Make Up Your Own Word

Create a new word based on a famous person's name (real or fictional). The name should make everyone think of the meaning of your word.

For example, the Australian Consise Oxford Dictionary (1988) lists

 quisling = 'person cooperating with an enemy who has occupied his country; traitor'

Vidkun Quisling (1887-1945) was a Norwegian army officer, diplomat and politician who was the 'puppet' Prime Minister of Norway for the Nazies when they occupied Norway in the Second World War. He was executed at the end of the war.

Quixote = 'enthusiastic visionary, pursuer of lofty but impractical ideas...'

Don Quixote was the hero of a novel by Cervantes (1547-1616). Here's two of mine

wallis = 'someone for whom another person gives up something valuable'

Wallis Simpson (1896-1986) was a divorced American woman for who Edward VIII abdicated the British Crown to marry.

beethoven = 'a creator of something that he or she can never experience'

 Ludwig van Beethoven (1770-1827) became deaf in 1802 but continued composing - writing some of the greatest masterpieces of Westerm music. I look forward to seeing your words with your definition and information about the famous person.

WORDS BASED ON FAMOUS NAMES - click here for other examples

 

 

Hugo

How about Hugo interacts with us directly not though you. We need more people responding to our Challenges - & you must have friends too Christopher, Brian and Bob Farley.

Caesar

One who is the victim of a well-known crime (he got famously assassinated)

SCHLIEFFEN

This comment should have been earlier !

How do we know the strategy is foolproof if it's never been used properly?
Could you please provide more information about his strategy ?

Schlieffen Plan

Schlieffen Plan

(For the picture, see the wordless email I sent you)

The Schlieffen Plan basically involved an invasion of Belgium which then could help Germany administer a pincher attack on France, defeating them in six weeks. That then allowed Germany to turn its full forces to Russia, which Schlieffen calculated would take 40 days to mobilise. I discovered the Schlieffen in a book devoted to it: The Incomplete History of World War I.
Here is it from Wikipedia (an excerpted Overview)

After the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, the French province of Alsace-Lorraine, with a mixed population of both French and Germans, had been made part of the German Empire. The French revanchism vowed to regain the territories they had possessed for nearly 200 years. Due to Bismarck's alliances, France was initially isolated, but after young Kaiser Wilhelm II took over in 1888, he estranged Germany gradually from Russia and Britain, so fears about having to fight a future war on two fronts simultaneously grew among German leaders.

France, having been beaten in a few weeks in 1870, was not considered as dangerous in the long run as the Russian Empire, which was expected to be hard to beat if the Tsar was allowed the necessary time to mobilize his huge country to full extent. After the Entente Cordiale of 1904 was signed between Britain and France, Kaiser Wilhelm II asked Alfred Graf von Schlieffen to devise a plan which would allow Germany to fight a war on two fronts, and in December 1905 von Schlieffen began circulating it.

The idea of the plan was to win a two-front war quickly by first triumphing in the West again before the "Russian Steamroller" would be able to mobilize and descend upon East Prussia—the plan scheduled 39 days for the fall of Paris [1].

It envisioned a rapid German mobilization, disregard of the neutrality of Luxembourg and Belgium, and an overwhelming sweep of the powerful German right wing southwest through Belgium and Northern France, "letting the last man on the right brush the Channel with his sleeve," [2] in the words of Schlieffen, while maintaining only a defensive posture on the central and left wings, in Lorraine, the Vosges, and the Moselle.

Paris was not to be taken (the Siege of Paris had lasted for months) but to be passed by the right wing to the west of the city. The intent of the plan was not to conquer cities or industry in order to weaken the French war efforts, but to capture most of the French Army and to force France to surrender, in essence a repeat of the strategy used to defeat France during the Franco-Prussian War. The plan was that the French army would be hemmed in around Paris and forced to fight a decisive envelopment battle.

A seed of disaster lurked in the conception of the plan: both Schlieffen and the man who would eventually implement his Plan, Helmuth von Moltke the Younger, were seduced by the possibility of the double envelopment of the entire French Army by the right wing coming from the north and west of France and the left wing coming from the east. The inspiration was the destruction of the Roman Army by Hannibal's forces at the Battle of Cannae in 216 BC, which was the object of meticulous study by Schlieffen. In essence, his plan was a large scale strategic readressing of Hannibal's tactics, capitalizing on the recent breakthroughs in communications and transport.

Politically, one of the major drawbacks of the Schlieffen Plan was that it called for the invasion of the neutral states of Belgium and the Netherlands. As it turned out, at least formally, it was the decision to invade Belgium which led to war with Great Britain.

As noted previously, Russian mobilization would supposedly be extremely slow, due to its poor railway system. Following the speedy defeat of France, the German General Staff would switch German concentrations to the Eastern Front. The plan called for sending 91% of the German troops to France and 9% to Russia. His goal was to defeat France in six weeks, the time it took for Russia to mobilize her army, and turn back to the Eastern Front before Russia could react. Kaiser Wilhelm II is quoted as having said "Paris for lunch, dinner at St. Petersburg."

Here is why it failed (or some factors):

Belgian resistance: Although the Belgian army was only a tenth the size of the German army, it still delayed the Germans for nearly a month, defending fortresses and cities. The Germans used their "Big Bertha" artillery to destroy Belgian forts in Liège, Namur and Antwerp, but the Belgians still fought back, creating a constant threat on German supply lines in the North. In addition, the German attack on neutral Belgium and reports about atrocities turned public opinion in many neutral countries against Germany and Kaiser Wilhelm.
The presence/effectiveness of the British Expeditionary Force: After the war, it was revealed by German documents that many German generals and politicians did not believe that the British Empire would enter the war. Because of the Treaty of London, the Triple Entente, and fear of German expansion, however, they did. While the BEF (British Expeditionary Force) was forced into retreat throughout the month of August, it provided enough resistance against the German First Army under Alexander von Kluck to help induce the German general to break off the Plan. Instead, von Kluck turned south-east towards Compiegne, showing his flank to the Garrison of Paris under Gallieni, making possible the "Miracle of the Marne".
The speed of Russian mobilization: The Russians moved faster than expected, gaining ground in Eastern Prussia more quickly than the Germans wanted, surprising them. While the Russian advance may not have posed much real threat at the time, had they kept gaining ground at that pace, they were going to get dangerously close to Berlin. This caused the Germans to pull even more men from their main force, in order to reinforce the Eastern Front. While this proved unnecessary, since the forces pulled from the Western Front were still in transit during German victory at Tannenberg in early September 1914, the weakening of the all-important right wing was problematic for the plan.
The French railway system: Because of the delays caused by the British and Belgians, the French had more time to transfer troops from the border at Alsace-Lorraine. The Germans greatly underestimated how well they would be able to do this, especially with the extra time they were granted by the slowing of the German forces. The French sent some of their troops by train, some through taxis, and marched the rest of them. By the time the Germans got into France, the French were there waiting for them.
The changing alliances of Central allies: Before WWI, both kingdoms of Italy and Romania were considered pro-Central. Initially, both stayed neutral, with Italy claiming that the Triple Alliance had only defensive purposes, and that the war was started by the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Since Schlieffen planned for Italy and Romania to act as allies, their refusal largely damaged the plan. Both countries eventually entered the war as enemies of Germany. By doing so, Romania actually helped the Centrals because it was easily and quickly conquered and thus provided large amounts of coal, wheat, and oil, all of which the Centrals desperately needed. Italy, however, made twelve attempts to win the Battles of the Isonzo and gained the territory of South Tyrol only after the truce of the Battle of Vittorio Veneto had been signed. This also triggered the end of the war as it caused the Dual Monarchy to capitulate, after which Germany had to follow to prevent another front in the south.
Moltke's changes to the plan: Chief of the General Staff Helmuth von Moltke made several changes to the Schlieffen Plan, initially reinforcing the east with 180,000 men from the right-wing armies, weakening the invasion force in favor of defense. Moltke also had idealogical opposition for the proposed passage of the invading armies through the neutral Netherlands, the subsequent shift delayed his armies in Belgium and resulted in the "race to the sea" after the Marne. Moltke also further reinforced his left-wing with Corps from the right to prevent Allied forces from penetrating too far into Germany itself, an issue Schlieffen was not concerned with (Schlieffen's plan called for the invading French forces to be enveloped, putting the political concern of hostile invasions behind the strategic opportunity to destroy the invading armies). Moltke also chose to send 80,000 more men to the east to assist with the Russian invasion against the advisement of General Ludendorff (Two days before the reinforcements arrived the Germans had destroyed the Russians at Tannenberg). Ultimately Moltke reassigned 250,000 men (an entire army's worth) from the right-wing assault before finally abandoning the Schlieffen Plan. Repulsed by the left wing of Moltke's forces near Sarrebourg, the French retreated to the hills around the city of Nancy. Rather than sweeping around them and enveloping the French armies and Paris itself from the east, Moltke opted to directly attack their reinforced positions around Nancy which ended in an unmitigated failure.

So, There is the Schlieffen Plan!

Officially Signed and Most Graciously Authenticated, His Most Imperial and Royal Majesty, Christophe Wilhelm the Twelfth, by the Grace of God, Deutsch Kaiser and King of Prussia, The Imperial Supreme Ruler Emperor of The Great German Empire and Grand Kaiser of The Mighty German Armed Forces.

SCHLIEFFEN PLAN

Thanks Christopher - I knew about most of the above but the detail was still fascinating.

Grand plans often look brilliant on paper but fail when put into operation. One reason is that specfic assumptions in the plan (ie., speed of army advance through Belgium; British neutrality) do not pan out. Accordingly, what seems logical given the a priori assumptions fails to logically (or practically) follow when the plan is carried out. A second and related problem relates to parameters implied by the plan - for example, the parameter of time was 'narrow' relative to the invasion of Belgium and the speed of Russian mobilization. In both cases, the values of the time parameter assumed by Schlieffen's plan (model) were incorrect and hence predictions made by the plan / model were not met.

Perhaps the greater success of Blitzkrieg in 1939-40 was it's flexibility. There was no grand scheme within which everything had to fit. Rather it could be adapted to the specific situation of invading Poland, the low countries and France.

Reading the Schlieffen plan reminded me of Harold's problem in 1066. He successfully repulsed the Scandinavian invasion from the north and almost won the battle of Hastings. What would the history of England and Europe have been like if Harold had won ? Perhaps not much different given the almost 1000 years that have elapsed since then.

\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

Bush - a demon that is disguised as a human
Kahn - someone famous for goalkeeping skills
Khan - a historic leader famous for ruthless conquering
Howan - a talented saxophonist (after someone in my class)

trumper ?

Surely each of the above is trumped by someone else

BUSH by Hitler, Stalin , Pol Pot etc.
KAHN Schmickel [was goal-keeper for Manchester UNited etc.]
KHAN Alexander the Great, Napoloen, HItler etc.
HOWAN Coleman Hawkins, Charlie Parker, Sonny Rollins, John Coltrane

!

Trumped can be slightly changed to Trumpet, and in my school band, the person who plays the trumpet is a friend of a friend of the saxophonist I mentioned.

...

In reference to the title of the above post, plus many more of mine, I love speaking in punctuation.

Do a Fay (or a Richwhite)

FAY, Sir Michael Fay, double-crossing sinister merchant banker of now-defunct business Fay Richwhite

RICHWHITE, Richard Richwhite, see the above description

They both fled to Switzerland (yet still own the Mercury Islands)

Officially Signed and Most Graciously Authenticated, His Most Imperial and Royal Majesty, Christophe Wilhelm the Twelfth, by the Grace of God, Deutsch Kaiser and King of Prussia, The Imperial Supreme Ruler Emperor of The Great German Empire and Grand Kaiser of THe Mighty German Armed Forces

Nick's junior challenges

Nick's senior challenges

User login

Navigation