検索結果

A lull occurred on the main front as the French infantry reorganised and the surviving German defenders recovered from the effects of the attack. French gunners were hampered (paralysed) by their ignorance of the positions of the infantry and left unable to fire a preparatory bombardment; the gunners concentrated on shelling German reserves seen advancing and on counter-battery fire. The most advanced French infantry were cut off by German barrage-fire, suffered from a serious shortage of water and frequently were counter-attacked, which rapidly reduced their ability to attack again, particularly in the units which had advanced the furthest. To the south of XXXIII Corps, the 39th Division attacked Neuville on the orders of the corps commander, despite the reservations of the divisional and army commanders and suffered a costly repulse by devastating fire from the defenders. On the right, beyond the Arras–Béthune road, Neuville cemetery was taken and counter-attacks by German reserves brought up from Douai and Lens were repulsed. By 11 May, the Tenth Army had reorganised sufficiently to attempt another general offensive but the DM and the 77th Division, which were the most advanced, had received the fewest reinforcements and supplies. Communication with the foremost troops was almost impossible through the German artillery-fire but d'Urbal thought that the German defence was rapidly increasing in effectiveness and that delay would put the French at a greater disadvantage. To the north the 70th Division and the 13th Division of XXI Corps managed to advance at Ablain, Carency, Bois 125 and along the Lorette Spur, which left the German garrison in Ablain outflanked on both sides. The attack by the XXXIII Corps was met by a huge volume of German artillery and small-arms fire and repulsed, DM having suffered 5,120 casualties since 9 May; the 77th Division also gained little ground due to German flanking fire. On the evening of 11 May, the French captured the lower slopes of the Arabs' Spur in mutually costly fighting and a night counter-attack by German troops from the Spur of the White Way was repulsed. The 13th and 43rd divisions captured the crest of the Lorette Spur during the night, which deprived the Germans of the commanding views from the ridge. German artillery in Angres and the machine-guns in Ablain kept a constant fire on the new French positions. On 11 May, D'Urbal reinforced the XXXIII Corps and XX Corps with fresh divisions, ready to attack after a two-hour bombardment. The French captured the wood east of Carency, which overlooked German communication trenches with Souchez and prevented their use. A German party on a wooded hillock kept the French from the east end of the village and the western approach was blocked by infantry at a stone quarry, nearly 91 m (300 ft) deep.

Improvements in French artillery tactics, were foreshadowed by the pauses in the creep of the 77th Division barrage on 9 May, which enabled the infantry to keep up and capture ouvrage 123, the fanning-out barrages and hybrid barrages fired on 16 June, the use of chemical shells and artillery observation from aircraft equipped with wireless. The Battle of Aubers Ridge was a British offensive on the Western Front on 9 May 1915 during World War I. The battle was part of the British contribution to the Second Battle of Artois, a Franco-British offensive intended to exploit the German diversion of troops to the Eastern Front. The French Tenth Army was to attack the German 6th Army north of Arras and capture Vimy Ridge, preparatory to an advance on Cambrai and Douai. The British First Army on the left (northern) flank of the Tenth Army, was to attack on the same day and widen the gap in the German defences expected to be made by the Tenth Army and to prevent German troops from being moved south of La Bassée canal. The battle was the initial British component of the combined Anglo-French offensive known as the Second Battle of Artois. The French commander-in-chief, Joseph Joffre, had enquired of Sir John French, commander of the British Expeditionary Force, if British units could support a French offensive into the Douai Plain around late April or early May 1915. The immediate French objectives were to capture the heights at Notre Dame de Lorette and the Vimy Ridge. The British First Army was further north, between La Bassée and Ypres (Belgium). It was decided that the British forces would attack in the southern half of their front line, near the village of Laventie. Their objective in the flat and poorly drained terrain was Aubers Ridge, an area of slightly higher ground 2–3 kilometres (1.2–1.9 mi) wide marked by the villages of Aubers, Fromelles and Le Maisnil. The area had been attacked in the Battle of Neuve Chapelle two months earlier. The battle marked the second use of specialist Royal Engineer tunnelling companies, when men of 173rd Tunnelling Company tunnelled under no man's land and planted mines under the German defences to be blown at zero hour. The course of the Battle of Neuve Chapelle had shown that one breastwork was insufficient to stop an attack and the fortifications opposite the British were quickly augmented. Barbed-wire entanglements were doubled and trebled and 5-foot (1.5 m) deep breastworks were increased to 15–20 feet (4.6–6.1 m) broad, with traverses and a parados (a bank of earth behind the trench to provide rear protection). The two machine-guns per battalion were sited in emplacements at ground level set to sweep no man's land from flanking positions. Aubers Ridge オーベル山稜

Three squadrons of 1st Wing Royal Flying Corps (RFC) were attached to the First Army, to fly defensive patrols for four days before the attack, to deter enemy reconnaissance. During the attack they were to conduct artillery observation and reconnaissance sorties and bomb enemy rear areas, railway junctions and bridges further away. This battle was an unmitigated disaster for the British army. No ground was won and no tactical advantage gained. It is doubted if it had the slightest positive effect on assisting the main French attack 15 miles (24 km) to the south. The battle was renewed slightly to the south, from 15 May as the Battle of Festubert. In the aftermath of the Aubers Ridge failure, the war correspondent of The Times, Colonel Charles à Court Repington, sent a telegram to his newspaper highlighting the lack of high-explosive shells, using information supplied by Sir John French; The Times headline on 14 May 1915 was: "Need for shells: British attacks checked: Limited supply the cause: A Lesson From France". This precipitated a political scandal known as the Shell Crisis of 1915. The German Official Historians of the Reichsarchiv recorded c. 102,500 French casualties from 9 May – 18 June, 32,000 British casualties and 73,072 German casualties for the operations of the Second Battle of Artois. The British Official Historian, J. E. Edmonds recorded British casualties as 11,619 men. Edmonds wrote that the German Official History made little reference to the battle but in 1939 G. C. Wynne wrote that Infantry Regiment 55 had 602 casualties and Infantry Regiment 57 lost 300 casualties. The Battle of Festubert (15–25 May 1915) was an attack by the British army in the Artois region of France on the western front during World War I. The offensive formed part of a series of attacks by the French Tenth Army and the British First Army in the Second Battle of Artois (3 May – 18 June 1915). After the failure of the attempted breakthrough by the First Army in the attack at Aubers Ridge (9 May 1915) tactics of a short hurricane bombardment and an infantry advance with unlimited objectives, were replaced by the French practice of slow and deliberate artillery-fire intended to prepare the way for an infantry attack. A continuous three-day bombardment by the British heavy artillery was planned, to cut wire and demolish German machine-gun posts and infantry strong-points. The German defences were to be captured by a continuous attack, by one division from Rue du Bois to Chocolat Menier Corner and by a second division 600 yards (550 m) north, which was to capture the German trenches to the left of Festubert. The objectives were 1,000 yards (910 m) forward, rather than the 3,000 yards (2,700 m) depth of advance intended at Aubers Ridge. The battle was the first British attempt at attrition. Festubert フェステュベール

In February 1916, the Western Frontier Force was reinforced and a British column was sent west along the coast to re-capture Sollum. Air reconnaissance discovered a Senussi encampment at Agagia, which was attacked in the Action of Agagia on 26 February. The Senussi were defeated and then intercepted by the Dorset Yeomanry who charged across open ground swept by machine-gun and rifle fire as the Senussi withdrew. The British lost half their horses and 58 of 184 men but prevented the Senussi from slipping away. Jaafar Pasha the commander of the Senussi forces on the coast was captured and Sollum was re-occupied by British forces on 14 March 1916, which concluded the coastal campaign.

Lukin received the Yeomanry report and at 9:30 a.m. advanced from the camp and sent the Dorset Yeomanry (Lieutenant-Colonel H. M. W. Souter) to cut off the Senussi retreat, by moving round the west of the Senussi position to some sand hills, from which the Senussi could be observed. The Yeomanry dismounted and assisted by two armoured cars, which inhibited Senussi machine-gun fire, advanced to pin down the Senussi. The infantry advanced with the 3rd South African Battalion forward and the 1st South African Battalion in support. By 11:00 a.m., the troops had moved 8.9 kilometres (5.5 mi) and deployed and at 11:20 a.m. came under fire. The battalion advanced in line with the men at a two-pace interval, machine-guns on the flanks and covering fire from the Notts Battery.

Tactical developments Field artillery available to the British divisions covered a 1-mile (1.6 km) front, with 19 heavy guns in support, while the Tenth Army divisional frontages were .75-mile (1.21 km) wide with 35 heavy guns. The smaller number of British guns was matched by a lack of ammunition. The offensives were to begin with a continuous and methodical bombardment for 96 hours, in which counter-battery fire was as important as trench destruction. A four-hour intense bombardment was to be fired, before the infantry attacks in Artois and Champagne began simultaneously on 25 September. The infantry were to advance as an "irresistible mass", with reserves arranged in depth to move forward at the same time as the leading troops, ready to take over and maintain the momentum of the assault. Previous attacks in Artois had been obstructed by the many villages and industrial premises in the region, which were easy for the Germans to fortify and use to delay attacks. The Franco-British heavy artillery was to be used to destroy German fortified houses and villages, which were proof against field artillery. Such tactics were expected to break through both German defensive positions and enable the cavalry to rush forward and widen the breakthroughs, before advancing on distant objectives in Belgium. If the attacks succeeded the rest of the Franco-British-Belgian armies would join in a general offensive and force the German armies into open warfare, in which Allied numerical superiority would be overwhelming. The artillery of the 9th (Scottish) Division was arranged in two mobile groups and a reserve. One field artillery brigade supported each of the two attacking infantry brigades and two howitzer brigades with a mountain battery, were held back for counter-battery fire and targets of opportunity on the divisional front. The three brigade field companies of the Royal Engineers and the pioneer battalion were placed in reserve. Two 9.2-inch howitzers were dug in near a wood at Beuvry with arrangements made for ground and air observation of their fire and Russian saps were dug towards the redoubt. On the night before the attack the saps were opened and the ends joined, to make a jumping-off trench 150 yards (140 m) away from the face of the redoubt.[5]The 9th Division commanded by Major-General George Thesiger was to attack with 26th Brigade and 28th Brigade on a front of 1,500 yards (1,400 m) between the left flank of the 7th Division and the Vermelles–La Bassée railway to capture the German front and support trenches. The divisional objectives were the buildings and dump of Fosse 8 and the Hohenzollern Redoubt. The Dump was a flat-topped spoil-heap 20 feet (6.1 m) high with a commanding view and had been made the principal German observation post in the area. When captured The Dump would give the British observation over Haisnes and St. Elie. On the right the 26th Brigade with two battalions, was to overrun the Hohenzollern Redoubt and Fosse 8 in the first rush. The two supporting battalions would then attack south of the fosse and advance on Haisnes, while the leading battalions reorganised to follow on in support, as the fosse was consolidated by the 28th Brigade. The division was then to capture the redoubt, The Dump and Fosse 8 before advancing to the Lens–La Bassée road; after reaching the road the division was to press on to the German second position between Cité St. Elie and Haisnes. The 27th Brigade in reserve, was then to advance through Douvrin to the Haute Deûle Canal (Canal de la Deûle), with the 7th Division on the right flank; XI Corps would then pass through to continue the advance.

自分は若輩ですが、いっちょまえに国防に不安があり質問させていただきます。 ・もし万が一状況により自衛隊が防衛出動や治安出動があり、それでも法律により自衛官が発砲できずに犠牲者が出た場合、世論はどんな反応をするのでしょうか。そのような状況に陥っても国民は自衛隊に批判的な態度を取るのでしょうか。 ・自衛隊を廃止して、警察の力を上げれば良いという意見を聞いたことがあるのですが、それでは警察が「軍隊化」するだけだと思うのですがどうでしょう。 ・自衛隊を廃止すべき。憲法九条は無くすべき。、と主張される方々は、もし敵勢力に侵略された場合どうすべきだとお考えなのでしょう。ちなみに自分は、自衛隊にもっと権限と「実力」を与えるべきだと思っています。具体的には、臨機応変に敵対勢力に実力を持って対抗する権利を与えるべきだと思っています。 ・コレは主旨から外れるのですが、以前あった長久手の立てこもり事件において、警察官の方が死傷されましたが、警察官の命より犯罪者の命を重視する体制についてどう思いますか？ 多くの質問で申し訳ありませんが、お願いします。 また、自分は政治や法律に関しては素人です。間違いがありましたら、教えていただきたいです。

全ての国が武器や軍隊を捨てたらどうなりますか？ 教えてくださいm(..)m

無知な質問ですみませんが、教えてください。 よくＴＶで議論される「日本は侵略国家じゃなかった」とか「侵略国家だった」というのがあります。侵略国家じゃなかったというひとたちに対して、じゃあ満州？南京？はなんだったんだよ！と 話をぶつけると、きまって 大東亜共栄圏というのがあってー、・・・・ というのをみるんですが、大東亜共栄圏って、チャンドラボースたちと日本やタイ？アジアの代表者たちと会議して、ヨーロッパからの解放を協力し合おう、アジアからヨーロッパやアメリカを追い出そうという目的ですよね？　だったらやっぱり侵略じゃないの・・・？と疑問をもちました。 大東亜会議に中国も参加してますが、満州や南京のことがあったのになんで参加したんですか？侵略された側ならそんなの参加しないのでわないのですか？ ネットなどみて調べてみたのですが、いまいちわかりません。無知な質問すみませんが分かりやすい言葉で説明してくださる方教えてください サイトなどで教えてくださる方、wikipediaなどはみたのでそれ以外でお願いします。

私は日本が軍隊を持つべきではないと思います。 私たちは経済的に強い。 でも、政治的には国民レベルで未熟です。 若い人たちに政治に対する感心がきわめて薄い。 有事の際といいますが、その際果たして軍隊を作って、どれだけの国民が最前線で戦う意志を持っているのでしょうか？ どれだけの国民が倫理に従って、行動できるのでしょう？ こういう例はどうでしょう。 アメリカでは銃を持つことが許されています。 自衛のため持っている人もいます。 でも、持たないことを選択する人もいます。 こういう人が多数です。 こういう人たちはもちろん宣伝をしません。 日頃から危険を避けるよう注意します。 武器を持たないと選択したのは、まわりを信用しているためではありません。 そんな危険なものを家におきたくないからです。事故があったら大変です。 盗まれでもしたら大変です。 使い方のしらないこどもが誤って人を傷つけるかもしれない。 だから、持たないことを選択したのです。 持つことは許されています。 でもそう選択したのです。 自衛での利より、事故の被害の方がリスクが高いと思ったのでしょう。 だから、日本も法律として市民は護身のために銃は持たないのです。 逆を言えば、”護身として、銃を持っている人が、ほかの目的で使うかもしれない。 「信用できない」ともいえると思います。 国土が攻撃される…。 例えば、原子力発電所が攻撃されるケースですが、そういう施設の管理が、きちんと自分たちでできているか考えてほしいと思います。 以前にも、戦争体験で一番痛いめに会っているのにも関わらず、事故の隠蔽などしていた例が何度かあったと思います。 自国の人間がきちんと管理できないから、地元の反発があります。 管理できないなら、当然です。 日本はどちらかというと、他国を信用してというよりは自分たちが上手に管理できないということで、軍備を持たないと選択したと私は思うようにしています。 イラクは核兵器を作って、戦争を起こすことを目的に軍備を強化しているという、誤った情報だけでれだけのダメージを受けました。 その上、日本は日中戦争という、ワルーイ印象が既にあります。 大東亜共栄圏はうたい文句としてはすばらしかったかもしれない。 でも、ふたを開ければどうだったでしょうか？ 一人一人の軍人さんが、それをきちんと理解して行動したでしょうか？ 自衛のための軍隊を作ることで、失う信用の方が私は大きいと思う。 他国が軍隊を持っているから自分もというのは簡単な近道です。 どうして、自分は持っていない。 私は危険じゃない、だから、友好関係を築きましょうって思えないんでしょうか？ 時間はかかる．朝鮮、中国の信頼を得るのは大変です。 でも、例えば、立てこもった、武器を持った人たちに武器を持って歩み寄りをするのはナンセンスです。 かえって、相手の不信感を逆なでする。 こういうとき、武器を持たずに両手を上げて歩み寄りするのが、相手を信頼せず、多額の税金を人殺しの武器に使うより、ずっと勇気がいると思う。 馬鹿じゃないの？ そうかも知れない。 でも、そのとき、日本と同じ思想を持った国がきっと協力してくれると思う。 相手が武器を持つから武器をだったら、きっと相手が武器を持たないから自国もということが起こる可能性だってあるとおもう。 そういうことを率先してする。 リスクを持っても、平和のために他国に例はなくても踏み出すことができる国。 それがほんとのアジアの先進国だと思う。 日本はそういうことで、他国のまねをする国であってはならないと思います。 日本はダメージを受けて、外国の助けでここまでやって来れました。 日本国憲法は私たちのオリジナルではなかった。 でも、私たちにここまでよい憲法をつくることはアメリカの助けをなしにできなかったと思います。 私は今も覚えていますが、小学校の時、憲法を読んで自国の憲法はすばらしいと思いました。 自分たちでこういうものをもっと昔に作れなかったのが残念です。 日本国憲法のことですが、国際法違反といいますが、その法律違反、私は一国民として訴えたいとは思いません。 わたしたちによい憲法を作る力がなかったのです。 平和憲法があれば平和か…いいえ、絶対違います。 法律があっても犯罪がなくならないのと一緒です。 私たちの憲法は私たちのスタンスです。 私たちの社会の中での構えです。 みなさんはどうお考えですか？ ちなみに私は在米邦人です。

水上偵察機瑞雲は水上戦闘機としての運用を狙って２０ミリ機銃を搭載しているようです。 　艦上攻撃機流星も２０ミリ機銃を搭載してますが、これも同様でしょうか。 　瑞雲は昭和１８年登場、流星は昭和１９年です。昭和１８年ならまだアメリカも旧式戦闘機がありましたが、１９年にもなりとＦ４ＵやＦ６Ｆの新型戦闘機が相手で零戦も苦戦していました。そんな状態なのに艦上攻撃機を戦闘機代わりというのは無理があると思います。どうでしょうか。

映画ノーカントリーのイカれた殺し屋が使うサイレンサー付きショットガン Remington 11-87 は一般的な武器なのでしょうか？ YouTubeでは多くのレビュー動画が溢れており、射撃動画も沢山ありました。もちろんあの銀色に輝くサイレンサー付きで笑 これは単にこの映画か流行ったからなのか、元々戦闘用として使われていたのか、どっちなんでしょうか？ ちなみに、ザ・戦闘用という有名な銃火器もありましたら教えて下さい。