"William Maxwell "Max" Aitken, 1st Baron Beaverbrook, Bt, PC, ONB, (25 May 1879 ? 9 June 1964) was an Anglo-Canadian business tycoon, politician, and writer. Lord Beaverbrook held a tight grip on the British media as an influential Press Baron, owning The Daily Express newspaper, as well as the London Evening Standard and the Sunday Express. His political career included serving as a Minister in the British Government during both world wars. Beaverbrook was an influential and often mentioned figure in British society of the first half of the 20th century."--Wikipedia.
Invaded by foreign armies and threatened by the terrors of civil strife, Russia's leaders mobilized more than fifteen million fighting men between 1914 and 1918 only to find that at least a quarter of them had no boots, rifles, or ammunition. With field casualties soaring into the millions, scourges of starvation and disease joined the enemy's guns to double and treble Russia's human losses. Never in modern history had war so devastated a nation. Recounting the tale of the Russians' passage through the shattering experience of the First World War and the revolutions of 1917, W. Bruce Lincoln offers a profoundly intelligent and detailed chronology of the watershed events and devastating hardships that led to the Bolshevik Revolution. Mining an abundance of resources, including letters, diaries, memoirs, government reports, military dispatches, and testimony given to the revolution's first Supreme Commission of Inquiry, he allows the reader to step directly into army headquarters, state council chambers, boudoirs, trenches, and underground revolutionary hideaways of the men and women who shaped the events of this crucial era.
'Lloyd George at War, 1916-1918' refutes the traditional view that Lloyd George was the person most responsible for winning the Great War. Cassar's careful analysis shows that while his work on the home front was on the whole good, he was an abysmal failure as a strategist and nearly cost Britain the war.
Chronicles the rise of the American military and the role it played in winning World War I, from the declaration of war in 1917 to the social changes that occurred on the home front.
In this biography Rodney Atwood details the life of General Lord Rawlinson of Trent (1864-1925), a distinguished British soldier whose career culminated in decisive victories on the Western Front in 1918 and command of the Indian Army in the early 1920s. He served his soldier's apprenticeship in the Victorian colonial wars in Burma, the Sudan and South Africa. His career provides a lens through which to examine the British Army in the late-19th and early-20th century. In the South African War (1899-1902) Rawlinson's ideas aided the defence of Ladysmith, and he distinguished himself leading a mobile column in the guerrilla war. In the First World War he held an important command in most of the British Expeditionary Force's battles on the Western Front. He bears a heavy part-responsibility for the disastrous first day of the Somme, but later in the battle his successful tactics inflicted heavy losses on the enemy. His Western Front career culminated in a series of victories beginning at Amiens. He commanded the Indian Army between 1920 and 1925 at a time of military and political tension following the 3rd Afghan War and the Amritsar Massacre. He introduced necessary reforms, cut expenditure at a time of postwar retrenchment and began commissioning Indians to replace British officers. He would have taken up the post of CIGS (Chief of the Imperial General Staff), thus being the only British soldier to hold these two top posts. He died, however, four days after his sixty-first birthday. Drawing extensively on archival material including Rawlinson's own engagingly-written letters and diaries, this thorough examination of his life will be of great interest to those studying British military history, imperial history and the First World War.
The frustrating stalemate on the western front with its unprecedented casualties provoked a furious debate in London between the civil and military authorities over the best way to defeat Germany. The passions aroused continued to the present day. The mercurial and dynamic David Lloyd George stood at the centre of this controversy throughout the war. His intervention in military questions and determination to redirect strategy put him at odds with the leading soldiers and admirals of his day. Professor Woodward, a student of the Great War for some four decades, explores the at times Byzantine atmosphere at Whitehall by exhaustive archival research in official and private papers. The focus is on Lloyd George and his adversaries such as Lord Kitchener, General Sir William Robertson, and Field Marshall Sir Douglas Haig. The result is a fresh, compelling and detailed account of the interaction between civil and military authorities in total war.
... drawing upon a uniquely wide range of official and private papers to examine the historical development of the Cabinet Office, the custodian of Cabinet secrecy.
The role of the military in a society raises a number of issues: How much separation should there be between a civil government and its army? Should the military be totally subordinate to the polity? Or should the armed forces be allowed autonomy in order to provide national security? Recently, the dangers of military dictatorships-as have existed in countries like Panama, Chile, and Argentina-have become evident. However, developing countries often lack the administrative ability and societal unity to keep the state functioning in an orderly and economically feasible manner without military intervention. Societies, of course, have dealt with the realities of these problems throughout their histories, and the action they have taken at any particular point in time has depended on numerous factors. In the "first world" of democratic countries, the civil-military relationship has been thoroughly integrated, and indeed by most modern standards this is seen as essential. However, several influential Western thinkers have developed theories arguing for the separation of the military from any political or social role. Samuel Huntington, emphasized that professionalism would presuppose that the military should intervene as little as possible in the political sphere. Samuel E. Finer, in contrast, emphasizes that a government can be efficient enough way to keep the civil-military relationship in check, ensuring that the need for intervention by the armed forces in society would be minimal. At the time of the book's original publication, perhaps as a consequence of a post-World War II Cold War atmosphere, this was by no means a universally accepted position. Some considered the military to be a legitimate threat to a free society. Today's post-Cold War environment is an appropriate time to reconsider Finer's classic argument. "The Man on Horseback" continues to be an important contribution to the study of the military's role in the realm of politics, and will be of interest to students of political science, government, and the military.
