Ernest Schaal wrote:
> in article co3l04$ds5$1@nnrp.gol.com, Brett Robson at deep_m_m@hotmail.com
> wrote on 11/25/04 12:53 PM:
> 
> 
>>
>>Ernest Schaal wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Actually, the nature of war could have been foretold if they had looked at
>>>the right previous wars. Both the US Civil War and the Russo-Japanese War
>>>could have given them a sense of what would happen in trench warfare against
>>>prepared positions.
>>
>>It was.
> 
> 
> It was what? 

It was foretold. Generals were well aware of the power of machine 
gun and artillery. Get this, some of them even imagined the use 
of motor vehicles and aircraft!


> 
> It had everything to do with tactics. Only a fool hits prepared positions
> over and over when they don't have a numerical advantage.

This shows your complete ignorance both of what actually happened 
and what the objectives were.


> The European generals attacked, and attacked, and
> attacked, because the mantra of the times was "the only good defense is a
> strong offense."

More fantasy of yours.

> Yes, they wanted victory and they were prepared to pay for it. But no, that
> doesn't make them great generals. 

They are not "generals". They are "both sides", governments, 
politcians, nations.

> 
>>So you have some magic tactic that would prevent deaths in trench
>>warfare?
> 
> 
> For starters, play defensive more and offensive less.

Wow you are fucking genius. That is exactly how PARIS was 
defended. But then there was this little problem that France was 
full of Huns. And of course that is exactly what Germany did at 
the end of the war - and lost.

Now little give you a little gem. You stay in one spot you die in 
that spot. A defensive position attracts artillery like flies to 
a corpse. The British did lots of nasty things like tunneling 
underneath and blowing up German positions with huge mines, not 
to mention those big nasty guns.

Your opening tactic is useless, got anymore?

Nearly one million men on each side are facing each other. What 
are you going to do Field Marshall Schaal? Issue them with soft 
toys and tell them to play nice?


> There is an old saying that says only a fool repeats the same mistake over
> and over again and expects a different result. 

Here is a new saying, you don't know what you are talking about.


The European generals were
> fools in that they continued a losing tactic with no real chance of success,
> partly because of their egotistical pride and partly because of their
> dogmatic belief in the attack.
> 
> 
> The role of the American troops in the war is an interesting one  ...

Seems that is all you know. Try reading a history book that 
doesn't start with US soliders arriving in France, much like that 
other one of yours, WWII.



> One result of the way the British and French treated their Ally is that
> after the war America drifted into isolationism that delayed their entrance
> into the Second World War.
> 

I nearly choked on that one. Maybe you should read about US 
interference in the Versailles Treaty and the problems the US 
caused for France in the 1930s. Occupation of the Rhine is a good 
starting point. The Nye Commision makes good reading too.