Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Arcanetrance

(2,670 posts)
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 11:11 AM Jan 2014

Myths about world war 1

[div class="excerpt"
Much of what we think we know about the 1914-18 conflict is wrong, writes historian Dan Snow.

No war in history attracts more controversy and myth than World War One.

For the soldiers who fought it was in some ways better than previous conflicts, and in some ways worse.

By setting it apart as uniquely awful we are blinding ourselves to the reality of not just WW1 but war in general. We are also in danger of belittling the experience of soldiers and civilians caught up in countless other appalling conflicts throughout history and the present day.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25776836?ocid=socialflow_facebook_bbcnews

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Myths about world war 1 (Original Post) Arcanetrance Jan 2014 OP
Only 700,000 British soldiers died? aint_no_life_nowhere Jan 2014 #1
Did they count their colonial mercs ? jakeXT Jan 2014 #3
There were also Indochinese and Senegalese units that fought aint_no_life_nowhere Jan 2014 #5
Interesting. Another fun fact - Avalux Jan 2014 #2
When at local cemeteries, there's a number of people here of all ages who died in 1918 Kaleva Jan 2014 #4

aint_no_life_nowhere

(21,925 posts)
1. Only 700,000 British soldiers died?
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 03:33 PM
Jan 2014

I'd never heard it said that most participating soldiers died in the conflict, but that number is one I find appalling even though it represents about 11 percent. And twice as many French soldiers died, about 1.4 million out of 8.5 million mobilized (6 million casualties counting wounded, dead, and mia - an entire generation of Frenchmen or over 70 percent of the French participants). This year will be the one hundred year anniversary of the start of that awful war and I guess we'll be reading lots of interesting articles. Thanks for posting.

jakeXT

(10,575 posts)
3. Did they count their colonial mercs ?
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 05:12 PM
Jan 2014

The Indian Corps in France

In August 1914, as the German Army advanced through France and Belgium, more Allied troops were desperately needed for the Western Front. The Indian Army, 161,000 strong, seemed an obvious source of trained men, and the Lahore and Meerut infantry divisions were selected for service in Europe. In October, shortly after they arrived, they were fed piecemeal into some of the fiercest fighting around Ypres. Losses were heavy. The average Indian battalion had 764 men when it landed; by early November the 47th Sikhs had only 385 men fit for duty. The fighting came as a shock to soldiers more used to colonial warfare. One man wrote home 'this is not war; it is the ending of the world

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwone/india_wwone_01.shtml

aint_no_life_nowhere

(21,925 posts)
5. There were also Indochinese and Senegalese units that fought
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 05:23 PM
Jan 2014

from French colonies in the Far East and Africa. 100,000 Vietnamese conscripts were sent into battle. However they were counted and whether they were included in the total casualty count or not, the losses were absolutely staggering.



Avalux

(35,015 posts)
2. Interesting. Another fun fact -
Mon Jan 20, 2014, 04:27 PM
Jan 2014

The flu pandemic of 1918 killed 50 million people. WWI killed 16 million.

Latest Discussions»The DU Lounge»Myths about world war 1