The Biggest Misconceptions About Trench Warfare
2024 ж. 14 Мам.
648 620 Рет қаралды
Get an exclusive Surfshark VPN WINTER deal! Enter promo code SIDEPROJECTS to get up to 6 additional months for free at Surfshark.deals/SIDEPROJECTS
This video is #sponsored by Surfshark.
Biographics: / @biographics
Geographics: / @geographicstravel
Warographics: / @warographics643
MegaProjects: / @megaprojects9649
Into The Shadows: / intotheshadows
TopTenz: / toptenznet
Today I Found Out: / todayifoundout
Highlight History: / @highlighthistory
Business Blaze: / @brainblaze6526
Casual Criminalist: / thecasualcriminalist
Decoding the Unknown: / @decodingtheunknown2373
Get an exclusive Surfshark VPN WINTER deal! Enter promo code SIDEPROJECTS to get up to 6 additional months for free at Surfshark.deals/SIDEPROJECTS
Timeout, you mention trenches are only used in a few cases and forgot to mention Ukraine and Russia. It being used in modern warefare and shows the stalemate of future wars with world powers... assuming we don't go nuclear.
All Wars are Fake and you know it. VPN's are a data gathering op.
I can't believe you said the Americans turned up to save the day when you didn't even mention the Australians or anyone else that were on the bloody western or eastern front whatever it was kicking ass long before the American showed up, who were responsible for World War 1 by selling the Germans the military equipment and sending Houdini over to teach them how to fly . Of course we never mention Australia, look at the battle of Beersheba 20,000 British troops could not take the town the Aussies did it in one hour on horseback charging at machine gun fire without even firing a shot till they got to the trenches only losing 40 men obviously the Aussies show up the big country's so they don't like to mention us but always want to call us up when they're going in
In my opinion, you really shouldn't have skipped right past Boelcke to Richthofen. The whole evolution of aerial warfare, especially on the German side but not limited to it, was built upon his 'Dicta' or rules of dogfighting combat. He deserved a mention at that spot.
2:34 I wouldn't consider trench warfare "a thing of the past". It's more or less what the conflict between Ukraine and Russia has boiled down to in many areas.
Indeed. Tanks and better aircraft made trench warfare mostly obsolete after WW1, but cheap drones and better air defense made a return to trench warfare between state-level powers.
For real, this got me immediately , did he forget all the other videos he makes, or did the surfshark ad distract him for thinking
"for the most part" is an important part of that sentence.
I mean, the Museum pieces that both sides are using are also a thing of the past, but they're still being used.
I’d have to say it’s reverted to trench warfare for the reason, it’s really the first large scale conflict since WW2 that is between ‘near peer’ adversaries.
My Great Uncle was a pilot in WWI. He said it was the most terrifying thing he'd ever experienced, but they were instructed to say nothing about the fear. The idea was to inspire young men to join up and be glorious heroes. Afterwards he felt terrible guilt about that.
That still very much exists.... modern recruiters don't mention the horrors that these KIDS are potentially signing up for.
@@captainspaulding5963Or the fact that Uncle Sam will do everything in its power to deny you your benefits.
Being a WW1 pilot was probably the most dangerous thing you could do. The ware broke out less than 11 years after the Wright Brothers flight, and the aircraft were extremely primitive and unreliable. A pilot had a good chance of crashing and dying even if he never encountered the enemy.
@@anthonygerace332 His plane was made of wood and fabric! He near died of fear every time he had to get back in and fly again. He did it 13 times.
Plus unlike Germany, England and America didn’t give pilots parachutes. They wouldn’t even do so for training. Apparently they ‘encouraged cowardice’. I’m guessing it never occurred to them that if you don’t have pilots who live through a dogfight, you don’t have experienced pilots. Japan 20 years would learn that the hard way with kamikazes. Eventually all the experienced pilots were extremely few amongst 100’s- 1000’s of inexperienced pilots. And it did not do them any favors.
German’s trenches are VERY different from the Allies. I met a guy in college who knew about it from his grandfather. For clarity…I’m OLD. College was 1973. He was the youngest grandchild and the grandfather was just over 90. The GrF had a couple of those really grainy pics of him in one trench. He said rats, as big as a small terrier were everywhere. There was always water in the trenches. (The Germans usually had wood, laid down as floors). He said you ALWAYS had to check your feet. Shoes that seldom dried out fully, would soften and many men had to use razors to separate the skin of their feet from the spongey leather. You had to keep your threadbare, soggy socks on your person, pockets etc because the rats would take them. Everyone says this, but it’s a tragedy no one recorded this veteran while he was still in his 50’s, while his voice was stronger
The tragedy is that this whole war could have been avoided if the Americans didn't keep selling military equipment to the enemy and then changing sides
One aspect that really doesn't get examined is that for all of the horrors of trenches, they were safer than the alternative. The whole point of trenches was to protect soldiers who would otherwise be out in the open and easy targets. The Canadian experience serves as an example. Canadians consistently served in some of the bloodiest battles throughout the war. It must be noted then that of the 60k Canadian deaths during the war, almost half of those happened during the Hundred Days Offensive at the end of the war when the fighting returned to more mobile forms.
Well Thank you for explaining „fortifications“
Totally fair point. There were absolutely still trenches in WWII too. People just weren’t strolling up to them by the thousands 😬 the tactics to take them were much better. But digging yourself into a hole in the ground, making it harder to shoot you and more capable of hiding your men? Still totally legit.
the French suffered approx. 4 million casualties during the war, 1 million of these were in the first 4 months
Not necessarily. Successful maneuvre warfare coupled with combined arms warfare had the potential to kill many more enemies, achieve strategic objectives and significantly improve kill / death ratios. By doing so, such offensives could have shortened the war but many officers were attached to outdated doctrine which prolonged the war and encouraged a stalemate to emerge. Arguably, the trenches (and the fact that they were a viable option on a grand scale in this context) prolonged the war and led to outbreaks of disease. On a tactical scale, the trenches saved lives but there is an argument that they created an industrialised meat grinder thanks to decisions at the strategic level - decisions that trenches enabled.
@@aymonfoxc1442 The trenches really weren't a choice. WW I happened just after the Napoleanic wars where artillery was massively successful, particularly the use of artillery just before an assault. We were also still on the tail end of an age where war was romanticized. Many of the sides still war colourful, flamboyant dress, especially for the officers. The entire mindset of the militaries at the time was to "just do what's worked before and we'll all have a gentlemanly time of us". The same problem that plagued the US the american civil war plagued the world during WW I. Weapons advanced significantly and tactics did not. Using generation old tactics with a generation old mindset while using next generation weapons. It's easy to look back and be like "duh just cover and move and you'll increase survivability by like 90%" but it's impossible to get past the mindset of the time. It's truly such a different time than today. Even just basic problem solving and logic has increased ridiculously since then. We're so much smarter than we were a hundred years ago. Now adays if a modern tactic stopped working it wouldn't take a master tactician to suggest we stop doing that and change it to something else.
A filthy existence, exposed to artillery shelling, occasionally being exposed to gas attacks, the stench of dead bodies, and raw sewage, standing in water leading to trench foot. And boredom, punctuated by terror of attacking, or being attacked. That sums it up
Only thing worse than WWI is probally the Iran Iraq war, which featured chemical weapons attacks and extensive trench warfare, but with better weapons and in the freaking desert
Don't forget the rats. 🐀sm
@@cascadianrangers728also swamps. Swamps of which were electrified to electrocute large numbers of men
@@badart3204i rember hearung a story of some fwllow who fought for the irgc. He brought a reporter to show the iraqis. The reporter panicked as they were almost arrived through a swamp, thousands of them. Then the guy flipped an electronic switch and they all fried to death.
@@cascadianrangers728you obviously know nothing about WW2.
I was slightly surprised that the trench warfare of the U.S. Civil War didn't get mentioned. The extensive use of trenches by Grant demonstrated that trench combat was going to be important to the European observers.
Many sieges in the 16th and 17th century involved massive trench networks and battles were often fought to stop the enemy from reaching the defensive positions. The movie Alatriste gives a stunning rendition of trench and tunnel warfare during the siege of Breda in 1624.
@@rotwang2000 If you want to talk about sieges and trenches then you can go back to Troy! 1500 is rookie years. Julius Caesar's accounts of his Gaul campaigns include pages of discussion of the offensive and defensive trench works of his own army.
You guys understand the difference between Entrenched Warfare in the age of Rifles and artillery and the dark ages.... right?
@@JetEngine787 1600's is the period of Pike and Shot where trenches was the only way to take a fortress defended by cannons and muskets. Redoubts and trenches are used in battles to reinforce one's lines (Yorktown, Poltava, Borodino etc) and from 1850 onward we see troops routinely use trenches in extended campaigns, like the Civil War, Crimean War, Balkan Wars, Russo-Japanese war etc.
They don’t like that the US invented the modern world
Trench warfare was used in the US Civil War. The Siege of Petersburg Virginia is an example. The Battle of the Crater is a great story from the siege, including the Union seizing defeat from the jaws of victory.
I've read that European military observers of the American Civil War denigrated both sides extensive use of trenches believing that it showed that they lacked tactical and maneuver expertise. They found out soon enough that the growing lethality of weapons would soon foist the same trenches upon them.
@@primafacie9721the very mobile Franco-Prussian, Austro-Prussian, Russo-Turkish and even the 2 Balkan Wars gave a very false sense of vindication for the Great Powers of Europe that "fighting spirit" can overcome even the best of static defenses. Even the massive casualties suffered by the Japanese in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905 were overlooked because of how inept the Russians were on the defense and the Japanese won all of the major land engagements in Manchuria despite their high losses.
@@senpainoticeme9675I mean that did work when the fronts were large enough to maneuver around. The eastern front was much more mobile but the western front was too narrow for the millions of men to outmaneuver each other thus it bogged down
@@badart3204 what I meant is that the Great Powers learned nothing what modern weapons could do defensively despite major wars preceding 1914. Even the much more mobile eastern front still have the defenders having the advantage when it comes to inflicting casualties when employed properly. The Russo-Japanese War really did fucked up the mentality of the militaries of the Great Powers since the Russians failed how to properly field their machine guns and breech loading rifles/artillery outside of the bloody siege of Port Arthur. If the military observers learned the proper lessons of how modern weapons could make the human wave tactics pre 1914 bloody on the offensive, they would have properly appreciated the nascent lessons of the American Civil War and develop tactics to counter static warfare.
The machine gun didn't tip the balance towards the defense, nor did modern French artillery. Rifles were accurate to hundreds of yards in the Civil War, and a calvary charge would eat three volleys from arty before they reached the line. After the Civil War, cartridges, needle rifles, and bolt action greatly increased lethality.
Ian McCollum - of Forgotten Weapons fame - gave an impromptu lecture on the French mutinies of 1917 ("Ian Explains the French Mutinies of 1917"). It is 14 minutes of him talking on a bus, without notes, and it explains many of the 'whys' of WW1 better than entire books I have read. It is absolutely required viewing.
Any chance you know the name of the video? I can't seem to locate it in the KZhead nether sphere
@@roryhennessey8836 How? He gave the title and I got it as the first result using "Ian Frensh mutiny".
France at the time has used court martials to discipline people for breaking. It's hard to do that when an entire unit refuses to move. They don't start shootin their own officers and turning to march on Paris, they start to refuse orders to advance but still hold their current positions. A lot of the armies in '17 are starting to teeter.
@@roryhennessey8836 I replied yesterday and my reply got disappeared. Completely gone. No idea why. Trying again. If searching for "Ian Explains the French Mutinies of 1917" doesn't bring anything up on KZhead, go to the Forgotten Weapons channel, and look for the magnifying glass icon that is to the right of the "Home Videos Shorts Live ..." line. That lets you search just within that channel. Search for "mutinies" and the video should be top of the results.
@@roryhennessey8836 Okay, my replies keep disappearing, this is my third try. If searching for "Ian Explains the French Mutinies of 1917" doesn't bring anything up on KZhead, go to his channel, and click on the magnifying glass icon that that lets you search just within that channel. Search for "mutinies" and the video should be top of the results.
My Grandfather served in WWI in France (Canadian Expeditionary Force) and I don’t think that he ever set foot in a trench. His battalion (173rd) was broken up upon reaching France to reinforce other battalions and because he was only barely seventeen he was assigned to the Forestry Corps felling, hauling and sawing trees to supply the large amounts of wood planks and telegraph poles required. I have a photo of him with his team of horses that were used to haul the logs.
I just finished reading “All Quiet on the Western Front “. Recommended reading about the atrocities of warfare. With the never ending barrage of artillery it’s no wonder that the trenches collapsed or were filled with bodies. Gruesome.
The dug holes close to 10 meters deep with their artillery. And they were firing for days, sometimes even weeks without breaks. Then the stormed forward, and somehow the enemy had survived and the attackers died in the machine gun fire.
I have read All Quiet On The Western front too. It is very compelling.
It’s an anti war propaganda book so it would be compelling.
Have you seen the film? Superb film that gives a small glimpse into the horror or war
@@SprogFla Which one of the three? And the newest one sucks, it is a shitty Disney version of how it was back then.
If you want to see WW1 from a different light watch they shall not grow old. I'm sure most people know about it but for those who don't it's a documentary that got colored, steadied, increased frame rate and audio added to it to where it looks so much more recent. It's surreal to watch and makes it much easier to see these young guys as real people than the old Shakey black and white film that you feel so far removed from. It's very enlightening. I saw it on one of the streaming services recently, I think it was prime. It starts off black and white and then the color, sound and everything comes in making you suddenly feel super immersed. It's a cool effect.
That sounds pretty cool! I'll have to check it out 😎
Great piece
@@Crossbuzzin420It’s fascinating, and on Netflix now, I believe.
Im surprised how many people didn’t know the casualty count from WW1. That’s what’s crazy.
WW2 always takes the spotlight. I remember WW2 having it's own entire chapter during history class, while WW1 only was a small footnote.
The Great War became the forgotten war after WW2.
@@marktg98 Too be fair I think the Soviet Union had more casualties in WW2 than the total casualties of all countries in WW1
WWII definitely has the larger death tole- but with respect, I would rather have served in WWII. They had better tactics and supply chains and medical knowledge etc WWI was an existential nightmare. (Again no disrespect to the amazing brave people who fought both wars. Both were horrible, I’m only saying if I was forced to pick one that would be my personal choice)
@OpalLeigh don't be sorry bro u made a fair statement. I for one completely agree.
While commenting on WWl it is not helpful or historically accurate to use images from WWll. I believe I even saw images from the American Civil War. I challenge you to dig deeper for your supporting imagery.
Trench works were elaborate in the American civil war around Petersburg, they really came to the full WWI version in the Russo Japanese war at Port Arthur. The dedicated ground attack plane was introduced late in WWI...
I suppose you're not aware that the Americans actually started World War 1 by selling the military equipment to the Germans and then changing sides and selling to the allies ?
I met a WWI American vet when I was in college. I asked him how men could fight effectively when they were facing the fear of almost certain death. He said, "When someone shoots at you, it makes you so angry that you shoot back."
Did you know the only reason that War started was because the Americans sold all the military weapons to the Germans knowing what they were going to do and then supplied the allies
They're using trenches in ukraine, modern man portable rpgs make tanks a lot less effective. Drone strikes are good but far from perfect. Average infantry men are not worth using a 2-3 million dollar bunker buster. Trenches are still an effective way to make hard points on the front that make advancing very difficult, especially when you mine in between hard points.
Bunker busters don't cost that much, and you wouldn't use them on trenches anyway. Some cruise missiles cost that much but are rare and get used on valuable targets; a simple 2000-pound (or 1000 kg) glide bomb that can wreck all but the strongest bunkers costs a few tens of thousands of dollars and has a lethal radius of perhaps 400 meters. The reason that trenches work in Ukraine is that neither side can get air superiority right now. Russia has better planes but they can't go up against Western anti-aircraft systems. Ukraine has older and fewer aircraft and can't afford to lose them against Russian anti-aircraft or air-to-air missiles. This leads both sides to race up, lob weapons, and zip away, all at low altitude. As a result, their ground forces can't move as much, making trenches useful.
For cleaning trenches in Ukraine they use instead a 1000 bucks quadcopter droping an RPG warhead.
RPGs have existed for decades now and are not the reason for tank losses and have not made them less effective either. The reason behind the tank losses is a matter of doctrine and not because of the sudden appearance of new wunderwaffe. Tanks are still very effective on the modern battlefield, but they have to be used properly and part of that is including infantry with any armored formation, infantry that can screen for the tanks because of their better all around visibility. But to do that, they can't be buttoned up inside of APCs and IFVs, they have to be unbuttoned an actively looking around, and it doesn't hurt to some out on foot searching the sides of the roads for hidden anti-tank teams.
Ukraine is completely different they're not living in the trenches for months on end isolated they go home when the conditions are bad
I remember reading a line in my high school textbook the British lost 30,000 men in one morning. True or not, it got my attention and gave me the scale of the carnage.
That's mentioned in the longer version video by Sabaton - 1916 - song originally by Motorhead. The Sabaton one is well worth watching for the information roll that follows the actual song portion.
That's an exaggeration, but not a huge one. On the first day of The Somme the British suffered 19,000 dead and 38,000 injured.
@@jdb47games Losses are the accumulation of dead and wounded; so by your numbers, which I will just take at face value for this, the British suffered 57000 lost men that morning, which makes the 30000 OP mentioned definitely not an exaggeration.
They reckoned first day of the Somme cost them nearly 60,000, or that’s what I’ve read, at those numbers the people who counted the casualties were all dead too, whole battalions gone, in a blink, My grandfather was 16 in the Argyll and Sutherland highlanders, lied about his age and joined up, 16 yrs old, a child, he must have been lucky he survived the Somme, then as an old man on MTBoats in the channel 1940 ended up at Dunkirk, survived that too, he died at 52,quite young, 9 of those yrs at war, 😮
@@alanwilkin8869 what did you 'read'?
Will never forget a WW I Vet came and talked to our class when I was 5 years old in 1974. He was a tall thin man and wore his uniform. He was not very talkative so during the questions at the end Is how I remember him best. A kid asked him if he shot anyway? The Nun said he did not have to answer that. He said it is okay and went on that he was not sure but he fired his gun at the enemy a lot so maybe. Another kid asked him if he felt bad about shooting at people. He laughed and said, well that was what they told me to do and I just wanted to do what they told me so I could go back home and help my family on the farm. I am American as was he. Wish I knew who he was. I suspect be is buried in the very town I still live in. Such a kind and humble man some 50 years later I can still see his face and hear his laugh.
Trenches were dug in the 1982 Falklands war. 3 Commando Brigade Royal Marines, with the attachment of 2 Parachute Regiment battalions - 2 and 3 Para - dug in on reverse slopes immediately after landing in San Carlos Bay.
Goering was the Red Baron 2nd in command. Taking over 'The Flying Circus' after his dead
The Americans who sold all the military equipment the Germans also sent Harry Houdini over to teach them how to fly
10 million casualties that’s crazy
That is, but also keep in mind that casualties don't mean just killed, that number also includes wounded. So that 10 million figure means the total dead and wounded and wounded can include somebody with a bullet wound that went clean through the meaty part of an arm or leg without hitting a vital organ or major blood vessel. But, it is still a staggering number.
And every life could have been saved if it wasn't for the Americans sending all the military equipment to the Germans in the first place
Trenches are a thing of the past? Ukraine anyone?
You have no clue what you are talking about
Looks like a pigeon is trying to play chess with you.
Trenches have been used as defenses since the beginning of warfare. They were not introduced in ww1. The war in Ukraine is NOT trench warfare. It is significantly more urban.
@@engineer0323 idk what war you've been watching, there is more in Ukraine than just urban, there is thousands of kilometers of farmland
@ryuhanja3415 and it's not even kind of trench warfare. The tactics are still very urban. Small groups formtions with massive emphasis on light armored vehicles. Whereas trench warfare is mass wave attacks and usually insanely heavy armor to break the lines
The biggest misconception about trench warfare is the fact that people think its a thing of the past, when in reality trench warfare is very much a staple of war still to this day. The only time it isnt is when one force massively outclasses the other, like allies vs iraq (both wars) allies vs taliban, etc.
Yes but people don't live in the trenches for 6 months without any technology very different
You forgot one major example of trench warfare...Ukraine.
I was thinking the same thing.
Go see Bovington Tank Museum, south England. It has an excellent recreation of both sides of trench. Hundreds of original tanks , too.
The Canadian corps earned the moniker storm troopers at the battle of the Somme, They were feared by the germans for night raids and not taking prisoners.
My Great Uncle fought for Canada in WW1. Never met him, but I heard some of the very few stories he told others. I found his file on Ancestry as well. Based on unit, date and injury, he fought in the vanguard attack on Vimy Ridge. He was probably at the 3rd Battle of Ypres (Passchendaele) as well. He was always one of the first Canadians sent over and sent in the initial attacks of major battles. He came home with medals from German officers. I'm pretty sure he was one of these notorious Canadian soldiers known for their brutality. He was only injured twice in 4 years, survived multiple gassings and lived into his 80s.
The Canadian perfected war by any means! Throw in food to the German trench then when they call for more or you hear them coming to get the food throw In some “cooked” grenades
@@imurgodsgodthey also perfected the art of get the British to win this war other wise they’d be label with some of the worst war crimes I the whole conflict. The Treatment of POW’s in the Genova Convention references Canadians treatment of German POW’s.
it's only a warcrime if you lose
@@soundwavegamer2321care to provide a citation for your claims? I won’t hold my breath.
No mention of tunnelling under the trenches? Both sides had extensive mining teams trying to dig through, so as to pop up in or behind enemy trenches, while having to constantly listen ahead of where they were digging, so as to avoid accidentally digging into the other side's under trench tunnels. That was a big part of trench warfare in ww1 that rarely gets attention. There is an Aussie film about it if anyone's interested, "beneath hill 60"
Digging underneath earthworks and forts happened in the early modern period. People figured out they could dig tunnels, stash them with explosives and light up a section of a fort from underneath. It's hard to move large amounts of troops through these little tunnels. Sometimes they shuffle and infiltrate small units, like you can have people sneak into and out of the city. And they have some sort of skirmishes in tunnels now and then. But they can't move a field army throuhg them.
Yes rather disappointing the Australians never get a mention even though we kicked ass over there .
My maternal Grandfather was 17 at Ypres. He was taken off the front line to drive ambulances (being one of the few who could drive) and ended up back there bringing out the dead and injured.
Last time I was this early we had trench warfare Never mind we still do
Sobs in Russian Infantry....
@@punksoab😂😂😂
@@punksoab Ukrainians are fighting from trenches, too. It's a return to early last century for both sides.
Trenches of today are very different to what they had back then
@@James-kv6kb What they had in WW1 were arguably better. Most of those were planned and built to drain water, and connected to other sets of trenches so you could get to the front lines without ever getting your head shot. What they have now are often disconnected and ad hoc. For all the criticism of the trenches Russia built as part of the Surovikin Line, they allowed men to move fast, stock up supplies, and have useful cover, and were difficult to actually take. When Ukraine did take them, the Russians had similar problems trying to get them back. What they have now are sometimes planned but more often ad hoc, cramped, and frequently lack proper drainage leading to a lot of cases of trench foot and other illnesses and injuries, as well as a higher chance of getting shot or hit by artillery when moving between trenches. (The Russians have this problem, too, away from their prepared trench lines.)
My grandpa in the HAC told me a couple of his WW1 experiences in the western front trenches, one was having his face covered in the bloody remains of the soldier who had been nearest to him, hit by a shell on his first attack across no mans land, and the other of a 'live show' behind the lines which was so disgusting it will never be included in a film or documentary on trench warfare. My other grandad was a Royal Engineer in the trenches and once got lost laying cable and finding himself behind the German trenches he managed to get back unscathed.
oh dear
Ok what’s a live show?
@@charlesterrizzi8311 a performance which I doubt would be permitted in any officially recognised red light district.
My grandfather fought in trenches in WW2. In his bataliion was a guy from bavaria named Tony. During one attack, Tony had to be left in no man's land and screamed for a few days befoe he died. My grandfather dreamed of this over and over again. And he told us the story over and over. After his death, we called a taumatic incident in our life "our personal Tony".
7:35... Storm Battalion 5 "only took 600 casualties," that's over half the unit lol
That really did "reshape my understanding" of WW1 and of trench warfare in particular. Your description of the "typical attack" paralleled the battle scene from the original All Quiet on the Western Front.
Did mention any of the people that kicked ass in this conflict only the Americans turning up to save the day as if he's been paid to say that .
I remember my grandfather Tommy Taylor who fought at Ypres (he called it "Wipers" ) telling me how they had to beat the carcass of dead horses with rifle butts to get rid of the rats before they could harvest the meat. As a young boy at the time I never fully understood the horror, physical and mental my grandfather and his comrades endured. RIP Grandad, wish I'd been older to fully appreciate what you did for us.
I think it's worth pointing out that the Maginot Line worked mostly as intended, but failed due to political and strategic failures that led Belgium to lose faith in the joint defense. When Germany massed armor at the Ardennes (specifically to avoid the strong defenses of the Maginot Line), French leadership refused to believe it was possible for Germany to attack through the forest, leading Leopold III to the correct conclusion that the Line would rapidly collapse inside Belgian territory. This is why he surrendered-France had abandoned them, and Belgium could not withstand the full force of a massive German assault alone. If France had recognized the threat and responded firmly, the joint Franco-Belgian defensive line would almost certainly have held, and the War in Europe would have ended then and there.
Except that airplanes can fly over forts.
@@tomsmith3045 They can, but airplanes can be shot down and airplanes cannot hold ground. After all, if the Maginot Line wasn't a problem why did the Nazis have to go around it?
@@NupetietI joke, but static defenses have been known not to be a good idea since the American civil war. The Maginot line was of course a problem, but it's fault wasn't that it wasn't long enough, it was that it was a poor choice. The same money spent on a modern army would have left France much less vulnerable. They tried to plan to re-fight WW1 again, and it was an incredibly poor plan by any objective analysis. Airplanes absolutely can hold ground, when they deliver troops by air, and that's exactly one of the methods they used to defeat Maginot. They can also land troops behind it.
@@tomsmith3045 It would certainly have been a more effective constraint on Hitler if the Franco-Belgian alliance held, but you are correct that relying on permanent fortifications is a bad idea. The Maginot Line incorporated logistical features like parallel railroads and tunnels to mitigate some of the downsides, but I think we can both agree that a stationary fort gives the attacker the benefit of only having to defeat it once, and possessing it thereafter.
@@Nupetiet I get why they did it, in a sense wanting to avoid the suffering of ww1 trenches.
The last season of ‘ Black Adder ‘ does a great job of showing both the day to day life of life in the trenches, and ultimately the futility of trench warfare.
The last line of the last script of the entire Blackadder series. "They do not get far" When asked if they could reshoot the last scene again Rowan simply said No. . . hence the transition to {ideally} flander's fields.
Possibly the most poignant and greatest ending ever to a series.
it was a comedy played for sick laughs. How do you know 'it does a great job'? you are deluded, sadly.
Not really.
Read the book Storm of Steel ---- absolutely terrifying diary of a low ranking German officer who survived the front for 4 years.
The problem with peoples' views of trench warfare is that many do not realise how much it changed. As war historian Spencer Jones says, Napoleon would have felt at home with the tactics of 1914, yet by 1918 the tactics were basically the same as today's. That fact also disproves the idea that World War 1 generals never learned anything and just did the General Melchett tactics as shown in Blackadder.
The French Generals of WWI didn't learn anything because they built their elaborate trench system after WWI that ended up being a stumbling block for them and Germany overran them and defeated France quickly in WWII.
@@robertkarp2070 Oh, you know so much. Where did you gast your 'facts'?
The armies in 1918 have become proto-WW II armies. They use infiltration tactics, they have a hint of modern combined arms warfare. All the Great Powers are advancing doctrine, but not so mismatched that one side outpaces the other. They lack a few key things. Communication in 1910 was racing ahead but communications from the HQ section to forward units, especially units pushing out into no man's land, was awkward. A lot of their plans are pre-planned time tables with little room for adjustment and exploitation on a large scale. Communication consists of flags, runners, whistles, telephone cable and messener pigeons etc. A spotter in a balloon or aircraft has to land or drop film in a chute instead of communicating directly with the ground.
All so the Americans can make money out of selling military equipment absolutely disgusting
Worth mentioning the quick clip of dogfight, seems to be WW2, not WW1
My Grandpa's uncle wrote a diary of his "trench warfare" with the US Army. He wrote that much of his time was actually away from the trenches. He spent hours upon hours of just "laying around".
Typical you start the bloody war then claim your coming to save the world and your soldiers sit on their ass and don't actually do anything
@@James-kv6kb USA "started" WWI? Facts please.
Funny this video got uploaded now. The game All Quiet in the Trenches just released in Early Access on the 17th. Especially that last part of the video reminds me a lot of that game - you're mostly in the camp or in the trenches but without a fight going on. It's a lot about preparing, waiting and the ultimate futility of it all. Probably worth a look, if you're interested in these topics.
It makes me want a vomit the Americans just keep making money out of War they started World War 1 and now they're still making money out of children's games about it it's pathetic we certainly could do without that country
WW1 has more myths associated with it than WW2. Its just not as often discussed.
No one ever talks about the Americans suppling the Germans so they could attack and then change sides
Worst part is the entire war was completely pointless
you mean the very one war that saw 5 big empires collapsed? world war one is neither pointless nor avoidable.
It's not true that the Maginot line failed or was obsolete. It forced the Germans to invade through Belgium. It can be argued that the only real failure was not extending the Maginot line all the way to the North Sea, whether along the French border or the Belgian and Dutch borders; either would have been good enough, since there was no point in invading Belgium or Holland alone.
The British first encountered trench warfare in their battles against the Maori in New Zealand during the late 19th century. The Maori had been utilizing trenches to defend their elevated settlements for centuries.
In movies I never saw a rolling barrage, something that I understood was often used in WW1.
Both my grandfathers fought in WW2, one was in the Australian Army in Africa fighting Rommel, the other was a UK navigator in B-52s bombing Germany and other targets. Both were real men, never took a step back in any situation. They also never said a word about their experiences that changed their lives. Both a bit scary under the surface if you pushed, PTSD I guess, but solid men- one was 5 foot tall the other over 6 feet tall but neither man was the lesser, completely honest , spoke their minds without fear or favour, role models, family men, strong morals and community leaders. I wish we lived with these men to lead us now.
My Grandfather was in the US 3rd. He literally almost never spoke about it. The only things he told me is 1. that he would always hate Germans until his dying day, 2. and that he would give back his purple heart and silver star to have never walked into Buchenwald.
Such a shame no one ever gives the Australians the credit they deserve for their outstanding service . Secretly I think the big countries are a bit jealous . Lest We forget
@@editorrbr2107you don't know the Americans sold the military weapons to the Germans and then changed sides and sold to the allies . So like the American soldiers today sadly they've got no idea what's going on
I think you likely mean B-17s, or B-25s, as B-52s were not in service during WW2.
Into the trench, boys, it's gonna be epic. Cheers from Tennessee
How disgusting an American actually making fun of this when you started the whole bloody thing by selling military equipment
You don't know your country started this whole thing by selling military equipment
@@James-kv6kbGet over it.
The first weapon used in aerial combat was a brick. A German pilot dropped it on a French aeroplane, tearing a great hole in it. The French pilot made a hasty retreat.
And who taught the Germans how to fly Harry Houdini sent over by the American as part of the arms deal
Everyone always talks up Richthofen, but no love for our guy, Billy Bishop. In fact, he gets slandered. Such a shame.
Fair call. Also Fonck, Mannock and McCudden. To me Fonck is the greatest ace. His own tally was over 100 and he survived the war.
But was he ever immortalized by a cartoon beagle?
@andrewstevenson118 the red barons friend also reportedly had a last stand where he was outnumbered heavily but performed well, if I remember right he was I. A modifies fokker dr1 he modified himself
So the Black Adder series was more accurate.....
The progress aeronautics made within just 4 years in between 1914 and 1918 is absolutly staggering - just as the fact that it took not even a human lifetime from the first powered flight in 1903 to the moon landing in 1969. Only 66 years to utterly master something some scientists thought to be impossible to begin with as recently as 1902..
The unfortunate reality, nothing is as good at driving technological advances as war.
And the computer behind the moon landing was less powerful than the simplest electronic device you'd have now.
@@holygooff Yep, a modern smartphone exeeds the capacity of all super-computers contributing to the moon landing combined which is pretty crazy to think of - you are a so right to point it out as well! 👌
That's about 3 casualties per inch of territory during the battle of the Somme
Forgetting that the Somme was planned as a joint operation with the French until the French needed to transfer troops to the Verdun battle. Haig had only been in command for 6 months. It was the first battle of the expanded British army that was rushed through training (some never trained with guns,as an example), the failures of offensives in 1915 were out down to shell shortage,which is why the preliminary barrage was so huge. There was no way of coordinating troops with artillery except by strict timings, communication was only by runners as telephone cables would get cut or have to be laid while advancing,etc.
Hello Simon, Thanks for the great video. Could you and your team prepare a video on spy communications during WWII. It could sound as a very niche interest at first, but if you research the matter you'll see how many Allied spies were deployed and hidden in occupied territories, and their daily heroic actions - to transmit their intelligence to England (mostly) while the Germans were using radio direction finders to locate the area and the building where our spies were located. It is a very appealing but also gut-wrenching tale of cat & mouse, where the allies had to face a very determined and powerful enemy - but at the end they won. Sadly British radios were clunky and deaf when compared to the corresponding US models, which were all of superheterodyne design, with the British radios being of a simpler super-reactive design, therefore saving a couple of vacuum tubes, some battery power, and a lot of complexity. Thank you. Greetings, Anthony
7:25 That's not how you pronounce Vosges, Simon!😆
Artilleries upgrades, machinguns upgrades before WW1 frenzied cavalry divisions maneuvering and mass infantry assault during 1914 ..that pushed 🫸 both sides toward trenches wayfarer
WAR TO END ALL WARS! That was a misconception.
No that wasn't the idea the idea was piss off the Germans so much that they would have another go and the Americans could keep making money out of selling military equipment which is how the first world war actually started
I read an autobiography from an English soldier during ww1. He described it as great fun and nothing like what you read in All Quiet on the Western Front
The Maginot Line was there before the first World War. That is why Germany went through Belgium and some other countries so they could go around the Maginot Line. In the first World War if you gained a few yards it was a great victory. German's developed a type of warfare to go around the enemy which was more mobile.
Our alien masters are getting out the grilles , inviting their buddies over to watch the greatest show of carnage ever.
If you think German stormtroopers are cool, you will love the Italian Arditi, whos motto was "We win or we all die"
Considering the Italian war efforts the latter was usual what happened I mean Izonso isn’t famous for nothing.
In World War II the Australians were rounding up thousands of them they just gave up
Depends what part of the front and yr for mud chalky dry dirt and forest. I still see grass growing in no mans land in some areas in which it's utter stalemate or quiete sectors.
1864 Virginia. Both American Armies learned that the direct storming of prepared works was suicide. Flanking movements and attrition was what finally thinned, then ended the War.
I wouldn’t say the winter war, which was shortly before World War II was around the same time as World War I.
1918 and 1939 are slightly different
It is literally impossible to keep up with 30+ channels every week I discover a new channel and get upset I missed videos
*Are stock photos of WW1 biplane fighters and biplane bombers so hard to come by that this video had to use photos of WW2 fighters and bombers?*
If they only had Manscaped back then. Lice would 🐝 no worry at all. Not to mention the Magic spoon 20 quid a box protein injection, that would have been helpful as well.
Watch the video again. Images of the Civil War were used while he was discussing the history of trench warfare. His comment was that trenches were not a new concept, citing several examples, including trench warfare in the American Civil War.
Trench warfare can be a lot of fun. I'm putting it on my bucket list.
I’m not sure I agree that trench warfare is for the most part a thing of the past; the Russo-Ukraine war very much appears to mark the reemergence of trench warfare in the 21st century, and perhaps for similar reasons. The deadly effectiveness of new artillery technology was a large factor leading to the adoption of trench warfare on the Western Front of WWI, so its not a huge stretch that the effectiveness of things like (but not limited to) drone swarms against armor may mean we see something of a return to it, perhaps with new twists - e.g., subterranean warfare with existing subway tunnels serving as a more elaborate version of trenches.
I think one of the myths is that most of the casualties were from going over the top. Artillery took a constant toll, and it took a while before they thought steel helmets were a thing.
most deaths were actually from disease
Agreed. Interestingly the records for head wounds went up when the helmet were issued. People with helmets get wounds. People without die.
@@JohnFlower-NZ maybe, or maybe they think they can stick their head up & look over the trench & the helmet will protect them. Head injuries also rose in Victoria Australia when helmets became mandatory on push bikes - but deaths did NOT decrease proportionately to that
@@mehere8038 I'm open to your speculation. On my story, I have never seen the statistics, I don't even know if it is true. But it sounded plausible. It might just have been a cautionary story to show how statistics can be cherry picked and used out of context.
As long as the content is good, who cares! 😂 Great job Simon's Team! Also the narrator 👊🏾😂
In my opinion, Recon and the mg is what caused trench warfare. It’s the ability to be able to see massing troops and reinforce those areas before the attack using planes. The same thing has happened in Ukraine because of drones and TOWs.
Organized recon has existed since forever in warfare. The roman army had special recon units scouting and probing in all directions of the main force.
You don't need history, just examine the trench warfare in Ukraine.
Surprises he didn’t mention it lol
ignoring history and not learning from it is why Ukraine and now the rest of the mid east is at war. Turning the other cheek, ignoring dictators who invade homelands... and we get what we got. Hard to compare WWI/II trench warfare to what Ukraine is going through right now. No one was spotting and correcting their own fire with flying cameras, delivering booms on heads and tanks with flying cameras, and a political environment where racicts have taken over the 'murican gubment and blocks everything helpful. NOT EVEN CLOSE to WWI/II -You could use some history edumacation.
Yeah, drones were a nightmare for the allied trenches 🙄
Was just about to mention that.......
It's modern wacka-mole thanks to drones.
9:55 -- That's not Adolphe Pegoud, that's Captain Blackadder.
The amount of ground gained is irrelevant; no-one was trying to push the line back, but to break through it.
Thanks for explaining.
great video. you didn't mention billy bishop!
i read that trench warfare was used on the eastern front ( in an articule about the tasr tank it said the wheels got stuck in the trenches) and trench warfare was fought on the italian front with some trenches being dug in the snow
that`s tsar tank. opps
That the Maginot line is a huge misconception, it worked as planned. The goal was to protect the industrial area just behind it, force an invasion through Belgium or Switzerland, and with relatively few troops in it during peacetime give France time to mobilize if there was a surprise attack. It did all that in WWII. It was the French field army that was planned to meet the Germans that passed around the line and failed in is task to stop them. It is in part because when the Maginot line were built the planned defense line of the field army was is along the Albert Canal and Meuse River in Belgium and a bit in France, an ally of France at the time. They did change to neural in 1936. The result was French and British troops were only let in when German troops had attacked the county and the time for field fortification was very short. Fort Eben-Emael is where the line changes from river to canal that failed to stop an attack from paratroopers that landed on the fort, no one had anticipated airplanes landing of the large flat top of the fort. The Maginot line capitulated when ordered after France had already surrendered. Germany had managed some breaches through the Maginot line, it was only after some units were redeployed to protect another part of France. No major fortification had been captured or destroyed before they surrendered. Belgian neutrality is not the only reason of the failure, the Germans crossed the Meuse River at Sedan in France where they could have built field fortifications anytime they liked. The Maginot line. No one expected troops especially armored units to move through the Ardennes as quickly as they did. That part of the front was lightly defended and the French commander hadle the defence badly. From that point, there was nothing between the Greman tanks and the English Channel. So it is the field army of France that failed not the units in the Maginot line. The Belgian for Fort Eben-Emael did fail because no one had realized the need to defend the flat top of it from arorn assault.
In 1914 the trench walls were made of bodies used as sandbags in the mud. My grandfather said when hit you were showered in body parts. People literally broke!
I enjoy your videos a lot, but, seriously, with all the WW1 photography out there, did you really have to use WW2 and ACW pictures and artwork for this one?
Simon Whistler fought in the trenches and would fill his mouth full of cartridges and spit out the bullets. These bullets would penetrate any armor on the battle field. It was also the fastest rate of fire of any weapon in WW1.
My favourite WWI mystery is how people survived that hell and were still willing to do it again in their lifetime.
I mean, if you already defended your country once, are you really gonna let someone try to take it a second time?
Heard of appeasement?prewar British labour party wanted to unilaterally disarm.
If you guys wanna see what trench warfare was really like from first hand accounts, watch the 1930 release of all quiet from the western front, every single extra in that film were real veterans from both sides of the war and gave the crew pointers on what actually happened and many scenes are from the veterans first hand accounts like the hands on barb wire scene
In 1759 the capture of the French built Fort Niagara was partly achieved by the British by digging trenches to approach the fort.
Im sure i read somewhere that STDs sidelined so many soldiers it rivalled trench foot and Lice
What really surprised me was how the very first battles on the Western Front had no trenches but 19th Century type open warfare with cavalry charges (e.g Mons, the Marne, Nery). The very first British engagement in combat with the Germans was two cavalry scout teams clashing with one another. The first British kill was from a cavalry sabre wielded by a mounted British cavalry officer.
The horse was the keep of it's age. It could cross virtually any terrain at speed, rarely broke down and it only needed some grass and water.
I'd argue that WWI was peak cavalry. Certainly they had significant successes in many theatres. The charge by the Australian Light Horse at Bersheeba being one such example.
And the last cavalry charge even though it technically wasn't, was done by the Australians because the British couldn't take Beersheba with 20000 men so the Australians did it with 800 on horseback in 1 hour
@@James-kv6kb Yeah, I think that modern assumptions get ww1 cavalry all wrong. For example, by 1914 most armies already knew that charging well fortified positions over bad terrain on horseback was suicide, so they could switch from mounted to infantry tactics quite easily. As trench warfare set in, they were uses as backup in reserve because they could reach the front more easily and quickly than infantry - which would be exhausted on reaching it, or tanks or lorries which broke down often. Even as the war began moving again in 1918, cavalry did actually carry out some fairly successful charges, it didn't disappear from the battlefield afterwards either, it just mechanised because armoured personnel vehicles became fast and reliable enough to replace horses from roundabout the 1920s and 1930s. In fact, the last cavalry charge in history was 2001 with anti-Taliban tribes accompanied by US Special Forces against Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.
I remember in 1992 buying a GY boxed game Tryanid Attack and knowing $65 was over priced 😅💵😂
Regarding the trench lines being dynamic, during WWI The Onion had a headline similar to "These 4 inches of mud will no longer bow before the whip of tyranny."
No one wants to hear from a country that's never actually won a war only starts them like World War I
10:20 disnt the red baron once have to land after shooting down a enemy and once the aircrafts where landed they just chatted or some such thing, he used to collect trophies from down aircraft's? 😅
I love the idea of pilots waving, smiling and generally not having a care in the world while actual hell takes place below
At Gallipoli they had a truce to bury the dead at one point & all the soldiers got out of the trenches to go collect the bodies from no man's land & while there chatted & shared cigarettes & then said goodbye to each other & returned to their own trenches & started shooting again at those they had just been smoking with
My grandfather served in WWI and was in the trenches almost all the time until his second time he was wounded that put him in the hospital the last few months of the war. He hated telling anything about the War, only when I found his medals he had hid, and I looked up what they meant, did I get an idea of what he did. I was 8. I remember him finally telling me a bit about it one day. He only talked about some of the tactics but other than that, he just said "War would end if the leaders had to sit with us in wet mud, rats, feces and blood waiting for the whistle"
One of my great grandfather served the 4 years, I never met him but photos of him are shocking. The look in his eyes even in the last picture of him was of sheer terror. All 7 brothers died during the war. Another one went when he was 16, in 1917, lost a long by being covered by earth after an artillery barrage. He managed to dig himself out, while crawling back a wounded German soldier grabbed his leg, he couldn't bring him to safety soemthing hebfelt bad about fornrhebrest of his life. The crazy thing is that then their children also fought in ww2, one was taken prisoner and sent to farm work camp, where the owners of the farm helped him escape. He got home in Brittany after walking through Germany and occupied France. He arrived at the house seeing my grandad playing on the steps of their house. He had never seems him since he was born a few weeks after he had been mobilised in 39. My father is the only one in at least 5 generations to have not been in war... F.... Politicians
Trenches were used since artillery arrived in Europe When sieging a fort defenders would approach the fort ( still over 300 meters away ) while entrenching to set up siege guns closer whilst still safe Ww1 compared to previous conflict is similar to a massive long lasting siege
For a British aspect, I suggest reading "Goodbye to All That" by Robert Graves.
Ha! My mom found my mascara in the freezer just a few days ago. I have no idea.
I think another factor is there is likely way more footage and photographs of the western fronts. The nations involved would have had way more access to photography then Romania, Bulgaria, Russia, Italy and even Austro-Hungary. Also because they were more stagnant in trenches its easier to film from a trench then a moving front.
One plane dropped a brick through the enemy wing of another