| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
048268
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
London, UCL Press, 1999.
|
| Description |
ix, 260p.
|
| Series |
Warfare and history
|
| Standard Number |
1857285883
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 041897 | 358.4/BUC 041897 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
097566
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Surrey, Ashgate, 2010.
|
| Description |
vii, 467p.
|
| Standard Number |
9780754674108, hbk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 055100 | 355.02/KAS 055100 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
133798
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Negative myths about the British Army's performance, especially during the Great War, obscure the reality of an institution that learned and improvide throughout both world wars
The performance of the British Army in the two world wars has been the subject of much scrutiny in both scholarly and popular history. The latter has long been dominated by the perception of an underperforming army fighting under incompetent leadership in a futile First World War, in contrast to a more successful and effective force supporting a just cause in the Second. Yet, John Buckley and Gary Sheffield argue, sound scholarly research paints a much more nuanced picture of an institution that between 1914 and 1945 underwent a rich learning process that must be understood in its entirety.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
100740
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The British Army of the Second World War does not retain a positive reputation in the field of operational and tactical battle doctrine, particularly so in armoured warfare. Many historians argue that in Normandy in the summer of 1944, British armoured forces had still failed to grasp many essential elements of modern combat. This article demonstrates that in reality the British Army's loose approach to developing and imposing doctrine, despite inherent shortcomings, actually facilitated a flexible attitu
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|