FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99  
100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   >>  
d. The Admiral expresses his agreement, and says that it was a fatal blunder of the German Highest Command not to use their submarine power at the very outbreak of the war to prevent our Expeditionary Force from crossing the Channel and co-operating in resisting the German advance towards Calais. From there Germany could have commanded the Channel and bombarded London. So he says, and we were quite aware all along that he might well think so. The other thing that he makes plain by implication is that the direct invasion of England was never contemplated by Germany in the face of our command of the sea. I had long ago satisfied myself that this was the German view, by a study of their military textbooks and from conversations with high German officers. But, what was more important than what I personally thought, the Committee of Imperial Defense, on which I sat regularly during eight years, was clear about it, and this after close study, and after hearing what the most eminent exponents in this country of a different view had to urge before them. Consequently our military policy was not doubtful. No doubt it would have been a nice thing could we have possessed in 1914 a great army fashioned and trained, not for firing rifles on the seashore, but for a struggle on French and Belgian soil. But such an army would have taken two generations at least to raise and train in peace time, and if we had laid out our money on it after 1870 instead of on ships, we should not have had the sea power which Tirpitz says gave us "bulldog" strength. In strategy and in military organization you can not successfully bestride two horses at once. He who would accomplish anything has to limit himself. Possibly it was because this was not clearly kept in view even in Germany that the volume before us is an exposition of a thesis which is novel in these islands, that it was not England that was unprepared, but Germany herself. For the confusion of objectives that led to this Tirpitz blames Bethmann's peace policy, the parsimony of the Reichstag, and the Emperor's failure to attain to clear notions about war aims. He criticizes me for saying that there was in Germany before 1914 a war party alongside of a peace party. It was really only the Bethmann group, he declares, that believed in peace being built on anything else than preponderance in armed power. The tradition of the German nation and the view of all sensible statesmen in Germany, _e.g
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99  
100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   >>  



Top keywords:

Germany

 

German

 

military

 
Bethmann
 

England

 
Tirpitz
 

Channel

 

policy

 
generations
 
horses

bestride

 

Belgian

 
successfully
 
strength
 
bulldog
 

strategy

 

organization

 

alongside

 

attain

 
notions

criticizes

 
declares
 

believed

 

nation

 

statesmen

 

tradition

 
preponderance
 
failure
 

Emperor

 

volume


exposition

 

thesis

 

Possibly

 

French

 

blames

 

parsimony

 

Reichstag

 
objectives
 

confusion

 

islands


unprepared
 

accomplish

 
commanded
 
bombarded
 
London
 

direct

 

invasion

 
contemplated
 
implication
 

Calais