World War II history appreciation thread - you insensitive clod

[Don Luigi]

I came on here to tell you which parts of WW2 I find fascinating and I see that my prophecy has fulfilled itself

I'm interested in a broad area of things. My biggest interests are the politics behind everything and the grey areas of what we think we know as 'victors'. WW2 is just an extension of my fascination with 20th century history. The interwar and postwar periods have some of the most interesting geopolitical wranglings. Trying miserably to enforce self determination (almost sounds like an oxymoron). There's so much interesting history taking place between 1918-39 that is often overlooked, being sandwiched between two great shadows of war. Japanese expansion, the west's involvement in the Russian civil war, the Greco-Turkish war. I'm also a nerd for weaponry and military equipment of all sorts.

Then during the war there is so much that is overlooked, such as the roles played by the minor powers.

Having a multinational discussion about any 20th century war in Europe is touchy because it has never been sorted out..because the wars fought on the continent for the past 2000+ years were never really sorted out. We've just tried a bit of glue and a flag to sort it and the tension is still very much there. The nationalism may not be militarised now but it is still very much there and it is a sensitive subject in certain situations; such as the internet when people really have time to think about what they're saying.

 

[Vurtual]

Ever read this book? 'Friendly Fire' by Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince and Stephen Prior http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1840189967?*Version*=1&*entries*=0

Bringing the tone down a bit from the 'proper' WW2 books being posted in the book thread, but some interesting stuff in it to contradict the usual story a bit (the authors also write about ufos and templars so you can ad hominem at will (though their 'Stargate Conspiracy' book is well worth a read as an antidote to the usual 'cosmic pyramids' type of book))

Friendly Fire (2004) strips away the wartime propaganda that seamlessly became accepted 'fact', revealing the intrigue and treachery between - and within - the nations that were ostensibly on the same side, the Allies of the Second World War.

Always jockeying to be in superior position for after the war, the Allies' war effort was driven first and foremost by vested interests, concerns about the defeat of Nazi Germany and Japan being secondary. In fact, their machinations actually prolonged the war by as much as two years - causing the death of hundreds of thousands unnecessarily - and resulting in a Europe divided between East and West, and the onset of the Cold War.

Incredibly, the administration of American President Franklin D. Roosevelt actively encouraged the conflict between Britain and Germany, while the relations between Britain and America were characterised by suspicion, mistrust and a struggle for post-war supremacy.

Friendly Fire reveals how British agents even tricked Hitler into declaring war on the US in order to bring America into the European conflict and how, under the guise of war aid, the US gave the USSR the means to establish itself as a world superpower - including, from 1943, the secrets of the atom bomb...

Lynn, Clive, Stephen and Robert based this book on extensive research on both sides of the Atlantic, drawing on information obtained from important archives and the testimonies of individuals who had been actively and intimately involved with the pivotal events.

Friendly Fire exposes the shocking truth about now-legendary figures - Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin - who actively shaped the destiny of countless millions, and uncovers the real agenda behind the formation of the post-war world, and the consequences that we are still living with in the 21st-century.

(also, when totting up the numerical evil that happened in WW2, don't forget to chuck 3-6 million starved indians onto churchill's side of the scales (ref: churchill's secret war)

 

[BigG]

I came on here to tell you which parts of WW2 I find fascinating and I see that my prophecy has fulfilled itself

I'm interested in a broad area of things. My biggest interests are the politics behind everything and the grey areas of what we think we know as 'victors'. WW2 is just an extension of my fascination with 20th century history. The interwar and postwar periods have some of the most interesting geopolitical wranglings. Trying miserably to enforce self determination (almost sounds like an oxymoron). There's so much interesting history taking place between 1918-39 that is often overlooked, being sandwiched between two great shadows of war. Japanese expansion, the west's involvement in the Russian civil war, the Greco-Turkish war. I'm also a nerd for weaponry and military equipment of all sorts.

Then during the war there is so much that is overlooked, such as the roles played by the minor powers.

Having a multinational discussion about any 20th century war in Europe is touchy because it has never been sorted out..because the wars fought on the continent for the past 2000+ years were never really sorted out. We've just tried a bit of glue and a flag to sort it and the tension is still very much there. The nationalism may not be militarised now but it is still very much there and it is a sensitive subject in certain situations; such as the internet when people really have time to think about what they're saying.

The geopolitical wranglings of that period are as you say a hotly contested subject as is the political spheres of influence wranglings that took place at the time.

One subject you mentioned in your post is your personal fascination with weaponry and equipment of the period....me too!! Especially the superiority in military hardware enjoyed by the Germans.

Their MG42 General Purpose light machine gun was VASTLY superior to the equivalent on the allied side (the .30 cal Browning). The MG42 had a cyclical rate of fire of between 1,200 and 1,500 rounds per minute as oppose to the M1919 which had a cyclical rate of approximately 600 rounds per minute. Added to this was the quick release system of changing barrels on the MG42 and the fact that it was made from mainly stamped steel parts made it much cheaper than it's predecessor the MG34.

Also the German Panzerfaust hand held anti-tank weapon was miles better than the American bazooka (and the least said about the British PIAT hand-held anti-tank weapon system the better!!! ).

Finally the most obvious advantage on the battlefield in terms of armour also lay with the Germans in the form of the Panther and Tiger tanks....especially the Tiger http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_I. With it's thick armour and formidable 88mm gun (the same as that employed by the dual purpose 88mm flack gun crews that were often employed in the ground role against Anglo/American Shermans). It was well known among allied tank crews that the Germans could pick them off with ease long before the Shermans could bring to bear effective fire from their comparatively "puny" 75mm guns themselves. In wasn't until the more widespread deployment of the Sherman Firefly tank with it's excellent 17 pounder British anti-tank gun as it's main armament that things began to even out a bit.

Well as usual I could go on all day about this stuff but I'll leave it there. It's nice to have a proper discussion on WW2 history which was the purpose of the thread in the first place.....not to hurl personal insults and each other and argue over which side were the "good guys". That could be a whole other thread by itself. I'd much rather keep this to an actual discussion of WW2 rather than the rights and wrongs of mankind as a species

 

[Don Luigi]

The MG42 really is such a, typically German, simple, efficient killing machine. Testament to this is how many countries are still using some derivative of it, with the design changing very little since its creation. It's basically the Kalashnikov of GPMGs
.

The Panzerfaust models are also a testament to their ingenuity. Simple to build, simple to use, and disposable. The range was a big drawback wit the 30 model but they really improved this with later ones. Much better than the bazooka in terms of being able to actually penetrate armour in later stages of the war. The German adaptation of the Bazooka, the Panzerschreck also packed much more punch. I wouldn't have liked to go in fighting with a bloody PIAT. Springs just don't scream deadly to me

Thank fuck for Lend-Lease, eh?

 

[felix]

I don't think the range of the Panzerfaust was much of a problem when there were so many Hitler Kinder willing to run right up to Allied tanks.

 

[Don Luigi]

I always wondered about this but never actually looked too far into it. Do you know how common it was for the Volkssturm, specifically the children, to show such bravery? I know that they put up a bitter fight but never started to sift through propaganda from both sides regarding it.

The stories from the Russian advance into German territories and the post-war occupation are terrifying. However, they have been reported among many nation's solders. Some of the worst I've read is about the Nanjing massacre. It's easy to get swept up in the emotion of it all but I always like to keep an open mind about what has good evidence behind it and what stinks of propaganda.

 

[felix]

There is footage of Hitler pinning Iron Crosses onto young Volkssturm and Hitler Youth kids, on one of his last days on earth above the bunker. No doubt filmed for propaganda purposes (who the hell was gonna see it by that stage??) but I've read lots of reports of them putting up a good fight in those last days. They seemed to dissipate pretty quickly once they realised all was lost, though, just like Himmler's "Werwolf", which didn't come to much after hostilities ceased.

All the shit that was going on in China with the Japanese is pretty well out of my sphere of knowledge. That was a whole different world out there, and in some cases made the SS look like the Red Cross.

 

[itsonlyme123]

Hitler was a cunt no doubt, but it was Churchill who made gassing semetic people popular during the first world war I believe?

 

[felix]

Source, please.

(Not that I'm denying Churchill was a cunt at many times, of course)

 

[itsonlyme123]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alleged_British_use_of_chemical_weapons_in_Mesopotamia_in_1920

Start there. Note his reasoning for doing so... kurds are sub human!

 

[Shambles]

All the shit that was going on in China with the Japanese is pretty well out of my sphere of knowledge. That was a whole different world out there, and in some cases made the SS look like the Red Cross.

The Japanese appear to have gone much farther down the "medical experimentation" route than the Nazis did. They referred to their Chinese captives as maruta (which roughly translates as 'logs') and using the poor sods as firewood would have been far kinder than what they actually did in most cases. It's certainly no competetion but it is rather odd the way Nazi atrocities are so embedded in national - nay world - consciousness yet Japanese WWII atrocities are barely known outside of China. And what is worse is that at least Germany took ownership of what was done in their name and - in an inevitible number of instances - by them whilst Japan doesn't exactly deny what it did but seems to simply shrug it off and has never really been held to account for it. Then again, nor were the Allies for all the vile shit they did (albeit somewhat different in nature it was still pretty frikkin vile in many cases).

 

[felix]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alleged_British_use_of_chemical_weapons_in_Mesopotamia_in_1920

Start there. Note his reasoning for doing so... kurds are sub human!

Not sure what your point is.

Churchill wasn't PM in 1920. And it was only "alleged", and it was "only" tear gas.

It's bad history to judge historical figures by the mores of today. Having said that, we'd just come out of a World War with the Germans who had no compunction about using some properly horrible stuff on our own troops.

There was an FOI this week that mentioned something about Thatcher considering building up stocks of chemical weapons herself. If you want me to agree that the governments of the day will do shitty things, then you have my full agreement. :D

 

[Shambles]

I don't think there is any doubt that Chuchill was an utterly vile human being fond of racism, chemical weapons and concentration camps - all for Johnny Foreigner of course. However, such a person does apparently have a use when facing up to somebody at least as repulsive.

 

[felix]

^ Amen

The Japanese appear to have gone much farther down the "medical experimentation" route than the Nazis did. They referred to their Chinese captives as maruta (which roughly translates as 'logs') and using the poor sods as firewood would have been far kinder than what they actually did in most cases. It's certainly no competetion but it is rather odd the way Nazi atrocities are so embedded in national - nay world - consciousness yet Japanese WWII atrocities are barely known outside of China. And what is worse is that at least Germany took ownership of what was done in their name and - in an inevitible number of instances - by them whilst Japan doesn't exactly deny what it did but seems to simply shrug it off and has never really been held to account for it. Then again, nor were the Allies for all the vile shit they did (albeit somewhat different in nature it was still pretty frikkin vile in many cases).

There were a lot of weird compromises in Japan in that postwar period. The Americans basically had General McArthur running the country, while the Emperor was still being aloofly propped up, somehow untouched by all the badness, and completely blameness for all that had gone on in his name. The Japanese psyche is an odd thing, even more then than it is now.

The retrospective Japanese history shortly afterwards was to blame it all on their "militaristic" element, i.e. the Generals. But of course that military consisted of many, many, regular Japanese.

 

[Shambles]

To be fair, I think the Japanese got off lightly compared to the Nazis cos their civilian population was used by America to play with their new toys. Japan was wanting surrender when Russia was closing in but the US wouldn't let them till they got to make big bangs just to see what would happen. Can see why they were cut some slack in the post-war period but it does niggle slightly that they still to this day won't acknowledge quite how disgusting their treatment of the Chinese and others was during the war.

 

[felix]

To be fair, I think the Japanese got off lightly compared to the Nazis cos their civilian population was used by America to play with their new toys. Japan was wanting surrender when Russia was closing in but the US wouldn't let them till they got to make big bangs just to see what would happen. Can see why they were cut some slack in the post-war period but it does niggle slightly that they still to this day won't acknowledge quite how disgusting their treatment of the Chinese and others was during the war.

I seem to remember the Japanese apologising about something not so long ago, but it might have been about those used panties vending machines.

 

[Shambles]

As I recall they made what is commonly known as a half-arsed apology which came over more as a "fuck you" to those being apologised to.

 

[One Thousand Words]

America set up military bases and have pretty much denied Japan having anything other than a Coast guard up until a couple of years ago. Most of the Asia pacfic Region stil despise and distrusts Japan, particularly Korea and China. I know many old diggers who would rather suck a dick than buy a Toyota.

The saving face of japanese culture means they will never apologise. They truly believe that horrible things happen in war and let's leave it at that. Even the forced prostitutes are brushed off as being employed as "comfort women", at least they had a job sort of thing.

 

[zzz101]

Did they ever find out what happened to Hitler?

I think he did die as they say - (shot himself) However there was mixed reports of his death(what happened) at the time. and the FBI continued to investigate finding what really happened to Hitler for years after

Russians were the first into the bunker, They can't really say any of the bodies they found was really Hitler. They were in poor conditions to find out, they did not want to work with USA, etc. Stalin then saying the Russians didn't kill him and that UK had captured him alive, or he fled to Argentina with the 1000s of other Nazis that did

 

[felix]

Grey Wolf

Did Hitler (code name Grey Wolf ) really die in 1945? The evidence says no. Here s the gripping story of what might have happened. When Truman asked Stalin in 1945 whether Hitler was dead, Stalin replied bluntly, 'No'. What really happened? Simon Dunstan and Gerrard Williams have compiled extensive evidence, some recently declassified, that Hitler actually fled Berlin and took refuge in a remote Nazi enclave in Argentina. Dunstan and Williams cite people, places and dates in over 500 detailed notes that identify the plan's escape route, vehicles, aircraft, U-boats and hideouts. Among the details: the CIA's possible involvement and Hitler's life in Patagonia, including his two daughters.

This was actually a semi-plausible read.

However, if the Russians didn't actually find his remains, why would it be in their interests to say they did? I think they did.