Passchendaele battle
An article on History Wire said that the Allies lost 250,000 troops in the battle to capture Passchendaele. What a bloody war!
History Wire http://historywire.ca/en/article/20384
yes, this is why it makes me mad when Americans make fun of our military. We gave our blood to save our British allies, our soldiers were being brutally murdered, and at the same time never gave an INCH of ground to the germans. without the Canadian efforts at Passchendaele, the allied forces may very well have lost WW1.
so anyone who makes fun of your soldiers can go *beep* themselves
last game played: Mass Effect 2 10/10
Canadians were and will always be the toughest soldiers in the world.
shareAmusing. Totally ignore the tens of thousands of fresh troops coming from the US.
The war was lost for Germany the moment they lost their momentum at the "miracle of the Marne". It was only a matter of time until the US would enter the war. Even the Japanese fought against Austria and Germany in Europe (the Japanese Navy escorted convoys and actually lost a destroyer to an Austrian sub.)
And hats off for all the Canadians who died for a foreign king in a useless war. Well done.
Thousands dead on both sides for absolutely nothing. Bravo!
And before anyone says it was about freedom, think again. The German empire building was harmless compared to the British. And remember, the only democracy involved initially was France. All the other countries were dictatorships where some king or emperor sat on his fat ass sending thousands to their deaths in his name.
Bravo.
You really can't expect to be allowed to get away with that.
1) NO US TROOPS WERE INVOLVED IN THE BATTLE OF PASSCHENDAELE.
2) You think German empire building was harmless? A little reading on the history of Namibia, by way of one example, would advance your education. And British empire building, while nothing to be proud of, would certainly stand comparison with US empire building since WWII, which of course continues to this day: you think PNAC is a myth?
3) The UK in 1917 was a dictatorship? Hard to think of any figure in the US executive with less power than the monarchy, then or now. And the British electoral system was at the very least as representative as the US one (with its absurd "colleges"): women were only just getting the vote, but that was true on both sides of the Atlantic.
It is certainly true that many thousands died for nothing: some of us, unlike you, lost close relatives. Your adolescent cynicism is a thin disguise for your outrage at any war movie which fails to make the USA the hero.
It was only a matter of time until the US would enter the war.
Had Germany not provoked the United States by sinking US merchant ships and killing American seamen and travelers and by trying to entice Mexico to go to war with America, the US would not have entered the war. There was no inevitability about it.
The German empire building was harmless compared to the British.
German colonies were not better or more humanely run than British ones, - just fewer. As for being "harmless", do compare Brest-Litovsk with Versailles.
All the other countries were dictatorships where some king or emperor sat on his fat ass sending thousands to their deaths in his name.
he decision for the British Empire to go to war was made by an elected Prime Minister and Cabinet. Whether to send forces, how many forces, and what financial support to give them was entirely the decision of the Dominion parliaments. The King was little more than a figure head even then, and had been since Prince Albert dies a half century earlier.
some king or emperor sat on his fat ass sending thousands to their deaths in his name.
I didn't see Poincaré or Wilson at the front either. On the other hand, George V's son, the future King George VI, did serve on a British battleship at Jutland and later joined the RAF when the act of flying, let alone combat, was considered extremely hazardous.
Not to mention that being in combat didn't exactly guarantee the leadership would NOT be bellicose: MOST of The leaders of the European nations who took part in WW2 were not pacifistic either: Hitler & Mussolini were both wounded & decorated Vets of WW1; Churchill had been in combat in Sudan, The Northwest Frontier & a correspondent during the Boer War; Tito was an AustroHungarian 'grunt' turned 'Russian Revolutionary'; and Stalin HAD to have been inured to violence during the Russian Revolution.
nm
A lot of NZ'ers died at Passchendaele too.
shareDon't act like the king wasn't our king too. He was just as much our king as he was the British king. Yes the war was started over stupid reasons, but with the war made inevitable, we made the right choice to join in to help the British. Just like today with NATO and stuff, help your allies. The British and Canada go hand-in-hand.
But yeh World War 1 was a terrible war. Fun to read about though. This movie as a whole wasn't very good, but I loved the battle scene at the end, besides that one over-the-top silliness at the end that I am sure you all know. I have showed this scene to all my siblings and friends so they can get an idea of what World War 1 was like instead of taking a teachers word for it while they sit half-asleep in history class.
Americans don't make fun of Canadian soldiers or their quality as fighters. We never really think about it, to be honest. We do like to make fun of the French, however, given how we had to bail their asses out twice, the second time after they let the Germans into France without a fight. (Which is kind of a shame, actually, given that the French fought hard in WW I and were, of course, the best soldiers in the world during the days of Napoleon.)
On a personal level, I have long been aware of the Canadian army's fine performance at Vimy Ridge (a very rare success for the Allies on the Western Front) and in the Normandy invasion and subsequent advance into Germany, not to mention the exploits of individuals such as Billy Bishop.
mjz688 is correct. If Americans do make fun of the Canadian military it would likely be regarding the overall size. But I am not familiar with anyone who has or would criticize the spirit, toughness, or ability of the Canadian soldier.
shareNapoleon lost.
share