Podcasts about allied

As soon as Allied leaders chose Normandy as the site of the Operation Overlord invasion, British intelligence set to work convincing the Germans that the invasion would be somewhere else.

Today's Adventure: An OSS agent goes into France to team up with a formidable wealthy French woman to set up an escape route for downed Allied flyers.Original Radio Broadcast: September 8, 1950Originating from New YorkStarring: Les Tremayne; Bryna Raeburn; Lily Valenti; Jack Gordon; Ralph BellTo subscribe to this podcast and, go to https://greatadventures.info/Become one of our ongoing Patreon supporters at https://patreon.greatdetectives.netSupport the show on a one-time basis at http://support.greatdetectives.net.Mail a donation to: Adam Graham, PO Box 15913, Boise, Idaho 83715Take the listener survey at http://survey.greatdetectives.netGive us a call at 208-991-4783Follow us on Instagram at http://instagram.com/greatdetectivesFollow us on Twitter @radiodetectives

General Lucian K. Truscott was one of the United States Army's most capable commanders of the Second World War. Known for his aggressive leadership and determination, Truscott led American forces in North Africa, Sicily, at Anzio, and later in southern France and Germany. Despite his impressive record, he remains one of the lesser-known U.S. generals of World War Two. In this episode of the WW2 Podcast, I'm joined by military historian Glyn Harper, emeritus professor of war studies at Massey University in New Zealand. Glyn is the author of General Lucian K. Truscott: "Quite a Talent for Fighting", a new biography that explores Truscott's remarkable career and lasting contribution to the Allied victory in Europe.   patreon.com/ww2podcast  

In this documentary, we revisit the early days of World War II in the Pacific: Japan's invasion of the Philippines and the rapid unraveling of American defenses under General Douglas MacArthur. We explore how a mix of overconfidence, scarce resources, and logistical missteps—shaped in part by War Plan Orange—led to a staggering defeat for Allied forces in 1941–1942. You'll see how the surprise strike on Clark Field knocked out air power and paved the way for a swift Japanese advance through Luzon and beyond. The film emphasizes leadership choices, supply challenges, and the intense morale battles endured by American and Filipino troops, including the grim stand on the Bataan Peninsula and the brutal Bataan Death March that followed surrender. Through survivor testimonies, archival footage, and expert insights, the documentary connects battlefield actions to their human costs, highlighting resilience, courage, and camaraderie in the face of extreme hardship. It also reflects on the broader strategic consequences for the U.S. Army, the Allied alliance, and the Philippine resistance, showing how these early battles shaped later Allied strategy in the Pacific. Whether you're a history buff or new to this chapter, the film offers a clear, balanced look at tactical decisions, personal sacrifice, and the lasting impact on Filipino and American memory. Don't forget to like, subscribe, and hit the bell for more deep-dives and expert interviews.

They are known as America's first military stealth aircraft. Under cover of darkness, the Waco CG-4A combat glider carried U.S. troops and materiel into battle during World War II.  William Horn and Leo Cordier, pilots who flew these unarmed and un-powered planes, landed behind enemy lines before the invasion troops arrived in Europe on D-Day. Their courageous stories are a little known chapter in the Allied march to victory during WWII. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Monsignor Hugh O'Flaherty has been commemorated with the launch of a new postage stamp. With this, An Post aims to celebrate the man who saved more than 6,000 Allied prisoners of war, anti-Fascists, and Jews from Nazi concentration and prisoner-of-war camps.Author Joseph O'Connor, joins Ciara Doherty to explain a bit of the significance behind this.Image: An Post

In 1941, as the world plunged deeper into war, a small contingent of U.S. Marines found themselves far from the Pacific jungles, engaging in missions that would not capture headlines but were no less critical. Deployed far from the Pacific, they prepared the groundwork for larger Allied operations. In London, amidst the Blitz, they protected the American Embassy and took on tasks that extended far beyond their original mission. Across the Atlantic, in the rugged terrain of Scotland, Marines were pushed to their physical limits, learning unconventional warfare tactics from British Royal Marines, skills that would later define the elite Marine Raiders. Though often unsung, these Marines quietly helped lay the foundation for major victories to come. Their early, discreet efforts were crucial in shaping the success of later, larger campaigns and establishing the Marine Corps as a force capable of adapting to the ever-changing demands of global conflict. ************* Visit HistoryoftheMarineCorps.com to subscribe to our newsletter, explore episode notes and images, and see our references. Follow us on social media for updates and bonus content: Facebook and Twitter (@marinehistory) and Instagram (@historyofthemarines). Visit AudibleTrial.com/marinehistory for a free audiobook and a 30-day trial.

People from both sides of the Taiwan Strait said that no separatist forces can erase the shared history and national identity that bind people across the Strait, as the 80th anniversary of Taiwan's restoration to China was commemorated in Beijing.在北京纪念台湾光复80周年之际，海峡两岸同胞表示，任何分裂势力都无法抹去联结两岸同胞的共同历史与民族认同。A grand gathering celebrating the anniversary was held in Beijing on Saturday. It marked the first Commemoration Day of Taiwan's Restoration, following an official designation on Friday by the Standing Committee of the 14th National People's Congress, China's top legislature.周六，北京举行纪念台湾光复80周年盛大集会。此前一日（周五），中国最高立法机关——第十四届全国人民代表大会常务委员会正式设立“台湾光复纪念日”，本次集会是该纪念日设立后的首次纪念活动。Wang Huning, chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, addressed the event, calling on compatriots on both sides of the Strait to work together to advance national reunification and to firmly oppose all forms of "Taiwan independence" separatist activities.全国政协主席王沪宁在集会上发表讲话，呼吁海峡两岸同胞共同努力推进祖国统一大业，坚决反对任何形式的“台独”分裂活动。Wang stressed that the establishment of the commemoration day demonstrated the unwavering commitment of all Chinese people to uphold the one-China principle and safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity.王沪宁强调，设立“台湾光复纪念日”，彰显了全体中国人民坚定维护一个中国原则、捍卫国家主权和领土完整的不变决心。After the event, several guests from Taiwan said the commemoration had strengthened their confidence in the nation's eventual reunification.集会结束后，多位台湾嘉宾表示，此次纪念活动增强了他们对祖国最终实现统一的信心。Justin Lin Yifu, a Taiwan-born economist and professor at Peking University, said that Taiwan's restoration to China and the victory in the Chinese People's War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression (1931-45) should be remembered by all Chinese people.出生于台湾的经济学家、北京大学教授林毅夫指出，台湾光复回归中国与中国人民抗日战争（1931-1945年）的胜利，是全体中国人民应当铭记的历史。"The course of history will not be altered by the obstruction of a small handful of people," he said, adding that the commemoration day strengthens pride in being Chinese.“历史进程不会因少数人的阻挠而改变，”林毅夫表示，“设立这一纪念日，进一步增强了我们的民族自豪感。”WuRong-yuan, chairperson of Taiwan's Labor Party, said the establishment of the commemoration day demonstrated to the world that commemorating Taiwan's restoration is the heartfelt, shared wish of compatriots on both sides of the Strait.台湾劳动党主席吴荣元表示，“台湾光复纪念日”的设立向世界表明，纪念台湾光复是海峡两岸同胞共同的深切心愿。"Our shared bonds and memories cannot be severed by any external forces or separatists," he emphasized.“我们之间的血脉联结与共同记忆，任何外部势力和分裂分子都无法割裂。”他强调道。Wu added that the decision provided strong legal and political support for all patriotic forces committed to advancing the cause of national reunification.吴荣元补充称，这一决定为所有致力于推进祖国统一事业的爱国力量提供了坚实的法律与政治支撑。On Oct 25, 1945, the ceremony to accept Japan's surrender in the Taiwan province of the China war theater of the Allied powers was held in Taipei. From that moment, Taiwan and the Penghu Islands were restored to China's sovereign jurisdiction.1945年10月25日，同盟国中国战区台湾省受降仪式在台北举行。自那一刻起，台湾及澎湖列岛重新回归中国主权管辖之下。Shaw Kai-ping, honorary president of the association for relatives of patriots in Taiwan who fought against Japanese aggression, said it was a great honor for Oct 25 to be established as a national commemoration day. Shaw's father and grandfather both took part in the resistance against Japanese occupation.台湾抗日爱国志士亲属联谊会荣誉会长萧开平表示，将10月25日设立为国家级纪念日，是一件意义重大的事。萧开平的父亲与祖父均曾参与反抗日本殖民统治的斗争。"This decision shows that the motherland has not forgotten the people of Taiwan, and that reunification is destined to be achieved," Shaw said.“这一决定表明，祖国没有忘记台湾同胞，统一大业注定实现。”萧开平说。Chi Hsing, honorary chairman of the Reunification Alliance Party in Taiwan, said he had long awaited the establishment of the commemoration day. "As the historical truth comes to light, more and more people are gaining a clearer understanding of what really happened," Chi said.台湾统一联盟党荣誉主席纪欣表示，她一直期盼“台湾光复纪念日”的设立。“随着历史真相的不断揭示，越来越多的人开始清晰了解当年的真实情况。”纪欣说。The Taiwan Work Office of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council hosted a reception in Beijing on Saturday, attended by guests from both Taiwan and the mainland who had participated in the earlier gathering.中共中央台湾工作办公室、国务院台湾事务办公室于周六在北京举办招待会，出席此前纪念集会的两岸嘉宾受邀参加。Song Tao, head of both offices, said at the reception that establishing the commemoration day on the occasion of the 80th anniversary of Taiwan's restoration fully reflects the will of the people and the resolve of the nation.两办主任宋涛在招待会上表示，在台湾光复80周年之际设立这一纪念日，充分体现了人民的意愿与国家的决心。"We are confident in advancing the great cause of national reunification and enhancing the well-being of our Taiwan compatriots," Song said.“我们有信心推进祖国统一伟大事业，增进台湾同胞福祉。”宋涛说。Chi Hsing, publisher of The Observer magazine in Taiwan, said the decision reflects the shared aspirations of the vast majority of Taiwan compatriots.台湾《观察》杂志发行人纪欣表示，设立“台湾光复纪念日”的决定，反映了绝大多数台湾同胞的共同心声。"It will carry forward the patriotic tradition, reaffirm that both sides of the Strait belong to one China, and inspire pride in being Chinese," she said.“这将传承爱国传统，重申海峡两岸同属一个中国，激发民族自豪感。”她说。Ji Bin, vice-chairman of the All-China Federation of Taiwan Compatriots, said the restoration of Taiwan is solid evidence of the Chinese government's resumption of sovereignty over Taiwan and a crucial link in the historical and legal chain of Taiwan being part of China.中华全国台湾同胞联谊会副会长纪斌指出，台湾光复是中国政府恢复对台湾行使主权的铁证，也是台湾作为中国一部分的历史与法律链条中的关键一环。"No matter how the Democratic Progressive Party and its politicians distort the truth of the war of resistance against Japanese aggression, deny the achievements of the war victory, downplay or deny the historical significance of Taiwan's restoration, and collude with external forces to promote the fallacy of 'Taiwan's undetermined status', they cannot distort or undermine the historical and legal fact that Taiwan belongs to China," Ji said.“无论民进党及其政客如何歪曲抗日战争史实、否认抗战胜利成果、淡化甚至否定台湾光复的历史意义，勾结外部势力宣扬‘台湾地位未定论'谬论，都无法歪曲和改变台湾属于中国的历史与法律事实。”纪斌说。In Taipei, the memorial association of the Chinese war of resistance against Japanese aggression in Taiwan and the Chinese Kuomintang party jointly held a celebration on Saturday marking the anniversary of Taiwan's restoration.在台北，台湾抗日民族统一战线纪念会与中国国民党于周六联合举办台湾光复80周年纪念活动。Overseas Chinese from both sides of the Strait also celebrated the commemoration day in various forms. Chinese embassies in countries including the United States, Japan, Brazil and Indonesia held symposiums marking the 80th anniversary of Taiwan's restoration on the day of commemoration.海外两岸侨胞也以多种形式庆祝这一纪念日。中国驻美国、日本、巴西、印度尼西亚等国的大使馆，均在纪念日当天举办台湾光复80周年座谈会。In New York City, hundreds of Chinese compatriots from both sides of the Strait gathered in the Flushing neighborhood of Queens borough on Friday to celebrate the anniversary.在纽约，数百名两岸同胞于周五齐聚皇后区法拉盛社区，共同庆祝台湾光复80周年。separatist/ˈseprətɪst/adj.分裂主义的，分离主义的sovereignty /ˈsɒvrənti/n.主权；最高统治权jurisdiction/ˌdʒʊərɪsˈdɪkʃn/n.管辖权，司法权

The Allied campaign in Italy stalled, and British and American leaders were searching for a way to break the stalemate on the peninsula. Winston Churchill suggested an amphibious invasion behing enemy lines.

Winston Churchill famously remarked that the threat of the German U-Boats was the only thing that had “really frightened” him during World War Two. The U-Boats certainly claimed a bitter harvest among Allied shipping: nearly 3,000 ships were sunk, for a total tonnage of over 14 million tonnes, nearly 70% of Allied shipping losses in all theatres of the war. With justification, then, they are an integral part of the traditional narrative of the Battle of the Atlantic; a story of technological brilliance, dramatic sinkings, life and death, and – of course – the sinister, unseen threat of the U-Boats themselves. For Allied seamen during the war, the U-Boat was a hidden menace, a faceless killer lurking beneath the waves; and the urgent needs of survival afforded them little time or energy to consider the challenges and privations of their enemy. History, however, affords us that time and energy, and any pretence of comprehensiveness demands that we consider what life was like for the crews of those most claustrophobic vessels; packed into a steel hull, at the mercy of the enemy, of the elements – and of basic physics. Germany's U-Boat crews posted the highest per-capita losses of any combat arm during World War Two. Some 30,000 German submariners were killed – over 75% of the total number deployed – the vast majority of whom have no grave except the seabed. Using archival sources, unpublished diaries and existing memoir literature, Wolfpack: Inside Hitler's U-Boat War (Basic Books, 2025) by Roger Moorhouse gives the U-Boatmen back their voice, allowing their side of the narrative to be aired in a comprehensive manner for the first time. With that testimony, Wolfpack takes the reader from the heady early days of the war, when U-Boat crews were buoyed with optimism about their cause, through to the challenges of meeting the Allied counterthreat, to the final horror of defeat, when their submarines were captured by the enemy or scuttled in ignominy. Using the U-Boatmen's own voices to punctuate an engaging narrative, it tells their story; of courage, certainly, but also of fear, privation and – ultimately – failure. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Winston Churchill famously remarked that the threat of the German U-Boats was the only thing that had “really frightened” him during World War Two. The U-Boats certainly claimed a bitter harvest among Allied shipping: nearly 3,000 ships were sunk, for a total tonnage of over 14 million tonnes, nearly 70% of Allied shipping losses in all theatres of the war. With justification, then, they are an integral part of the traditional narrative of the Battle of the Atlantic; a story of technological brilliance, dramatic sinkings, life and death, and – of course – the sinister, unseen threat of the U-Boats themselves. For Allied seamen during the war, the U-Boat was a hidden menace, a faceless killer lurking beneath the waves; and the urgent needs of survival afforded them little time or energy to consider the challenges and privations of their enemy. History, however, affords us that time and energy, and any pretence of comprehensiveness demands that we consider what life was like for the crews of those most claustrophobic vessels; packed into a steel hull, at the mercy of the enemy, of the elements – and of basic physics. Germany's U-Boat crews posted the highest per-capita losses of any combat arm during World War Two. Some 30,000 German submariners were killed – over 75% of the total number deployed – the vast majority of whom have no grave except the seabed. Using archival sources, unpublished diaries and existing memoir literature, Wolfpack: Inside Hitler's U-Boat War (Basic Books, 2025) by Roger Moorhouse gives the U-Boatmen back their voice, allowing their side of the narrative to be aired in a comprehensive manner for the first time. With that testimony, Wolfpack takes the reader from the heady early days of the war, when U-Boat crews were buoyed with optimism about their cause, through to the challenges of meeting the Allied counterthreat, to the final horror of defeat, when their submarines were captured by the enemy or scuttled in ignominy. Using the U-Boatmen's own voices to punctuate an engaging narrative, it tells their story; of courage, certainly, but also of fear, privation and – ultimately – failure. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/military-history

Winston Churchill famously remarked that the threat of the German U-Boats was the only thing that had “really frightened” him during World War Two. The U-Boats certainly claimed a bitter harvest among Allied shipping: nearly 3,000 ships were sunk, for a total tonnage of over 14 million tonnes, nearly 70% of Allied shipping losses in all theatres of the war. With justification, then, they are an integral part of the traditional narrative of the Battle of the Atlantic; a story of technological brilliance, dramatic sinkings, life and death, and – of course – the sinister, unseen threat of the U-Boats themselves. For Allied seamen during the war, the U-Boat was a hidden menace, a faceless killer lurking beneath the waves; and the urgent needs of survival afforded them little time or energy to consider the challenges and privations of their enemy. History, however, affords us that time and energy, and any pretence of comprehensiveness demands that we consider what life was like for the crews of those most claustrophobic vessels; packed into a steel hull, at the mercy of the enemy, of the elements – and of basic physics. Germany's U-Boat crews posted the highest per-capita losses of any combat arm during World War Two. Some 30,000 German submariners were killed – over 75% of the total number deployed – the vast majority of whom have no grave except the seabed. Using archival sources, unpublished diaries and existing memoir literature, Wolfpack: Inside Hitler's U-Boat War (Basic Books, 2025) by Roger Moorhouse gives the U-Boatmen back their voice, allowing their side of the narrative to be aired in a comprehensive manner for the first time. With that testimony, Wolfpack takes the reader from the heady early days of the war, when U-Boat crews were buoyed with optimism about their cause, through to the challenges of meeting the Allied counterthreat, to the final horror of defeat, when their submarines were captured by the enemy or scuttled in ignominy. Using the U-Boatmen's own voices to punctuate an engaging narrative, it tells their story; of courage, certainly, but also of fear, privation and – ultimately – failure. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

Winston Churchill famously remarked that the threat of the German U-Boats was the only thing that had “really frightened” him during World War Two. The U-Boats certainly claimed a bitter harvest among Allied shipping: nearly 3,000 ships were sunk, for a total tonnage of over 14 million tonnes, nearly 70% of Allied shipping losses in all theatres of the war. With justification, then, they are an integral part of the traditional narrative of the Battle of the Atlantic; a story of technological brilliance, dramatic sinkings, life and death, and – of course – the sinister, unseen threat of the U-Boats themselves. For Allied seamen during the war, the U-Boat was a hidden menace, a faceless killer lurking beneath the waves; and the urgent needs of survival afforded them little time or energy to consider the challenges and privations of their enemy. History, however, affords us that time and energy, and any pretence of comprehensiveness demands that we consider what life was like for the crews of those most claustrophobic vessels; packed into a steel hull, at the mercy of the enemy, of the elements – and of basic physics. Germany's U-Boat crews posted the highest per-capita losses of any combat arm during World War Two. Some 30,000 German submariners were killed – over 75% of the total number deployed – the vast majority of whom have no grave except the seabed. Using archival sources, unpublished diaries and existing memoir literature, Wolfpack: Inside Hitler's U-Boat War (Basic Books, 2025) by Roger Moorhouse gives the U-Boatmen back their voice, allowing their side of the narrative to be aired in a comprehensive manner for the first time. With that testimony, Wolfpack takes the reader from the heady early days of the war, when U-Boat crews were buoyed with optimism about their cause, through to the challenges of meeting the Allied counterthreat, to the final horror of defeat, when their submarines were captured by the enemy or scuttled in ignominy. Using the U-Boatmen's own voices to punctuate an engaging narrative, it tells their story; of courage, certainly, but also of fear, privation and – ultimately – failure. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science

Winston Churchill famously remarked that the threat of the German U-Boats was the only thing that had “really frightened” him during World War Two. The U-Boats certainly claimed a bitter harvest among Allied shipping: nearly 3,000 ships were sunk, for a total tonnage of over 14 million tonnes, nearly 70% of Allied shipping losses in all theatres of the war. With justification, then, they are an integral part of the traditional narrative of the Battle of the Atlantic; a story of technological brilliance, dramatic sinkings, life and death, and – of course – the sinister, unseen threat of the U-Boats themselves. For Allied seamen during the war, the U-Boat was a hidden menace, a faceless killer lurking beneath the waves; and the urgent needs of survival afforded them little time or energy to consider the challenges and privations of their enemy. History, however, affords us that time and energy, and any pretence of comprehensiveness demands that we consider what life was like for the crews of those most claustrophobic vessels; packed into a steel hull, at the mercy of the enemy, of the elements – and of basic physics. Germany's U-Boat crews posted the highest per-capita losses of any combat arm during World War Two. Some 30,000 German submariners were killed – over 75% of the total number deployed – the vast majority of whom have no grave except the seabed. Using archival sources, unpublished diaries and existing memoir literature, Wolfpack: Inside Hitler's U-Boat War (Basic Books, 2025) by Roger Moorhouse gives the U-Boatmen back their voice, allowing their side of the narrative to be aired in a comprehensive manner for the first time. With that testimony, Wolfpack takes the reader from the heady early days of the war, when U-Boat crews were buoyed with optimism about their cause, through to the challenges of meeting the Allied counterthreat, to the final horror of defeat, when their submarines were captured by the enemy or scuttled in ignominy. Using the U-Boatmen's own voices to punctuate an engaging narrative, it tells their story; of courage, certainly, but also of fear, privation and – ultimately – failure. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science-technology-and-society

Winston Churchill famously remarked that the threat of the German U-Boats was the only thing that had “really frightened” him during World War Two. The U-Boats certainly claimed a bitter harvest among Allied shipping: nearly 3,000 ships were sunk, for a total tonnage of over 14 million tonnes, nearly 70% of Allied shipping losses in all theatres of the war. With justification, then, they are an integral part of the traditional narrative of the Battle of the Atlantic; a story of technological brilliance, dramatic sinkings, life and death, and – of course – the sinister, unseen threat of the U-Boats themselves. For Allied seamen during the war, the U-Boat was a hidden menace, a faceless killer lurking beneath the waves; and the urgent needs of survival afforded them little time or energy to consider the challenges and privations of their enemy. History, however, affords us that time and energy, and any pretence of comprehensiveness demands that we consider what life was like for the crews of those most claustrophobic vessels; packed into a steel hull, at the mercy of the enemy, of the elements – and of basic physics. Germany's U-Boat crews posted the highest per-capita losses of any combat arm during World War Two. Some 30,000 German submariners were killed – over 75% of the total number deployed – the vast majority of whom have no grave except the seabed. Using archival sources, unpublished diaries and existing memoir literature, Wolfpack: Inside Hitler's U-Boat War (Basic Books, 2025) by Roger Moorhouse gives the U-Boatmen back their voice, allowing their side of the narrative to be aired in a comprehensive manner for the first time. With that testimony, Wolfpack takes the reader from the heady early days of the war, when U-Boat crews were buoyed with optimism about their cause, through to the challenges of meeting the Allied counterthreat, to the final horror of defeat, when their submarines were captured by the enemy or scuttled in ignominy. Using the U-Boatmen's own voices to punctuate an engaging narrative, it tells their story; of courage, certainly, but also of fear, privation and – ultimately – failure. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day

In early 1945, the Allies were advancing in Burma after their hard-won victories at Kohima and Imphal. The focus shifted to the Arakan, a region of dense jungle, mangrove swamps, and unforgiving terrain. For the men sent there, disease, supply difficulties, and the monsoon were as formidable as the Japanese defenders. Among the formations deployed was Britain's 3 Commando Brigade, working alongside Indian and West African divisions of XV Corps in a campaign that tested endurance as much as combat skill. In this episode of the WW2 Podcast, I'm joined by military historian Lucy Betteridge-Dyson. Lucy is the author of Jungle Commandos: The Battle for Arakan, Burma 1945, which tells the story of the Commandos who fought in this overlooked theatre, culminating in the ferocious struggle for Hill 170. Drawing on first-hand accounts, her work reveals the realities of jungle warfare and the contribution of these specialist troops to the final Allied victories in Burma.   Jungle Commandos is also available on Audible. patreon.com/ww2podcast  

During the Second World War Germany's submarines sank over three thousand Allied ships, that figure amounting to nearly three-quarters of Allied shipping losses in all theaters of the war. What would become a war within a war began in the very first days after September 1, 1939. This war–particularly the contest which has become known as the Battle of the Atlantic–has been the focus of numerous studies and arguments. But until now, little has been said about the undersea war from the perspective of the German submariners.Roger Moorhouse has now remedied that with his new book Wolfpack: Inside Hitler's U-boat War. It is not simply a story of the undersea war, but a history of those who fought it; who endured the miserable conditions within a German U-Boat, had only a 25% chance of survival, and when they did survive often were psychologically scarred for the remainder of their lives.Roger Moorhouse is a historian of the Second World War. The author of numerous books, his most recent was The Forgers: The Forgotten Story of the Holocaust's Most Audacious Rescue Operation, which we discussed in a conversation of November 6, 2023. For more information, including to resources mentioned in the conversation, go to our Substack page, at www.historicallythinking.org

Discover the untold story of the RAF heroes who photographed victory.What if the intelligence that won World War II didn't come from Bletchley Park — but from the skies above? In this gripping episode of History Rage, host Paul Bavill is joined by historians and podcasters Dave Robertson and Tony Hoskins from For You The War Is Over to uncover the hidden story of the RAF's Photographic Reconnaissance Unit (PRU) — the unarmed pilots who risked everything to capture the images that shaped Allied strategy and victory.These daring aviators, flying stripped-down Spitfires and Mosquitos, gathered over 26 million photographs during the war — producing 80% of all Allied intelligence. But their story remains one of WWII's least recognised triumphs.The Untold Legacy of Aerial IntelligenceEnigma cracked codes, but aerial reconnaissance won battles. Dave and Tony reveal how the PRU began as a handful of maverick pilots before evolving into a highly specialised global intelligence unit that transformed modern warfare. They share the staggering dangers these pilots faced — flying alone, unarmed, and often without armour — at freezing altitudes to capture photos over heavily defended targets.From the development of stereography and 3D imaging that made D-Day possible, to the astonishing innovation behind Sandy Gunn's Spitfire, the episode brings to life the courage, technology, and sacrifice of those who turned cameras into weapons of war.You'll also hear how today's historians and engineers are preserving this legacy — including the restoration of Sandy Gunn's Spitfire (AA810) and the creation of a new memorial in London to honour PRU crews.Featuring Guests:

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Well, VE Day is the sort of nickname that the world press gave to the day when victory in Europe was achieved.  So VE stands for victory in Europe, which obviously is where we are going with this episode, but we've got a ways to go yet.  And the eventually victory over Japan is going to be called VJ Day, but that one doesn't get all that much traction, for some reasons that we'll go into next episode.  But lots of newspapers and countries around the western world were very excited about VE Day, and the name kind of stuck.At the end of the last episode, we left about 150,000 Allied troops holding a small but solid beachhead in Normandy.  The D-Day invasion was a huge Allied victory, but it was only the start of a long and difficult road to the defeat of Nazi Germany.  But it was, indeed, the beginning of the end.  

It's 1943. Nazi Germany and its Axis power allies are ravaging Europe and the Pacific with a terrible war. At this juncture, President Franklin Roosevelt has one critical goal: a face-to-face meeting with his allies, Joseph Stalin and Winston Churchill. The first ever meeting of the "Big Three" is set to take place in Tehran, Iran, where the leaders of the three great superpowers will discuss and decide on some of the most crucial strategic details of the war. But when the Nazis learn about the meeting, they form their own secret, deadly plan: an assassination plot that would forever change history...if they're successful. This riveting true story, filled with daring rescues and high stakes intrigue, explains how this pivotal meeting in Tehran changed the course of World War II, and how the Nazi conspiracy to assassinate the Allied leaders nearly led to world-shattering disaster. Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/arroe-collins-like-it-s-live--4113802/support.

On this episode of Reaganism, host Roger Zakheim sits down with Tim Bouverie, author of the new book "Allies at War: How the Struggles Between the Allied Powers Shaped the War and the World." Tim and Roger delve into the complexities of alliances during World War II, focusing on the intricate dynamics between the Allied powers. Tim discusses how the collaboration among nations like the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union was crucial in defeating the Axis powers, despite internal rivalries and suspicions. They explore the historical context of these alliances, the strategic decisions made, and the lessons learned, emphasizing the importance of unity in facing global threats. They conclude their conversation with a contemporary appraisal of Roosevelt and Churchill, rejecting far-right reinterpretations of World War II and Roosevelt and Churchill's legacies.

In this episode, Dr Gary Buck, author of A Risk Too Far: A Psychological Autopsy of the Planning for Arnhem, joins Dr Huw Dylan to explore the human factors behind one of WWII's most daring operations. Drawing on his expertise in operational psychology, Dr Buck reveals how stress, ambition and personality shaped the decisions of commanders like Montgomery, Browning and Urquhart during Operation Market Garden. Through this psychological lens, the episode uncovers how bias, rivalry and pressure influenced Allied command—and how the mind can be as decisive a battlefield as any fought on land or air.

The Allied attack through the Tebaga Pass gets underway. It starts well until the sand storms come. Meanwhile, Patton's attack starts out well, until the American tanks run into a minefield. All this causes arguments amongst the Allied High Command. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Japanese used approximately 60,000 POWs, mainly British, Dutch, Australian, and American, to construct the railway alongside an estimated 180,000 to 250,000 Asian civilians. It is estimated that around 12,000 Allied prisoners and up to 90,000 civilians died during ...

This Day in Legal History: Nuremberg ExecutionsOn October 16, 1946, ten prominent Nazi war criminals were executed by hanging in the aftermath of the landmark Nuremberg Trials, held to prosecute key figures of the Third Reich for crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crimes against peace. The executions marked the culmination of months of legal proceedings conducted by an international military tribunal composed of judges from the Allied powers: the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and France. Among those hanged was Joachim von Ribbentrop, Hitler's former Foreign Minister, convicted for his role in orchestrating Nazi foreign policy and enabling the Holocaust.The trials had concluded in late September 1946, with 12 of the 22 main defendants receiving death sentences. However, Hermann Göring, one of the most high-profile defendants and head of the Luftwaffe, committed suicide by cyanide just hours before his scheduled execution. The hangings took place inside the gymnasium of the Nuremberg Palace of Justice, where the tribunal had convened, and were carried out in the early morning hours.The executions were overseen by U.S. Army personnel, and steps were taken to document them for historical record. The event was viewed by many as a pivotal moment in the establishment of international criminal law, affirming that individuals—even heads of state and high-ranking officials—could be held personally accountable for war atrocities. These proceedings laid the groundwork for future tribunals, including those for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.Some criticized the process as “victor's justice,” pointing to perceived inconsistencies in sentencing and legal procedures. Nevertheless, the trials represented a significant shift from the post-World War I approach, which had failed to adequately prosecute war crimes. The executions on October 16 symbolized not only the end of an era of unchecked totalitarian violence but also the beginning of a new international legal order based on accountability and the rule of law.A federal judge in California has temporarily blocked the Trump administration's latest wave of federal layoffs, calling the move likely “illegal and in excess of authority.” In a sharply worded order, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston halted terminations that began last week, siding with a coalition of federal worker unions. Illston criticized the administration's approach as “ready, fire, aim” and warned that the human cost of such abrupt cuts is unacceptable.The layoffs—over 4,100 in total—targeted several federal agencies, with the Departments of Health and Human Services and Treasury seeing the bulk of cuts. Judge Illston's order requires the administration to report all completed and planned layoffs by Friday and set a hearing for a preliminary injunction on October 28. She also rejected the Department of Justice's attempt to steer the case toward procedural issues, stating that the legal merits were too concerning to ignore.President Trump has framed the cuts as politically motivated, stating they were aimed at eliminating programs he called “egregious socialist, semi-communist.” He added that Republican-backed programs would be spared. The administration recently lifted a long-standing hiring freeze but is now requiring agencies to submit staffing plans for approval.Union plaintiffs argue that the layoffs violate the Antideficiency Act and the Administrative Procedure Act, citing the administration's use of the government shutdown as an arbitrary justification. This case, AFGE v. OMB, marks another legal confrontation over workforce reductions, following an earlier freeze issued by Judge Illston that was ultimately overturned by the Supreme Court.Trump's Shutdown-Linked Layoffs Paused by California Judge (4)The 2026 U.S. law school admissions cycle is off to an intense start, with applications up 33% compared to this time last year, according to new data from the Law School Admission Council. This surge follows last year's admissions boom and signals another highly competitive year for aspiring law students. Admissions consultant Mike Spivey noted he's never seen such a sharp early increase in over two decades of reviewing application data, predicting a likely total rise of around 20% once the cycle concludes.Several factors are driving the spike, including a tough job market for recent college graduates—whose unemployment rate now surpasses that of the broader labor force—and growing political instability. Law School Admission Council President Sudha Setty also cited concerns about the impact of AI and broader economic uncertainty as motivators for many applicants. Additionally, more people are taking the LSAT this year, up nearly 22% over 2025 levels.A recent Kaplan survey found 56% of law school admissions officers pointed to politics as a major factor behind last year's surge, with 90% expecting this cycle to be just as competitive, if not more so. Some applicants are likely reapplying after being rejected last year, or returning after delaying applications due to last year's high volume. While law schools will benefit from a deeper pool of candidates, Spivey warned the sharp increase means tougher odds for acceptance across the board.US law school applicants increase 33%, boosting competition | ReutersPresident Donald Trump's decision to fund military pay during the ongoing government shutdown is only a short-term solution, according to House Speaker Mike Johnson. On Wednesday, Johnson confirmed that 1.3 million active-duty service members, along with tens of thousands of National Guard and reservists, were paid using $6.5 billion in unused military research and development funds. However, he warned that unless Democrats act to reopen the government, troops are unlikely to receive their next paycheck on October 31.The White House has not explained its legal rationale for this funding maneuver, and it hasn't requested the required congressional approvals to shift funds between accounts. Federal law caps such transfers at $8 billion annually and only allows them if the funds are used for their legally designated purposes. Without further funding authority, it's unclear how the administration could cover future military pay. While many lawmakers support a standalone bill to guarantee troop pay, Republican leaders—including Johnson and Senate Majority Whip John Thune—are resisting that option. They argue that doing so would reduce pressure to end the shutdown overall.Some Republicans, like Sen. Lisa Murkowski, say the move has reduced urgency in Congress while leaving other federal workers unpaid. The political optics are further complicated by Trump's claim that only Democrat-backed programs are being cut, as he seeks to frame the issue as partisan. Internally, GOP leaders worry that passing targeted funding bills could open the door to broader demands for agency-by-agency funding relief, weakening their leverage in shutdown negotiations.By way of brief background, the move likely violates the Antideficiency Act (ADA), which bars federal officials from spending money before or beyond congressional appropriations. Trump reportedly ordered the Department of Defense to divert funds from the RDT&E account—meant for weapons research—to cover military payroll. That account is not legally authorized for such use, and the funds may have also exceeded their availability period.This raises two major legal issues. First, under the Appropriations Clause (Article I, § 9, cl. 7), only Congress may authorize government spending. The president cannot repurpose funds without specific legislative approval. Second, the ADA prohibits both misappropriation of purpose (spending money on unauthorized functions) and misappropriation of timing (using expired funds). If proven willful, such violations can carry criminal penalties, though prosecutions are rare.Beyond the legal breach, this act could set a dangerous precedent. If courts decline to intervene, it could signal that future presidents—regardless of party—can redirect federal funds without congressional consent. This would erode legislative power and potentially turn the presidency into a de facto appropriations authority, undermining the Constitution's separation of powers.Special thanks to Bobby Kogan, the Senior Director of Federal Budget Policy for the Center for American Progress, for his instructive Bluesky post explaining the deficiency issue in a way much clearer and more succinctly than I otherwise would have been able to.Trump's troop pay move is a ‘temporary fix,' Johnson says - Live Updates - POLITICOPost by @did:plc:drfb2pdjlnsqkfgsoellcahm — BlueskyA piece I wrote for Forbes this week looks at how Norway is showing the rest of the world how to end EV subsidies without wrecking the market. The country announced in its latest budget that it will phase out its long-standing value-added tax (VAT) exemption for electric vehicles—partially in 2026, and fully by 2027. This might seem like a policy retreat, but the timing is deliberate: EVs now make up 95–98% of new car sales in Norway. The market has matured, and the subsidy is no longer essential.I argue that this is what smart policy looks like—temporary support that steps aside when it's no longer needed. The U.S., by contrast, killed its federal EV tax credit abruptly and politically, without phasing it out or adapting it for current market conditions. In doing so, it treated the credit as a political symbol rather than a market tool. Norway, on the other hand, used the exemption strategically, aligning it with broader policy goals and allowing it to sunset once those goals were met.The piece highlights how the U.S. often fears both removing and maintaining subsidies, caught in a cycle where incentives become political footballs. Norway's approach offers a model for how to responsibly end subsidies: gradually, rationally, and only once the market no longer needs them. This isn't anti-EV or anti-climate policy—it's a sign that the original policy worked.Norway Shows How To End EV Subsidies Without Killing The Market This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

When we think of the Second World War, the story is so often told through an Anglo-American lens: Britain holding out alone in 1940, the United States joining the fight in 1941, and the combined Allied effort that followed. But this perspective tends to overshadow the contributions of other nations, particularly Canada. Canada was not usually regarded as a global military power, yet its role in the war was both significant and far-reaching. From the skies over Europe to the convoys crossing the Atlantic and the soldiers who landed on D-Day, Canadian forces made an impact far greater than their country's population might suggest. In this episode of the WW2 Podcast, I am joined by historian David Borys to look more closely at Canada's military in the Second World War. We discuss how Canada approached the conflict, the part it played within the wider Allied war effort, and how its contribution is remembered today. David is a Canadian academic, author of Punching Above Our Weight: The Canadian Military at War Since 1867, and host of Curious Canadian History. His new podcast, Conflict and Culture, explores the intersections of war and society, and we'll touch on that later in our conversation.   patreon.com/ww2podcast  

The October 15 edition of the AgNet News Hour featured one of California agriculture's most respected voices: Nat DiBuduo, former Allied Grape Growers president and lifelong champion of California's wine industry. Hosts Nick Papagni and Josh McGill welcomed DiBuduo for an honest discussion about the past, present, and uncertain future of the state's vineyards and farms. Known as the “godfather of the grape industry,” DiBuduo reflected on growing up among vineyards where Copper River now stands — a reminder of how quickly farmland has disappeared under urban expansion. “Back in the day, it was all tree fruit and grapes,” he said. “Now it's housing developments. Every generation needs a house, but we're losing farmland one field at a time.” DiBuduo, who also served 16 years on the Fresno City Planning Commission, explained how housing demand has transformed the Central Valley landscape. What was once prime farmland has become subdivisions, a change he sees as both inevitable and troubling. “Farmers can't compete with developers when it's this hard to farm in California,” he said. “Regulations, labor, and water costs keep rising — and people are just cashing out.” On the state of the wine industry, DiBuduo warned that California has lost roughly 100,000 acres of wine grapes in the last decade as markets shift and consumer demand changes. “When I was at Allied, we had around 500,000 acres,” he said. “Now it's closer to 400,000. You can drive through Fresno and Madera and see vineyards piled up waiting to be shredded.” He believes the wine industry must reinvent its marketing to connect with younger consumers. “The older generation is drinking less wine, and younger people don't know what to buy,” he said. “We need to make wine fun again — get people to tastings, use social media, and tell the story behind every label.” He also encouraged innovation in packaging, including canned and low-alcohol wines, to meet new consumer preferences. DiBuduo spoke passionately about farming challenges — from water scarcity to overregulation — and said California's leadership needs to rediscover balance. “We need legislators who actually understand agriculture,” he said. “Farmers aren't villains. They're the best environmentalists on the planet. We live on our farms; we take care of them for future generations.” He also echoed concerns about Proposition 50, warning that it would further silence rural voices. “It would be a disaster for the Central Valley and for California,” he said. “We need representation, not redistricting that wipes us out.” Despite the challenges, DiBuduo remains optimistic. “Don't give up,” he told listeners. “We've seen ups and downs before. The California farmer has always found a way through.”

The hunt is over. Black May (May 1943) marks the U-boat campaign's devastating turning point, forcing Admiral Dönitz to withdraw his "Grey Wolves" from the North Atlantic. In the final episode Saul and Roger track the U-boats' demise against overwhelming Allied technological advances. We explore the grim reality for U-boat crews—the brutal conditions and a staggering 75% casualty rate—and why advanced subs like the Type XXI "Elektroboote" arrived too late. We conclude the series by assessing the final collapse, Operation Deadlight, and the campaign's immense human cost. If you have any thoughts or questions, you can send them to - podbattleground@gmail.com Producer: James Hodgson X (Twitter): @PodBattleground Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hey before I begin the podcast, I just want to thank all of you who joined the patreon, you guys are simply awesome. Please take the time to vote and comment on the patreon polls so I can best tackle the specific subjects you want to hear more about and hell it does not have to be about the Pacific War, I like ancient Rome, WW1, WW2, just toss some ideas and I will try to make it happen.   This Podcast is going to be a very remarkable story about a Korean man who fought for the IJA, the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany during the second world war.  He is also a man whom most than likely never existed.   Did that catch you off guard haha?   If you have a chance you can pull up wikipedia and search Yang Kyoungjong. The first thing you will notice is a disclaimer that states numerous historians who claim Yang Kyoungjong does not exist. Yet this man exists in some history books, there is a iconic photo of him, there is a documentary looking into him, countless Korean stories are writing loosely about him, there is a pretty decent war film and multiple youtubers have covered his so-called story. So how does this guy not exist if his story is so popular?   His story is claimed to be real by military historian Stephen Ambrose who wrote about him in his book in 1994 titled “D-day, june 6th, 1944: the Climactic battle of World War II. There is also references to him in Antony Beevor's book “the second world war” and that of defense consultant and author Steven Zaloga's book“the devil's garden: Rommel's desperate Defense of Omaha Beach on D-Day”. In 2005 a Korean SBS documentary investigated his existence and concluded there was no convincing evidence of his existence. For those of you who have ever heard of this man, I guarantee it's because of the 2011 south korean film “My Way”. That's where I found out about it by the way. Many of you probably saw the iconic photo of him, again if you pull up the wikipedia page on Yang Kyoungjong its front and center. The photo shows a asiatic man wearing a wehrmacht uniform and he has just been captured by american forces on the d-day landings.   Now I don't want to jump into the is he real or not busy just yet. So this is how the podcast will go down, very reminiscent of “Our fake History's Podcast” might I add, I am a huge fan of that guys work. I am going to tell you the story of Yang Kyoungjong, then afterwords disclose my little investigation into whether he is real or not.   So without further adieu this is the story of a man who fought for three nations during WW2.   The Story   It was June 1944, the allies had just unleashed Operation Overlord, the D-Day landings at Normandy. Lt Robert Brewer of the 506th parachute infantry regiment, 101st airborne division was overlooking the capture of Axis forces and reported to his regiment finding four Asians in Wehrmacht uniform around the Utah beach landings. Brewer nor any of his colleagues spoke the language the Asian men spoke, they assumed them to be Japanese.  The four asians were processed as POW's, listed as young Japanese and sent to a British POW camp, before he would be sent to another POW camp in the US. At some point between his capture and the POW camps, he gave his name as Yang Kyoungjong, stated he was Korean and gave an extremely incredible story. To who did he say these things, no one knows.   Yang Kyoungjong was born in 1920, in Shin Eu Joo, part of modern day North Korea. At the age of 18, Yang was forcibly conscripted into the Imperial Japanese army. Korea was one of the bread baskets of Asia and the Empire of Japan had annexed her in 1910. Japan held sovereignty over Korea, making Koreans subjects.    In 1939 the Empire of Japan faced major labor shortages and as a result began conscription of Japanese men for the military, while importing vast amounts of Korean laborers to work in mainland Japan. For the Imperial Japanese Army, Koreans were not drafted until 1944 when things were dire for Japan. Until 1944, the IJA allowed Koreans to volunteer in the army. In 1938 there was a 14% acceptance rate, by 1943 this dropped dramatically to 2%, but the number of applicants increased exponentially from 3000 per annum in 1939 to 300,000 by the end of the war. On paper it looked like Koreans were registering en masse on their on violation, but this is quite the contrary, the Japanese policy was to use force. Japanese officials began press gang efforts against Korean peasants, forcing them to sign applications, it is believed over half of the applications were done in such a manner. Other applicants registered for a variety of reasons, typically because of economic turmoil. Korea would produce 7 generals and many field grade officers. One of the most well known was Lt General Crown Prince Yi Un who would command Japanese forces in the China War.   Thus Yang Kyoungjong was forced into the IJA and would find himself stationed with the Kwantung Army. Quite unfortunately for him, he was enlisted into their service at a time where two major border skirmishes occurred with the Soviet Union. The USSR was seen as Japan's number one rival going all the way back to the Triple Intervention of 1895 when the Russians thwarted Japan's seizure of the Liaodong peninsula after they had won the first sino japanese war. This led to the Russo-Japanese war, where Japan shocked the world being victorious over the Russian Empire. When the Russian Empire fell and the Russian civil war kicked off, Japan sent the lionshare of men to fight the Red Army during the Siberian Intervention of 1918-1922.    Communism was seen as the greatest if not one of the greatest threats to the Kokutai and thus Japan as a whole. As such Japan placed the Kwantung Army along the Manchurian borderlands to thwart any possible soviet invasion. There had numerous border skirmishes, but in 1938 and 1939 two large battles occurred. In 1938 the Kwantung army intercepted a Soviet message indicating the Far East forces would be securing some unoccupied heights west of Lake Khasan that overlooked the Korean port city of Rajin. Soviet border troops did indeed move into the area and began fortifying it. The Kwantung army sent forces to dislodge them and this soon led to a full on battle. The battle was quite shocking for both sides, the Soviets lost nearly 800 men dead with 3279 wounded, the Japanese claimed they had 526 dead with 913 wounded. The Soviet lost significant armor and despite both sides agreeing to a ceasefire, the Kwantung army considered it a significant victory and proof the Soviets were not capable of thwarting them.   In theory Yang Kyoungjong would be in training and would eventually reach the Manchuria borders by 1939. Another man sent over would be Georgy Zhukov who was given the task of taking command of the 57th special corps and to eliminate Japanese provocations. What was expected of Zhukov was if the Japanese pressed again for battle, to deliver them a crushing and decisive blow. On May 11th, 1939 some Mongolian cavalry units were grazing their horses in a disputed area. On that very same day, Manchu cavalry attacked the Mongols to drive them past the river of Khalkhin Gol. Two days later the Mongols returned in greater numbers and this time the Manchu were unable to dislodge them.    What was rather funny to say, a conflict of some horses grazing on disputed land, led to a fully mechanized battle. On May 14th, Lt Colonel Yaozo Azuma led some regiments to dislodge the Mongols, but they were being supported by the Red Army. Azuma force suffered 63% casualties, devastating. June saw the battle expand enormously, Japan was tossing 30,000 men in the region, the Soviets tossed Zhukov at them alongside motorized and armored forces. The IJA lacking good armored units, tossed air forces to smash the nearby Soviet airbase at Tamsakbulak. In July the IJA engaged the Red Army with nearly 100 tanks and tankettes, too which Zhukov unleashed 450 tanks and armored cars. The Japanese had more infantry support, but the Soviet armor encircled and crushed them. The two armies spared with another for weeks, the Japanese assumed the Soviets would suffer logistical problems but Zhukoev assembled a fleet of 2600 trucks to supply his forces, simply incredible. Both sides were suffering tremendous casualties, then in August global politics shifted. It was apparent a war in Europe was going to break out, Zhukov was ordered to be decisive, the Soviets could not deal with a two front war. So Zhukov now using a fleet of 4000 trucks began transported supplies from Chita to the front next to a armada of tanks and mechanized brigades. The Soviets tossed 3 rifle divisions, two tank divisions and 2 tank brigades, nearly 500 tanks in all, with two motorized infantry divisions and 550 fighters and bombers.    The stalemate was shattered when Zhukov unleashed is armada, some 50,000 Soviets and Mongols hit the east bank of Khalkhin Gol. The Japanese were immediately pinned down, while the Soviets were employing a double envelopment. The Japanese tried to counter attack and it failed horribly. The Japanese then scrambled to break out of the encirclement and failed. The surrounded Japanese forces refused to surrender as the Soviets smashed them with artillery and aerial bombardment. By the end of August the Japanese forces on the Mongolian side of the border were annihilated. On September 15th the USSR and Japan signed a ceasefire.    The battle of Khalkhin Gol was devastating for both sides. The Japanese claim they had 8440 deaths, 8766 wounded, lost 162 aircraft and 42 tanks. Its estimated 500-600 Japanese forces were taken prisoner. Because of IJA doctrine these men were considered killed in action. Some sources will claim the real numbers for Japanese casualties could have been as high as 30,000. The Soviets claim 9703 deaths, 15,251 wounded, the destruction of 253 tanks, 250 aircraft, 96 artillery pieces and 133 armored cars. Of those tank losses, its estimated 75-80% were destroyed by anti-tank guns, 15-20% field artillery, 5-10% infantry thrown incendiary bombs, 3% mines and another 3% for aircraft bombing.   Back to Yang Kyoungjong, he alongside the other Japanese, Manchu and Korean POW's were sent to Gulags in Siberia. As the war on the Eastern Front kicked off between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, facing annihilation the Soviets did anything possible to survive. One of these actions was to create the Shtrafbats, “Penal battalions”. Stalins order No 227 created the first penal battalions, who were supposed to be around 800 men strong. The first Shtrafbat battalion was deployed to the Stalingrad Front on August 22nd of 1942.   On order was issued on November 26, 1942 “status of Penal units of the army”, it was issued by Georgy Zhukov, now deputy commander in chief who was the man who formally standardized soviet penal units. The Shtrafbats were around 360 men per battalion commanded by mid range Red Army officers and politruks. The men forced into these were permanents or temporaries. Permanents were officers, commanders, the higher ranks guys. Temporary known as shtrafniki “punishees” were the grunts, typically prisoners and those convicted of crimes. From september 1942 to May of 1945 422,700 men would be forced into penal battalions.    Typically those forced into penal military units were one of two things: 1) those convicted of dissertation or cowardice, 2) Soviet Gulag labor camp inmates. It seems Yang Kyoungjong found himself in a very awkward situation as he would be forced into one of these penal battalions and sent to fight on the eastern front. As pertaining to Order No. 227, each Army was to have 3–5 barrier squads of up to 200 persons each, these units would be made up of penal units.    So back toYang Kyoungjong, he would find himself deployed at the third battle of Kharkov. This battle was part of a series of battles fought on the eastern front. As the German 6th army was encircling Stalingrad, the Soviets launched a series of wide counter attacks, as pertaining to “operation star”. Operation star saw massive offensives against Kharkov, Belgorod, Kursk, Voroshilovgrad and Izium. The Soviets earned great victories, but they also overextended themselves. Field Marshal Erich von Manstein seeing the opening, performed a counter-strike against Kharkov on February 19th of 1943, using fresh troops of the 2nd SS Panzer Corps alongside two other panzer armies. Manstein also had massive air support from field Marshal Wolfram von Richthofens Luftflotte 4, 1214 aircraft tossed 1000 sorties per day from February 20th to march 15th. The Red army had approximately 210,000 troops who fought in the Voronezh-Kharkov offensive, the Germans would have roughly 160,000 men, but their tanks outnumbered the Soviets 7-1, they had roughly 350 of them.   The Germans quickly outflanked the Soviets, managing to encircle and annihilate many units. Whenever soviets units made attempts to escape encirclements, the German air forces placed pressure upon them. The German air forces had the dual job of airlifting supplies to the front lines giving the Soviets no breathing space. Gradually the fight focused around the city of Kharkov seeing the Soviets dislodged. The Germans caused severe casualties, perhaps 45,000 dead or missing with another 41,000 wounded. The Germans suffered 4500 deaths, 7000 wounded. The Germans took a large number of prisoners, and Yang Kyoungjong was one of them.   Yet again a prisoner Yang Kyoungjong was coerced into serving another nation, this time for Die Ost-Bataillone. The Eastern Front had absolutely crippled Germany and as a result Germany began to enlist units from just about any nation possible and this included former Soviet citizens. There were countless different units, like the Russian liberation Army, die Hilfswillige, Ukrainian collaborationists, and there were also non-Russians from the USSR who formed the Ost-Bataillone. These eastern battalions would comprise a rough total of 175,000 men. Many of the Ost-Bataillone were conscripted or coerced into serving, though plenty also volunteered. Countless were recruited from POW camps, choosing to serve instead of labor in camps. The Osttruppen were to typically deployed for coastal defense, rear area activities, security stuff, all the less important roles to free up the German units to perform front line service.   There were two different groups, the Ost-Legionen “eastern legions” and Ost-Bataillone “eastern battalions”. The Ostlegionen were large foreign legion type units raised amongst members of specific ethnic or racial groups. The Ost-Bataillone were composed of numerous nationalities, usually plucked from POW camps in eastern europe. They were tossed together into battalion sized units and integrated individually into German combat formations. Obviously the Germans did not get their hands on large numbers of Koreans, so Yang Kyoungjong found himself in a Ost-Bataillone.    In 1944, due to massive losses in the Eastern Front, and in preparation for the allies about to open a second front, the Germans began deploying a lot of Ost-Bataillone along the coastal defense line at Cherbourg. Yang Kyoungjong was enlisted in the 709th static infantry division, a coastal defense unit assigned to defend the eastern and northern coasts of the Cotentin Peninsula. This would include the Utah beach landing site and numerous US airborne landing zones. The sector was roughly 250 km running northeast of Carentan, via Barfleur-Cherbourg-Cap de la Hague to the western point of Barneville. This also included the 65 km of land just in font of Cherbourg harbor. A significant portion of the 709th were Ost-bataillon, countless were from eastern europe, many were former Soviet POW'S. There were also two battalions of the 739th Grenadier regiment whom were Georgian battalions. A significant amount of the 709th had no combat experience, but had trained extensively in the area.   The 709th would be heavily engaged on D-day meeting US airborne units and the 4th infantry division who landed at Utah beach. In the early hours of June 6th, the US 82nd and 101st airborne divisions landed at the base of the Cotentin peninsula and managed to secure a general area for the US 4th infantry division to land at Utah beach, with very few casualties compared to other beach landings. After the landings the forces tried to link up with other forces further east. By June 9th they had crossed the Douve river valley and captured Carentan. House to house fighting was seen in the battle for Carentan, the Germans tossed a few counterattacks, but the Americans held on with the help of armor units of the 13th.    The Americans then advanced to cut off the Cotentin Peninsula, now supported by 3 other infantry divisions. The Germans had few armored or mobilized infantry in the area. By June 16th the German command was tossed into chaos as Erwin Rommel wanted them to pull out and man the Atlantic Wall at Cherbourg, but Hitler demanded they hold their present lines of defense. By the 17th Hitler agreed to the withdrawal, under some provisions the men still took up limited defenses spanning the entire peninsula. On the 18th the US 9th infantry division reached the west coast of the peninsula thus isolating the Cherbourg garrison. A battle was unleashed for 24 hours with the 4th, 9th and 79th US infantry divisions driving north on a broad front. They faced little opposition on the western side and the eastern, the center held much stronger resistance. The Americans would find several caches of V-1 flying bombs and V-2 rocket installations at Brix. After two days the Americans were in striking distance of Cherbourg. The garrison commander Lt General Karl-Wilhelm von Schlieben had 21,000 men, but many were naval personnel and labor units. Schliebens 709th had performed a fighting withdrawal to Cherbourg and were completely exhausted. The trapped forces were low in provisions, fuel and ammunition. The luftwaffe tried dropping supplies on their positions but it was inadequate.    A general assault began on the 22nd and the German forces put up stiff resistance within their concrete pillboxes. Allied warships bombarded the city on the 25th of june and on the 26th a British elite force, No. 30 Commando launched an assault against Octeville, a suburb of southwestern Cherbourg. The commandos quickly captured 20 officers and 500 men of the Kriegmarine naval intelligence HQ at Villa Meurice. As the Germans were ground down, Schlieben was captured and with that a surrender was made on the 29th.   The Americans suffered nearly 3000 deaths with 13,500 wounded during the operation. The Germans suffered 8000 deaths with 30,000 captured. For the 709th who took a lionshare of the fighting they reported sustaining 4000 casualties.    Amongst the captured was Yang Kyoungjong. As I said in the beginning Lt Robert Brewer of the 506th parachute infantry regiment, 101st airborne division was overlooking the capture of Axis forces and reported to his regiment finding four Asians in Wehrmacht uniform around the Utah beach landings. Brewer nor any of his colleagues spoke the language the Asian men spoke, they assumed them to be Japanese.  The four asians were processed as POW's, listed as young Japanese and sent to a British POW camp, before he would be sent to another POW camp in the US. At some point between his capture and the POW camps, he gave his name as Yang Kyoungjong, stated he was Korean and gave the story. Apparently Yang Kyoungjob was granted US citizenship and would spend the rest of his life in Illinois until his death in 1992.   So that is the story of Yang Kyoungjong.    The truth Did Yang Kyoungjong exist? Where does his story originate? For those of you who have not guessed it yet, the story I told you was full of details, I simply added based on historical events, with zero evidence at all any man named Yang Kyoungjong was involved in them. I did this specifically to highlight, thats exactly what others have done over the course of many years, creating a sort of mythos. If you know the game broken telephone, thats what I would theorize makes up most of this mans story. But lets go through some actual evidence why don't we?   From the digging I have done, the story seemed to originate with historian Stephen Ambrose book in 1994 titled “D-day, june 6th, 1944: the Climactic battle of World War II”. While writing this book, Ambrose interviewed Robert Burnham Brewer, who served E Company, 2nd battalion, 506th parachute infantry regiment of the 101st airborne division. This same man was portrayed in Band of Brothers by the way. Brewer gave one rather ambiguous account where he spoke about capturing 4 asian men in Wehrmacht uniforms.    Here is patient zero as told to us by Ambrose's book (Page 34, no footnote on the page)   The so-called Ost battalions became increasingly unreliable after the German defeat at Kursk; they were, therefore, sent to france in exchange for German troops. At the beach called Utah on the day on the invasion, Lt Robert Brewer of the 506th Parachute infantry regiment, 101st airborne division, US Army, captured four asians in Wehrmacht uniforms. No one could speak their language; eventually it was learned that they were Koreans. How on earth did Koreans end up fighting for Hitler to defend france against Americans? It seems they had been conscripted into the Japanese army in 1938-Korea was then a Japanese colony-captured by the Red Army in the border battles with Japan in 1939, forced into the Red Army, captured by the Wehrmacht in December 1941 outside Moscow, forced into the German army, and sent to France”. What happened to them, Lt Brewer never found out, but presumably they were sent back to Korea. If so, they would almost certainly have been conscripted again, either into the south or north korean army. It is possible than in 1950 they ended up fighting once again, either against the US army or with it, depending on what part of Korea they came from. Such are the vagaries of politics in the 20th century. By June 1944, one in six German rifleman in France was from an Ost battalion.   Now digging further since there are no footnotes, it seems Ambrose took an oral account from Lt Brewer, but did not directly quote him and instead abstractly expanded upon his story. Ambrose was guilty of doing this often. As multiple historians have pointed out, Brewer was living in the 1940s and was by no means an ethnographer, he was not a person who could have accurately known the nationality of the four asian men he captured. It is plausible he or other US units around him, just came up with Korean for the four asians who could have been from nearly anywhere in central to east asia. For all we know the men found could have been from Turkestan. What was “asian” to westerners of the 1940's is extremely broad.    If you look up the Ost-Bataillone or Ostlegionen you will see they consisted of captured former soviet soldiers. During the d-day landings, 1/6th of the German forces defending the atlantic coast were made up of the Ost-battailones. They came from numerous places, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, India, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Turkestan, Mongolia and numerous parts of the USSR. Needless to say, there were a ton of people whom would be considered asian and could be mistaken to be from Korea, Japan, Burma, etc.    It seems Brewer's vague account was transformed by Amrose, but this only covers one part of all of this, the story, what about the photo?    The iconic photograph is another matter entirely. The photograph has nothing to do with Brewer's account, it is simply a random photograph taken at Utah beach of a captured asian soldier wearing a Wehrmacht uniform. The official description of the photo states “Capture Jap in Nazi uniform. France, fearful of his future, this young Jap wearing a nazi uniform, is checked off in a roundup of German prisoners on the beaches of france. An american army captain takes the Jap's name and serial number” Author Martin Morgan believes the man in the photograph is not Yang Kyoungjong, but instead an ethnic Georgian from the 795th Georgian Battalion, which was composed of Georgian Osttruppen troops or someone who was Turkistani. In 2002 word of the story became more popularized online and in 2004 the iconic photo also began to circulate heavily on the internet. The Korean media became aware of the story in 2002 and when they saw the picture the Korean news site DKBNews investigated the matter. Apparently a reader of the DKBNews submitted biographical details about the soldier in the photo, including his name, date of birth, the general story we now know, his release, life in Illinois and death. The DKBNews journalist requested sources and none were provided, typical.   So some random unknown reader of the DKBNews gave a name, place and time of birth and even where he ended up and died.  In 2005 the Seoul broadcasting system aired a documentary specifically investigating the existence of the asian soldiers who fought for Germany on d-day.   In the SBS special “The Korean in Normandy,” produced and broadcast in 2005 based on rumors of Yang kyoungjog,  they searched for records of Korean prisoners of war during the Battle of khalkhin gol and records of Korean people who participated in the German-Japanese War, and records related to the German Army's eastern unit, but could not find traces of such a person. In addition, the soldiers who served in the Soviet army, who were captured, and then transferred to the German army's eastern units were considered by the Soviet Union to be serious traitors. Accordingly, under a secret agreement between the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union, they were forcibly repatriated to the Soviet Union after the war and held in Gulags.. The SBS production team stated that the rumors that a 'Korean from Normandy' had gone to the United States and that he died in seclusion near Northwestern University under the name of 'Yang Kyoungjong', which they were unaware of, were false. The investigative team looked for any traces of a Yang Kyoungjong and found none, so they concluded although there were accounts of asian soldiers in the German army during WW2, there was zero evidence of the existence of Yang Kyoungjong or any Koreans fighting on D-day for that matter.    The 2005 SBS Special documentary sprang forth a bunch of stories by Korean authors, expanding the mythos of Yang Kyoungjong.   In 2007 author Jo Jeong-rae published a novel titled “human mask” which told the story of SHin Gilman, The story ends with Shin Gil-man, who was conscripted into the Japanese army at the age of 20, as a prisoner of war in Normandy, then transported back to the Soviet Union and eventually executed by firing squad. Another novel called “D-day” by author Kim Byeong-in was release in 2011, just prior to the film My War, the plot is extremely similar to the movie. The main characters are Han Dae-sik and Yoichi, who met as children as the sons of a Japanese landowner and the house's housekeeper, harboring animosity toward each other, and grew up to become marathon runners representing Joseon and Japan. As they experience the war together, they feel a strange sense of kinship and develop reconciliation and friendship.   And of course the most famous story would find its way to the big screen. In 2011 the film My Way came out, back then the most expensive south korean film ever made at around 23$ million.   Then in 2012 a unknown person created a wikipedia page piecing together the Ambrose story, the photo and the unknown DBK readers information. With all of this information becoming more viral suddenly in 2013, two history books hit the scene and would you know it, both have “Yang Kyoungjong” in them.    These are Antony Beevor's book “the second world war” and that of defense consultant and author Steven Zaloga in his book “the devil's garden: Rommel's desperate Defense of Omaha Beach on D-Day”. Both authors took the story, name and iconic photo and expanded on the mythos by adding further details as to how the Korean man would have gone from Korea to Cherbourg france.   So Ambrose's story spreads across the internet alongside this photo. Both spark interest in Korea and an investigation receives some random guys testimony, which quite honestly was groundless. Despite the korean documentary stating there was no evidence of a Yang Kyoungjong, it sparks further interest, more stories and a famous film in 2011. 2012 sees a wikipage, it becomes more viral and now seeps into other historians work.   And I would be remiss not to mention the bizarre controversy that broke out in my nation of Canada. A nation so full of controversies today, dear god. Debbie Hanlon a city councilor in St John Newfoundland was absolutely wrecked online in 2018 for an advertisement promoting her real estate business stating “Korean Yang kyoungjong fought with Japan against the USSR. He then fought with the USSR against Germany. Then with Germany against the US! Want an agent who fights for you, call me!” Really weird ad by the way. So it seems her ad was to point out how far she was willing to go for her real estate clients. It was considered extremely offensive, and not the first time she pulled this off, her husband Oral Mews had recently come under fire for another ad he made using a photo of the Puerto Rican cab driver Victor Perez Cardona, where the vehicle turned into a casket. That ad said “He can't give you a lift because he's dead. He's propped up in his cab at his wake! Need a lift to great service, call me!” Hanlon was surprised at the amount of backlash she received since the ads had been running for over 4 years online. She claimed to be the victim of cyberbullying and trolls. So yeah, that happened.    Did Yang Kyoungjong exist, more than likely not, was it possible some Koreans found themselves in a position his story pertains to, you know what it's quite possible. During War a lot of weird things happen. I hope you liked this episode, please let me know in the comments on the Patreon what you think, how I can improve things and of course what you want to hear about next!

Dwight D. Eisenhower was born in Denison, Texas, in 1890. He was the President of the United States when I was born in Dallas, Texas, 68 years later.People called me “Little Roy.” People called him “Ike.”I worry that we have forgotten him.Ike Eisenhower graduated from the United States Military Academy in 1915 when he was 24 years old. His superiors noticed his organizational abilities, and appointed him commander of a tank training center during World War I.In 1933, he became aide to Army Chief of Staff General Douglas MacArthur, and in 1935 Ike went with him to the Philippines when MacArthur accepted the post of chief military adviser to that nation's government.On June 25, 1942, Ike Eisenhower was chosen over 366 senior officers to lead the Armed Forces of the United States in World War II.After proving himself on the battlefields of North Africa and Italy in 1942 and 1943, Ike Eisenhower was appointed supreme commander of Operation Overlord – the Allied invasion of northwestern Europe.Ike was now commanding the Armed Forces of all 49 Allied nations – including Great Britain, the Soviet Union, and China – in the war against Hitler and his minions. He personally planned and supervised two of the most consequential military campaigns of World War II: Operation Torch in the North Africa campaign in 1942–1943 and the invasion of Normandy in 1944.Ike Eisenhower never talked like a tough guy, but only a fool would call him “weak” or “woke.”This past July, Robert Reich – an eloquent and intelligent spokesperson on the left – quoted a passage from an anti-war speech that Ike Eisenhower made at the beginning of his presidency in 1953. Reich ended his quote just prior to Ike's unsettling reference to the crucifixion of Christ.Eloquent and intelligent people on the right refused to believe that a celebrated warrior had ever made a speech that could be classified as “anti-war.”Curious, I decided to get to the bottom of it.Here is a link to the complete transcript and original recording of the speech that President Dwight D. Eisenhower made before the American Society of Newspaper Editors on April 16, 1953, from the Statler Hotel in Washington, D.C.This is the passage from that speech that got everyone worked up:“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.This world in arms is not spending money alone.It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities.It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population.It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals, it is some 50 miles of concrete pavement.We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat.We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people.This is, I repeat, the best way of life to be found on the road the world has been taking.This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.”The title of that speech was originally “Chance for Peace,” but due to the vivid mental image contained in the middle of the speech, it quickly became known as the “Cross of Iron” speech.Words have impact when they contain vivid mental images.I own guns, but I am not a hunter. Neither my family nor my friends have ever seen my guns. But in the unlikely event of a home invasion, I am adequately prepared to protect

In this episode of the US Navy History Podcast, hosts Dale and Christophe delve into the Atlantic U-Boat Campaign of World War I, a critical maritime struggle far from the Western Front trenches. The discussion covers the evolution and impact of German submarine warfare, the U-Boat's technological and strategic significance, and the moral and political consequences of unrestricted submarine warfare. They also explore the Allied response, including the implementation of the convoy system, technological advancements, and the entry of the United States into the war. The episode closes with reflections on the legacy of the campaign for naval strategy and a tribute to First Lieutenant Travis L. Manion, highlighting his bravery and sacrifice.

Joseph Picard was a teenager when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in December 1941. Unlike some of his peers, Picard was neither excited to join the service nor dreading it. He just accepted that he would need to serve.After completing basic training, Picard was assigned to the 552nd Field Artillery Battalion, working with the massive 240mm guns. The battalion was held out of D-Day operations and landed at Utah Beach in late June 1944.In this edition of Veterans Chronicles, Picard takes us through all the work involved in assembling and operating the 240mm guns. He also walks us from Utah Beach through the Battle for St. Lo and the Allied drive to Paris.Picard also describes the devastating combat at the Battle of Aachen, losing his best friend in combat, and the chaos and bitter cold at the Battle of the Bulge.

Think the WWII U-Boat War was Britain's closest brush with defeat? Think again. In this live History Rage special, historian Roger Moorhouse – author of Wolfpack: Inside Hitler's U-Boat War – joins host Paul Bavill to torpedo one of the Second World War's most persistent myths.Drawing on brand-new research from the German perspective, Roger reveals why the Battle of the Atlantic was not the near-disaster Churchill's famous quote suggests. He walks us through:Why most English-language histories ignore the German side of the U-boat campaign.How a brief “happy time” in 1940–41 shaped Britain's self-image as plucky underdog.The statistics showing how Liberty ships and countermeasures reversed the threat.Inside the cramped, stressful life aboard a Type VII U-boat — from “tin can rage” to PTSD-like symptoms.The propaganda, recruitment and astonishing casualty rates of the Kriegsmarine's submarine arm.Enigma, aerial radar, hedgehog mortars and other Allied innovations that made 1943 the turning point.It's WWII history as you've never heard it before — directly from the other side of the periscope. If you're fascinated by Second World War naval history, military myths, or the Battle of the Atlantic, this episode is a must-listen. Roger Moorhouse blends gripping stories with hard data to show how the real U-boat war unfolded — and why understanding it matters.Roger's new book Wolfpack: Inside Hitler's U-Boat War (out 9 October) is the definitive account of Germany's submarine campaign told from the inside.

In late 1942, German U-boats were sinking Allied merchant ships faster than they could be replaced, pushing Britain to the brink of starvation in the 'Black Pit' of the mid-Atlantic. In this episode Roger Moorhouse is joined by Saul David as he dives into the most critical period of the Battle of the Atlantic, from the peak losses of March 1943 to the stunning Allied victory in 'Black May.' They explore the high-stakes technological race—including the deployment of long-range aircraft, advanced radar, sonar, and breaking the Enigma code—that transformed the Allies from prey to predator and secured the lifeline that made the liberation of Europe possible. If you have any thoughts or questions, you can send them to - podbattleground@gmail.com Producer: James Hodgson X (Twitter): @PodBattleground Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Battleship North Carolina has a distinguished history as part of the Allied victory in World War Two, and for decades has served as a living museum and monument to that effort and to the technological innovations in its design. But it's also one of the most haunted places in the Carolinas! Come aboard for a deep dive discussion with Charlie and Michael about one of the Carolinas' most iconic locations! Links: Arcane Carolinas Vol. 3 (Charlie's newest entry in our series of nonfiction volumes!) Children of Solitude (Michael's latest horror novel!) Upcoming Live Appearances: SplatterFlix Film Series (Durham, NC - October 10 & 11, 2025) - Michael solo (he'll be selling books and giving away AC swag!) Book Ferret (Winston-Salem, NC - early November, dates TBD) - Michael solo (he'll be doing a reading and signing books) Follow us! Arcane Carolinas on Patreon Arcane Carolinas on Facebook Arcane Carolinas on Instagram Arcane Carolinas on Tumblr Contact us! arcanecarolinas@gmail.com

The Allied forces in Tunisia, now designated the 18th Army gets a new leader, Harold Alexander. He wants training and new leadership. So on his way from Casablanca is Gen. Patton. Meanwhile, Rommel is out as the North African Axis Commander. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We're a day late because spam filters can really slow things down. This week, Patrick and Lori welcome Drew Medlock, the CEO of Allied Cycle Works in Bentonville, Arkansas. The international nature of the bike business has been thrown into turmoil by government tariffs and we wanted to talk to Drew as Allied has experience […]

Rome orders a new attack plan. Rommel tries to carry it out, but the Allied forces stop him. Still, the Axis take control of the Kasserine Pass. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In August 1942, over 7,000 Allied troops stormed the beaches of Normandy, France, in a largely forgotten landing, with only a small fraction surviving unscathed. The raid failed due to poor planning and lack of underwater reconnaissance, which left the Allies unaware of strong German coastal defenses and underwater obstacles. Inadequate submersible technology prevented effective pre-landing surveys, leading to heavy casualties and the inability to secure a foothold. Scientists had a rudimentary grasp of mixing air for prolonged underwater survival, with limited rebreather technology, poor understanding of oxygen toxicity, and inadequate gas supply systems. Two summers before D-Day, the Allies realized they desperately needed underwater intelligence to succeed in another beach invasion and win the war. Led by controversial biologists J.B.S. Haldane and Dr. Helen Spurway, an ingenious team of ragtag scientists worked in makeshift labs throughout the London Blitz. Amid a rain of bombs, they pioneered groundbreaking advances in underwater reconnaissance through painful and potentially fatal self-experiments. Their discoveries enabled the safe use of miniature submarines and breathing apparatuses, ultimately allowing the Allies to take the beaches of Normandy. Blast-injury specialist Dr. Rachel Lance, author of Chamber Divers: The Untold Story of the D-Day Scientists Who Changed Special Operations Forever, joined us a few years ago to discuss the CSS Hunley, a Confederate submersible used during the American Civil War, the first submarine to sink an enemy ship in combat. We explore these experiments while bringing to life the men and women whose brilliance and self-sacrifice shaped the war’s outcome, including the danger they faced in their quest to enable Allied troops to breathe underwater.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Allied Intervention into the Russian Civil War remains one of the most ambitious yet least talked about military ventures of the 20th century. Coinciding with the end of the first World War, some 180,000 troops from several countries including the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Japan, Italy, Greece, Poland, and Romania, among others, were sent to fight alongside Russian “Whites” against the Red Army. Despite one victory for the Allied troops – independence for the Latvians and the Estonians – the two-year long attempt at reversing the 1917 Russian Revolution ended in humiliating defeat. To explore this crucial event of the early 20th century is today’s guest, Anna Reid, author of “A Nasty Little War: The Western Intervention into the Russian Civil War.” What was originally aimed to prevent Germany from exploiting the power vacuum in Eastern Europe left by the Russian Revolution ultimately morphed into the Allies’ gamble to destroy Communist ideology. It was a mixture of good intentions and self-delusion, flag-waving and empty promises, cover-ups, exaggerations, and downright lies from politicians.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Nick Lloyd's "The Western Front: The History of the Great War, Volume 1" provides a comprehensive narrative of the Great War in Belgium and France from 1914 to 1918. As the first volume of a planned trilogy, this work aims to offer a nuanced understanding of this pivotal theater, moving beyond common myths and focusing on the operational perspective of senior commanders across all involved powers. 1914-1918 US MERCHANT NAVY Here's a summary of the key aspects, figures, and events covered: Lloyd's Ambition and Approach Comprehensive Narrative: Lloyd, a reader in military and imperial history at King's College London, undertook this "big project" to create a grand narrative of the entire Western Front, encompassing the French sector, American sector, and the German story, alongside the often-emphasized British perspective. Focus on Senior Commanders: A primary goal was to view the war from the lens of senior commanders, challenging the traditional portrayal of them as "donkeys or butchers and bunglers." Lloyd aims to help readers appreciate the immense pressures and difficulties these individuals faced, offering a "cooler perspective" on their successes and errors. Trilogy: This book is the first of three volumes; future volumes will cover the Eastern Front and global warfare in the Middle East and Africa. Lloyd emphasizes that while other fronts are mentioned, the Western Front remained the decisive theater where Germany, France, Britain, and America determined the war's outcome. British Involvement and Leadership Initial Reluctance: Britain initially entered the conflict with a limited commitment, deploying only four infantry divisions and one cavalry division as the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), a "small army" compared to the French (80 divisions) and Germans (over 100 divisions). This reflected a desire for "limited liability" to the Western Front, contrasting sharply with French demands for more manpower. Early Leaders: H.H. Asquith (Prime Minister) was reportedly distracted by personal affairs at the war's outset. Lord Kitchener (Minister of War) was a professional soldier and hero of the empire, wary of deep British involvement but committed to supporting the French. Field Marshal Sir John French (Commander-in-Chief, BEF) was a Boer War hero who found himself "out of his depth" by 1914, struggling with the war's scale and intensity. During the August 1914 retreat, French considered pulling the BEF out of the line due to immense losses and pressure, a move Kitchener personally intervened to prevent, ordering French to stay and fight. Frencheventually "breaks down" due to losses and pressure and is sent home at the end of 1915. Later Leadership and Strategy: David Lloyd George (Prime Minister from late 1916) is credited as "the prime minister that wins the war" in Britain. He showed great energy in revitalizing British industry and re-equipping the army, despite having poor relations with his top generals. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig replaced French as Commander-in-Chief of the BEF. Haig and Lloyd George had fundamentally different strategic outlooks, leading to "constant arguments and backstabbing". At the Battle of the Somme (1916), Haig favored a breakthrough strategy, aiming for maneuver and cavalry deployment to defeat the German army. However, his army commander, Rawlinson, advocated a "bite and hold" strategy, focusing on concentrated artillery to smash enemy lines, take ground, then consolidate before repeating, acknowledging that a grand breakthrough was not yet feasible for the largely "green" British army. German Strategy and Commanders Initial Invasion: The German invasion of France and Belgium in 1914 was based on the ambitious Schlieffen Plan, which aimed for a massive attack through Belgium to outflank French defenses and destroy their army in a grand battle of envelopment. Helmuth von Moltke the Younger (Chief of the General Staff) was under immense pressure and altered the Schlieffen Plan, weakening its critical right wing, and ultimately suffered a nervous breakdown by mid-September 1914. Moltke's controversial decision to order General Kluck's First Army to turn southeast instead of enveloping Paris contributed to the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, despite Kluck initially ignoring the order. Kaiser Wilhelm: His character was inconsistent, often described as a "weather vane," and he gradually became a less central figure as Hindenburg and Ludendorff gained influence from 1916. Erich von Falkenhayn (replaces Moltke in 1914) was the architect of the Verdun Offensive (1916). His vision was unique, aiming not for territorial gains but for attrition: to "kill Frenchmen" and exhaust them. Political Interference: Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg often opposed Falkenhayn's desire for unrestricted submarine warfare due to diplomatic concerns (e.g., fear of American entry), illustrating the German military's tendency to prioritize tactical effectiveness over political and strategic issues, which was ultimately "fatal". French Efforts and Leadership Joseph Joffre (Commander of French Forces): Described as a "great hero" of the French army, Joffrepossessed remarkable calmness and an ability to absorb punishment and react quickly. His leadership was crucial in defeating the Schlieffen Plan and counterattacking at the Battle of the Marne in September 1914, preventing a German victory. Raymond Poincaré (President of the French Republic): A nationalist deeply involved in military analysis, Poincaré was central to the political efforts to reassert civilian primacy over the army and secure British manpower commitments. General Castelnau (Joffre's chief of staff): A deeply religious man who personally lost three sons in the war, Castelnau exemplifies the human cost and personal horror experienced by some senior commanders, helping to humanize these figures in Lloyd's narrative. Robert Nivelle: An artillery officer who rose rapidly due to his successes at Verdun, Nivelle replaced Joffrein December 1916. He attempted a decisive breakthrough in his Nivelle Offensive in April 1917 with a "formula" for success, but it failed catastrophically due to his being "out of his depth" at the command-in-chief level, leading to French army issues including mutiny. Philippe Pétain: Replaced Nivelle, Pétain became a "savior of France." He was renowned for his deep understanding of battlefield realities and a strong connection with his troops. At Verdun, he innovated by rotating divisions out of the line for rest and recuperation, contrasting with the German practice of fighting units "until basically there's not a lot left". Ferdinand Foch (Supreme Allied Commander from April 1918): Foch is widely regarded as one of the most important generals of the war. He was an energetic and charismatic leader who successfully coordinated the American, British, and French forces in 1918, leading them to victory in the multinational war. His reputation continues to strengthen over time. American Involvement Entry into War: The United States declared war on Germany and Austria in April 1917. General John J. Pershing arrived in Paris in June 1917 to lead the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), despite having only 113,000 men in the army at the time. Rejection of Amalgamation: Pershing steadfastly resisted French and British desires to "amalgamate" American manpower into their existing divisions, insisting that American soldiers fight as an independent army. He argued that the Allies had a poor record of "not killing your own troops". German Miscalculation: Germany severely underestimated how quickly the United States could build and deploy an army, believing it would take years. This misjudgment ultimately contributed to their defeat once the Americans demonstrated their seriousness in 1918. American involvement became "crucial" by 1917, changing the atmosphere. Evolution of Warfare on the Western Front From Movement to Stalemate: The initial German invasion failed to achieve a decisive victory, leading to the establishment of trench warfare after the Battle of the Marne. Realization of No Breakthrough: After the Second Battle of Champagne (1915), Allied and Germancommanders like Joffre and Falkenhayn began to recognize that a "grand shattering breakthrough" was not achievable in the foreseeable future. Constant Adaptation: This realization led to a continuous arms race. As Allied artillery and tactics improved, German defenses evolved from single lines to complex "zones of pill boxes," making progress difficult and bloody. The war became an intense exercise in violence where commanders constantly adapted to a "cauldron of war". Key Battles and Their Significance Battle of the Marne (September 1914): Joffre's successful counterattack forced the Germans to retreat, effectively ending the Schlieffen Plan and leading to the beginning of trench warfare. Second Battle of Champagne (September-October 1915): A major French offensive that, despite immense effort and casualties, failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, solidifying the understanding that trench deadlock could not be easily broken. Verdun (1916): Falkenhayn's attrition battle, designed to "kill Frenchmen," concentrated immense firepower in a small area, creating a "moonscape effect." While not decisive in destroying the French, it was a moment where "things start to go wrong for Germany," from which she never truly recovers. Somme (1916): A British and French offensive intended to relieve pressure on Verdun, but also driven by Haig's ambition for a breakthrough. The debate between breakthrough and Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy highlighted the dilemmas of Western Front warfare. Nivelle Offensive (April 1917): A disastrous French attempt at a breakthrough, which highlighted Nivelle'soverreach and led to significant disillusionment and mutiny within the French army. End of the War and its Legacy German Defeat: Lloyd's book argues that the German army was "falling apart" and "defeated rapidly in 1918" despite the persistent "stab in the back" myth that claimed they were betrayed at home. Armistice Decision: The decision by the Allies not to invade Germany was primarily political, as the British and French were "totally exhausted," while the Americans were "much fresher" and more keen to continue. Lloyd considers the armistice "fair on all sides". Lloyd's work underscores that the Western Front was a complex, multinational struggle marked by evolving strategies, immense pressures on commanders, and profound human costs, which ultimately determined the course of the Great War and cast a long shadow over the 20th century.

Nick Lloyd's "The Western Front: The History of the Great War, Volume 1" provides a comprehensive narrative of the Great War in Belgium and France from 1914 to 1918. As the first volume of a planned trilogy, this work aims to offer a nuanced understanding of this pivotal theater, moving beyond common myths and focusing on the operational perspective of senior commanders across all involved powers. Here's a summary of the key aspects, figures, and events covered: Lloyd's Ambition and Approach Comprehensive Narrative: Lloyd, a reader in military and imperial history at King's College London, undertook this "big project" to create a grand narrative of the entire Western Front, encompassing the French sector, American sector, and the German story, alongside the often-emphasized British perspective. Focus on Senior Commanders: A primary goal was to view the war from the lens of senior commanders, challenging the traditional portrayal of them as "donkeys or butchers and bunglers." Lloyd aims to help readers appreciate the immense pressures and difficulties these individuals faced, offering a "cooler perspective" on their successes and errors. Trilogy: This book is the first of three volumes; future volumes will cover the Eastern Front and global warfare in the Middle East and Africa. Lloyd emphasizes that while other fronts are mentioned, the Western Front remained the decisive theater where Germany, France, Britain, and America determined the war's outcome. British Involvement and Leadership Initial Reluctance: Britain initially entered the conflict with a limited commitment, deploying only four infantry divisions and one cavalry division as the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), a "small army" compared to the French (80 divisions) and Germans (over 100 divisions). This reflected a desire for "limited liability" to the Western Front, contrasting sharply with French demands for more manpower. Early Leaders: H.H. Asquith (Prime Minister) was reportedly distracted by personal affairs at the war's outset. Lord Kitchener (Minister of War) was a professional soldier and hero of the empire, wary of deep British involvement but committed to supporting the French. Field Marshal Sir John French (Commander-in-Chief, BEF) was a Boer War hero who found himself "out of his depth" by 1914, struggling with the war's scale and intensity. During the August 1914 retreat, French considered pulling the BEF out of the line due to immense losses and pressure, a move Kitchener personally intervened to prevent, ordering French to stay and fight. Frencheventually "breaks down" due to losses and pressure and is sent home at the end of 1915. Later Leadership and Strategy: David Lloyd George (Prime Minister from late 1916) is credited as "the prime minister that wins the war" in Britain. He showed great energy in revitalizing British industry and re-equipping the army, despite having poor relations with his top generals. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig replaced French as Commander-in-Chief of the BEF. Haig and Lloyd George had fundamentally different strategic outlooks, leading to "constant arguments and backstabbing". At the Battle of the Somme (1916), Haig favored a breakthrough strategy, aiming for maneuver and cavalry deployment to defeat the German army. However, his army commander, Rawlinson, advocated a "bite and hold" strategy, focusing on concentrated artillery to smash enemy lines, take ground, then consolidate before repeating, acknowledging that a grand breakthrough was not yet feasible for the largely "green" British army. German Strategy and Commanders Initial Invasion: The German invasion of France and Belgium in 1914 was based on the ambitious Schlieffen Plan, which aimed for a massive attack through Belgium to outflank French defenses and destroy their army in a grand battle of envelopment. Helmuth von Moltke the Younger (Chief of the General Staff) was under immense pressure and altered the Schlieffen Plan, weakening its critical right wing, and ultimately suffered a nervous breakdown by mid-September 1914. Moltke's controversial decision to order General Kluck's First Army to turn southeast instead of enveloping Paris contributed to the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, despite Kluck initially ignoring the order. Kaiser Wilhelm: His character was inconsistent, often described as a "weather vane," and he gradually became a less central figure as Hindenburg and Ludendorff gained influence from 1916. Erich von Falkenhayn (replaces Moltke in 1914) was the architect of the Verdun Offensive (1916). His vision was unique, aiming not for territorial gains but for attrition: to "kill Frenchmen" and exhaust them. Political Interference: Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg often opposed Falkenhayn's desire for unrestricted submarine warfare due to diplomatic concerns (e.g., fear of American entry), illustrating the German military's tendency to prioritize tactical effectiveness over political and strategic issues, which was ultimately "fatal". French Efforts and Leadership Joseph Joffre (Commander of French Forces): Described as a "great hero" of the French army, Joffrepossessed remarkable calmness and an ability to absorb punishment and react quickly. His leadership was crucial in defeating the Schlieffen Plan and counterattacking at the Battle of the Marne in September 1914, preventing a German victory. Raymond Poincaré (President of the French Republic): A nationalist deeply involved in military analysis, Poincaré was central to the political efforts to reassert civilian primacy over the army and secure British manpower commitments. General Castelnau (Joffre's chief of staff): A deeply religious man who personally lost three sons in the war, Castelnau exemplifies the human cost and personal horror experienced by some senior commanders, helping to humanize these figures in Lloyd's narrative. Robert Nivelle: An artillery officer who rose rapidly due to his successes at Verdun, Nivelle replaced Joffrein December 1916. He attempted a decisive breakthrough in his Nivelle Offensive in April 1917 with a "formula" for success, but it failed catastrophically due to his being "out of his depth" at the command-in-chief level, leading to French army issues including mutiny. Philippe Pétain: Replaced Nivelle, Pétain became a "savior of France." He was renowned for his deep understanding of battlefield realities and a strong connection with his troops. At Verdun, he innovated by rotating divisions out of the line for rest and recuperation, contrasting with the German practice of fighting units "until basically there's not a lot left". Ferdinand Foch (Supreme Allied Commander from April 1918): Foch is widely regarded as one of the most important generals of the war. He was an energetic and charismatic leader who successfully coordinated the American, British, and French forces in 1918, leading them to victory in the multinational war. His reputation continues to strengthen over time. American Involvement Entry into War: The United States declared war on Germany and Austria in April 1917. General John J. Pershing arrived in Paris in June 1917 to lead the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), despite having only 113,000 men in the army at the time. Rejection of Amalgamation: Pershing steadfastly resisted French and British desires to "amalgamate" American manpower into their existing divisions, insisting that American soldiers fight as an independent army. He argued that the Allies had a poor record of "not killing your own troops". German Miscalculation: Germany severely underestimated how quickly the United States could build and deploy an army, believing it would take years. This misjudgment ultimately contributed to their defeat once the Americans demonstrated their seriousness in 1918. American involvement became "crucial" by 1917, changing the atmosphere. Evolution of Warfare on the Western Front From Movement to Stalemate: The initial German invasion failed to achieve a decisive victory, leading to the establishment of trench warfare after the Battle of the Marne. Realization of No Breakthrough: After the Second Battle of Champagne (1915), Allied and Germancommanders like Joffre and Falkenhayn began to recognize that a "grand shattering breakthrough" was not achievable in the foreseeable future. Constant Adaptation: This realization led to a continuous arms race. As Allied artillery and tactics improved, German defenses evolved from single lines to complex "zones of pill boxes," making progress difficult and bloody. The war became an intense exercise in violence where commanders constantly adapted to a "cauldron of war". Key Battles and Their Significance Battle of the Marne (September 1914): Joffre's successful counterattack forced the Germans to retreat, effectively ending the Schlieffen Plan and leading to the beginning of trench warfare. Second Battle of Champagne (September-October 1915): A major French offensive that, despite immense effort and casualties, failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, solidifying the understanding that trench deadlock could not be easily broken. Verdun (1916): Falkenhayn's attrition battle, designed to "kill Frenchmen," concentrated immense firepower in a small area, creating a "moonscape effect." While not decisive in destroying the French, it was a moment where "things start to go wrong for Germany," from which she never truly recovers. Somme (1916): A British and French offensive intended to relieve pressure on Verdun, but also driven by Haig's ambition for a breakthrough. The debate between breakthrough and Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy highlighted the dilemmas of Western Front warfare. Nivelle Offensive (April 1917): A disastrous French attempt at a breakthrough, which highlighted Nivelle'soverreach and led to significant disillusionment and mutiny within the French army. End of the War and its Legacy German Defeat: Lloyd's book argues that the German army was "falling apart" and "defeated rapidly in 1918" despite the persistent "stab in the back" myth that claimed they were betrayed at home. Armistice Decision: The decision by the Allies not to invade Germany was primarily political, as the British and French were "totally exhausted," while the Americans were "much fresher" and more keen to continue. Lloyd considers the armistice "fair on all sides". Lloyd's work underscores that the Western Front was a complex, multinational struggle marked by evolving strategies, immense pressures on commanders, and profound human costs, which ultimately determined the course of the Great War and cast a long shadow over the 20th century.

Nick Lloyd's "The Western Front: The History of the Great War, Volume 1" provides a comprehensive narrative of the Great War in Belgium and France from 1914 to 1918. As the first volume of a planned trilogy, this work aims to offer a nuanced understanding of this pivotal theater, moving beyond common myths and focusing on the operational perspective of senior commanders across all involved powers. 1916 VERDUN Here's a summary of the key aspects, figures, and events covered: Lloyd's Ambition and Approach Comprehensive Narrative: Lloyd, a reader in military and imperial history at King's College London, undertook this "big project" to create a grand narrative of the entire Western Front, encompassing the French sector, American sector, and the German story, alongside the often-emphasized British perspective. Focus on Senior Commanders: A primary goal was to view the war from the lens of senior commanders, challenging the traditional portrayal of them as "donkeys or butchers and bunglers." Lloyd aims to help readers appreciate the immense pressures and difficulties these individuals faced, offering a "cooler perspective" on their successes and errors. Trilogy: This book is the first of three volumes; future volumes will cover the Eastern Front and global warfare in the Middle East and Africa. Lloyd emphasizes that while other fronts are mentioned, the Western Front remained the decisive theater where Germany, France, Britain, and America determined the war's outcome. British Involvement and Leadership Initial Reluctance: Britain initially entered the conflict with a limited commitment, deploying only four infantry divisions and one cavalry division as the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), a "small army" compared to the French (80 divisions) and Germans (over 100 divisions). This reflected a desire for "limited liability" to the Western Front, contrasting sharply with French demands for more manpower. Early Leaders: H.H. Asquith (Prime Minister) was reportedly distracted by personal affairs at the war's outset. Lord Kitchener (Minister of War) was a professional soldier and hero of the empire, wary of deep British involvement but committed to supporting the French. Field Marshal Sir John French (Commander-in-Chief, BEF) was a Boer War hero who found himself "out of his depth" by 1914, struggling with the war's scale and intensity. During the August 1914 retreat, French considered pulling the BEF out of the line due to immense losses and pressure, a move Kitchener personally intervened to prevent, ordering French to stay and fight. Frencheventually "breaks down" due to losses and pressure and is sent home at the end of 1915. Later Leadership and Strategy: David Lloyd George (Prime Minister from late 1916) is credited as "the prime minister that wins the war" in Britain. He showed great energy in revitalizing British industry and re-equipping the army, despite having poor relations with his top generals. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig replaced French as Commander-in-Chief of the BEF. Haig and Lloyd George had fundamentally different strategic outlooks, leading to "constant arguments and backstabbing". At the Battle of the Somme (1916), Haig favored a breakthrough strategy, aiming for maneuver and cavalry deployment to defeat the German army. However, his army commander, Rawlinson, advocated a "bite and hold" strategy, focusing on concentrated artillery to smash enemy lines, take ground, then consolidate before repeating, acknowledging that a grand breakthrough was not yet feasible for the largely "green" British army. German Strategy and Commanders Initial Invasion: The German invasion of France and Belgium in 1914 was based on the ambitious Schlieffen Plan, which aimed for a massive attack through Belgium to outflank French defenses and destroy their army in a grand battle of envelopment. Helmuth von Moltke the Younger (Chief of the General Staff) was under immense pressure and altered the Schlieffen Plan, weakening its critical right wing, and ultimately suffered a nervous breakdown by mid-September 1914. Moltke's controversial decision to order General Kluck's First Army to turn southeast instead of enveloping Paris contributed to the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, despite Kluck initially ignoring the order. Kaiser Wilhelm: His character was inconsistent, often described as a "weather vane," and he gradually became a less central figure as Hindenburg and Ludendorff gained influence from 1916. Erich von Falkenhayn (replaces Moltke in 1914) was the architect of the Verdun Offensive (1916). His vision was unique, aiming not for territorial gains but for attrition: to "kill Frenchmen" and exhaust them. Political Interference: Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg often opposed Falkenhayn's desire for unrestricted submarine warfare due to diplomatic concerns (e.g., fear of American entry), illustrating the German military's tendency to prioritize tactical effectiveness over political and strategic issues, which was ultimately "fatal". French Efforts and Leadership Joseph Joffre (Commander of French Forces): Described as a "great hero" of the French army, Joffrepossessed remarkable calmness and an ability to absorb punishment and react quickly. His leadership was crucial in defeating the Schlieffen Plan and counterattacking at the Battle of the Marne in September 1914, preventing a German victory. Raymond Poincaré (President of the French Republic): A nationalist deeply involved in military analysis, Poincaré was central to the political efforts to reassert civilian primacy over the army and secure British manpower commitments. General Castelnau (Joffre's chief of staff): A deeply religious man who personally lost three sons in the war, Castelnau exemplifies the human cost and personal horror experienced by some senior commanders, helping to humanize these figures in Lloyd's narrative. Robert Nivelle: An artillery officer who rose rapidly due to his successes at Verdun, Nivelle replaced Joffrein December 1916. He attempted a decisive breakthrough in his Nivelle Offensive in April 1917 with a "formula" for success, but it failed catastrophically due to his being "out of his depth" at the command-in-chief level, leading to French army issues including mutiny. Philippe Pétain: Replaced Nivelle, Pétain became a "savior of France." He was renowned for his deep understanding of battlefield realities and a strong connection with his troops. At Verdun, he innovated by rotating divisions out of the line for rest and recuperation, contrasting with the German practice of fighting units "until basically there's not a lot left". Ferdinand Foch (Supreme Allied Commander from April 1918): Foch is widely regarded as one of the most important generals of the war. He was an energetic and charismatic leader who successfully coordinated the American, British, and French forces in 1918, leading them to victory in the multinational war. His reputation continues to strengthen over time. American Involvement Entry into War: The United States declared war on Germany and Austria in April 1917. General John J. Pershing arrived in Paris in June 1917 to lead the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), despite having only 113,000 men in the army at the time. Rejection of Amalgamation: Pershing steadfastly resisted French and British desires to "amalgamate" American manpower into their existing divisions, insisting that American soldiers fight as an independent army. He argued that the Allies had a poor record of "not killing your own troops". German Miscalculation: Germany severely underestimated how quickly the United States could build and deploy an army, believing it would take years. This misjudgment ultimately contributed to their defeat once the Americans demonstrated their seriousness in 1918. American involvement became "crucial" by 1917, changing the atmosphere. Evolution of Warfare on the Western Front From Movement to Stalemate: The initial German invasion failed to achieve a decisive victory, leading to the establishment of trench warfare after the Battle of the Marne. Realization of No Breakthrough: After the Second Battle of Champagne (1915), Allied and Germancommanders like Joffre and Falkenhayn began to recognize that a "grand shattering breakthrough" was not achievable in the foreseeable future. Constant Adaptation: This realization led to a continuous arms race. As Allied artillery and tactics improved, German defenses evolved from single lines to complex "zones of pill boxes," making progress difficult and bloody. The war became an intense exercise in violence where commanders constantly adapted to a "cauldron of war". Key Battles and Their Significance Battle of the Marne (September 1914): Joffre's successful counterattack forced the Germans to retreat, effectively ending the Schlieffen Plan and leading to the beginning of trench warfare. Second Battle of Champagne (September-October 1915): A major French offensive that, despite immense effort and casualties, failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, solidifying the understanding that trench deadlock could not be easily broken. Verdun (1916): Falkenhayn's attrition battle, designed to "kill Frenchmen," concentrated immense firepower in a small area, creating a "moonscape effect." While not decisive in destroying the French, it was a moment where "things start to go wrong for Germany," from which she never truly recovers. Somme (1916): A British and French offensive intended to relieve pressure on Verdun, but also driven by Haig's ambition for a breakthrough. The debate between breakthrough and Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy highlighted the dilemmas of Western Front warfare. Nivelle Offensive (April 1917): A disastrous French attempt at a breakthrough, which highlighted Nivelle'soverreach and led to significant disillusionment and mutiny within the French army. End of the War and its Legacy German Defeat: Lloyd's book argues that the German army was "falling apart" and "defeated rapidly in 1918" despite the persistent "stab in the back" myth that claimed they were betrayed at home. Armistice Decision: The decision by the Allies not to invade Germany was primarily political, as the British and French were "totally exhausted," while the Americans were "much fresher" and more keen to continue. Lloyd considers the armistice "fair on all sides". Lloyd's work underscores that the Western Front was a complex, multinational struggle marked by evolving strategies, immense pressures on commanders, and profound human costs, which ultimately determined the course of the Great War and cast a long shadow over the 20th century.

Nick Lloyd's "The Western Front: The History of the Great War, Volume 1" provides a comprehensive narrative of the Great War in Belgium and France from 1914 to 1918. As the first volume of a planned trilogy, this work aims to offer a nuanced understanding of this pivotal theater, moving beyond common myths and focusing on the operational perspective of senior commanders across all involved powers. 1918 JOHN MONASH Here's a summary of the key aspects, figures, and events covered: Lloyd's Ambition and Approach Comprehensive Narrative: Lloyd, a reader in military and imperial history at King's College London, undertook this "big project" to create a grand narrative of the entire Western Front, encompassing the French sector, American sector, and the German story, alongside the often-emphasized British perspective. Focus on Senior Commanders: A primary goal was to view the war from the lens of senior commanders, challenging the traditional portrayal of them as "donkeys or butchers and bunglers." Lloyd aims to help readers appreciate the immense pressures and difficulties these individuals faced, offering a "cooler perspective" on their successes and errors. Trilogy: This book is the first of three volumes; future volumes will cover the Eastern Front and global warfare in the Middle East and Africa. Lloyd emphasizes that while other fronts are mentioned, the Western Front remained the decisive theater where Germany, France, Britain, and America determined the war's outcome. British Involvement and Leadership Initial Reluctance: Britain initially entered the conflict with a limited commitment, deploying only four infantry divisions and one cavalry division as the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), a "small army" compared to the French (80 divisions) and Germans (over 100 divisions). This reflected a desire for "limited liability" to the Western Front, contrasting sharply with French demands for more manpower. Early Leaders: H.H. Asquith (Prime Minister) was reportedly distracted by personal affairs at the war's outset. Lord Kitchener (Minister of War) was a professional soldier and hero of the empire, wary of deep British involvement but committed to supporting the French. Field Marshal Sir John French (Commander-in-Chief, BEF) was a Boer War hero who found himself "out of his depth" by 1914, struggling with the war's scale and intensity. During the August 1914 retreat, French considered pulling the BEF out of the line due to immense losses and pressure, a move Kitchener personally intervened to prevent, ordering French to stay and fight. Frencheventually "breaks down" due to losses and pressure and is sent home at the end of 1915. Later Leadership and Strategy: David Lloyd George (Prime Minister from late 1916) is credited as "the prime minister that wins the war" in Britain. He showed great energy in revitalizing British industry and re-equipping the army, despite having poor relations with his top generals. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig replaced French as Commander-in-Chief of the BEF. Haig and Lloyd George had fundamentally different strategic outlooks, leading to "constant arguments and backstabbing". At the Battle of the Somme (1916), Haig favored a breakthrough strategy, aiming for maneuver and cavalry deployment to defeat the German army. However, his army commander, Rawlinson, advocated a "bite and hold" strategy, focusing on concentrated artillery to smash enemy lines, take ground, then consolidate before repeating, acknowledging that a grand breakthrough was not yet feasible for the largely "green" British army. German Strategy and Commanders Initial Invasion: The German invasion of France and Belgium in 1914 was based on the ambitious Schlieffen Plan, which aimed for a massive attack through Belgium to outflank French defenses and destroy their army in a grand battle of envelopment. Helmuth von Moltke the Younger (Chief of the General Staff) was under immense pressure and altered the Schlieffen Plan, weakening its critical right wing, and ultimately suffered a nervous breakdown by mid-September 1914. Moltke's controversial decision to order General Kluck's First Army to turn southeast instead of enveloping Paris contributed to the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, despite Kluck initially ignoring the order. Kaiser Wilhelm: His character was inconsistent, often described as a "weather vane," and he gradually became a less central figure as Hindenburg and Ludendorff gained influence from 1916. Erich von Falkenhayn (replaces Moltke in 1914) was the architect of the Verdun Offensive (1916). His vision was unique, aiming not for territorial gains but for attrition: to "kill Frenchmen" and exhaust them. Political Interference: Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg often opposed Falkenhayn's desire for unrestricted submarine warfare due to diplomatic concerns (e.g., fear of American entry), illustrating the German military's tendency to prioritize tactical effectiveness over political and strategic issues, which was ultimately "fatal". French Efforts and Leadership Joseph Joffre (Commander of French Forces): Described as a "great hero" of the French army, Joffrepossessed remarkable calmness and an ability to absorb punishment and react quickly. His leadership was crucial in defeating the Schlieffen Plan and counterattacking at the Battle of the Marne in September 1914, preventing a German victory. Raymond Poincaré (President of the French Republic): A nationalist deeply involved in military analysis, Poincaré was central to the political efforts to reassert civilian primacy over the army and secure British manpower commitments. General Castelnau (Joffre's chief of staff): A deeply religious man who personally lost three sons in the war, Castelnau exemplifies the human cost and personal horror experienced by some senior commanders, helping to humanize these figures in Lloyd's narrative. Robert Nivelle: An artillery officer who rose rapidly due to his successes at Verdun, Nivelle replaced Joffrein December 1916. He attempted a decisive breakthrough in his Nivelle Offensive in April 1917 with a "formula" for success, but it failed catastrophically due to his being "out of his depth" at the command-in-chief level, leading to French army issues including mutiny. Philippe Pétain: Replaced Nivelle, Pétain became a "savior of France." He was renowned for his deep understanding of battlefield realities and a strong connection with his troops. At Verdun, he innovated by rotating divisions out of the line for rest and recuperation, contrasting with the German practice of fighting units "until basically there's not a lot left". Ferdinand Foch (Supreme Allied Commander from April 1918): Foch is widely regarded as one of the most important generals of the war. He was an energetic and charismatic leader who successfully coordinated the American, British, and French forces in 1918, leading them to victory in the multinational war. His reputation continues to strengthen over time. American Involvement Entry into War: The United States declared war on Germany and Austria in April 1917. General John J. Pershing arrived in Paris in June 1917 to lead the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), despite having only 113,000 men in the army at the time. Rejection of Amalgamation: Pershing steadfastly resisted French and British desires to "amalgamate" American manpower into their existing divisions, insisting that American soldiers fight as an independent army. He argued that the Allies had a poor record of "not killing your own troops". German Miscalculation: Germany severely underestimated how quickly the United States could build and deploy an army, believing it would take years. This misjudgment ultimately contributed to their defeat once the Americans demonstrated their seriousness in 1918. American involvement became "crucial" by 1917, changing the atmosphere. Evolution of Warfare on the Western Front From Movement to Stalemate: The initial German invasion failed to achieve a decisive victory, leading to the establishment of trench warfare after the Battle of the Marne. Realization of No Breakthrough: After the Second Battle of Champagne (1915), Allied and Germancommanders like Joffre and Falkenhayn began to recognize that a "grand shattering breakthrough" was not achievable in the foreseeable future. Constant Adaptation: This realization led to a continuous arms race. As Allied artillery and tactics improved, German defenses evolved from single lines to complex "zones of pill boxes," making progress difficult and bloody. The war became an intense exercise in violence where commanders constantly adapted to a "cauldron of war". Key Battles and Their Significance Battle of the Marne (September 1914): Joffre's successful counterattack forced the Germans to retreat, effectively ending the Schlieffen Plan and leading to the beginning of trench warfare. Second Battle of Champagne (September-October 1915): A major French offensive that, despite immense effort and casualties, failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, solidifying the understanding that trench deadlock could not be easily broken. Verdun (1916): Falkenhayn's attrition battle, designed to "kill Frenchmen," concentrated immense firepower in a small area, creating a "moonscape effect." While not decisive in destroying the French, it was a moment where "things start to go wrong for Germany," from which she never truly recovers. Somme (1916): A British and French offensive intended to relieve pressure on Verdun, but also driven by Haig's ambition for a breakthrough. The debate between breakthrough and Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy highlighted the dilemmas of Western Front warfare. Nivelle Offensive (April 1917): A disastrous French attempt at a breakthrough, which highlighted Nivelle'soverreach and led to significant disillusionment and mutiny within the French army. End of the War and its Legacy German Defeat: Lloyd's book argues that the German army was "falling apart" and "defeated rapidly in 1918" despite the persistent "stab in the back" myth that claimed they were betrayed at home. Armistice Decision: The decision by the Allies not to invade Germany was primarily political, as the British and French were "totally exhausted," while the Americans were "much fresher" and more keen to continue. Lloyd considers the armistice "fair on all sides". Lloyd's work underscores that the Western Front was a complex, multinational struggle marked by evolving strategies, immense pressures on commanders, and profound human costs, which ultimately determined the course of the Great War and cast a long shadow over the 20th century.

Nick Lloyd's "The Western Front: The History of the Great War, Volume 1" provides a comprehensive narrative of the Great War in Belgium and France from 1914 to 1918. As the first volume of a planned trilogy, this work aims to offer a nuanced understanding of this pivotal theater, moving beyond common myths and focusing on the operational perspective of senior commanders across all involved powers. 1914 HINDENBERG Here's a summary of the key aspects, figures, and events covered: Lloyd's Ambition and Approach Comprehensive Narrative: Lloyd, a reader in military and imperial history at King's College London, undertook this "big project" to create a grand narrative of the entire Western Front, encompassing the French sector, American sector, and the German story, alongside the often-emphasized British perspective. Focus on Senior Commanders: A primary goal was to view the war from the lens of senior commanders, challenging the traditional portrayal of them as "donkeys or butchers and bunglers." Lloyd aims to help readers appreciate the immense pressures and difficulties these individuals faced, offering a "cooler perspective" on their successes and errors. Trilogy: This book is the first of three volumes; future volumes will cover the Eastern Front and global warfare in the Middle East and Africa. Lloyd emphasizes that while other fronts are mentioned, the Western Front remained the decisive theater where Germany, France, Britain, and America determined the war's outcome. British Involvement and Leadership Initial Reluctance: Britain initially entered the conflict with a limited commitment, deploying only four infantry divisions and one cavalry division as the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), a "small army" compared to the French (80 divisions) and Germans (over 100 divisions). This reflected a desire for "limited liability" to the Western Front, contrasting sharply with French demands for more manpower. Early Leaders: H.H. Asquith (Prime Minister) was reportedly distracted by personal affairs at the war's outset. Lord Kitchener (Minister of War) was a professional soldier and hero of the empire, wary of deep British involvement but committed to supporting the French. Field Marshal Sir John French (Commander-in-Chief, BEF) was a Boer War hero who found himself "out of his depth" by 1914, struggling with the war's scale and intensity. During the August 1914 retreat, French considered pulling the BEF out of the line due to immense losses and pressure, a move Kitchener personally intervened to prevent, ordering French to stay and fight. Frencheventually "breaks down" due to losses and pressure and is sent home at the end of 1915. Later Leadership and Strategy: David Lloyd George (Prime Minister from late 1916) is credited as "the prime minister that wins the war" in Britain. He showed great energy in revitalizing British industry and re-equipping the army, despite having poor relations with his top generals. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig replaced French as Commander-in-Chief of the BEF. Haig and Lloyd George had fundamentally different strategic outlooks, leading to "constant arguments and backstabbing". At the Battle of the Somme (1916), Haig favored a breakthrough strategy, aiming for maneuver and cavalry deployment to defeat the German army. However, his army commander, Rawlinson, advocated a "bite and hold" strategy, focusing on concentrated artillery to smash enemy lines, take ground, then consolidate before repeating, acknowledging that a grand breakthrough was not yet feasible for the largely "green" British army. German Strategy and Commanders Initial Invasion: The German invasion of France and Belgium in 1914 was based on the ambitious Schlieffen Plan, which aimed for a massive attack through Belgium to outflank French defenses and destroy their army in a grand battle of envelopment. Helmuth von Moltke the Younger (Chief of the General Staff) was under immense pressure and altered the Schlieffen Plan, weakening its critical right wing, and ultimately suffered a nervous breakdown by mid-September 1914. Moltke's controversial decision to order General Kluck's First Army to turn southeast instead of enveloping Paris contributed to the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, despite Kluck initially ignoring the order. Kaiser Wilhelm: His character was inconsistent, often described as a "weather vane," and he gradually became a less central figure as Hindenburg and Ludendorff gained influence from 1916. Erich von Falkenhayn (replaces Moltke in 1914) was the architect of the Verdun Offensive (1916). His vision was unique, aiming not for territorial gains but for attrition: to "kill Frenchmen" and exhaust them. Political Interference: Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg often opposed Falkenhayn's desire for unrestricted submarine warfare due to diplomatic concerns (e.g., fear of American entry), illustrating the German military's tendency to prioritize tactical effectiveness over political and strategic issues, which was ultimately "fatal". French Efforts and Leadership Joseph Joffre (Commander of French Forces): Described as a "great hero" of the French army, Joffrepossessed remarkable calmness and an ability to absorb punishment and react quickly. His leadership was crucial in defeating the Schlieffen Plan and counterattacking at the Battle of the Marne in September 1914, preventing a German victory. Raymond Poincaré (President of the French Republic): A nationalist deeply involved in military analysis, Poincaré was central to the political efforts to reassert civilian primacy over the army and secure British manpower commitments. General Castelnau (Joffre's chief of staff): A deeply religious man who personally lost three sons in the war, Castelnau exemplifies the human cost and personal horror experienced by some senior commanders, helping to humanize these figures in Lloyd's narrative. Robert Nivelle: An artillery officer who rose rapidly due to his successes at Verdun, Nivelle replaced Joffrein December 1916. He attempted a decisive breakthrough in his Nivelle Offensive in April 1917 with a "formula" for success, but it failed catastrophically due to his being "out of his depth" at the command-in-chief level, leading to French army issues including mutiny. Philippe Pétain: Replaced Nivelle, Pétain became a "savior of France." He was renowned for his deep understanding of battlefield realities and a strong connection with his troops. At Verdun, he innovated by rotating divisions out of the line for rest and recuperation, contrasting with the German practice of fighting units "until basically there's not a lot left". Ferdinand Foch (Supreme Allied Commander from April 1918): Foch is widely regarded as one of the most important generals of the war. He was an energetic and charismatic leader who successfully coordinated the American, British, and French forces in 1918, leading them to victory in the multinational war. His reputation continues to strengthen over time. American Involvement Entry into War: The United States declared war on Germany and Austria in April 1917. General John J. Pershing arrived in Paris in June 1917 to lead the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), despite having only 113,000 men in the army at the time. Rejection of Amalgamation: Pershing steadfastly resisted French and British desires to "amalgamate" American manpower into their existing divisions, insisting that American soldiers fight as an independent army. He argued that the Allies had a poor record of "not killing your own troops". German Miscalculation: Germany severely underestimated how quickly the United States could build and deploy an army, believing it would take years. This misjudgment ultimately contributed to their defeat once the Americans demonstrated their seriousness in 1918. American involvement became "crucial" by 1917, changing the atmosphere. Evolution of Warfare on the Western Front From Movement to Stalemate: The initial German invasion failed to achieve a decisive victory, leading to the establishment of trench warfare after the Battle of the Marne. Realization of No Breakthrough: After the Second Battle of Champagne (1915), Allied and Germancommanders like Joffre and Falkenhayn began to recognize that a "grand shattering breakthrough" was not achievable in the foreseeable future. Constant Adaptation: This realization led to a continuous arms race. As Allied artillery and tactics improved, German defenses evolved from single lines to complex "zones of pill boxes," making progress difficult and bloody. The war became an intense exercise in violence where commanders constantly adapted to a "cauldron of war". Key Battles and Their Significance Battle of the Marne (September 1914): Joffre's successful counterattack forced the Germans to retreat, effectively ending the Schlieffen Plan and leading to the beginning of trench warfare. Second Battle of Champagne (September-October 1915): A major French offensive that, despite immense effort and casualties, failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, solidifying the understanding that trench deadlock could not be easily broken. Verdun (1916): Falkenhayn's attrition battle, designed to "kill Frenchmen," concentrated immense firepower in a small area, creating a "moonscape effect." While not decisive in destroying the French, it was a moment where "things start to go wrong for Germany," from which she never truly recovers. Somme (1916): A British and French offensive intended to relieve pressure on Verdun, but also driven by Haig's ambition for a breakthrough. The debate between breakthrough and Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy highlighted the dilemmas of Western Front warfare. Nivelle Offensive (April 1917): A disastrous French attempt at a breakthrough, which highlighted Nivelle'soverreach and led to significant disillusionment and mutiny within the French army. End of the War and its Legacy German Defeat: Lloyd's book argues that the German army was "falling apart" and "defeated rapidly in 1918" despite the persistent "stab in the back" myth that claimed they were betrayed at home. Armistice Decision: The decision by the Allies not to invade Germany was primarily political, as the British and French were "totally exhausted," while the Americans were "much fresher" and more keen to continue. Lloyd considers the armistice "fair on all sides". Lloyd's work underscores that the Western Front was a complex, multinational struggle marked by evolving strategies, immense pressures on commanders, and profound human costs, which ultimately determined the course of the Great War and cast a long shadow over the 20th century.

Nick Lloyd's "The Western Front: The History of the Great War, Volume 1" provides a comprehensive narrative of the Great War in Belgium and France from 1914 to 1918. As the first volume of a planned trilogy, this work aims to offer a nuanced understanding of this pivotal theater, moving beyond common myths and focusing on the operational perspective of senior commanders across all involved powers. 1914 BELGIUM Here's a summary of the key aspects, figures, and events covered: Lloyd's Ambition and Approach Comprehensive Narrative: Lloyd, a reader in military and imperial history at King's College London, undertook this "big project" to create a grand narrative of the entire Western Front, encompassing the French sector, American sector, and the German story, alongside the often-emphasized British perspective. Focus on Senior Commanders: A primary goal was to view the war from the lens of senior commanders, challenging the traditional portrayal of them as "donkeys or butchers and bunglers." Lloyd aims to help readers appreciate the immense pressures and difficulties these individuals faced, offering a "cooler perspective" on their successes and errors. Trilogy: This book is the first of three volumes; future volumes will cover the Eastern Front and global warfare in the Middle East and Africa. Lloyd emphasizes that while other fronts are mentioned, the Western Front remained the decisive theater where Germany, France, Britain, and America determined the war's outcome. British Involvement and Leadership Initial Reluctance: Britain initially entered the conflict with a limited commitment, deploying only four infantry divisions and one cavalry division as the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), a "small army" compared to the French (80 divisions) and Germans (over 100 divisions). This reflected a desire for "limited liability" to the Western Front, contrasting sharply with French demands for more manpower. Early Leaders: H.H. Asquith (Prime Minister) was reportedly distracted by personal affairs at the war's outset. Lord Kitchener (Minister of War) was a professional soldier and hero of the empire, wary of deep British involvement but committed to supporting the French. Field Marshal Sir John French (Commander-in-Chief, BEF) was a Boer War hero who found himself "out of his depth" by 1914, struggling with the war's scale and intensity. During the August 1914 retreat, French considered pulling the BEF out of the line due to immense losses and pressure, a move Kitchener personally intervened to prevent, ordering French to stay and fight. Frencheventually "breaks down" due to losses and pressure and is sent home at the end of 1915. Later Leadership and Strategy: David Lloyd George (Prime Minister from late 1916) is credited as "the prime minister that wins the war" in Britain. He showed great energy in revitalizing British industry and re-equipping the army, despite having poor relations with his top generals. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig replaced French as Commander-in-Chief of the BEF. Haig and Lloyd George had fundamentally different strategic outlooks, leading to "constant arguments and backstabbing". At the Battle of the Somme (1916), Haig favored a breakthrough strategy, aiming for maneuver and cavalry deployment to defeat the German army. However, his army commander, Rawlinson, advocated a "bite and hold" strategy, focusing on concentrated artillery to smash enemy lines, take ground, then consolidate before repeating, acknowledging that a grand breakthrough was not yet feasible for the largely "green" British army. German Strategy and Commanders Initial Invasion: The German invasion of France and Belgium in 1914 was based on the ambitious Schlieffen Plan, which aimed for a massive attack through Belgium to outflank French defenses and destroy their army in a grand battle of envelopment. Helmuth von Moltke the Younger (Chief of the General Staff) was under immense pressure and altered the Schlieffen Plan, weakening its critical right wing, and ultimately suffered a nervous breakdown by mid-September 1914. Moltke's controversial decision to order General Kluck's First Army to turn southeast instead of enveloping Paris contributed to the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, despite Kluck initially ignoring the order. Kaiser Wilhelm: His character was inconsistent, often described as a "weather vane," and he gradually became a less central figure as Hindenburg and Ludendorff gained influence from 1916. Erich von Falkenhayn (replaces Moltke in 1914) was the architect of the Verdun Offensive (1916). His vision was unique, aiming not for territorial gains but for attrition: to "kill Frenchmen" and exhaust them. Political Interference: Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg often opposed Falkenhayn's desire for unrestricted submarine warfare due to diplomatic concerns (e.g., fear of American entry), illustrating the German military's tendency to prioritize tactical effectiveness over political and strategic issues, which was ultimately "fatal". French Efforts and Leadership Joseph Joffre (Commander of French Forces): Described as a "great hero" of the French army, Joffrepossessed remarkable calmness and an ability to absorb punishment and react quickly. His leadership was crucial in defeating the Schlieffen Plan and counterattacking at the Battle of the Marne in September 1914, preventing a German victory. Raymond Poincaré (President of the French Republic): A nationalist deeply involved in military analysis, Poincaré was central to the political efforts to reassert civilian primacy over the army and secure British manpower commitments. General Castelnau (Joffre's chief of staff): A deeply religious man who personally lost three sons in the war, Castelnau exemplifies the human cost and personal horror experienced by some senior commanders, helping to humanize these figures in Lloyd's narrative. Robert Nivelle: An artillery officer who rose rapidly due to his successes at Verdun, Nivelle replaced Joffrein December 1916. He attempted a decisive breakthrough in his Nivelle Offensive in April 1917 with a "formula" for success, but it failed catastrophically due to his being "out of his depth" at the command-in-chief level, leading to French army issues including mutiny. Philippe Pétain: Replaced Nivelle, Pétain became a "savior of France." He was renowned for his deep understanding of battlefield realities and a strong connection with his troops. At Verdun, he innovated by rotating divisions out of the line for rest and recuperation, contrasting with the German practice of fighting units "until basically there's not a lot left". Ferdinand Foch (Supreme Allied Commander from April 1918): Foch is widely regarded as one of the most important generals of the war. He was an energetic and charismatic leader who successfully coordinated the American, British, and French forces in 1918, leading them to victory in the multinational war. His reputation continues to strengthen over time. American Involvement Entry into War: The United States declared war on Germany and Austria in April 1917. General John J. Pershing arrived in Paris in June 1917 to lead the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), despite having only 113,000 men in the army at the time. Rejection of Amalgamation: Pershing steadfastly resisted French and British desires to "amalgamate" American manpower into their existing divisions, insisting that American soldiers fight as an independent army. He argued that the Allies had a poor record of "not killing your own troops". German Miscalculation: Germany severely underestimated how quickly the United States could build and deploy an army, believing it would take years. This misjudgment ultimately contributed to their defeat once the Americans demonstrated their seriousness in 1918. American involvement became "crucial" by 1917, changing the atmosphere. Evolution of Warfare on the Western Front From Movement to Stalemate: The initial German invasion failed to achieve a decisive victory, leading to the establishment of trench warfare after the Battle of the Marne. Realization of No Breakthrough: After the Second Battle of Champagne (1915), Allied and Germancommanders like Joffre and Falkenhayn began to recognize that a "grand shattering breakthrough" was not achievable in the foreseeable future. Constant Adaptation: This realization led to a continuous arms race. As Allied artillery and tactics improved, German defenses evolved from single lines to complex "zones of pill boxes," making progress difficult and bloody. The war became an intense exercise in violence where commanders constantly adapted to a "cauldron of war". Key Battles and Their Significance Battle of the Marne (September 1914): Joffre's successful counterattack forced the Germans to retreat, effectively ending the Schlieffen Plan and leading to the beginning of trench warfare. Second Battle of Champagne (September-October 1915): A major French offensive that, despite immense effort and casualties, failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, solidifying the understanding that trench deadlock could not be easily broken. Verdun (1916): Falkenhayn's attrition battle, designed to "kill Frenchmen," concentrated immense firepower in a small area, creating a "moonscape effect." While not decisive in destroying the French, it was a moment where "things start to go wrong for Germany," from which she never truly recovers. Somme (1916): A British and French offensive intended to relieve pressure on Verdun, but also driven by Haig's ambition for a breakthrough. The debate between breakthrough and Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy highlighted the dilemmas of Western Front warfare. Nivelle Offensive (April 1917): A disastrous French attempt at a breakthrough, which highlighted Nivelle'soverreach and led to significant disillusionment and mutiny within the French army. End of the War and its Legacy German Defeat: Lloyd's book argues that the German army was "falling apart" and "defeated rapidly in 1918" despite the persistent "stab in the back" myth that claimed they were betrayed at home. Armistice Decision: The decision by the Allies not to invade Germany was primarily political, as the British and French were "totally exhausted," while the Americans were "much fresher" and more keen to continue. Lloyd considers the armistice "fair on all sides". Lloyd's work underscores that the Western Front was a complex, multinational struggle marked by evolving strategies, immense pressures on commanders, and profound human costs, which ultimately determined the course of the Great War and cast a long shadow over the 20th century.

Nick Lloyd's "The Western Front: The History of the Great War, Volume 1" provides a comprehensive narrative of the Great War in Belgium and France from 1914 to 1918. As the first volume of a planned trilogy, this work aims to offer a nuanced understanding of this pivotal theater, moving beyond common myths and focusing on the operational perspective of senior commanders across all involved powers. 1914 ROYAL FLYING CORPS Here's a summary of the key aspects, figures, and events covered: Lloyd's Ambition and Approach Comprehensive Narrative: Lloyd, a reader in military and imperial history at King's College London, undertook this "big project" to create a grand narrative of the entire Western Front, encompassing the French sector, American sector, and the German story, alongside the often-emphasized British perspective. Focus on Senior Commanders: A primary goal was to view the war from the lens of senior commanders, challenging the traditional portrayal of them as "donkeys or butchers and bunglers." Lloyd aims to help readers appreciate the immense pressures and difficulties these individuals faced, offering a "cooler perspective" on their successes and errors. Trilogy: This book is the first of three volumes; future volumes will cover the Eastern Front and global warfare in the Middle East and Africa. Lloyd emphasizes that while other fronts are mentioned, the Western Front remained the decisive theater where Germany, France, Britain, and America determined the war's outcome. British Involvement and Leadership Initial Reluctance: Britain initially entered the conflict with a limited commitment, deploying only four infantry divisions and one cavalry division as the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), a "small army" compared to the French (80 divisions) and Germans (over 100 divisions). This reflected a desire for "limited liability" to the Western Front, contrasting sharply with French demands for more manpower. Early Leaders: H.H. Asquith (Prime Minister) was reportedly distracted by personal affairs at the war's outset. Lord Kitchener (Minister of War) was a professional soldier and hero of the empire, wary of deep British involvement but committed to supporting the French. Field Marshal Sir John French (Commander-in-Chief, BEF) was a Boer War hero who found himself "out of his depth" by 1914, struggling with the war's scale and intensity. During the August 1914 retreat, French considered pulling the BEF out of the line due to immense losses and pressure, a move Kitchener personally intervened to prevent, ordering French to stay and fight. Frencheventually "breaks down" due to losses and pressure and is sent home at the end of 1915. Later Leadership and Strategy: David Lloyd George (Prime Minister from late 1916) is credited as "the prime minister that wins the war" in Britain. He showed great energy in revitalizing British industry and re-equipping the army, despite having poor relations with his top generals. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig replaced French as Commander-in-Chief of the BEF. Haig and Lloyd George had fundamentally different strategic outlooks, leading to "constant arguments and backstabbing". At the Battle of the Somme (1916), Haig favored a breakthrough strategy, aiming for maneuver and cavalry deployment to defeat the German army. However, his army commander, Rawlinson, advocated a "bite and hold" strategy, focusing on concentrated artillery to smash enemy lines, take ground, then consolidate before repeating, acknowledging that a grand breakthrough was not yet feasible for the largely "green" British army. German Strategy and Commanders Initial Invasion: The German invasion of France and Belgium in 1914 was based on the ambitious Schlieffen Plan, which aimed for a massive attack through Belgium to outflank French defenses and destroy their army in a grand battle of envelopment. Helmuth von Moltke the Younger (Chief of the General Staff) was under immense pressure and altered the Schlieffen Plan, weakening its critical right wing, and ultimately suffered a nervous breakdown by mid-September 1914. Moltke's controversial decision to order General Kluck's First Army to turn southeast instead of enveloping Paris contributed to the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, despite Kluck initially ignoring the order. Kaiser Wilhelm: His character was inconsistent, often described as a "weather vane," and he gradually became a less central figure as Hindenburg and Ludendorff gained influence from 1916. Erich von Falkenhayn (replaces Moltke in 1914) was the architect of the Verdun Offensive (1916). His vision was unique, aiming not for territorial gains but for attrition: to "kill Frenchmen" and exhaust them. Political Interference: Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg often opposed Falkenhayn's desire for unrestricted submarine warfare due to diplomatic concerns (e.g., fear of American entry), illustrating the German military's tendency to prioritize tactical effectiveness over political and strategic issues, which was ultimately "fatal". French Efforts and Leadership Joseph Joffre (Commander of French Forces): Described as a "great hero" of the French army, Joffrepossessed remarkable calmness and an ability to absorb punishment and react quickly. His leadership was crucial in defeating the Schlieffen Plan and counterattacking at the Battle of the Marne in September 1914, preventing a German victory. Raymond Poincaré (President of the French Republic): A nationalist deeply involved in military analysis, Poincaré was central to the political efforts to reassert civilian primacy over the army and secure British manpower commitments. General Castelnau (Joffre's chief of staff): A deeply religious man who personally lost three sons in the war, Castelnau exemplifies the human cost and personal horror experienced by some senior commanders, helping to humanize these figures in Lloyd's narrative. Robert Nivelle: An artillery officer who rose rapidly due to his successes at Verdun, Nivelle replaced Joffrein December 1916. He attempted a decisive breakthrough in his Nivelle Offensive in April 1917 with a "formula" for success, but it failed catastrophically due to his being "out of his depth" at the command-in-chief level, leading to French army issues including mutiny. Philippe Pétain: Replaced Nivelle, Pétain became a "savior of France." He was renowned for his deep understanding of battlefield realities and a strong connection with his troops. At Verdun, he innovated by rotating divisions out of the line for rest and recuperation, contrasting with the German practice of fighting units "until basically there's not a lot left". Ferdinand Foch (Supreme Allied Commander from April 1918): Foch is widely regarded as one of the most important generals of the war. He was an energetic and charismatic leader who successfully coordinated the American, British, and French forces in 1918, leading them to victory in the multinational war. His reputation continues to strengthen over time. American Involvement Entry into War: The United States declared war on Germany and Austria in April 1917. General John J. Pershing arrived in Paris in June 1917 to lead the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), despite having only 113,000 men in the army at the time. Rejection of Amalgamation: Pershing steadfastly resisted French and British desires to "amalgamate" American manpower into their existing divisions, insisting that American soldiers fight as an independent army. He argued that the Allies had a poor record of "not killing your own troops". German Miscalculation: Germany severely underestimated how quickly the United States could build and deploy an army, believing it would take years. This misjudgment ultimately contributed to their defeat once the Americans demonstrated their seriousness in 1918. American involvement became "crucial" by 1917, changing the atmosphere. Evolution of Warfare on the Western Front From Movement to Stalemate: The initial German invasion failed to achieve a decisive victory, leading to the establishment of trench warfare after the Battle of the Marne. Realization of No Breakthrough: After the Second Battle of Champagne (1915), Allied and Germancommanders like Joffre and Falkenhayn began to recognize that a "grand shattering breakthrough" was not achievable in the foreseeable future. Constant Adaptation: This realization led to a continuous arms race. As Allied artillery and tactics improved, German defenses evolved from single lines to complex "zones of pill boxes," making progress difficult and bloody. The war became an intense exercise in violence where commanders constantly adapted to a "cauldron of war". Key Battles and Their Significance Battle of the Marne (September 1914): Joffre's successful counterattack forced the Germans to retreat, effectively ending the Schlieffen Plan and leading to the beginning of trench warfare. Second Battle of Champagne (September-October 1915): A major French offensive that, despite immense effort and casualties, failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, solidifying the understanding that trench deadlock could not be easily broken. Verdun (1916): Falkenhayn's attrition battle, designed to "kill Frenchmen," concentrated immense firepower in a small area, creating a "moonscape effect." While not decisive in destroying the French, it was a moment where "things start to go wrong for Germany," from which she never truly recovers. Somme (1916): A British and French offensive intended to relieve pressure on Verdun, but also driven by Haig's ambition for a breakthrough. The debate between breakthrough and Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy highlighted the dilemmas of Western Front warfare. Nivelle Offensive (April 1917): A disastrous French attempt at a breakthrough, which highlighted Nivelle'soverreach and led to significant disillusionment and mutiny within the French army. End of the War and its Legacy German Defeat: Lloyd's book argues that the German army was "falling apart" and "defeated rapidly in 1918" despite the persistent "stab in the back" myth that claimed they were betrayed at home. Armistice Decision: The decision by the Allies not to invade Germany was primarily political, as the British and French were "totally exhausted," while the Americans were "much fresher" and more keen to continue. Lloyd considers the armistice "fair on all sides". Lloyd's work underscores that the Western Front was a complex, multinational struggle marked by evolving strategies, immense pressures on commanders, and profound human costs, which ultimately determined the course of the Great War and cast a long shadow over the 20th century.

Nick Lloyd's "The Western Front: The History of the Great War, Volume 1" provides a comprehensive narrative of the Great War in Belgium and France from 1914 to 1918. As the first volume of a planned trilogy, this work aims to offer a nuanced understanding of this pivotal theater, moving beyond common myths and focusing on the operational perspective of senior commanders across all involved powers. 1919 LONDON CHURCHILL Z PERSHING Here's a summary of the key aspects, figures, and events covered: Lloyd's Ambition and Approach Comprehensive Narrative: Lloyd, a reader in military and imperial history at King's College London, undertook this "big project" to create a grand narrative of the entire Western Front, encompassing the French sector, American sector, and the German story, alongside the often-emphasized British perspective. Focus on Senior Commanders: A primary goal was to view the war from the lens of senior commanders, challenging the traditional portrayal of them as "donkeys or butchers and bunglers." Lloyd aims to help readers appreciate the immense pressures and difficulties these individuals faced, offering a "cooler perspective" on their successes and errors. Trilogy: This book is the first of three volumes; future volumes will cover the Eastern Front and global warfare in the Middle East and Africa. Lloyd emphasizes that while other fronts are mentioned, the Western Front remained the decisive theater where Germany, France, Britain, and America determined the war's outcome. British Involvement and Leadership Initial Reluctance: Britain initially entered the conflict with a limited commitment, deploying only four infantry divisions and one cavalry division as the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), a "small army" compared to the French (80 divisions) and Germans (over 100 divisions). This reflected a desire for "limited liability" to the Western Front, contrasting sharply with French demands for more manpower. Early Leaders: H.H. Asquith (Prime Minister) was reportedly distracted by personal affairs at the war's outset. Lord Kitchener (Minister of War) was a professional soldier and hero of the empire, wary of deep British involvement but committed to supporting the French. Field Marshal Sir John French (Commander-in-Chief, BEF) was a Boer War hero who found himself "out of his depth" by 1914, struggling with the war's scale and intensity. During the August 1914 retreat, French considered pulling the BEF out of the line due to immense losses and pressure, a move Kitchener personally intervened to prevent, ordering French to stay and fight. Frencheventually "breaks down" due to losses and pressure and is sent home at the end of 1915. Later Leadership and Strategy: David Lloyd George (Prime Minister from late 1916) is credited as "the prime minister that wins the war" in Britain. He showed great energy in revitalizing British industry and re-equipping the army, despite having poor relations with his top generals. Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig replaced French as Commander-in-Chief of the BEF. Haig and Lloyd George had fundamentally different strategic outlooks, leading to "constant arguments and backstabbing". At the Battle of the Somme (1916), Haig favored a breakthrough strategy, aiming for maneuver and cavalry deployment to defeat the German army. However, his army commander, Rawlinson, advocated a "bite and hold" strategy, focusing on concentrated artillery to smash enemy lines, take ground, then consolidate before repeating, acknowledging that a grand breakthrough was not yet feasible for the largely "green" British army. German Strategy and Commanders Initial Invasion: The German invasion of France and Belgium in 1914 was based on the ambitious Schlieffen Plan, which aimed for a massive attack through Belgium to outflank French defenses and destroy their army in a grand battle of envelopment. Helmuth von Moltke the Younger (Chief of the General Staff) was under immense pressure and altered the Schlieffen Plan, weakening its critical right wing, and ultimately suffered a nervous breakdown by mid-September 1914. Moltke's controversial decision to order General Kluck's First Army to turn southeast instead of enveloping Paris contributed to the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, despite Kluck initially ignoring the order. Kaiser Wilhelm: His character was inconsistent, often described as a "weather vane," and he gradually became a less central figure as Hindenburg and Ludendorff gained influence from 1916. Erich von Falkenhayn (replaces Moltke in 1914) was the architect of the Verdun Offensive (1916). His vision was unique, aiming not for territorial gains but for attrition: to "kill Frenchmen" and exhaust them. Political Interference: Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg often opposed Falkenhayn's desire for unrestricted submarine warfare due to diplomatic concerns (e.g., fear of American entry), illustrating the German military's tendency to prioritize tactical effectiveness over political and strategic issues, which was ultimately "fatal". French Efforts and Leadership Joseph Joffre (Commander of French Forces): Described as a "great hero" of the French army, Joffrepossessed remarkable calmness and an ability to absorb punishment and react quickly. His leadership was crucial in defeating the Schlieffen Plan and counterattacking at the Battle of the Marne in September 1914, preventing a German victory. Raymond Poincaré (President of the French Republic): A nationalist deeply involved in military analysis, Poincaré was central to the political efforts to reassert civilian primacy over the army and secure British manpower commitments. General Castelnau (Joffre's chief of staff): A deeply religious man who personally lost three sons in the war, Castelnau exemplifies the human cost and personal horror experienced by some senior commanders, helping to humanize these figures in Lloyd's narrative. Robert Nivelle: An artillery officer who rose rapidly due to his successes at Verdun, Nivelle replaced Joffrein December 1916. He attempted a decisive breakthrough in his Nivelle Offensive in April 1917 with a "formula" for success, but it failed catastrophically due to his being "out of his depth" at the command-in-chief level, leading to French army issues including mutiny. Philippe Pétain: Replaced Nivelle, Pétain became a "savior of France." He was renowned for his deep understanding of battlefield realities and a strong connection with his troops. At Verdun, he innovated by rotating divisions out of the line for rest and recuperation, contrasting with the German practice of fighting units "until basically there's not a lot left". Ferdinand Foch (Supreme Allied Commander from April 1918): Foch is widely regarded as one of the most important generals of the war. He was an energetic and charismatic leader who successfully coordinated the American, British, and French forces in 1918, leading them to victory in the multinational war. His reputation continues to strengthen over time. American Involvement Entry into War: The United States declared war on Germany and Austria in April 1917. General John J. Pershing arrived in Paris in June 1917 to lead the American Expeditionary Force (AEF), despite having only 113,000 men in the army at the time. Rejection of Amalgamation: Pershing steadfastly resisted French and British desires to "amalgamate" American manpower into their existing divisions, insisting that American soldiers fight as an independent army. He argued that the Allies had a poor record of "not killing your own troops". German Miscalculation: Germany severely underestimated how quickly the United States could build and deploy an army, believing it would take years. This misjudgment ultimately contributed to their defeat once the Americans demonstrated their seriousness in 1918. American involvement became "crucial" by 1917, changing the atmosphere. Evolution of Warfare on the Western Front From Movement to Stalemate: The initial German invasion failed to achieve a decisive victory, leading to the establishment of trench warfare after the Battle of the Marne. Realization of No Breakthrough: After the Second Battle of Champagne (1915), Allied and Germancommanders like Joffre and Falkenhayn began to recognize that a "grand shattering breakthrough" was not achievable in the foreseeable future. Constant Adaptation: This realization led to a continuous arms race. As Allied artillery and tactics improved, German defenses evolved from single lines to complex "zones of pill boxes," making progress difficult and bloody. The war became an intense exercise in violence where commanders constantly adapted to a "cauldron of war". Key Battles and Their Significance Battle of the Marne (September 1914): Joffre's successful counterattack forced the Germans to retreat, effectively ending the Schlieffen Plan and leading to the beginning of trench warfare. Second Battle of Champagne (September-October 1915): A major French offensive that, despite immense effort and casualties, failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, solidifying the understanding that trench deadlock could not be easily broken. Verdun (1916): Falkenhayn's attrition battle, designed to "kill Frenchmen," concentrated immense firepower in a small area, creating a "moonscape effect." While not decisive in destroying the French, it was a moment where "things start to go wrong for Germany," from which she never truly recovers. Somme (1916): A British and French offensive intended to relieve pressure on Verdun, but also driven by Haig's ambition for a breakthrough. The debate between breakthrough and Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy highlighted the dilemmas of Western Front warfare. Nivelle Offensive (April 1917): A disastrous French attempt at a breakthrough, which highlighted Nivelle'soverreach and led to significant disillusionment and mutiny within the French army. End of the War and its Legacy German Defeat: Lloyd's book argues that the German army was "falling apart" and "defeated rapidly in 1918" despite the persistent "stab in the back" myth that claimed they were betrayed at home. Armistice Decision: The decision by the Allies not to invade Germany was primarily political, as the British and French were "totally exhausted," while the Americans were "much fresher" and more keen to continue. Lloyd considers the armistice "fair on all sides". Lloyd's work underscores that the Western Front was a complex, multinational struggle marked by evolving strategies, immense pressures on commanders, and profound human costs, which ultimately determined the course of the Great War and cast a long shadow over the 20th century.