Thursday, December 13, 2018

Entrenchments.

This is coolbert:

Yet more extracts with my commentary from original articles as seen at the isegoria.net Internet web site topic the Great War.

To war with spade and pick axe! The Great War. Can you dig it?

"A Great War of Entrenchments"

Once again, evidence of time travel in the Nineteenth Century this time courtesy Ivan Bloch?

"In the late 1800s, Ivan Bloch saw that the next great war would be a great war of entrenchments"

“Certainly, everybody will be entrenched in the next war. It will be a great war of entrenchments. The spade will be as indispensable to a soldier as his rifle. The first thing every man will have to do, if he cares for his life at all, will be to dig a hole in the ground, and throw up as strong an earthen rampart as he can to shield him from the hail of bullets which will fill the air.”
[...]

The hail of bullets AND the metal splinters from artillery detonations!!

From the British perspective that vulnerability of the man-a-foot, metal splinters from artillery fire and shelter as offered by entrenchments:

"The Effects of Target Posture"
It's also useful to note how vulnerability changes with target posture because it suggests the relative amounts of fire needed in different circumstances.  The following estimates the relative risks of becoming a casualty to ground-burst shells on ‘average’ ground:-
Standing
1
Lying
1/3
Firing from open fire trenches
1/15 – 1/50
Crouching in open fire trenches
1/25 – 1/100

Ivan had it all figured out, didn't he! Not a military man but his prescience most profound! Keep your head down and no foolish charges.

Can you dig it?

coolbert.

America.

This is coolbert:

What if?

Continuing yet further still extracts with my commentary from original articles as seen at the isegoria.net Internet web site topic the Great War.

"Should America have entered World War I?"

"The US entered the Great War 100 years ago, but why?"

MORE IMPORTANTLY CONSIDER NOT SO MUCH THE QUESTION "WHY" BUT RATHER "WHAT IF" THE USA HAD NOT BECOME A COMBATANT.

From a comment to the isegoria.net original entry and thanks to Cassander:

"In 1917, the French army mutinies were put down largely by the French government and general staff going around promising that there wouldn’t be a major offensive until the Americans showed up. In the absence of the expectation of millions of doughboys arriving, those mutinies get a lot harder to deal with. Combined with the Russian revolution, the position of the Allies looks extremely shaky. A negotiated peace, or at least ceasefire, in 1917 was a very strong possibility if the US didn’t enter the war."

THAT BREAKDOWN OF FRENCH ARMY DISCIPLINE IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE FAILED NIVELLE OFFENSIVE MOST ACUTE. FRENCH TROOPS WILLING TO FIGHT STRICTLY DEFENSIVELY BUT NO MORE GOING OVER THE TOP IN FRUITLESS OFFENSIVE ACTION! FRENCH MILITARY AND CIVILIAN MORALE AT AN ALL-TIME LOW!

Massive infusions of fresh American troops that only answer to the morale crisis of the allies on the Western Front from 1917 onward! Yanks to the rescue and all that?

Probably so!

coolbert.



Bloch II.

This is coolbert:

Once more extracts with my commentary from original articles as seen at the isegoria.net Internet web site topic the Great War.

Ivan Bloch and his pronouncements on Grand Strategy from the perspective of the "financier turned political-economist".

Considerations of a non-military nature that must be taken into account when waging war. The nation-state entity as not being fully and 100 % self-sufficient with regard to resources a severe impediment when waging war.

"Homogeneous, Self-Contained, Self-Sufficing Units"

"In previous wars, each nation had been a homogeneous, self-contained, self-sufficing unit, but that was no longer true by the Great War, Ivan Bloch noted"

Bloch speaking, addressing the British:

"You [English], of course, in England are absolutely dependent upon supplies from over sea[s]. But you are only one degree worse off than Germany in that respect. In 1895, if the Germans had been unable to obtain any wheat except that which was grown in the Fatherland, they would have lacked bread for one hundred and two days out of the three hundred and sixty-five. Every year the interdependence of nations upon each other for the necessaries of life is greater than it ever was before. Germany at present is dependent upon Russia for two and a half months’ supply of wheat in every year."

As pertains to grand strategic considerations of the German prior to commencing unrestricted submarine warfare. See some previous and very old Military Thoughts blog entries:

https://militarythoughts.blogspot.com/2006/03/this-is-coolbert-unrestricted.html

https://militarythoughts.blogspot.com/2006/03/this-is-coolbert-unrestricted_04.html

https://militarythoughts.blogspot.com/2006/03/this-is-coolbert-in-my-two-previous.html

ONCE MORE BLOCH IT SEEMS HIS OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS QUITE CORRECT.

Germany and Great Britain both during the Great War suffering privation from lack of food, the military and civilian sector neither immune to a lack of sustenance when most vital.

coolbert.




Wednesday, December 12, 2018

Bloch I.

This is coolbert:

The naval sea mine!

Continuing yet further extracts with my commentary from original articles as seen at the isegoria.net Internet web site topic the Great War.

"A Rivalry in Invention"

"Ivan Bloch describes the rivalry in invention in naval warfare leading into the Great War"

WITH SPECIFIC REGARD TO THE NAVAL SEA MINE:

"Would it not be possible to direct mines underneath these immense ships, and destroy them by means of powerful explosions in the vicinity of weakly defended parts? For a long time the application of this idea was unsuccessful, many obstacles had to be overcome, and only in recent times has the question been successfully resolved."

See previous blog entry the efficacy of the naval sea mine:

https://militaryanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/07/mine-b-29.html

NAVAL SEA MINES SIXTY TIME MORE EFFECTIVE COST-EFFICIENCY WISE AS OTHER CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS OF NAVAL WARFARE!!

"Bloch was a financier turned political-economist, in case that wasn’t clear."

BLOCH UNDERSTOOD PERFECTLY WELL TECHNOLOGY AND THE MILITARY APPLICATION THEREOF IN A MANNER FLAG OFFICES OF THE PERIOD DID NOT? AND WHY IS THAT?

coolbert.




Persecution.

This is coolbert:

Keine Deutschen erlaubt!!

Yet further more extracts with my commentary from original articles as seen at the isegoria.net Internet web site topic the Great War.

"McCarthy, the Wilsonite"

"Ralph Raico’s ironically titled Great Wars and Great Leaders compares Woodrow Wilson to Joseph McCarthy — unfavorably"

"We have all been made very familiar with the episode known as 'McCarthyism,' which, however, affected relatively few persons, many of whom were, in fact, Stalinists. Still, this alleged time of terror is endlessly rehashed in schools and media. In contrast, few even among educated Americans have ever heard of the shredding of civil liberties under Wilson’s regime, which was far more intense and affected tens of thousands."

Anti-German sentiment in the United States during the Great War most pronounced. All things German bad. Lots of stupid propaganda and downright foolish actions done in the name of patriotism and national solidarity. Lots of dumbness with hindsight! YES!

From the time of the Great War onward distinct German ethnic communities in the USA on the way out never to return. The German language as either spoken or read in a newspaper now verboten. Ethnic German communities with a beer garden on every block too a thing of the past never to return.

Deutsche sind nicht willkommen!!

Wait however several decades and you find the names of Eisenhower, Nimitz, Krueger, Eichelberger, Spaatz among the highest command echelons of the USA military during WW2. Time heals all?

coolbert.


Tuesday, December 11, 2018

Model 97.

This is coolbert:

More lead on the target faster than with an Uzi! Listen up humanoids!

Yet still more extracts with my commentary from original articles as seen at the isegoria.net Internet web site topic the Great War.

"Combat Shotgun"

The European combatants of the Great War [WW1] seem to have totally missed the versatility of the combat shotgun? Not so the American military. U.S. troops during periods of trench warfare using the Model 97 shotgun with effectiveness. Clearing out a section of trench or enemy dugouts during close-quarter-battle an excellent application of the combat shotgun.

At Model 97 pump shotgun in particular having a feature that made for rapidity of fire and able to place on the target faster than with a sub-machine gun!!

"Unlike most modern pump-action shotguns, the Winchester Model 1897 . . . fired each time the [pump] action closed with the trigger depressed (that is, it lacks a trigger disconnector) . . . This characteristic allowed troops to fire the whole magazine with great speed. "

THE COMBAT SHOTGUN UNDERSTAND MOST USEFUL AT CLOSE-RANGE!

"John Schaefer shares some numbers to illuminate just how effective a shotgun can be at short range"

"The table below shows the average results of firing at fifty and seventy-five yards [meters] at a full-length human silhouette with typical standard (non-premium) rounds of #4, #1, 00, and 000 buck from cylinder-bored, rifle-sighted, riot gun. Note: most of the hits at 75 yards were very 'marginal'.”

       Loading                                Average Number of Hits
(Full sized humanoid target)
                                               50 Yards                   75 Yards
27 pellet 4 buck                            10                             3
34 pellet 4 buck                              6                             2
16 pellet 1 buck                              6                             2
20 pellet 1 buck                              7                             4
9 pellet 00 buck                              3                             1
12 pellet 00 buck                            4                             2
8 pellet 000 buck                            1                             0

The "stopping power" of a shotgun at long-range however limited. I have it on good authority that using # 4 shot the penetration of a leather coat at twenty-five yards [meters] not possible. Again  shotgun effective at short range!

coolbert.


Engels.

This is coolbert:

Evidence of time travel in the year 1887? Courtesy Friedrich Engels!

Continuing with extracts and my commentary from original articles as seen at the isegoria.net Internet web site topic the Great War.

"Prophets of the Great War"

"Anatoly Karlin cites three prophets of the Great War — a Communist, Friedrich Engels; a Warsaw banker, Ivan Bloch; and a Russian conservative minister, Pyotr Durnovo."

"In 1887, in a preface to a pamphlet, Engels predicts that the next war will be terrible"

"No war is any longer possible for Prussia-Germany except a world war and a world war indeed of an extent and violence hitherto undreamt of. Eight to ten millions of soldiers will massacre one another and in doing so devour the whole of Europe until they have stripped it barer than any swarm of locusts has ever done. The devastation of the Thirty Years’ War compressed into three or four years, and spread over the whole Continent; famine, pestilence, general demoralization both of the armies and of the mass of the people produced by acute distress; hopeless confusion of our artificial machinery in trade, industry and credit, ending in general bankruptcy; collapse of the old states and their traditional state wisdom to such an extent that crowns will roll by dozens on the pavement and there will be no body to pick them up; absolute impossibility of foreseeing how it will all end and who will come out of the struggle as victor; only one result is absolutely certain: general exhaustion and the establishment of the conditions for the ultimate victory of the working class."

Friedrich had it all figured out, didn't he? Amazingly so at least with regard to battlefield casualties. "Crowns will roll" meaning the reigning European kings, queens, emperors deposed in a manner not imaginable prior to 1914. Think Wilhelm, Nicholas, Charles!

coolbert.