Failure in Battle

[handtohand22]

Tragedy on the battlefield, such as POWs, death and injury, can be attributed more to political interference, faulty strategy and inadequate equipment rather than the tactics of the individual soldier. This is just as true today as it was during WWII.

True or False?

I'm thinking of the sacrifices made at Calais and Boulogne in May 1940 by troops who were ill prepared to deal with the German blitzkrieg as it advanced to destroy the defeated army at Dunkirk.

These two battles were deliberately planned to allow the evacuation at Dunkirk to go ahead, and it worked.

In all the litrature available is there adequate coverage given to this aspect of warfare, where the troops suffer, take the blame and the political and military leaders never say in their war stories, 'It was my fault'?

Is there a more balanced viewpoint out there to this dilemma of adressing failure in battle?

[Capt.Sensible]

It's been a while since I read it but Norman Dixon's On the Psychology of Military Incompetance does include some material on institutional and political failures, and how individuals or units are then blamed. It is best on how background, culture and training can produce bad leaders, though.

Amazon.co.uk: On the Psychology of Military Incompetence (Pimlico): Norman F. Dixon: Books

CS

[dbf]

Originally Posted by handtohand22

In all the litrature available is there adequate coverage given to this aspect of warfare, where the troops suffer, take the blame and the political and military leaders never say in their war stories, 'It was my fault'?

Is there a more balanced viewpoint out there to this dilemma of adressing failure in battle?

H2H,
Not a battle, more a small skirmish, only thing I have actually come across, and rather poignant for that.

JOE Vandeleur recalled in his own book an incident a fortnight before OMG.

WD for the day, 4th Sept. '44: "The Bn [3rd] spent a quiet day in a pleasant area, with the exception of the Commanding Officer who staged a private battle near WATERLOO with a pl and a tp of tks who were compelled to withdraw in good order with the loss of one scout car.
Cas for the day were one OR killed and nine Ors wounded."

Event also recounted in IG History, pgs. 458-9

[sapper]

Seldom do politics have any effect on battles, It is always the commander in the Field that has the last say. That they are commanded to do things such as Dunkirk Etc is pretty obvious.

[handtohand22]

Thanks for all that. My reading has become rather blinkered of late. I have just dug out one of my 'Bolshie' books on the subject, The Guinness Book of Military Blunders' by Geoffrey Regan. I will have a good read at that for starters.

The trouble is that I still talk to soldiers who sixty-eight years after a battle still feel guilty about losing or becoming POWs. They have had to work out for themselves that they were sent out to provide a glorious defeat. I'm thinking about Calais but the same affair happened at Verdun where thousands were sacrificed at The Somme so that the politicians could demonstrate their support for their French allies.