• 🇬🇧󠁿 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
    European & African
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • EADD Moderators: Pissed_and_messed | Shinji Ikari

World War II history appreciation thread - you insensitive clod

All "sides" of WW2 committed heinous crimes. The fact we've never learnt or moved on from them and have indeed continued the madness is just a sign that the elite couldn't give a fuck about anything other than themselves and the feeding of the machine.
 
Erikmen said:
Very controversial. After all we are talking of thousands of bombs during 3 days with so many innocents lives taken away, despite of being Germans or not.
From what my father in law says, films about that are never close to what happened there.
Click to expand...

The bombing (annihilation) of Dresden was a low point in the Allied's efforts. No doubt about that. We remember it too.

Totally unnecessary and it was the result of an RAF Commander's unrestrained ego. Bomber Harris should have been in Nuremberg for that along with the rest of the bad guys, but history is written by the victors and he was one of our fucking untouchable "heroes". Shameful shit when there were other more militarily useful targets waiting to be hit. The Americans wanted to hit oilfields and munition factories, but they were overruled. Atrocities like Dresden prolonged the war; they didn't shorten it.
 
I'm not as up on these periods as you or others in this thread, but i seem to remember reading that 'strategic bombing' was something that churchill initiated and encouraged, and shifting the blame to bomber harris was maybe part of churchill's 'intention to write' history. A quote from here (don't know how reliable but have read similar elsewhere):
Overy traces the origins of the bombing war back to 10 May 1940, the same day that Germany began its attack on the West and Churchill replaced Chamberlain as British prime minister. ‘Chamberlain had always opposed the use of bombing against urban targets,’ writes Overy, ‘but Churchill had no conscientious or legal objections.’ Indeed, already as Minister of Munitions in 1917, Churchill had been in favour of an independent air force and a policy of long-range bombing against German industrial targets.

Up until Churchill’s appointment as prime minister both Germany and Britain had stuck to a pledge not to attack targets in each other’s cities where civilians were at risk. Overy dismisses the long-held belief ‘firmly rooted in the British public mind’ that Hitler initiated the trend for indiscriminate bombings. Instead, he says, the decision to take the gloves off was Churchill’s, ‘because of the crisis in the Battle of France, not because of German air raids [over Britain].’
Click to expand...

And this from Clive Ponting on the relative scale of the bombing (again not sure how reliable - he seems not to acknowledge german bombing of spain, holland and russia (but i remember ponting from the belgrano incident, so...):

'German bombing of civilians was almost entirely restricted to Britain. The period of greatest bombing was in 1940 when just under 37,000 tons were dropped � the total for the whole of the war was just over 74,000 tons. This figure is small compared with the Allied bombload. They dropped just short of 2 million tons of bombs on Europe, including nearly 1.2 million tons in 1944 alone. The casualty rate reflected these figures. The bombing of Britain killed 51,000 people. However, the Allies killed about 600,000 German civilians, 62,000 Italians and over 900,000 Japanese. They also killed about 60,000 French people even though bombing of occupied territory was not allowed before spring 1942. In Germany about 800,000 people were seriously injured and 7.5 million were made homeless. Overall the Allies killed at least 1,600,000 civilians through bombing.' (Clive Ponting, Armageddon, New York 1995, pp. 239-40)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Vurtual said:
I'm not as up on these periods as you or others in this thread, but i seem to remember reading that 'strategic bombing' was something that churchill initiated and encouraged, and shifting the blame to bomber harris was maybe part of churchill's 'intention to write' history.
Click to expand...

Interesting stuff, thanks.

There is no doubt that Churchill had an eye on the history books and his legacy from a very early age, so you may well be right. At the end of the day, he and Brooke were in charge of things on the UK side, and they allowed Portal to allow Harris to do his thing. The buck must ultimately stop with Churchill.

I'm only halfway through Brookie's diaries (god knows when I'll get back to it; it's massive and so is my reading list), and it'll be interesting to see what he had to say about it. He was often over-ruled on things, so there's probably something in what you're saying.
 
2183.jpg
 
Hobarts Funnies..... I'm sure felix knows exactly what they are :)

I loved the Duplex Drive Sermon....the swimming tank...shame the yanks set them off too far from the shore at omaha on d day and most of them sunk....was a good idea though :)
 
Hah, I'm vaguely familiar with them, but as always want to know more.

On a similar subject, are you aware of the importance of a tiny village called Garlieston, on the edges of SW Scotland? We camped there last year. Lovely place and I took a nice smooth boulder from the beach home, just because. %)

During the Second World War the village became part of the secret Mulberry Harbour project. The profile of the beach and sea bed at Garlieston was similar to that of the proposed harbour points in Normandy and that, coupled with the remote nature of the locality, led to Garlieston and the surrounding area being selected as the development region for the harbours. Prototypes of the harbours were constructed at Conwy in North Wales and then transported and positioned in Wigtown Bay, where they were tested and modified through 1943 and 1944. A fixed pierhead from the harbours could be seen in Cruggleton (or Rigg) Bay until it was destroyed by a storm on Sunday 12 March 2006.
Click to expand...
 
This will be an amazing film. :)

http://www.betacinema.com/13minutes

158164.jpg_image_scaler_230x0.jpg


A stunning, emotional portrait of the resistance fighter who tried to assassinate Hitler in the Munich Bürgerbräukeller on November 8th 1939.

Georg Elser was a man who could have changed world history and saved millions of human lives. If only he had had 13 more minutes. With 13 more minutes, the bomb he had personally assembled would have torn apart Adolf Hitler and his henchmen. But this was not to be, and on 8 November 1939, Hitler left the scene of the attempted assassination earlier than expected - leaving Elser to fail catastrophically. Who was this man who recognized the danger emanating from Hitler sooner than many others, who took action when everybody else, including the German generals, meekly followed orders or kept silent? What did he see which our parents or grandparents did not see or want to see? The man who told his torturers to their faces that he wanted to prevent the bloodshed of the imminent world war?

The film 13 MINUTES (WT) relates the background of the failed attack in the Bürgerbräukeller and paints a suspenseful, emotional portrait of the resistance fighter who was called „Georgie“ in his hometown. A story that takes us from his early years in the Swabian Alps - when National Socialism arrived in his hometown - to his last days at the Dachau concentration camp, where he was killed shortly before the end of the war at the command of the one whom he himself wanted to kill, Adolf Hitler.

Beta Cinema reunites with "Downfall " director Oliver Hirschbiegel on the Hitler resistance drama 13 MINUTES.
Click to expand...
 
Here I am :)

Just thought I'd bump this thread as I've recently finished another highly acclaimed WW2 book.....

9nRmvmN.jpg
[/IMG]

The Second World War - By Antony Beevor.

I think Beevor is probably my favourite WW2 historian and writer and I loved his books: D-Day, Starlingrad and Berlin - The Downfall. They were all excellent books, brilliantly written , insightful and informative so when I realised he had written a book in which he was attempting to cover the ENTIRE Second World War 1939-45 in both European and Pacific theatres I had to buy it. Yout would think that trying to summarise such a huge depth of subject into a single book would be too much but I think he managed it pretty well. I learned some things I wasn't aware of but mainly it was going over stuff I'd already read.

Anyone wanting a good, solid grounding in the events of WW2 could do a lot worse than make this their starting point.

Would be good to see the WW2 thread brought to life again :)
 
englandgz74 said:
so when I realised he had written a book in which he was attempting to cover the ENTIRE Second World War 1939-45 in both European and Pacific theatres I had to buy it.
Click to expand...

You mean: when I specifically recommended it to you (in this thread), you forgetful clod? :D

Glad you enjoyed it.
 
felix said:
You mean: when I specifically recommended it to you (in this thread), you forgetful clod? :D

Glad you enjoyed it.
Click to expand...

Actually bro, I forgot that you had recommended it until I messaged you on FB and you reminded me. I'm a proper forgetful clod!!

It was a good read.but obviously when you try to squash the whole.of the second world war in one 900 odd(I think....I'd look but I can't find it :):) page book it's going to be fairly brief about some events.

I think I've managed to expand my WW2 knowledge by reading it was though definitely. I learned several things about events with which I was already Familiar... Kursk for example. Everyone just thinks of Kursk as a tank batle and leave it al that...it was howecer one of the largest areal engagements of the war, I didn't know that at all ( fuck I wish I could find the bloody thing to quote figures but I think I've lost if........ Not like me at all that :) )

Anyway on the whole I really enjoyed the book. I very highly regard Beevor as a historian and as a writer.

It would be a great book for anyone first getting into WW2 and wanted good grounding,

So yeah thanks for recommending it felix mate.

Have you got any decent WW2 books on the go at present?
 
Last edited:
englandgz74 said:
I think I've managed to expand my WW2 knowledge by reading it was though definitely. I learned several things about events with which I was already Familiar... Kursk for example. Everyone just thinks of Kursk as a tank batle and leave it al that...it was howecer one of the largest areal engagements of the war, I didn't know that at all

Have you got any decent WW2 books on the go at present?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know what you mean. When I first got it, I rather naively and arrogantly assumed I wouldn't really learn much new from it, because I'd read so much on the subject already. But it didn't take long to realise that that was an idiotic thing to think. I found it to be an unputdownable page-turner, as they say on the back of books, and would recommend it to anyone interested in the subject.

Haven't read any war stuff for a while, I'm going through a fiction phase at the moment, which is a nice change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top