Originally Posted by
Canuck of NI
I think the spontaneous soldier's truce of 1914 is almost beyond dispute; what is considered surprising is that there could have been one two years later in 1916. The Canadian newspaper articles suggest the surprise is because there was considerable... ummmmm... dislike built up after to years of close-in fighting, to which I will add that it appears that the leaders on the Allied side were pretty determined to ensure that the 1914 thing didn't happen again. This would be in line with how the war was conducted by them at least.
Anyway, if only it COULD have been the War to End All Wars as they hoped at the time. Peace to all.
I recall reading how similar "truces" were attempted in 1915 & (maybe) even 1916, but the-powers-that-be clamped down pretty hard & quick. Not to mention that by that time (1916) two years of a very grim war had hardened the frontline troops.
At any rate, I agree with your sentiment.
Merry Christmas! 
[SIZE="2"][FONT="Georgia"][COLOR="DarkGreen"][B][I]T. E. ("TERRY") HOLMES[/I][/B][/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]
[SIZE="1"][FONT="Georgia"][COLOR="DarkGreen"][B][I]proud descendant of the McReynolds/MacRanalds of Ulster & Keppoch, Somerled & Robert the Bruce.[/SIZE]
[SIZE="1"]"Ah, here comes the Bold Highlander. No @rse in his breeks but too proud to tug his forelock..." Rob Roy (1995)[/I][/B][/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]
Bookmarks