was General Douglas Haig a good or bad general?
i think he was a bad general because he was only interested in winning the battle of the somme and not the lives of the soldiers.
There are several biographies here:
http://www.google.com/search?q=General+Douglas+Haig&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rlz=1R1GGGL_en___US321&client=firefox-a
Read through several, and then repost with your response and your reasons.
Determining whether General Douglas Haig was a good or bad general is a matter of interpretation and historical analysis. While opinions may vary, it is important to consider various perspectives and factors when evaluating his performance.
Here's a step-by-step process on how to assess the performance of a military leader:
1. Research the historical context: In order to properly evaluate General Haig, it's important to understand the circumstances in which he led. General Haig served as the Commander-in-Chief of the British Expeditionary Force during World War I. This was a complex and challenging conflict with high casualties on all sides.
2. Examine strategic objectives: Consider the objectives and goals that General Haig was tasked with achieving. In the case of the Battle of the Somme in 1916, the primary aim was to relieve pressure on the French army at Verdun and achieve a breakthrough on the Western Front.
3. Assess tactics and decision-making: Study the military strategies and tactics employed by General Haig. Evaluate his decision-making process, including the planning and execution of offensives. Analyze factors such as the effectiveness of intelligence, coordination with allies, and the adaptation to changing circumstances.
4. Evaluate outcomes and results: Assess the outcomes of General Haig's actions during his military campaigns. Consider factors like the number of casualties, territorial gains or losses, and the attainment of strategic objectives. Also, take into account the long-term consequences of his actions.
5. Consider historical perspectives: Examine the opinions and assessments of historians and military experts. Different historians may have different interpretations based on their analysis of available evidence and differing perspectives.
It is worth noting that General Haig's leadership during World War I remains a subject of debate among historians. While some view him as a competent commander who made necessary tactical decisions and contributed to the ultimate Allied victory, others criticize his approach as overly reliant on attritional warfare and disregard for the lives of soldiers.
Remember, when discussing historical figures or events, it is important to consider multiple sources and viewpoints to form a well-rounded understanding of the topic.