Ibrahim Pasha’s leadership far surpassed Great War commander Douglas Haig’s

Evidence

On the face of it the Syrian campaign of 1831–40 and the First World War of 1914–18 are so different in nature and distant in time that the comparison between them becomes nearly untenable. For one thing, the Great War was fought between European powers in the twentieth century and the Syrian campaign was an inter-Ottoman military conflict that took place nearly a century earlier. The tactics employed, the weapons used, and the intensity of the battles of both wars make them look radically different. One was a campaign of swift movement, where thousands of troops marched over hundreds of miles in short spans of time; the other was a war of trenches, of countless abortive attacks, and of millions of troops “entrenched” in their positions for years on end. In addition, the causes of the wars and the quality of the military leadership make comparison even harder. In contrast to the remarkable imagination, the sly wit, and the insightful character of Ibrahim Pasha, Sir Douglas Haig, the commander of the British forces in the Great War, was lacking in “wit and invention … [in addition to being] stubborn, self-righteous, inflexible, intolerant … quite humourless … provincial [and] bullheaded.” — Khaled Fahmy, All the Pasha_s Men_ Mehmed Ali, his…, 1096

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Ibrahim Pasha ranked among the Ottoman Empire’s best commanders — Khaled Fahmy, All the Pasha_s Men_ Mehmed Ali, his…, 1380; Ibrahim Pasha won by superior supply infrastructure and Ottoman command failure — Khaled Fahmy, All the Pasha_s Men_ Mehmed Ali, his…, 1390
• yield-rescued: below the book’s yield-target cutoff, included anyway for connecting to: Ibrahim Pasha ranked among the Ottoman Empire’s best commanders — Khaled Fahmy, All the Pasha_s Men_ Mehmed Ali, his…, 1380; Ibrahim Pasha won by superior supply infrastructure and Ottoman command failure — Khaled Fahmy, All the Pasha_s Men_ Mehmed Ali, his…, 1390