infamous commander of the first world war
136249
It's not derogatory, but the only link I've been able to find to Field Marshall Haig and poetry of any sort is this:\n\nIn the aftermath of World War I, Field Marshal Earl Haig, the British Commander-in-Chief, recognised the plight of the "lost generation" of survivors, and devoted the remainder of his life to organising support for those who suffered as a result of the War. From his actions emerged several organisations committed to the ex-Service community in Scotland, including the Earl Haig Fund Scotland.\n\nIn addition, Lady Haig established the Poppy Factory for disabled ex-Service men to produce paper poppies for sale to the public.\n\nThe tradition of using poppies has its roots in a poem written by Lt Colonel John McCrae, a Scots-Canadian medical officer who served in Flanders during World War I. The poem linked the red poppies which flourished on the war-torn battlefields with the sacrifice of the soldiers who died there.  The poem is titled "in Flanders Fields" and is shown below.\n\nIn Flanders Fields\n\nIn Flanders fields the poppies blow \nBetween the crosses, row on row, \nThat mark our place; and in the sky \nThe larks, still bravely singing, fly \nScarce heard amid the guns below. \n\nWe are the dead. Short days ago \nWe lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow, \nLoved and were loved, and now we lie \nIn Flanders fields. \n\nTake up our quarrel with the foe;\nTo you from failing hands we throw \nThe torch; be yours to hold it high. \nIf ye break faith with us who die \nWe shall not sleep, though poppies grow \nIn Flanders fields.
325591
The First World War, or (before 1939) the Great War, was a world conflict lasting from August 1914 to the final Armistice on November 11, 1918. The Allied Powers (led by the United Kingdom, France and until 1917 Russia, and, after 1917, the United States) defeated the Central Powers (led by the German Empire, Austro-Hungarian Empire and the Ottoman Empire). The war caused the collapse of four empires and a radical change in the map of Europe and the Middle East.
88784
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_war_I
566852
World war 1\n---------------------------------\nAllies\n\nSerbia,\nRussia,\nFrance (Raymond Poincaré),\nRomania,\nBelgium,\nBritish Empire (David Lloyd George / George V)\nUnited States (woodrow wilson),\nItaly (Vittorio Emanuele III / Vittorio Orlando),\nand others\n\nCentral Powers:\n\nGermany,\nAustria-Hungary,\nBulgaria,\nOttoman Empire\n\nWorld War 2\n---------------------------------\n\nAllies:\n\nUnited Kingdom (Churchill),\nFrance/Free France,\nSoviet Union (Stalin),\nUnited States (Franklin Roosevelt),\nChina,\nCommonwealth countries\nand others\n\nAxis Powers:\n\nGermany (Hitler),\nItaly (Mussolini),\nJapan (Hirohito),\nand others\n\nI have put together a list of Allies, Central Powers, and Axis Powers for both wars, plus traced down their leaders at the time (which are in the paranthesis). If you want to know more information, you can find great articles about both wars on wikipedia. I have put links to the articles themselves. Be sure to click a few of the links in each section because the different parts of the wars are on different pages.\n\nBoth wars were massive scale, so there are pages focused on different parts and who was involved.\n\nHope this helps you out!
42132
I’m getting too old, I can’t believe anyone would need to ask such a question.\nWorld War I, 1914–18, also known as the Great War, conflict, chiefly in Europe, among most of the great Western powers. It was the largest war the world had yet seen.Causes \nWorld War I was immediately precipitated by the assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary by a Serbian nationalist in 1914. There were, however, many factors that had led toward war. Prominent causes were the imperialistic, territorial, and economic rivalries that had been intensifying from the late 19th cent., particularly among Germany, France, Great Britain, Russia, and Austria-Hungary.\nOf equal importance was the rampant spirit of nationalism, especially unsettling in the empire of Austria-Hungary and perhaps also in France. Nationalism had brought the unification of Germany by blood and iron, and France, deprived of Alsace and Lorraine by the Franco-Prussian War of 1870–71, had been left with its own nationalistic cult seeking revenge against Germany. While French nationalists were hostile to Germany, which sought to maintain its gains by militarism and alliances, nationalism was creating violent tensions in the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy; there the large Slavic national groups had grown increasingly restive, and Serbia as well as Russia fanned Slavic hopes for freedom and Pan-Slavism.\nImperialist rivalry had grown more intense with the new imperialism of the late 19th and early 20th cent. The great powers had come into conflict over spheres of influence in China and over territories in Africa, and the Eastern Question, created by the decline of the Ottoman Empire, had produced several disturbing controversies. Particularly unsettling was the policy of Germany. It embarked late but aggressively on colonial expansion under Emperor William II, came into conflict with France over Morocco, and seemed to threaten Great Britain by its rapid naval expansion.\nThese issues, imperialist and nationalist, resulted in a hardening of alliance systems in the Triple Alliance and Triple Entente and in a general armaments race. Nonetheless, a false optimism regarding peace prevailed almost until the onset of the war, an optimism stimulated by the long period during which major wars had been avoided, by the close dynastic ties and cultural intercourse in Europe, and by the advance of industrialization and economic prosperity. Many Europeans counted on the deterrent of war's destructiveness to preserve the peace.\nWar's Outbreak \nThe Austrian annexation (1908) of Bosnia and Hercegovina created an international crisis, but war was avoided. The Balkan Wars (1912–13) remained localized but increased Austria's concern for its territorial integrity, while the solidification of the Triple Alliance made Germany more yielding to the demands of Austria, now its one close ally. The assassination (June 28, 1914) of Archduke Francis Ferdinand at Sarajevo set in motion the diplomatic maneuvers that ended in war.\nThe Austrian military party, headed by Count Berchtold, won over the government to a punitive policy toward Serbia. On July 23, Serbia was given a nearly unacceptable ultimatum. With Russian support assured by Sergei Sazonov, Serbia accepted some of the terms but hedged on others and rejected those infringing upon its sovereignty. Austria-Hungary, supported by Germany, rejected the British proposal of Sir Edward Grey (later Lord Grey of Fallodon) and declared war (July 28) on Serbia.\nRussian mobilization precipitated a German ultimatum (July 31) that, when unanswered, was followed by a German declaration of war on Russia (Aug. 1). Convinced that France was about to attack its western frontier, Germany declared war (Aug. 3) on France and sent troops against France through Belgium and Luxembourg. Germany had hoped for British neutrality, but German violation of Belgian neutrality gave the British government the pretext and popular support necessary fo
136187
Well, you have to realize that after WWI, Germany was plunged into a deep depression. Both economy and morale were virtually nonexistent, and they were deeply humiliated by their loss. But then along came Hitler, who was, by all accounts, an excellent politician. He was a magnanimous speaker who told the German people exactly what they wanted to hear. He raised both morale using a sense of nationalism, and the economy, using the "common man" (I think he focused mostly on farmers). Even the anti-semitism made sense at the time; they felt like they needed SOMEONE to blame for all their hardship, and Hitler gave them one. It was in this fashion that he managed to seize power; Germany was putty at his feet. There were obviously a select few who did find something wrong with the regime, but these were exceptions, rather than the rule. \n\nPoint is, Hitler knew what the hell he was doing. He was brilliant, plain and simple. Of course, he was also very wrong in the head. He had skewed ideals regarding other races, he wildly misinterpreted Nietzsche (although to be fair, just about everyone does), and his intentions were nothing short of evil. But he was brilliant. Taking all these factors into account, it kind of makes you wonder how anyone in Germany COULD think their government was wrong.
365045
1. Shrapnel does not ping off trees it embeds itself, just as he was alledgedly doing. I have heard and read about many exploits during the war,some true some blatantly untrue, it helps to pass the time and i love hearing them and never discourage or disrespect anyone who has lived through the war,my father was one such storyteller from his exploits he battled hitler single handedly, he once told me he was in Andy Clydes Commados it was years later when i learned that it was the army catering corps, what he didnt tell me that he was also in a highland regiment, that fought many battles and was a seargeant major and had been awarded twenty two medals several for courage displayed in battle, so i never thought about that because those memories he held in ,preffering to lighten his stories of daring rather than relive them, LF
597268
YEAH of course. There are some truths and ideals, and they became combined in the Prussian army in the history. I know that the main tactics and rituels towards armies today are rooted in the Prussian army. Clausewtiz is worth reading for understanding what a war really is and the DISCIPLINE phenomenon. The communal sense of war and transportation and settling plannings are just worth respect...
30078
Enver Pasha was a Turkish politician and soldier, who led a military revolt in Turkey in 1908.  Born in 1881, in the early 1900s, he came to believe the Ottoman Empire was in need of radical reform.  He joined forces with two other 'Young Turks' (a group of army officers who wanted to modernise the administration of the Ottoman Empire).  As a result of the rebellion, the incumbent Sultan, Abdul Hamid, was deposed in 1909.\n\nOn the outbreak of the First World War in 1914, Pasha (having aligned himself with Germany and Austria-Hungary) became Minister for War and when Turkey was defeated in 1918, he fled to Turkestan.\n\nEnver Pasha died in 1922 at the age of 41, whilst leading an anti-Bolshevik revolt in Turkestan.
281881
Other than Jesus of course, I would say the very opposite type of person.  Adolph Hitler did lots of damage.
255168
All I can tell you about Schrader's background is that he was born in Bortfeld, Germany. He was born in 1903 so he would have been about 11 by the time WWI hit. Depending on how far back you consider "childhood", it was either normal or he grew up during the war. If you're assuming the formative years, I'll assume normal.
232731
assasination of the archduke francis ferdinand
457856
NO way.   Report him to his Commanding Officer. Hes breaking military law civil law and moral law.
4488
His promotion to Major General was likely a war-time promotion, which by definition reverts to the lower level once his position in charge of the division was eliminated. He would have to be a general of some sort to be able to give orders to every member of the division. He was ostensibly removed because of his age, but I'm sure the fact that the division failed its readiness test didn't help anything.
116709
Adolf certainly was a complex individual with many demons antagonizing a small brain.  He probably should have stuck to his earlier career, that of a house painter. The German army, during WWI didn't think much of him either, he made it to lowly corporal when, during war time, rank is relatively easy to make.  All you need do is stay alive and have half a brain.  We all know that he stayed alive.\n \nAdolf seemed to have relationship problems with women, it is my guess that he was a closet homosexual (not that there's anything wrong with it)but knew that his ambitions in politics would grind to a screeching halt if anyone knew.\n\nHis hatred for Jews is a mystery, except that he disliked their business practices and monopoly of many of the professions.  Speculation has it that he too had Jewish blood (bite your tongue).\n\nHis war time strategy was horrendously bad, especially his collaberration with astrology.  This was Germany's downfall militarily.  This man would overrule his generals and admirals on strategic matters that would end in failure.  Those failures were demoralizing and costly to the Third Reich and eventually brought Germany to defeat in WWII.  The best idea Hitler ever had was the Volkswagon.  That was even better than the 'chicken in every pot'.  I believe this was coined by FDR, during the depression.\n\nHitlers biggest strength was his fiery oratories.  He had the ability to encite the German people in a time when they needed a way out.  Even they couldn't read between the lines on where this guy was taking them, and by the time they realized it, it was probably too late.  He knew that anti-semnitism ran high amongst the Germans, and he played on that for all it was worth.  This should be a warning to all, in a democracy such as ours.  All men are created equal!  Don't ever forget that, and do not let it get in your way when deciding equality, politics, professions, religion or any other debate that you may run in to, in your lifetime.
356613
A, the great Desert Fox. That was too Here's a link on him easy.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Rommel. I think it's sad he didn't survive the war and that it was very stupid for Hitler to have had him killed.\n\n"Rommel, you magnificent bastard! I read your book!"
89104
Lieutenant General Lewis Burwell "Chesty" Puller \n(he was a Colonel at the time, of course)\n\nFull article here:\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chesty_Puller