[hef19898]

But let's be honest, regardless of all the work Haig did after the warbto support veterans, militarily he wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer. Sure, we argue from hindsight. Also true, the opposition wasn't much better. Also true, most WW1 commanders were better than what we make them today. And Haig was no Cadorna or Hötzendorf.

The big mistake Haig made, or the thing he didn't see, was IMHO how the war was fought and won on the Western Front. He wanted a breakthrough, instead he got a war of attrition. One the Entente was winning. Haig went from attempted breakthrough to winning, without realizing why his strategy worked. Because one can fight a war of attrition without sacrificing as much of your own men as the Entente did.

How the Entente reacted to the Kaiserschlacht so, well, that was the right reaction: let the Germans leave their fortified positions, outrun their logistics, and sacrifice some ground until the enemy runs out of steam. Then counter attack. That way, you don't even have to break through the enemies lines as they are already abandonned and unmanned. No idea how much influence Haig had on this so.

At least the authors you mentioned argue based on primary sources and facts. As oppossed to people using autobiographies and post-war memoires of WW2 generals.