarfed the battles of WW1, Allied invasion of Europe was a grinding killing ground, Italy, the Pacific island by the US, Burma grinding jungle war fare. More people died in WW2 than in WW1.

@@Hankeshon where did you get your numbers. WW1 c 15 million WW2 30-40 million mostly civilian.

Mine too. They thought he would have to lose both legs, but a doctor worked miracles and he survived. Always had pains in his legs from the shrapnel that remained. Never ever talked about it. An amazing and courageous generation

No they hadn't. Far, far from it. I invite you to come up with a better attack plan for the attack of 1st July. No get-out-of-jail one-liners, but an actual battle plan, using the manpower and resources available at that time. You have no choice but to launch the attack on the Somme and on that date, just as Haig didn't have that choice. Off you go.

A defence force that cannot defend its borders? Last time they done anything of note was them assisting ambulance staff.

It's bloody annoying when the rank is pronounced properly.

Unfortunately the German's often had the high ground

Neither King nor Kaiser ☘️

Australians, under British control or at least counted as Brits, were known to alter some decisions made by British General who were omly following orders from superiors after all, wars have and are only a human culling process. Its a Disgrace.

@@tomhughes3130 Indeed yes things were so different just a century back. Best wishes 🙏

😮😢

No way no how. God knows the way the document it I can't blame you for thinking so. If we had to pick one it was clearly we Americans. By the time we entered combat all 3 of the European principles were at the end of their tether. But I don't see it that way we all fought bravely for the same cause and I am thankful for both of our main allies. 😎

My grandfather fought there....NI.

Hurrah for ALL Irish Regiment's ☘️

You have been reading bullshit history. Try proper history.

"Oh! What A Lovely War", Blackadder and the war poets aren't documentaries, you know! I invite you to come up with a better attack plan for the attack of 1st July. No get-out-of-jail one-liners, but an actual battle plan, using the manpower and resources available at that time. You have no choice but to launch the attack on the Somme and on that date, just as Haig didn't have that choice. Off you go.

@@robertstallard7836 Maybe a smokescreen infront of the soldiers as they went over the top. Then throw large objects (such as very large barrels) in no man's land that soldiers can take cover behind. Give the soldiers a camouflage uniform to blend in as they take cover. Use moving decoys ahead of the first wave to absorb bullets. Use something similar to fireworks to explode infront of the machine guns to shock them. There is a lot they could have used as they walked forward without losing so many men before even reaching the lines.

@@uglee7675 Good for you! It means you're thinking about it instead of just accepting the narrative. SMOKE - Bingo! Good idea. Smoke has been used to very good effect in many battles, so why not on 1st July 1916? Unfortunately, smoke shells, although available in small numbers in 1916, simply weren't available in the quantities that would be needed. Later on in the war they were - at Cambrai a year or so later, for example, about a third of the shells fired during the attack were smoke shells - but in 1916 they simply weren't available. In addition, they not only covered advancing troops but also masked enemy positions and would have made allied artillery fire less effective. They could have used smoke pots from their own front line trenches but these were very much at the mercy of the wind (as was discovered at Loos in 1915 when using gas from trench-based dischargers) and thus the reliability of having the wind at just the right strength and in just the right direction at Zero Hour on 1st July was remote. Great idea, and it probably would have been effective, but so would a few fighter jets to strafe the German positions. Unfortunately, neither were around on 1st July 1916! COVER IN NO-MAN'S LAND. This is, unfortunately, not such a good idea. You have to remember that most of the troops taking part were inexperienced and lacked experienced NCO leadership. Contrary to popular belief, the battle plan did NOT dictate that the whole infantry advance walked across No-Man's Land; that was left to individual Divisional Commanders to decide, based upon the experience of their men. In the 18th Division (regulars) for example, the advance was made very effectively using fire-and-manoeuvre. That, however, was because the troops had the experience to do it - something sorely lacking in most Divisions. It was far better to keep inexperienced men moving forward, in ordered formation, otherwise once they had gone to ground (behind a barrel or anything else) they would be unlikely to get up again. As an aside, barrels aren't bullet-proof. A rifle bullet would pass straight through both sides (unless you filled the barrel with sand/soil/water, in which case good luck rolling that in front of you over broken ground!). CAMOUFLAGE UNIFORMS would have made no difference. Advancing men are as clear to artillery observers whatever they are wearing. In addition, much of the artillery (and machine guns) were simply firing on predetermined lines to a fixed schedule, laying down a barrage on a particular area irrespective of whether or not enemy troops were there or not. In other words, they were used for area denial and the troops had to pass through those areas anyway. MOVING DECOYS? You'll have to explain. Are these soldiers? Animals? Prisoners of War? People you don't like? Robots?? FIREWORKS. They had better than fireworks - they had artillery! The artillery targeted known machine-gun positions during the preliminary bombardment. What makes you think fireworks would be any more effective? Please don't think I'm mocking your ideas. Haig HAD to make the attack (or the French would have collapsed at Verdun and the war lost) and the planning for it was meticulous, utilising all available assets. A huge amount of planning and preparation went into it, by brilliant minds. The truth is that despite your best-laid plans, you can't win 'em all!

The British army had a taste of what was to come during the Anglo Boer War.

Don’t make silly pointless remarks.

@@anthonyeaton5153 Lol..that’s the people they usually took it to but Americans didn’t use spears and sent them back to England. Germans with guns should have been a warning to them.

@@MatthewBookof2 Can you repeat that in English?

😊are you high ?

That's more than America lost in the Vietnam War

Unfortunately that’s how wars were fought back then. The charging force had the advantage when it was muskets and cannons. With modern weapons and an outdated strategy, this could’ve happened to every country back then

The "Newfoundlanders" lost something like 90% in the first day, the highest casualty rate of any unit on the Somme.

Hague should have been court-martialed

Nonsense. The battle had to be fought to take off the pressure on French at Verdun. Generals do not do the fighting, the squaddie do that.

@@aarontwose3260First of all it is Haig and Haig had to launch the Somme to relieve the pressure on Verdun. The first day of the Battle of Somme 1916 was the 121st day of the Battle of Verdun.

"Oh! What A Lovely War", Blackadder and the war poets aren't documentaries, you know!

All Grandson's of Victoria?

That is how it has always been, it’s logic.

British Generals had an appalling casualty rate in WW1 - it was worse than being a conscript.

You're DAMN RIGHT!!!! I used to buy into all that militarism but not no mo. My thoughts to the old diaper wearers is this: Go fight it yourself it's so damn important. I'll let ya know next year if I deem it important enough to risk my life on. Oh and hold your breath.

Those are boring places. Well, mostly africa .

Im with u on that 1 mate, im nervous & ask who's gonna go at it nxt! Its a weird & unnerving time to live in at the moment! Not nice is it?! Chin up! ✌🏻👍🏻

Crazy? Britain Still had a need to protect it's empire. That is not achieved by writing stiff letters to The Times of London. Instead, thousands and thousands of people needed to be killed, sacrificed to maintain British hegemony. Eventually lost to the United States.

The next 5 years are going to be nerve wracking. Really worried about Taiwan.

China can’t take Taiwan. Russia can’t take Ukraine. No one will use nukes.

@@sadiearcher5157 almost every generation has thought they have lived in weird and unnerving times....nothing novel in that....same old shit...

No. Very, very far from it. That was a lazy, 1960s anti-establishment idea that has long ago lost any credibility. "Oh! What A Lovely War", Blackadder and the war poets aren't documentaries, you know! I invite you to come up with a better attack plan for the attack of 1st July 1916.. No get-out-of-jail one-liners, but an actual battle plan, using the manpower and resources available at that time. You have no choice but to launch the attack on the Somme and on that date, just as Haig didn't have that choice. Off you go.

I don't think he does. The some was strategically necessary. Both to take pressure off verdun and russia. The army was the first mass army they'd ever raised and was unsure of its battle readiness. Anyone who witnessed the bombardment would think the Germans were gone. Tag that with no new ways of command and control but carrier pidgeons,runners and telephone cables that were frequently broken and couldn't keep up with the front. It's also the battle that broke the Germans and made them relaunch unrestricted sub warfare and brought America into the war

​@@Trebor74 he was an idiot

Germans attack and take land. The allies push them back a bit. Winter comes. Germans decide to consolidate their gains, find the most easily-defended positions and dig in. Allies trundle up. Have to have a starting line from which to continue their attempts to throw the Germans out once the weather gets better and so they, too, dig in. Voila trenches. Trenches are improved over the winter until come the Spring it's a bit of a mare trying to get the Germans out again.

Sometimes it is necessary to fight wars to defend one's country from being destroyed, just an observation Frances...

This somme bull shii

How would you have removed the Germans??

@@hughzapretti-boyden9187 Not 100% sure dude. But what I am sure about is that I wouldn't have WALKED thousands in front of machine guns

I think he was going to be tried for 'treason' so unpopular was he but, he died of natural causes soon after the war (1919). Donkeys & Lions. Dreadful.

Exactly . Yanks say Loot we say Left.

He has to cater to an American audience which make up the bulk of youtubers. Unfortunately they don't know what Leff tenant means.

@@troybailey9524 Well , in that case they certainly have succeeded in dumbing down the US population . No wonder their politicians lead them around by their noses and get away with murder ! I wonder would they catch on if you gave them the German rank of Leutnant to mull over ?

Not so scary as the British Machine Gun Corps. That was true efficiency.

Europeans looked down on the American colonials back then. They saw Americans as stupid and lacking experience. A thought pattern that still exists today.

Yeah they did, the lessons was used in the Franco-Prussian war. By WW1 the lessons of the American Civil War were no longer relevant.

Lessons from the Russo-Japanese war of 1905 should have been learnt. There the battlefields were crossed by trenches protected by barbed wire, and machine guns and artillery were a foretaste of industrial warfare. Generals were still planning a war like the Boer War, across open ground using cavalry, ignorant of the 1905 lesson.

Poor coward bad tooth’s. Hurt your national pride ?

@@cd5433 I am an American who has studied history for over half a century, personally I have never heard of any British soldiers crossing the line during WW1. The French? Now that is a completely different story...they actually mutinied at one point in WW1. 4 generations of my family (including myself) have served in combat roles next to British soldiers sometimes even sharing cigarettes and meals with them and there is no coward among their ranks that I have witnessed or have been told by relatives. They have funny expressions for things but they do not breed cowards. Where are you from? And California is not the correct answer but that would explain a lot from what I gather about you.

@@mattjohnson7757 You seem to have a very romanticised and unrealistic view of the British Army and its fighting spirit. Every country has cowards, especially Britian what had back then around 40 million people. If you refuse to accept that then no one should take you seriously.

@@liveforever9888 Provide proof of those 2 soldiers is all I really said. The maker of the video has a claim not supported by facts. I am an eye witness to the honor and courage of British soldiers. Who are you to tell me if I refuse to change no one will take me seriously? I bet 10 to 1 every brave British soldier will stand next to my statement and question you the same way I did by asking who are you to tell me what to do?

@@liveforever9888 your screen name says it all as far as I am concerned.

Ron Maxi, the Battle of the Somme had to be fought to relieve the pressure at Verdun. If the French had been defeated the war would have been lost. The Somme battle compelled the Germans to move 13 divisions from Verdun to the Somme to stop the British. Haig had no choice,.

@@anthonyeaton5153 You misunderstand me. My shoe wasn't fighting the campaign. It was not having a goal set and a strategy set. Every general should have known both as well as how they would implement the attack. Instead, we had a genius set off a mine early. Captains and lieutenants weren't allowed to take take advantage of opportunities during the battle, but generals were allowed to undermine the entire campaign. This wasn't Lion's lead by lambs. It was lion's lead by lunatics

Generals on all sides fought this war with outdated thoughts and ideas. It wasn’t until much later in the war that tactics and strategic plans evolved with the technology of the day.

@@Panda-gs5lt The idea of a coordinated attack between different divisions wasn't new. The means of said coordination were new.

@@ronmaximilian6953 … this was a battle that Haig did not want to fight. He was planning a battle much later in the season, after his army was better trained and more guns as in bigger could be brought up. This was a new British army with very little experience as all the veterans (the old contemptible’s)were used up in the previous years battles and Haig knew it. Also the original plan saw a much bigger French role in the battle, but Verdun changed everything and Haig had to succumb to the pressures the French raised who pulled much of their forces out to bolster Verdun. Could Haig foresee that much of the British artillery shell fuses were defective and that much of the British armies reliance on field guns would have a negative effect on well laid barbed wire? Communications at the time were terrible with many messages of the front taking often days to reach HQ. Notice too, that battles thereafter the Somme and Verdun dramatically changed and became more effective. They learned to fight this new type of warfare, not ever seen on this scale, before or since. Small unit tactics weren’t a thing prior to 1917 and full combined arms battle was only beginning and weren’t fully realized until the battle of Cambrai, when it was put to great effect. Haig had to shoulder the blame for the Somme but he learned and imho, there was no one better in the wings.