Pershing & the 100 days.Egoist,Pro or deranged?

[dutchbarge]

I'm not convinced that President Wilson's plans for remaking postwar Europe were a determining factor in the size and structure of the AEF. In his book Over Here: The First World War and American Society, David M. Kennedy says Pershing was the most implacable opponent of the amalgamation idea. Writes Kennedy:

In the highest circles of the Wilson administration considerable confusion and irresolution surrounded the issue of amalgamation. [secretary of War] Baker remained committed to a separate American force, but Wilson seemed to waver, so that the Secretary, concludes his biographer, "often was not sure what the President was doing or wanted to have done." Tasker Bliss, American military representative on the Supreme War Council, infected by the gloom of the Allied military men, inclined toward accepting some form of amalgamation. But standing resolutely against all such proposals was the Commander in Chief of the American Expeditionary Force, General John J. Pershing.

Hello Pete,

Agree that in the vacuum created by Wilson's wishy washy outlook Pershing took the initiative. Several books refer to Wilson and Baker deferring to Pershing on the issue of amalgamation. Bliss and Pershing actually had a major show down over amalgamation. Bliss, during his stop over in London on the way to Paris, was swayed by lobbying from LG, Robertson, Haig to support amalgamation. When Bliss and Robertson arrived in Paris they thought, given Pershing's cable to Robertson conditionally accepting partial amalgamation, it was a done deal. As I said before several factors changed Pershing's mind and when he so informed Robertson and Bliss, Bliss sided with Robertson against Pershing in favor of amalgamation. After a heated argument Robertson stomped out leaving Pershing and Bliss to have it out. Bliss insisted the matter be decided by Baker with both Pershing and Bliss stating their oposing cases via cable for Baker to decide. Pershing informed Bliss that it was their duty to decide and bucking it up to Baker would justifiably get both of them sacked. Bliss waffled and caved to Pershing's decision to reject amalgamation.

Cheers, Bill

[dutchbarge]

Gee, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

Sorry folks, just couldn't resist the reference to today's shenanigans.

Great thread. Now, back to our regular programming.

Hello Al,

The parallels between the Mexican Punative Expedition and the hunt for Osama Bin Laden are amazing. US meddling in a sovereign nation's affairs (to protect US business interests) led to a terrorist attacks (Villa's raid on Columbus/911) on US soil resulting in a punative expeditions to restore order, set up a democracy and capture the perpetrators. We failed in Mexico. Not looking so good in Afghanistan (or Iraq) either. PS: in both instances the current administration proclaimed they'd bring back their man "dead or alive"

Cheers, Bill

[Pete1052]

To wander off-topic a bit on Patton, my late dad was a reporter for the Washington Post and when I was a kid in the '60s my family was close friends with another newspaper family, the Averills. Mr. Averill was the Washington DC correspondent for the Los Angeles Times. During World War II in Europe Mr. Averill earned a Bronze Star with a "V" device, a Purple Heart, and a battlefield commission. His most vivid memory of the war was being awakened from a nap he was taking on the deck of his Sherman tank by an angry Gen. Patton, who was whipping him with his riding crop because he didn't like to see his officers slacking off during the day. Mr. Averill was something of a wimp and just about the last person one would think had been a war hero.

[dutchbarge]

To wander off-topic a bit on Patton, my late dad was a reporter for the Washington Post and when I was a kid in the '60s my family was close friends with another newspaper family, the Averills. Mr. Averill was the Washington DC correspondent for the Los Angeles Times. During World War II in Europe Mr. Averill earned a Bronze Star with a "V" device, a Purple Heart, and a battlefield commission. His most vivid memory of the war was being awakened from a nap he was taking on the deck of his Sherman tank by an angry Gen. Patton, who was whipping him with his riding crop because he didn't like to see his officers slacking off during the day. Mr. Averill was something of a wimp and just about the last person one would think had been a war hero.

Thanks Pete, great story! Cheers, Bill

[Pete1052]

One of the results of the American defense of the line of the Marne in June 1918 was the rivalry between the U.S. Marine Corps and the Army that continues to this day. The battle of Belleau Wood involved the 2nd U.S. Infantry Division, which during the Great War included a brigade of Marines. According to The United States Marines: A History, by Edwin Howard Simmons:

The Marines got what the Army considered to be an inordinate amount of publicity for Belleau Wood. On 6 June, Floyd Gibbons [of the Chicago Tribune] had filed a story that began, "I am up front and entering Belleau Wood with the U.S. Marines." He was then badly wounded, including the loss of his left eye. Under the heavy-handed press censorship the names of units and their locations were not ordinarily allowed in press dispatches. However the censors, thinking that Gibbons was dying and had filed his last dispatch, allowed his story to go through uncensored. An American public, hungry for war news, siezed on the story that the Marines had saved Paris. This did not go down well with the Army, which chafed at the lack of mention of what the Army components of the 2nd Division had done, to say nothing of the considerable contributions of the 3rd Division at Chateau Thierry. Worse, some newspapers gave the Marines the credit for Chateau Thierry itself. It was something that would rankle the Army for many years to come.

[jdajd]

Just to throw my two (American Lincoln headed) cents in, the "common" American view of World War I and the AEF by extension is that we won the war. The Great War is a glossed over topic that starts with the M.A.I.N. reasons for the war then on to the Lusitania and Zimmerman affair then the 14 Points then 11/11/18. Most Americans you ask wouldn't know Black Jack Pershing from Jack Black Its sad to go into a book store and see shelves and shelves of Civil War books then a couple of WWI books that frequently get mixed into the WWII section. I do not know that there is a common "view" of Pershing. It is my understanding that the St Mihiel offensive was supposed to be his way of showing the Allies thatt he Americans were up to the task of a modern offensive, but his plan was ultimately scaled back to allow for the Meuse Argonne. It is rather amazing that he was able to bring off S.M. albeit at a smaller scale then to be able to turn his army and have them ready for the M.A. in time. M.A. was less well planned as it was not supposed to be the main thrust

As for other American involvement an entriely overlooked aspect is those units who did fight as part of foreign armies. Everyone knows about the black troops (Harlem Hell Fighters, Red Hand) that fought with the French. Little is known or discussed about the Americans who fought as part of the BEF. Several Divisions, the 27th and 30th among them, were sent to fight along side their UK brothers and fought with distinction. (There is a funny story of NY Irish soldiers who refused to wear BEF uniforms with the crown on them) In fact the 27th played an integral part in breaking the Hindenburg line on 9/29/18 with their attack on part of the St Quentin canal in and around Bony/Bellicourt.

I don't think this helps your original post, but I would recommend Eisenhower's Yanks (already quoted somewhere in this thread) as a good overview of the AEF and its formation/politics.

[Pete1052]

...the "common" American view of World War I and the AEF by extension is that we won the war.

I think that's more of a "man in the street" type of opinion rather than one held by people who have done any reading about the war.

[ackimzey]

I just finished reading Patton's "War as I Knew It" which covered WWII, but I found he made many interesting references to his WWI experiences, particularly in France.

Ann

[Pete1052]

General Patton recalled his return in 1944 to his Great War headquarters in Bourg, France in his book War as I Knew It:

We then drove through Langres, where we had no time to stop, and on to Bourg, my Tank Brigade Headquarters in 1918. The first man I saw in the street was standing on the same manure pile whereon I am sure he had perched in 1918. I asked if he had been there during the last war, to which he replied, "Oh, yes, General Patton, and you were here then as a Colonel." He then formed a triumphal procession of all the village armed with pitchforks, scythes, and rakes, and we proceeded to rediscover my old haunts, including my office, and my billet in the chateau of Madame de Vaux.

The grave of that national hero, "Abandoned Rear," was still maintained by the natives. It originated in this manner. In 1917, the mayor, who lived in the "new house" at Bourg, bearing the date 1700, came to me, weeping copiously, to say that we had failed to tell him of the death of one of our soldiers. Being unaware of this sad fact, and not liking to admit it to a stranger, I stalled until I found out that no one was dead. However, he insisted that we visit the "grave," so we went together and found a newly closed latrine pit with the earth properly banked and a stick at one end to which was affixed crosswise a sign saying, "Abandoned Rear." This the French had taken for a cross. I never told them the truth.

[4thGordons]

I think that's more of a "man in the street" type of opinion rather than one held by people who have done any reading about the war.

Not just the man in the street: Subtitle to Mosier's book the "Myth of the Great War" is: "How the Germans Won the Battles and the Americans Saved the Allies" Mosier is however, a professor of English and Film.

This is not a book I rate very highly (to say the least) but I assume he did do some reading on the topic although from the cited sources it seems to have been heavily French accounts.....

Here is my somewhat eclectic and unfocused list of "US and WWI" books I have read all or a large part of over the past couple of years, some related to specific projects some just general. I have left out very specific unit histories and things like the ABMC guides, and the 1920s General Histories/Collections. I put some descriptive comments at the end. No claim to comprehensiveness - I would be interested in other recommendations that I have missed!

AFS. (1920). History of the American Field Service in France "Friends of France" 1914-1917 (3 vols). Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Braim, Paul F. (1998) The Test of Battle. Shippenburg Pa: White Mane Books. Heavy going but excellent detail and analysis critique of Pershing is convincing

Broun, H. (1922). Our Army at the Front. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.

Callagher, C. J. (1998). The Cellars of Marcelcave. A Yank Doctor in the BEF. Shippensburg Pa: The Burd Street Press.

Center of Military History United States Army. (1931-49). AEF Order of Battle(4vols) . Washington DC: US Governement Printing Office. VOL 2 is an especially useful reference

Center of Military History United States Army. (1948(1989)). The United States Army in the World War 1917-19. Washington DC: US Governement Printing Office. (9 vols) A Mammouth set with lots of good information - more reference than reading

Coffman, E. M. (1986). The War to End All Wars. The American Military Experience in World War I. Madison Wi: University of Wisconsin Press. An excellent survey

Cooke, J. J. (1996). US Air Service in the Great War 1917-19. Wesport Cn: Praeger Publishers.

Eisenhower, John D. (2001) Yanks: The Epic Story of the American Army in WWI. New York: Free Press.An excellent survey

Farwell, B. (1999). Over There: The United States in the Great war 1917-18. New York: Norton Co. Another good general history / survey

Ferrell, R. H. (2005). Five Days in October. The Lost Battalion in World War I. Columbia Mo: University of Missouri Press.

Ferrell, R. H. (1985). Woodrow Wilson and World War I 1917-1921. New York: Harper Row. Interesting discussion of the Politics and Wilson

Goldstein, D. M., & Maihaifer, H. J. (2004). America in Workd War I. Dulles Va: Potomac books. I really disliked this picture book - lots of errors poor text...good job it was very cheap

Hallas, J. H. (2000). Doughboy War. The American Expeditionary Force in World War I. Covent Garden: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Harris, B. (2002). The Hellfighters of Harlem. New York: Carroll and Graf.

Harris, S. L. (2001). Duty, Honor, Privilege. Dulles Va: Brassey's .

Hudson, J. J. (1968). Hostile Skies A Combat History of The American Air Service in World War I. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.

Jackson, W. R. (2001). His Time in Hell: A Texas Marine in France. Novato, Ca.: Presidio Press.

Johnson, D. V., & Hillman, R. L. (1999). Soissons 1918. College Station, Tx: Texas A&M Press. Excellent tactical descriptions and analysis, lots of detailed diagrams and maps

Johnson, H. A. (2001). Wingless Eagle US Army Aviation Through World War I. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Good discussion of the politics of the creation of the US Air Service

Keene, J. D. (2001). Doughboys, the Great War and the Remaking of America. Baltimore Md: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Kennedy, D. M. (1980). Over Here. The First World War and American Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Interesting social history about the domestic front politics and society in the US

Lengel, E. G. (2007). To Conquer Hell. Meuse Argonne 1918. New York: Holt Co. New Good Interview material rather repetetive in style and "swashbuckling" in descriptions but still worth a look

Lettie, G. (1997). American Women in World War I. Niwot Co: University of Colorado Press.

Mackin, E. E. (1993). Suddenly We Didn't Want To Die. Novato Ca: Presidio Press.

Marshall, S. L. (1964). The American Heritage History of World War I. New York: Dell Publishing.

Maurer, M. (. (1978). The US Air Service in World War I (4 Vols). Washington DC: Office of Air Force History. Compilation of commetaries and extracts from Gorrell files

McGee, D. J., & (eds), B. R. (1983). America's First Eagles. The Official History of the US Air Service. Mesa Az: Champlin Fighter Museum Press. Good companion to the above

Mead, G. (2000). The Doughboys. America and the First World War. London: Allen Lane.

Sibley, F. (1919(2007)). With the Yankee Division in France. Cranbury Nj: The Scholars Bookshelf.

Stallings, L. (1963). The Doughboys. The Story of the AEF 1917-1918. New York: Harper and Row. The Classic - perhaps the first big survey history - has errors but is still a good read

Sweetster, A. (1919). The American Air Service. A Record of its problems its difficulties, its failures and its final acheivements. New York: Appleton.

Wilder, A. N. (1994). Armageddon Revisited: A World War I Journal. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Zeiger, S. (1999). In Uncle Sam's Service. Women Workers With the American Expeditionary Force. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.

[jdajd]

I think that's more of a "man in the street" type of opinion rather than one held by people who have done any reading about the war.

Man in the street is was what I meant by the "common American view". I may be incorrect, but I think the average British citizen knows more about their own country's involvement in the First World War than the average American citizen. I also think that there is a opinion of the British generals, Haig especially, that has become part of the "common view", whereas in America there is no common view of WWI generals as most couldn't even name one.

[59165]

"Everyone knows about the black troops (Harlem Hell Fighters, Red Hand) that fought with the French. Little is known or discussed about the Americans who fought as part of the BEF."

Sorry mate ,not me but thanks for the heads up.

Everyone does know about the segregation issues between minority & 'white' troops,to a certain extent but,the French had had some years experience of being in control of black & Arab troops (even some Asians too).

The point of this is,were there any black units fighting under 1st Army command in WW1?

How did these 2 units end up with the French?Were they already trained & formed in the US before they went to France?

My interest was piqued by watching that wealth of historical accuracy ,"Fly Boys' again, the other night.An awful lot of it was filmed about a mile from where I stay when I'm in England (I even have the Vickers gun from the downed plane where the bankrobber boy got his hand chopped off) & I fancied learning more about the black boxer,Eugene Bullard so I skip read the biog of him,'Eugene Bullard- Black Expatriate in Jazz Age Paris'.Still not sure if I will buy it yet but his history with the Legion plus his flying & boxing skills leads me to believe that with the French ties,I'll probably get it for Christmas.

Trying not too veer too off topic on me own thread,he fought at Verdun before learning to fly but,I cant remember if he left France (he joined up in 1940,still lived in Paris)via Dunkirk or Marseilles after again being wounded(I recall he was wounded twice in WW1 also).

"I don't think this helps your original post, but I would recommend Eisenhower's Yanks "

It all helps.

Dave.

[59165]

.

This is not a book I rate very highly (to say the least) but I assume he did do some reading on the topic although from the cited sources it seems to have been heavily French accounts.....

...& I know full well what can happen if you rely heavily on written French sources.....

Thanks for the list,Chris.

[4thGordons]

...& I know full well what can happen if you rely heavily on written French sources.....

Thanks for the list,Chris.

You're welcome - actually I didn't mean to criticise the French sources so much as his use of them but you get the idea...

[truthergw]

General Patton recalled his return in 1944 to his Great War headquarters in Bourg, France in his book War as I Knew It:

We then drove through Langres, .................. I never told them the truth.

This ought to be added to the list of tales never to be questioned.

[Pete1052]

The 369th U.S Infantry, the "Harlem Hellfighters," was one of the four all-black infantry regiments lent to the French army during the Great War. France awarded the unit the Croix de Guerre for its valor. Click here for an artist's conception of the 369th attacking in the Meuse-Argonne as well as a brief history of the unit. Click here for photos and additional information.

[Kutenay]

I am new to this fascinating forum, am a Canadian of founding pioneer ancestry and am now researching some of my ancestors, who fought in various wars here against the French and the Yankees, both in the Rebellion and the 1812-1814 fracas. My reason for being here is my longterm interest in "The Great War" as my late maternal grandfather, Lt. Donald Norbert McCallum, served with the 21st. "Eastern Ontario" Batt. and was wounded at Courcelette and, severely, at the magnificent Canadian victory at Passchendaele.

My recent reading and much of my earlier studies plus many conversations with surviving veterans, years ago and mostly from the 54th "Kootenay Battalion", C.E.F. have largely led me to consider Pershing to HAVE been an egotistical and relatively incompetent leader of troops whose performance was so poor that he was forced to ask General Sir Arthur Currie, O.C. Canadian Corps, to lend him Canadian officers to lead and train his men to acceptable standards.

The American contribution to victory was quite minimal and is frequently over-stated. Had Pershing BEEN wise enough to have US troops serve with Canadian, ANZAC and British units, I think that THEY would have done better AND their assistance would have been more effective and helped shorten the war. But, we can now merely speculate and be thankful that even greater numbers of our people were not killed, maimed and driven mad.

[Pete1052]

It is well known that units of the AEF received training from the British and French armies, so it is not surprising that Canadians served as trainers as well. A review of books written by Americans that are critical of Pershing and the performance of the AEF can be viewed by clicking here.

[dutchbarge]

Several Forum members have asked about books on the America experience in WW1. I think the best I have come across is 'The Last Days of Innocence" by Meirion and Susie Harries. Both are Cambridge educated and offer an unvarnished account of America's involvement 1917 1918. The book covers political, social, economical, racial, strategic, tactical and military aspects of US involvement. Cheers, BIll

[dutchbarge]

The American contribution to victory was quite minimal and is frequently over-stated.

Without US financial and material backing the Allies would have been scuppered possibly as early as mid '15, certainly by the following summer. While the US contribution on the ground may have had minimal tactical impact, the psycological impact on the Central Powers was profound. Much overlooked is the strategic contribution of the US Navy in mitigating the losses caused by submarine warfare and helping with the blockade of Germany, possibly the straw that broke the camel's back. Possibly most important US contribution was the War Trade Board which controlled America's foreign trade. So powerful was its knowledge and influence on world trade that the WTB (working in tandem with the Alien Property Custodian) was able to completely stop the flow of contraban to Germany. While the British blockade had been effective in halting the flow of contraban directly to Germany ports, it was not effective in stopping the flow from neutral countries. Once the US entered the war they closed this gap in the blockade.

Cheers, Bill

[4thGordons]

Several Forum members have asked about books on the America experience in WW1. I think the best I have come across is 'The Last Days of Innocence" by Meirion and Susie Harries. Both are Cambridge educated and offer an unvarnished account of America's involvement 1917 1918. The book covers political, social, economical, racial, strategic, tactical and military aspects of US involvement. Cheers, BIll

I agree although I found this a bit patchy, some excellent sections mixed in with some rather ordinary. Not sure how I missed it off my list, it was one of the earlier ones I read. As a broad survey I too thought it was decent.

Chris

[59165]

The 369th U.S Infantry, the "Harlem Hellfighters," was one of the four all-black infantry regiments lent to the French army during the Great War. France awarded the unit the Croix de Guerre for its valor. Click here for an artist's conception of the 369th attacking in the Meuse-Argonne as well as a brief history of the unit. Click here for photos and additional information.

Thanks,Pete.

That Hellfighters painting is wonderful!

Funnily enough,& I dont know if other visitors to the area will agree,there is less post war forestation in the US sector compared to Verdun & it's locality.I am supposing that the French held the same lines for 3 years but also,the late war advances meant that new ground taken hadn't suffered from the same arty per sq.ft.

That would make more sense if I knew how far from the old lines the later attacks were but,trying to get/find a French trench map has so far eluded me.

[59165]

"Without US financial and material backing the Allies would have been scuppered possibly as early as mid '15, certainly by the following summer. "

If that debate started here,we wouldn't find time for Christmas holidays!

By 1915/early '16,the Anzacs,Canadians et al were arriving ,our naval blockade was doing what it would always do & the Army felt confident (ok,maybe forced by the French) to prepare for the Somme offensive.I'll leave the Somme there for now,if I may....

"While the US contribution on the ground may have had minimal tactical impact, the psycological impact on the Central Powers was profound. "

This is something I do believe,but the 'threat' compared to the actual arrival of US troops may not have been enough.I think the US had to send troops to call the Germans bluff.

Dave.

[dutchbarge]

I agree although I found this a bit patchy, some excellent sections mixed in with some rather ordinary. Not sure how I missed it off my list, it was one of the earlier ones I read. As a broad survey I too thought it was decent.

Chris

Hey Chris,

Would you believe the book is considered revisionist and radical (and downright un American) by many here in the US? 'The Illusion of Victory' by Thomas Fleming, another book which challenges conventional thought (although this one rankles the British rather than Americans) is another that I can reccommend.

Cheers, BIll

[dutchbarge]

Dave,

Regarding 'scuppered by mid 1915'. It's a theme I have outlined on several other threads without arousing much disagreement, possibly because the financial aspects of the war are pretty boring to most folks. Nevertheless without the readies you just can't fight a war!

Regarding your reply that the US had to have troop in France to call the Germans bluff. Something that happened the day might just may prove your point. At breakfast my long suffering wife threatened me with divorce if I kept ignoring her in favor of this Forum. I laughed it off. It wasn't until she marched into my study and pulled the plug on my PC and demanded attention that I took her threat seriously!

Cheers, Bill