The Somme and Iraq 2003

A hundred and forty-one days, and twenty-one

At half past seven on the morning of 1 July 1916 some 120,000 British soldiers climbed out of their trenches on an eighteen-mile front and walked towards the German line. By nightfall 57,470 of them were casualties and 19,240 were dead, the worst day in the history of the British army. The battle went on for 141 days and gained about seven miles. On the night of 19 March 2003 cruise missiles from ships in the Gulf struck Baghdad, and on 9 April, twenty-one days later, American armour was in the centre of the city. British forces had taken Basra three days earlier. The Iraqi army, on paper the larger, had ceased to exist as a fighting force. The exam asks why each battle ended as it did, what part General Haig played in the first, and what technology did in the second. Then it asks you to compare them. This module gives you both with the figures that earn marks.

Five words the examiners use

Each definition ends with the battle it belongs to, because a term without a battle is worth half a mark.

Two campaigns, in order

Put these six events in the order they happened.

• The Germans attack Verdun and the French ask Britain to strike early to relieve the pressure
• The British infantry walk into uncut wire and unbroken machine guns on the first day of the Somme
• The first tanks in history go into action at Flers-Courcelette
• The Somme offensive is closed down in the snow after 141 days
• Cruise missiles strike Baghdad on the opening night of the Iraq war
• American armour enters central Baghdad and the statue of Saddam Hussein is pulled down

Why was the first day so costly?

For seven days before 1 July the British guns fired some 1.5 million shells at the German line. Haig and Rawlinson expected the wire cut and the defenders dead, and the infantry were told to walk. Which explanation best accounts for the 57,470 casualties?

• The bombardment did not do what it was assumed to have done: up to a third of the shells failed to explode, most were shrapnel that could not cut wire or reach dugouts thirty feet down, and when the guns lifted the German machine gunners came up in time to meet men crossing no man's land at walking pace in daylight.
• The Germans had far more men than the British on the Somme.
• The tanks broke down before they reached the German line.
• The Germans used gas against the attacking infantry.

Two battles, side by side

The comparison question can reach from 1916 to 2003 in a single sentence. Have both columns ready.

The case for Haig

Five statements about the Somme. Tap the TWO that a historian defending Haig would use, as opposed to describing the battle or condemning him.

• On 1 July the infantry were ordered to advance at walking pace carrying sixty pounds of equipment, and 19,240 of them were killed.
• The French had been under attack at Verdun since February and insisted on a British offensive by the end of June; within weeks of the Somme opening, the German attacks at Verdun stopped.
• Lloyd George wrote after the war that Haig was not a general of the first rank and that the Somme had been a bloody and futile fight.
• By November the army was attacking behind a creeping barrage, at night, with platoons trained to fight round strongpoints, and the tank had been tried in battle; these were the methods that won in 1918.
• The offensive ended in the snow on 18 November 1916 with the line about seven miles further east.

Iraq 2003: which are true?

Select the THREE statements that are true of the invasion of Iraq.

• About two in three of the munitions used were precision-guided, against fewer than one in ten in the Gulf War of 1991.
• Baghdad fell twenty-one days after the first strikes, with armoured columns covering some three hundred miles from Kuwait.
• About 46,000 British personnel took part, and British forces took Basra on 6 April.
• Large stocks of chemical and biological weapons were found after the fall of Baghdad.
• Fighting in Iraq ended when Baghdad fell.
• The Iraqi air force controlled the skies for the first week.

Judging the outcomes

Both case studies come with an argument attached, and the examiner wants you to know it and to take a position with evidence. The Somme and Haig. The case against: a plan resting on a bombardment that could not do what it was asked, the walking advance, and an offensive prolonged into November for seven miles at 420,000 British casualties. The case for: the date was set by the French need at Verdun, which the Somme relieved; German losses were as heavy or heavier and could not be replaced; and the army that ended the battle had learned the creeping barrage, the tank and the platoon tactics that won in 1918. Historians who have read the German records are gentler on Haig than those who have read the poets. Iraq and technology. The case for: air supremacy from the first night, guided weapons that hit what they were aimed at, satellites and drones that let a smaller force see everything, and a country taken in three weeks at 33 British dead. The case against: the war that followed was fought with roadside bombs and rifles against which none of the technology helped, and the stated reason for the war turned out to be false. Winning the battle and winning the war are different questions, and the 16-mark answer says so.

The commander decides

Three decisions for Haig and one for Franks. Choose what was actually decided, and notice what it cost or won.

• May 1916. Your New Army divisions are half trained and you would rather attack in August. The French, bleeding at Verdun since February, insist on the end of June and threaten to attack alone. You are Haig. What do you do?
• Evening, 1 July 1916. Reports are coming in of terrible losses on the northern half of the front and some success in the south. What do you order for tomorrow?
• September 1916. Forty-nine of the new tanks have arrived, untested in battle, and the Tank Corps officers beg you to wait until there are hundreds. What do you do?
• Early 2003. You are General Franks. The plan of 1991 used six months and half a million troops. Your political masters want speed and a smaller force. What do you do?

From cause to consequence

Because the Germans had attacked _____ in February, the British attacked on the Somme in July before the New Army was ready. Because the shells were mostly shrapnel and up to a third did not explode, the _____ was uncut and the dugouts intact, and the first day cost 57,470 casualties. Because the offensive ran until November, the army learned the _____ barrage and the tank, and the Germans fell back to the Hindenburg Line in the spring. Because the coalition could see everything and Iraq could see nothing, Baghdad fell in _____ days. And because the insurgency that came after it used roadside bombs against patrols, technology won the battle and not the _____.

The first day of the Somme

On 1 July 1916 the British army suffered 57,470 casualties, of whom 19,240 were killed. What percentage of the casualties were deaths, to the nearest whole number?

Question 3: similarity or difference

Question 3 reads: Explain one way in which the way the attack was made on the Somme in 1916 was different from the way the attack was made on Iraq in 2003. It is marked one point of comparison plus detail from each. Which answer scores all four marks?

• On the Somme the attack relied on massed unguided artillery, some 1.5 million shells over seven days that were expected to cut the wire and kill the defenders and did neither, whereas in Iraq about two in three of the munitions were guided by laser or satellite to particular targets, so that command centres and air defences were destroyed on the first night.
• In 2003 the coalition used precision-guided bombs and cruise missiles from the first night.
• The attacks were completely different because technology had moved on a great deal in ninety years.
• The Somme gained seven miles whereas Iraq was conquered in three weeks.

A 12-mark paragraph, marked

Question 4: Explain why the British suffered such heavy casualties on the first day of the Battle of the Somme. One reason for the casualties of 1 July 1916 was the failure of the bombardment on which the whole plan depended. For seven days the British guns fired some 1.5 million shells, and Haig and Rawlinson assumed that the wire would be cut and the German trenches destroyed, so the infantry were ordered to advance in lines at walking pace carrying their full equipment. But most of the shells were shrapnel, which burst in the air and could not cut wire or reach a dugout, and up to a third failed to explode at all, while the German garrison waited thirty feet down in the chalk. This meant that when the barrage lifted at 7.30 the defenders had time to climb to their machine guns before the attackers, walking, had crossed no man's land, and on the northern half of the front whole battalions were shot down in the wire. The tactics were wrong because the assumption behind them was wrong, and 19,240 men died of the difference. What earned the marks: a cause named in the first sentence; specific support (the shell count, the shrapnel, the dud rate, the depth of the dugouts, the time, the figure); the link phrase this meant that; and a closing sentence that returns to the question and ties the cause to the effect. Two more paragraphs, on the inexperience of the New Army and on the date forced by Verdun, and the answer reaches the top level.

Write the 12-mark answer

Explain why the coalition defeated the Iraqi army so quickly in 2003. You may use the following in your answer: precision-guided weapons; air power. You must also use information of your own.

• Support that counts: a date, a figure, a weapon, a place or a name
• Causes of your own: surveillance from satellites and drones, the plan of speed over mass, or the state of the Iraqi army

Question 5: how far do you agree?

Question 5 might read: "General Haig was responsible for the failure of the Somme." How far do you agree? A student has written the case FOR. Which is the strongest point to set AGAINST it?

• The date and place were forced on Haig by the French crisis at Verdun, and the offensive did what the alliance needed, since the German attacks there stopped within weeks; and the battle that cost 420,000 British casualties also cost the Germans as many or more and taught the British army the creeping barrage and the tank, which is not what failure looks like.
• Haig was personally brave and had served in the Boer War.
• The weather was bad in the autumn of 1916.
• Lloyd George called Haig a poor general after the war.