Youtube comments of (@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684).
-
It's SO bloody easy to make a casual misjudgement and over reach your endurance. A few years back I was on holiday in Portugal. We were on the beach at Praia de Falesia under a hired sunshade for the afternoon. Bit of swimming.... bit of sunbathing... but not being as much of a sun worshipper as my wife, I decided to go for a walk along the beach as there was a light breeze on a warm day.... it was beautiful, and I hadn't a care in the world.
I'd walked for just over an hour in the direction of Faro with the sun behind me, when I thought, I'd best turn back. As soon as I turned around and walked for a minute I realised that the sun was BLISTERINGLY hot, inspite of my sun hat and light summer clothing, and I'd absentmindedly already drank two thirds of my bottled water, and there was a stretch of beach ahead of me, probably no more than a mile and a half where there was nobody in sight and no facilities that I then had to traverse.
I'm NOT stupid, I'm a resourceful, strapping six footer, I've served a full 30 years as an inner city frontline fireman and KNOW the symptoms of heat stress, syncope & stroke, but despite all my experience & awareness of the dangers I very quickly realised I had stupidly landed myself in DEEP trouble, but suffice to say I eventually made it back to where my wife was starting to worry about me, and when she saw me she knew that I'd taken a beating off the sun.... even through my hat the skin of my forehead was blistered and had started to bleed, I had stopped sweating (a SURE sign of heat stroke) and I was, according to her, more than a little "incoherent". If I had not been on a beach where I knew that I HAD to determinedly follow the waterline to return to my starting point, and instead been on a featureless, rocky, barren landscape such as that that Michael appears to have inadvertantly stumbled into and traversed then I think I too would have succumbed the same way that he and many others over the years have sadly done. Its how a beautiful sunny day with family can unexpectedly slip into a fatal tragedy.....all because of a simple misjudgement.
It is SO easy to underestimate the conditions, overestimate your own endurance, and if you have no awareness of the onset of the symptoms of heat stroke, then confusion and disorientation strikes and your thinking and judgement processes VERY quickly become badly impaired. It appears to me that is EXACTLY what has happened to the unfortunate Mr Mosley. It does surprise me somewhat that with his apparently deep understanding of the human body & it's inner workings that he was not more self aware of the danger he was stumbling into.
Deepest sympathy and condolences to Michael's family.
173
-
165
-
Bismarck's main armour belt extended 2.3 meters below and 2.4 meters above the waterline (As can be seen at 6:43). To intentionally & directly strike that long, narrow strake of armour, showing above the water's surface even from the range of sub 3000m that HMS Rodney closed to whilst making headway in a heavy stormy North Atlantic swell would be nigh on impossible. As the report clearly says "the very large number of hits on the main belt WERE MOSTLY IF NOT ALL FROM SECONDARY guns". A number of the major calibre hits that impacted that long narrow main armour belt more than likely ricochetted off the surface of the sea due to the relatively short range and flattened trajectories involved and lost a large part of their momentum as they did so, that is apart from the two penetrations which were probably the only two direct major calibre hits on the 320mm armour belt..
Gun data for Rodney's 16"/45 Mark I main guns shows their penetration ability as 14.4 inches of vertical armour at 15000 yards. She was firing a LOT closer than this for much of the engagement, so even taking into account her shells striking the main belt at a reasonable angle she would have very little problem with penetrating Bismarck's main belt of 320mm (12.6 inches).
The principle is the same as arguing a dart cannot penetrate the skin of a balloon from 2 miles away. To which the answer is "of course it can.... if it can manage to hit it".
P.S And don't even get me started about Bismarck's wiki page. I've lost count of the exchanges I've had with the page's "self appointed guardian" A.K.A Parsecboy, who polices the page using his jaded, biased agenda, and who when presented with corroborated evidence supporting facts which he doesn't like (such as admiralty reports from the UK national archives), or even correcting blatant errors or misrepresentations on the page, he as a "wiki approved editor" deletes any changes he doesn't like with impunity, and if you've really rubbed his nose in it, will also temporarily ban your IP address from editing wikipedia at all. Not that it "gets my goat"... HONESTLY !!!!
158
-
This is from George Orwell's "1984", written in 1948..... 76 YEARS AGO !!!
"Inside the flat a fruity voice was reading out a list of figures which had something to do with the production of pig-iron. The voice came from an oblong metal plaque like a dulled mirror which formed part of the surface of the right-hand wall. Winston turned a switch and the voice sank somewhat, though the words were still distinguishable. The instrument (the telescreen, it was called) could be dimmed, but there was no way of shutting it off completely..... The telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously. Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it, moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard. There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live — did live, from habit that became instinct — in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.
Winston kept his back turned to the telescreen. It was safer, though, as he well knew, even a back can be revealing."
126
-
93
-
71
-
63
-
61
-
61
-
My father shook hands with Karl Dönitz in Hamburg in 1973, though it was only through politeness rather than in any friendship.
Dad, as a member of HMS Dorsetshire's crew was attending a joint reunion of survivors of both Bismarck & Royal Navy veterans involved with the sinking of Bismarck. During one of the functions of the 4 days he spent in Germany that year, there was a welcoming committee in the foyer of the hotel conference suite, with various German dignitaries and Bundesmarine naval officers present.
A slender, elderly, but ramrod straight gentleman in a sober civilian suit was amongst the ensemble, and he walked amongst the throng of British & German veteran sailors. At one point he was introduced to the group dad was standing with only as "our VERY special guest", but NOT by his name. It was only after the man, having spoken with the group and shaking hands, had moved on that dad was told that it was infact Grand Admiral Dönitz. His activities in postwar Germany were VERY closely monitored by the west German authorities and he was forbidden from overtly attending or addressing any group or society that was linked in any way to the former nazi state.
57
-
56
-
53
-
53
-
I have my own story of WW2 detective work.
My father was in the British Royal Navy during WW2. Amongst other ships, he served onboard the RN heavy cruiser HMS Dorsetshire, and took part in the sinking of the German battleship Bismarck. After the sinking, dad then assisted in the rescue of the Bismarck survivors, and one of the survivors he helped haul out of the stormy Atlantic that day was a German sailor named "Friedrich Junghans".
The survivors were off loaded in Newcastle UK 4 days after the sinking and Friedrich gave my father his "erkennungsmarke" (dogtag) as thanks for saving his life. Eventually the Bismarck survivors ended up being sent to POW camps in Canada.
I remember as a small child seeing this small oval aluminium disk in my father's desk at home and he explained to me what it was and how he came to own it. Dad's own ship had been sunk in 1942 in the Indian Ocean by Japanese dive bombers, and post war there was a "HMS Dorsetshire survivor's association" where once a year the old sailors would meet up to rekindle old friendships and recount their old experiences over many "tots" of navy rum.
In 1973 the Bismarck survivor's association invited the HMS Dorsetshire survivor's association over to Hamburg to have a shared, joint reunion. Dad decided that he was going to reunite Friedrich Junghans with his "Erkennungsmarke" at the reunion, but inspite of spending several days in Germany creating new friendships with their former foes (again over much alcohol), it tragically came to light that Friedrich Junghans who had decided to stay in Canada after the war (due to his home town now being inside "east Germany") had died just a month before the reunion, and so he never again saw his "dogtag / Erkennungsmarke" from Bismarck ever again.
In the 1990s Dad decided that he would donate Friedrich's "dogtag", together with the his own lifebelt that had saved his life when his own ship had been sunk in 1942 to the "Merseyside Maritime Museum" in Liverpool UK. They gratefully took possesion of these and several other items, and they are on display there to this day.
After dad passed away in 2013, I decided that I would try to track down the decendents of Friedrich to let them know that their ancestor's dogtag was on display in a Liverpool Museum. I searched online for a number of years but various leads to his descendents always seemed to lead to dead ends.
In 2019 one night I was surfing the net and ended up looking at an art website which displayed the artwork of people from around the world, when what did I spot? Some art work from a young American girl who in her "bio" mentioned that her great grandfather "Friedrich J" had been a Bismarck survivor who had elected to stay in Canada after WW2. I contacted her via email to ask if the "J" stood for "Junghans", and she was stunned, and obviously was also worried that I was some predatory "internet stalker", but I emailled her photos of her Great Grandfather's dogtag and some other evidence of my father's involvement with Friedrich's rescue. She confirmed that her great uncle (Friedrich's son) was still alive and to cut an already long story a bit shorter, he is now seeking to take possesion of his father's dogtag back from the Museum.... over 80 years after his father handed it to my father.
50
-
47
-
47
-
41
-
37
-
37
-
36
-
35
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
28
-
27
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
@_ArsNova WTF were "the Royal Navy under "no stop" orders"? Both HMS Dorsetshire & HMS Maori were directly ordered to pick up survivors by Admiral Tovey. As for your cooment "the dire conditions of those that were rescued", I assume you mean after having floated traumatised for 90 minutes in the oil covered raging north Atlantic, and not the conditions they were kept in onboard the RN ships. Read ANY survviors account and witness the dignity and humanity that was afforded each and every sailor that was rescued, 3 hot meals a day, supplied with rum, sweets and cigarettes, the best medical treatment available for the injured and a full military funeral for the one German sailor who died the following day. If you've any complaints about the events, direct them at Eitel-Freidrich Kentrat, the commander of U-74 who was in the area at the time, and whose periscope it was that was spotted, and which brought the rescue operations to an early end.
20
-
My father (Ldg/st KX 108902 Stanley Higgins) was a stoker onboard HMS Dorsetshire From June 1940 until her sinking in April 1942.
During the final Bismarck action on 27th May 1941, he was off watch from his stoker's station in the boiler rooms, and was at his action station in a damage control party. Part way through the action he was told by the party leader to go "up top" to see what was happening, and he witnessed the flaming, smoke shrouded wreck of Bismarck being pounded before its sinking.
After being stood down from action stations, all available hands were called to "man the sides" and help in the rescue of the Bismarck's survivors. he took part in the rescues, and during his assistance, one particular survivor called Friedrich Junghans, gave dad his "erkennungsmarke" or ID tag in gratitude. It is currently on display in the Merseyside maritime museum in Liverpool, UK.
11 months later on 5th April 1942, at the time of Dorsetshire's own sinking, he was again very luckily off-watch from the boiler rooms ("lucky" as no-one on duty there survived the sinking) and was again called to action stations, at this time he was a leader of a damage control party up near the Dorsetshire's bows adjacent to the ships "paint locker". Very shortly after the commencement of the Japanese air attack, all comms in the ship were lost, though it was all too apparent that Dorsetshire was receiving a heavy pounding, with the ship heeling over and quaking from the impact of the Japanese bombs and the many near misses.
During the chaos and din of the Japanese dive bombing attack, one concussion dislodged a length of heavy suction hose from a bracket on the compartment's bulkhead, the heavy, solid hose, known as an "elephant's foot", hit dad on the head, knocking him senseless for several seconds. On regaining his wits in the now blacked out darkness of the compartment, sensing that the ship was starting to list heavily, he ordered the party to get on the upper deck via a ladder leading to the "bosun's hatch" in the compartment roof. The first man up the ladder shouted that he couldn't unlatch the hatch "dogs". and dad used a crowbar to release the latches and the party crawled out into the burning sunlight on the rapidly inclining foredeck. One party member, a South African named David van Zyl, confided to dad that he couldn't swim and despite desperate pleas from dad for him to jump overboard, he tragically went down with the ship, the rest of the party all survived.
The two cruisers each had a complement of approx 650-700 men on board. After both were sunk, only one intact lifeboat remained afloat from the two ships, This was used to hold the many severely injured sailors while the less heavily wounded and healthy (including my dad), had to cling to assorted flotsam. The sinkings took place at around 2:00pm on a sunday afternoon, they floated through the first night, and right through the following Monday, suffering horrible burns under the tropical sun whilst being crusted in salt from the seawater, dad said the saving grace was the men slathered themselves in thick oil from the sunken ships fuel tanks which began to surface a couple of hours after the ships had gone down, this gave some protection and relief, but they all increasingly believed that in their exhausted state that they were to die during that second night. The British Eastern fleet commander was aware that the two ships were overdue and mercifully sent a light cruiser and 2 destroyers to make a sweep. But it was a Fairey Swordfish from Ceylon that spotted a reflection of the rays of the dying sun on a biscuit tin that had been tied to an oar and held upright being rotated by a man in the boat full of wounded. A message was sent from the aircraft and shortly before sunset, the 3 ships (HMS Emerald, Panther & Paladin) arrived on the scene and rescued 1120 sailors from the approximately 1400 men who were on this ships before their sinking, after having spent 33 hours clinging to wreckage.
He "Crossed the bar" in 2013 aged 93.
Great vid as usual from your channel, all the best.
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
It's SO bloody easy to make a casual misjudgement and over reach your endurance. A few years back I was on holiday in Portugal. We were on the beach at Praia de Falecia under a hired sunshade for the afternoon. Bit of swimming.... bit of sunbathing... and I thought I'll go for a walk along the beach as there was a light breeze on a warm day.... it was beautiful.
I'd walked for just over an hour in the direction of Faro with the sun behind me, when I thought, I'd best turn back. As soon as I turned around and walked for a minute I realised that the sun was blisteringly hot, inspite of my sun hat and light summer clothing, I'd drank two thirds of my water, and there was a stretch of beach probably a mile and a half where there was nobody and no facilities that I then had to traverse.
I'm NOT stupid, I'm a strapping six footer, and I've been a serving frontline fireman for 30 years and KNOW the symptoms of heat syncope & stress, and I very quickly realised I was in trouble, but suffice to say I made it back to where my wife was starting to worry about me, and when she saw me she knew that I'd taken a beating off the sun.... even through my hat the skin of my forehead had blistered and had started to bleed, and I was, according to her, more than slightly "incoherent". If I had not been on a beach where I had only to determinedly follow the waterline to return to my starting point, and instead been on a featureless landscape such as that that Michael appears to have traversed then I think I may well have succumbed the same way that Michael and John Tosell sadly did. How a beautiful sunny day with family can unexpectedly slip into a fatal tragedy, because of a simple misjudgement.
It is SO easy to underestimate the conditions, overestimate your own endurance, and if you have no awareness of the symptoms of the onset of heat stroke, then your thinking and judgement processes VERY quickly become impaired. I can see that is EXACTLY what has happened to unfortunate Mr Mosley. It does surprise me somewhat that with his apparently deep understanding of the human body that he was not more self aware of the danger he had stumbled into.
Deepest sympathy for Michael's and indeed John Tosell's families.
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
If you'd like a brief(ish) outline of the run up to the 1946 victory parade then read on, It's something I've written previously that I have saved ready to "copy and paste" in response to the oft repeated nonsense within YT regarding a supposed British "ban" on Poles at the victory parade.
For those who believe Poland was "excluded" from the 1946 London victory parade, here is a brief timeline of what actually happened to give some context to the oft repeated nonsense that "Brits never invited the Poles" or "the Brits banned the Poles".
Since before the end of WW2 in Europe, Britain and the US had been negotiating with the Soviets over the future of eastern Europe and especially Poland in post WW2 Europe. The UK & US wanted a democratic Polish government that would by way of democracy include both the Polish communists of the existing Moscow backed "Lublin committee", and the Polish nationalists from the Polish Govt in exile that had been based in London during most of WW2. This proposed "Polish provisional government of national unity" (Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) was to be setup in Warsaw, and was agreed to by all of the "Big 3" (UK / US / USSR) at the Feb 1945 Yalta conference, but from the outset the Soviets then occupying Poland did everything they practically could to bar the inclusion of the "London Poles" within the "unity govt", and to intimidate the small number of nationalists that did eventually make it into the provisional govt.
With regard to the 1946 Victory parade when Britain sent out its invites to all of the countries that had fought on the side of the Allies during WW2, The British Labour government of Clement Attlee, quite correctly handed the Polish invitation to the newly constituted Warsaw based "Polish provisional government of national unity" which was after all now the official government of Poland, as recognised by the United Nations.
The now effectively powerless & stateless nationalist Polish government in exile in London took great offence at their sidelining in this matter, and raised a torrent of indignation within the UK Parliament that was backed by many British MPs and ordinary people. A few days before the parade was due to take place, and with no response having been forthcoming from the Warsaw government, a belated invitation was hurriedly sent both to the Polish Govt in Exile in London as well as directly to various Polish generals who had fought with the allies, ALL of whom felt so disgusted with the perceived public disrespect shown by the INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY (That is, being made to play "second fiddle" to the official Warsaw Polish government on the world stage) that they CHOSE not to attend the parade to register their fury and resentment at not being consulted first.
And the final ignominy? The Soviet backed Warsaw government neither acknowledged the British invite, or attended the parade either.
We Brits are nevertheless still most appreciative of their important contribution to our collective victory against the horrors of European totalitarianism (indeed they are SPECIFICALLY honoured EVERY year at EVERY UK remembrance day parade I have attended since the 1970s)
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
I thought I'd create a simple "visual aid" in order to assist people learning about the history of the battle of Britain. There is much ongoing debate about the nationalities and proportions of RAF fighter pilots who took part in the battle, with occasionally a furtive aspect which attempts to portray the battle as a victory of "mostly Foreign pilots". Below is an accurate graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940.
Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the actual number of pilots from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%)
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%)
🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%)
🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%)
🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%)
🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%)
(And just to preempt any wandering idiot lefty "Identity warriors" from protesting about "The lack of credit given to the black pilots who fought in the battle of Britain"... the pilots from South Africa, Rhodesia & the Caribbean were all of white descent).
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
Terribly sad news, Deepest sympathy for Michael's family.
It's SO bloody easy to make a casual misjudgement and over reach your endurance. A few years back I was on holiday in Portugal. We were on the beach at Praia de Falecia under a hired sunshade for the afternoon. Bit of swimming.... bit of sunbathing... but not being as much of a sun worshipper as my wife, I decided to go for a walk along the beach as there was a light breeze on a warm day.... it was beautiful, and I hadn't a care in the world.
I'd walked for just over an hour in the direction of Faro with the sun behind me, when I thought, I'd best turn back. As soon as I turned around and walked for a minute I realised that the sun was BLISTERINGLY hot, inspite of my sun hat and light summer clothing, I'd drank two thirds of my water, and there was a stretch of beach probably a mile and a half where there was nobody and no facilities that I then had to traverse.
I'm NOT stupid, I'm a resourceful, strapping six footer, I've served a full 30 years as a frontline fireman and KNOW well the symptoms of heat stress, syncope & stroke, and I very quickly realised I was in trouble, but suffice to say I made it back to where my wife was starting to worry about me, and when she saw me she knew that I'd taken a beating off the sun.... even through my hat the skin of my forehead had blistered and had started to bleed, I had stopped sweating and was bone dry, and I was also, according to her, more than slightly "incoherent". If I had not been on a beach where I had only to determinedly follow the waterline to return to my starting point, and instead been on a featureless, barren, rocky landscape such as that that Michael appears to have inadvertantly stumbled into and traversed then I think I may well have succumbed the same way that he and many others over the years have sadly done. Its how a beautiful sunny day with family can unexpectedly slip into a fatal tragedy, because of a simple misjudgement.
It is SO easy to underestimate the conditions, overestimate your own endurance, and if you have no awareness of the symptoms of the onset of heat stroke, then your thinking and judgement processes VERY quickly become impaired. I can see that is EXACTLY what has happened to unfortunate Mr Mosley. It does surprise me somewhat that with his apparently deep understanding of the human body & it's inner workings that he was not more self aware of the danger he was stumbling into.
Once again, deepest sympathy and condolences to Michael's family.
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
For those who believe Poland was "excluded" from the 1946 London victory parade, here is a brief timeline of what actually happened to give some context to the devious nonsense that "Brits never invited the Poles". Since before the end of WW2 in Europe, Britain and the US had been negotiating with the Soviets over the future of Poland in post WW2 Europe. The UK & US wanted a democratic Polish government that would by way of democracy include both the Polish communists of the existing Moscow backed "Lublin committee", and the Polish nationalists from the Polish Govt in exile that had been based in London during WW2. This proposed "Polish provisional government of national unity" was to be setup in Warsaw, and was agreed to by all of the "Big 3" (UK / US / USSR) at the Feb 1945 Yalta conference, but the Soviets then occupying Poland did everything they could to bar the inclusion of the "London Poles" in the unity govt.
With regard to the 1946 Victory parade when it came to handing out the national invites to all the countries that had fought on the side of the Allies in WW2, The British Labour government of Clement Attlee, trying to engender good will between the eastern and western allies, handed the Polish invitation to the Warsaw based Polish provisional government of national unity (which was after all the official government of Poland, as recognised by the United Nations, though it was also by then well on its way to becoming a communist puppet govt). The now effectively powerless & stateless national Polish government in exile in London took great offence at their sidelining in this matter, and raised a torrent of indignation that was backed by many British MPs and ordinary people. A few days before the parade was due to take place a belated invitation was sent both to the Polish Govt in Exile in London as well as directly to various Polish generals who had fought with the allies, ALL of who felt so disgusted with the perceived disrespect shown by the INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY (I.E being made to play "second fiddle" to the official Warsaw Polish government) that they CHOSE not to attend the parade. And the final ignomy? The Soviet backed Warsaw government neither acknowledged the British invite, or attended the parade either.
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
You seem to put a lot of stock in survivor's accounts of the final battle and sinking... I'm fully with you on that point. Lets look at some shall we?
From "Battleship Bismarck: A survivor's story" Written by Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's senior ranking survivor.
Page 211 "Our list to port had increased a bit while firing was going on" followed by "Around 9:30am gas and smoke began to drift through our station" This means that prior to 9:30am Bismarck was already flooding, not something that happens to a healthy seaworthy ship, in other words she was already starting to sink.
Then from an interview conducted for the highly regarded weekly history journal "Purnell's history of the second world war" in the late 1960's with Gerhard Junack (who was Bismarck's only surviving engineering officer and the survivor who supposedly enacted the "scuttle order"). He stated that...
"Somewhere about 1015 hours, I received an order over the telephone from the Chief Engineer (Korvettenkapitän (Ing.) Walter Lehmann) to 'Prepare the ship for sinking.' That was the last order I received on the Bismarck. Soon after that, all transmission of orders collapsed."
Heading back to the account of Mullenheim-Rechberg, on Page 212 he states that (before 10:00am) "I was using all the telephone circuits and calling all over the place in an effort to find out as much as possible about the condition of the ship. I got only one answer. I reached the messenger in the damage control centre and asked "who has and where is the command of the ship? Are there new orders in effect?".... The man said he was in a great hurry. He told me that everyone had abandoned the damage control centre, adding that he was the last one in the room and had to get out... then he hung up".
This vain seach for contact & information over the Bismarck's internal comms happened BEFORE 10:00am which throws some mild doubt on Junack's testimony where he says he was contacted by the chief engineer who supposedly gave him the "scuttle order" over the phone at 10:15am... Hmmmmm.
If taken at face value these survivor testimonies show that there was at least a 45 minute gap between Bismarck starting to sink and the first mention of a "scuttle order" being given. Even if Bismarck's crew had done nothing, Bismarck was going to sink, and if the beaten crew want to help the RN, then all the better... But face it, Bismarck's crew weren't going to scuttle a perfectly seaworthy ship in the middle of the storm tossed North Atlantic of their own free will, it was only for the fact that the RN had already dismantled Bismarck and initiated the sinking process. In other words in every sense the sinking of Bismarck was the result of actions dictated by the Royal Navy.
Anything else is just hurt German pride, bolstered by modern day delusional wehraboos. Germany was well known for trying to hide its national humiliations, such as when they scuttled their "grand fleet" at the end of WW1, like illogically saying "We lost.. but you didn't win", or a pathetic "You didn't beat us because we killed ourselves before you killed us" sort of idiocy.
7
-
7
-
When devious nazi fanboi idiots and other assorted uninformed loons such as yourself say "Hitler never wanted war with Britain and France" they ALWAYS miss off the part that says "until he was ready for it on his OWN terms".
Because of course Hitler laid all his hopes on being left to expand the nazi empire EASTWARDS in peace, assimilate his new found conquests with their collective economies and resources, further build up his military power and only THEN conquer France followed by Britain (or possibly impose a crushing "pax Germanica" on the UK as they did with Vichy France), they had already attempted such a feat TWICE BEFORE in the previous 70 years, once in 1870 and again in 1914, the THIRD attempt in 1940 was precipitated by the British and French not sitting and waiting for it to happen on Hitler's terms. If we had've waited the outcome would have been much MUCH different from the destruction of nazism in 1945.
Not confronting Hitler in 1939 would have resulted with Britain by the late 1940s onwards having:
A puppet nazi government, a nazi supporting King Edward VIII restored to the throne, and the UK as a nazi satellite state.
Extermination camps in the Cotswolds, Pennines & Scottish Highlands.
SS Einsatzgruppen stalking the shires looking to find "undesirables" to summarily execute.
All UK males of working age being deported to the reich to be slaved to death in nazi armaments factories or infrastructure projects.
And now, slimy nazi fanbois and other devious loons want the uninformed to think that letting Hitler conduct his plans undisturbed would mean that we would have a Britain today filled with Rose cottages, warm beer, bar skittles, Morris dancers & village cricket.
How utterly devious those people are, people with greater awareness of the situation don't fall for their nazi apologist nonsense.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@arturgrodzicki1209 Look at the international situation in 1939, Artur. The 3 "major world powers" at the time were the USA, USSR & the British Empire.
USSR - Stabbed Poland in the back to steal half of the country, whilst also supplying nazi Germany with millions of tons of raw materials and fuel which enabled her to conquer the rest of continental Europe.
USA - Happily sat on the "sidelines" profitting from BOTH sides of the conflict at the same time as the nazis were setting about the destruction and murder of the Polish nation.
British Empire (& France) - declared war on nazi Germany to symbolically support Poland, and to oppose (and reverse) nazi military expansion in Europe, (Then likely set about the "soviet problem" after that had been achieved).
NO ONE else in the "international community" had lifted a finger to oppose the nazi/soviet occupation of Poland at the time.
No one can deny that the British and French as it turned out were caught with their pants down, and were FAR from being fully mobilised militarily, therefore unable to actually assist the Poles in their 6 week struggle.... except indirectly by the blockade of the North sea by the RN thereby putting economic pressure in Germany while they readied their armies.
BUT the flame had been lit by the British and French. IF they had not declared war in Sept 1939, or IF they had "stood down" after the conquest of Poland, or IF Britain had sued for peace with the nazis after the fall of France, instead of seeing the conflict through til the end, then its almost certain that nazi death camps which as events happened had been put of action by 1944 / 45, would have instead been operating on Polish (and ultimately European and Soviet soil until the 1950s & 60s or even beyond.
The British Empire and France collectively sacrificed over 1 million of their citizens and completely bankrupted themselves to see that it did NOT turn out like that. Unfortunately after the apocalyptic bloodshed of WW2 NO-ONE could liberate eastern & central Europe from the terrible yoke of communism after WW2, without further millions of deaths.
Its very easy to look at the course of history as it happened and pick fault with the decisions that were made, and the outcomes that came to pass, but its a lot harder to see how events would have turned out if different decisions had been taken.
All the best, Artur.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@richardbushey2666 First hit in Denmark Strait engagement? PoW on Bismarck. Bismarck achieved 6 hits from 98 380mm rounds expended... not bad, but made to look a lot better by the single "million to one" hit on Hood.
Lütjens had the sense not to chase PoW after Hood's demise, the reason being the German B-dienst team both on board and ashore had given him absolutely ZERO warning of the approach of two of the Royal Navy's largest capital ships, and he righly suspected that more were on their way from the direction of Scapa Flow. Not that he could have chased PoW down, with his speed reduced, down by the bow & with the unrepaired damage in his bow threatening to collapse his forward bulkheads, on top of his suddenly dire fuel situation he had no choice but to continue south and make for France, much to the annoyance of all the "armchair admiral" wehraboos on these threads.
Near stationary? Go check out a map for the final battle... and contrary to popular belief, she wasn't "steaming in circles" either. Aww poor Bismarck's crew had no sleep.... Rodney and KGV were in position to engage Bismarck on the late evening of the 26th May but decided to let Vian engage her through the night.... like a cat toying with its prey, leaving the RN "big hitters" rested and refreshed & ready to engage at first light.... fantastic planning by Jack Tovey in my book, not all battles are won with raw firepower (although they had that too). The only thing where Bismarck excelled was in her "running away power". As soon as she lost that and was engaged by contemporary British warships, she was shown for the mediocre 1930s waste of resources she really was.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Because unlike nazi Germany, neither country had spent the previous 7 years preparing at 110% for a European war. Do you imagine the real world is like a computer game were you press a button and fully equipped armies suddenly appear on the map? Or that democratic nations maintain huge standing armies ready to swing into action at a moments notice?
Both the UK and France immediately started mobilising their unprepared nations for war in very late August 1939. Britain on 3rd Sept 1939 IMMEDIATELY dispatched its first regular infantry division to France on 3rd Sept 1939. By Dec 1939 it had just THREE infantry divisions on the continent, and by May 1940 it had just TEN fully equipped (and 3 partially equipped) divisions on the Belgian border. All those conscripted civilians had to be assembled, equipped, sent for training, dispatched to units, then the units had to be transported to their assigned positions on the Belgian border, such a process is known as mobilisation and takes MONTHS.
The French nation, beset by political turmoil throughout the interwar years was a poorly organised and politically undermined and unstable nation. It fumbled its own mobilisation of it reserves and conscription of its population, so much so that it damaged its own economy by its blanket conscription of its skilled workforce, and tens of thousands of men had to be released from military service to restart its war economy. By the time that the western allies had organised anything like a cohesive military force the Germans and soviets had conquered Poland and by then the Wehrmacht had nearly 150 divisions stationed along Germany's western border facing around the same number of allied divisions (including just 10 British "BEF" divisions)... though many of the French divisions were poorly trained, equipped and organised.
As opposed to the idea that the British and French could muster 150 fully trained equipped and organised divisions on "day one".
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Who has ever said the battle of Britain was fought entirely by British pilots?
It was fought MOSTLY by British pilots with minority support from the commonwealth and some refugee European & other foreign pilots.
I thought I'd create a simple "visual aid" in order to assist people learning about the history of the battle of Britain. There is much ongoing debate about the nationalities and proportions of RAF fighter pilots who took part in the battle, with occasionally a furtive aspect which attempts to portray the battle as a victory of "mostly Foreign pilots". Below is an accurate graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940.
Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the actual number of fighter pilots/aircrew from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%)
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%)
🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%)
🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%)
🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%)
🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%)
(And just to preempt any wandering idiot lefty "Identity warriors" from protesting about "The lack of credit given to the black pilots who fought in the battle of Britain"... the pilots from South Africa, Rhodesia & the Caribbean were all of white descent).
It is however COMPLETELY true to say that Britain as a country DID stand alone against German aggression from July 1940 to April 1941, unless that is you can provide us with the details of the luftwaffe air assaults on Canberra, Ottawa, Delhi and Wellington? Or how the Wehrmacht stood poised to launch its invasion of the Indian sub continent or Canada? Or how the Kriegsmarine attempted to strangle "the British Empire" out of the war by enforcing a u-boat blockade of Australia and New Zealand?
Oh news just coming in...... NONE OF THOSE THINGS HAPPENED because the ONLY nation facing ALL of those threats between July 1940 and April 1941 was GREAT BRITAIN ALONE.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
And yet here are you unbidden, STILL trying to suggest that the RN didn't sink Bismarck... Why are YOU so obsessed?
IF any scuttling actually took place then all that was scuttled was a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken and penetrated in several places, her command staff physically obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater, a thousand of her crew dead, and further hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All that any scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer AFTER he has been punched senseless by a more skillful & powerful opponent, and only a deluded child would say, "the victor didn't win because his opponent killed himself before he lost.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off by the victor and handed back to him on a plate.
Imagine the ignominy of being forced to commit suicide by your opponent?
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Here's some of Bismarck's "uber" design choices....
1. Her incremental armour scheme and low horizontal "turtleback". Incremental armour (several layers of thinner armour above a "main armour" layer) the thinner armour was thick enough to activate shell fuses, but not thick enough to prevent the penetratation of even medium calibre shells, and her low turtleback while making her difficult to sink, saw all of her weapons and communications systems disabled within 30 minutes of her final battle. Most other battleship construction of the 1930s used the concept of an "all or nothing" armour scheme, where only the vital ship systems were protected, the rest of the superstructure being standard marine plating, which allowed the passage of a shell without activating its fuse. Witness HMS Prince of Wales at Denmark Strait, hit by multiple large calibre shells, none of which detonated, and all but two of which passed through the ship with only minimal damage.
2.Twin gunned main turrets, an outdated design choice which meant more turrets and their accompanying magazines required a greater weight of armour to protect them all, when more modern, more weight efficient thinking decreed triple and quadruple gunned turrets, thereby producing a greater weight of fire, from a smaller number of turrets & magazines with a much reduced weight of armour to protect them all.
3. Duplicated Secondary / anti-aircraft weapon systems that wasted a lot of weight for no added benefit, as opposed to the dual purpose secondary armament then becoming more common and more weight efficient in contemporary naval construction.
4. Triple propeller propulsion design which intrinsically reduced the amount of "off centre" propulsive power that could be used for steering with the engines by 33%, should she suffer the slim possibility of damage to her rudders (Well who knows? It might happen!!!). Look at the propulsion systems of many other major units, the majority have either 2 or 4 shafts powering them, both of which enable 100% of engine power off centre to increase the turning potential of the engines.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Its difficult to accept the charge that British documentaries in particular are biased !!! We are bottom of the "junior league" compared to the US "Major league champions". They inflict themselves on EVERY aspect of history even when they had little or nothing to do with it. You can see their intent with the US film industry's absolute OBSESSION with putting the yanks into every aspect of history (U-571 anyone?). Just yesterday I watched a documentary on British TV about "operation Dynamo" (The Dunkirk Evacuation) and the primary "talking head" throughout the programme was a US lieutenant colonel in full regalia, apparently the incongruity of a bemedalled senior US officer lecturing on the quintessentially European events of May/June 1940 was totally lost on the doc producers. Yes the man was probably a learned expert of WW2 military matters from West Point or wherever, but the bare faced crass US jingoism of the setup was incredbile !!! That's just one very recent example, but modern media is RIFE with such overbearing US inflection on world history.
Another example is the "battle of Britain". If you read a large amount (but thankfully not all) of US comment here on YT, the "BoB" was "won by the US", solely on the basis that the British bought supplies from the US, but strangely you never hear the counterpart cry of "Romania & the USSR conquered most of mainland Europe in 1939-41", which by using the rationale of US commenters that "we supplied you with fuel / materials" is exactly what Romania and the USSR did whilst using nazi Germany as their proxy.
I can though fully concur with your judgement regarding Thames TV's "The World at War", which is rightfully often described as "landmark TV", even so current repeats of "TWAW" are now savagely edited to make space for more advertising BS, its akin to plastering a landmark such as the Taj Mahal with "Tesla" "Amazon" and "Apple" adverts. Thankfully I have my own unedited, and uninterrupted copies of the entire series.
As you suggest, as the war generation leave our midst world history has (as it always has) been hijacked by those with their own contemporary agendas to push, with the consequence that almost nothing in the last 20 years can hold a candle to the best of pre 2000s documentaries.
Consider that what you now believe to be "British bias" is a reactionary counter balance to the increasing growth in juvenile wehraboo-ism as well as the globalist inspired "anti-Brit" sentiment now pushed in the general MSM, as a result of our rejection of their EUSSR branch of global hegemony, which seeks to "re-interpret" and undermine factual material and subvert the actualité of historical events,
All the best though Vincent.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
As with most idealistic young people, moving from childhood where they'd been inculcated to "play fair", "share and share alike" "be honesty as it is the best policy" etc, then during adolescence starting to see the world in all its duplicitous, self serving, unjust horror, Orwell was swayed by the basic principle of "The worker is entitled to the fruit of his labor. From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"... The very poetry of socialism.... also having been raised as the son of a civil servant in the "Raj" ruling in India, he was horrified by its injustices, so much like the idealistic but naive dupes who nowadays parrot "BLM" "Be ashamed of your White privilege" "multi-culturalism" "LGBTQSYCJUSTBKOXEF" rights, he believed he was rushing off to Spain to fight for the obviously just cause of "human goodness and kindness", and against the evils of fascism...... ONLY to discover that those who sold him and the other idealistic youth the socialist Utopian dream, were EVERY bit as murderous, untrustworthy, duplicitous, self serving & despotic as those they were being directed to kill.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
"Norman & Saxon"
By Rudyard Kipling.
"My son," said the Norman Baron, "I am dying, and you will be heir
To all the broad acres in England that William gave me for my share
When he conquered the Saxon at Hastings, and a nice little handful it is.
But before you go over to rule it I want you to understand this:–
"The Saxon is not like us Normans. His manners are not so polite.
But he never means anything serious till he talks about justice and right.
When he stands like an ox in the furrow – with his sullen set eyes on your own,
And grumbles, 'This isn't fair dealing,' my son, leave the Saxon alone.
"You can horsewhip your Gascony archers, or torture your Picardy spears;
But don't try that game on the Saxon; you'll have the whole brood round your ears.
From the richest old Thane in the county to the poorest chained serf in the field,
They'll be at you and on you like hornets, and, if you are wise, you will yield.
"But first you must master their language, their dialect, proverbs and songs.
Don't trust any clerk to interpret when they come with the tale of their wrongs.
Let them know that you know what they're saying; let them feel that you know what to say.
Yes, even when you want to go hunting, hear 'em out if it takes you all day.
"They'll drink every hour of the daylight and poach every hour of the dark.
It's the sport not the rabbits they're after (we've plenty of game in the park).
Don't hang them or cut off their fingers. That's wasteful as well as unkind,
For a hard-bitten, South-country poacher makes the best man-at-arms you can find.
"Appear with your wife and the children at their weddings and funerals and feasts.
Be polite but not friendly to Bishops; be good to all poor parish priests.
Say 'we,' 'us' and 'ours' when you're talking, instead of 'you fellows' and 'I.'
Don't ride over seeds; keep your temper; and never you tell 'em a lie!"
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@confederatenationalist7283 Let me address your points one by one.
"how many ships did it take to corner not destroy the Graf Spee" is not a testiment to the Graf Spee, but a comment to the size of the South Atlantic and Indian Oceans and the task of trying to find a single ship hiding in that vastness without air surveillance and only the most rudimentary short range radar. You point has utterly NO application to the German navy in the English channel and North Sea, where it would have immediately been located and sunk in short order.
By "devastating form" are you referring to the S & G running away from a single WW1 battlecruiser after she bitch slapped BOTH of them?? Yes Scharnhost & Gneisenau later fell completely by chance upon a poorly managed aircraft carrier and sank it.... and in the process Scharnhorst had to run for her life and was put out of action for over 6 months thereby removing her from the field of play for Seelowe. After Which Gneisenau & Admiral Hipper ineffectively stalked British convoys but took no action because they were too weak to oppose the escorting RN ships, then as Gneisenau attempted to decoy the Home Fleet from the crippled Scharnhorst's return to Germany, she only went and got herself torpedoed and was put out of action until late 1940. Such was their "devastating form" that the fleet commander Admiral Marschall was relieved of command for the damage that was inflicted on Scharnhorst, and his failure to follow orders.
When you refer to "the combined attacks of battleships and U-boats", What "battleships" are you referring to exactly? The Kriegsmarine had NO battleships available in the time frame of Seelowe. Neither of the Bismarck's were ready and even if you stoop to consider 11in gun armed ships as "battleships" BOTH of them were out of action for Seelowe as I detailed above.... leaving ZERO battleships available. As for "close in U-boat attacks" U-47's strike at Scapa was an excellent feat of navigation, followed by sinking a berthed and unaware WW1 battleship. When they operated in an active war zone, such as the English channel (where Seelowe was going to take place) there fared MUCH worse. In 1939 Donitz sent three U-boats to pass through the straits of Dover, U-12 (sunk in the straits of Dover on the 8th Oct 1939), U-40 (sunk in the straits of Dover on the 13th Oct 1939), & U-16 (sunk in the straits of Dover on the 25th Oct 1939). They decided not to send any more uboats into the English channel until desperation forced them to in 1944.
As for "It's obvious they never tried to wipe us out at Dunkirk", Your mate Hitler begs to differ. I'll refer you to the opening lines of his FührerBefehl No. 13
The Leader And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
Headquarters. 24th May, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 13
1. The next object of our operations is to annihilate the French, English, and Belgian forces which are surrounded in Artois and Flanders, by a concentric attack by our northern flank and by the swift seizure of the Channel coast in this area.
The task of the Air Force will be to break all enemy resistance on the part of the surrounded forces, to prevent the escape of the English forces across the Channel, and to protect the southern flank of Army Group A.
When you say the Luftwaffe was "capable of taking out large naval assets", can you give some examples of that? The Luftwaffe, inspite of facing an English channel PACKED with British and French warships managed only to sink FOUR RN destroyers during the Dunkirk Evacuation. As a further illustration of the Luftwaffe's poor maritime success rate study the Mediterranean where the RN operated for 5 years with ALL manner of Aircraft carriers, Battleships, Cruisers, Destroyers and submarines, in a sea SURROUNDED by enemy territory and land based air forces both German and Italian, What was the LARGEST ship they managed to sink in all that time? A Light Cruiser. Compare that performance to the single RN FAA operation at Taranto, which left 3 Italian battleships sitting on the sea floor.
What makes you think the Germans successfully supplied their forces in North Africa? The only time they had victories was when the British had to withdraw troops to other areas, The axis in north Africa were consistently struggling for supplies 2 million tons of which ended up on the Mediterranean seabed, sunk by the British Fleet air arm and RAF flying from Malta, they couldn't beat the British who didn't have the luxury of simply getting supplies from the Toe of Italy to Tripoli, but instead had to transport their supplies from across the Atlantic, around the Cape of Good Hope and up the East African coastline !!!
My father was in the Royal Navy for 6 years during WW2 and never for one second though that the nazis would be stupid enough to dip a toe in the English Channel. The fact that they never did proves he was right !!!!
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
IF any scuttling actually took place then all that was scuttled was a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken and penetrated in several places, her command staff physically obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater, a thousand of her crew dead, and further hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All that any scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer AFTER he has been punched senseless by a more skillful & powerful opponent, and only a deluded child would say, "the victor didn't win because his opponent killed himself before he lost.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off by the victor and handed back to him on a plate.
Imagine the ignominy of being forced to commit suicide by your opponent?
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
No there was a HUGE amount of luck involved in Bismarck's hit on Hood's magazine.
A full salvo of main gun fire from a battleship is analogous to a scatter of lead shot from a shotgun. During the battle of Denmark Strait, the Bismarck aimed at Hood from 8-9 nautical miles away. At that range the 38 cm SK C/34 (Bismarck's main armament) had a CEP (circular error probability - effectively the radius of a circle within which 50% of its shots would fall) of 100m. That means that if 8 of Bismarck's 15in guns fired at a single point 8-9 nm away, 4 of her shells would be expected to land (with completely random distribution) within an ellipse (think of it as a stretched circle, due to the angle of fall of the shells) measuring approximately 200m (660ft) wide, (or to put it another way 76% of HMS Hood's 860ft length), by more than two thousand feet long. The other 4 shots would land even further away from the aiming point. That being the case, how can an individual shell be aimed specifically at a tiny part of HMS Hood's structure, namely the 4in HA magazine, that its believed triggered off Hood's detonation? I'll give you a hint, there's a little clue in my paragraph above....where it says "completely random distribution".
A simplified analogy is that if you prop a dartboard up 50 yards away and can consistently knock it over with a shotgun at that range then that is pretty good shooting, just as Bismarck / PE achieved during the Denmark Strait encounter.
Now you can "knock the dartboard over" all day long with the shotgun and STILL NOT hit the bullseye (magazine) with an individual pellet. As opposed to being a skillful shot by knocking over the dartboard, whether you hit the bullseye with an individual pellet is complete luck.
The idea of HMS PoW not being more heavily damaged because of the failure of the German fuses, was less to do with luck and much more to do with the KGV class's "all or nothing" armour scheme. PoW was hit by a total of seven German shells during the battle of Denmarck Strait and not ONE of them detonated as designed. This is because in the "all or nothing" system of armouring only the most vital "citadel" is heavily armoured, the rest of the ship's superstructure being comprised of standard naval "splinter" plating. This meant that a shell hitting non vital areas of the ship, instead of having their fuse activated by the shock of impacting on a substantial piece of armour instead passed through without detonating (or only partially detonating or with a delayed detonation) menaing that far less damage was inflicted on the ship.
4
-
@WorshipinIdols So now you've changed your original assertion from "Bismarck's hit wasn't luck but skill", to "everyone has a degree of luck". Thats fine by me. Of course the specific point of impact of ANY shell at longer ranges is affected by luck. The skill in long range naval gunnery is simply getting the shells within a couple of hundred feet of your intended target, the rest is providence.
As for Bismarck "scoring hits with every salvo" that means that Bismarck must've only fired 3 salvoes at PoW, as that is the number of hits she achieved, when the truth is that there were plenty of salvoes that scored no hits (which is not to mock German gunnery, its just the nature of the game ), and as we agree none of the three hits detonated as intended, due to the design of PoW's armour scheme.
Seems your entrallment with the German ships knows no bounds, attributing torpedoes to Bismarck (she had none fitted) and Prinz Eugen Who at no point during the Denmark Strait engagement was anywhere near in range to use her G7a TI steam torpedos even at their lowest speed setting.
In what way do you consider that the RN "lost the battle"? Because of the loss of the Hood? What about the fact that Hood and PoW were tasked with preventing the German ships from breaking out into the Atlantic, and as a result of the action "operation Rhineübung" was stopped in its tracks and Bismarck then had to futilely run for its life back to France? Job done.
Its the same reason that the RN won the battle of Jutland. German high seas fleet sets out to ambush the Home fleet with a view to breaking the RN North sea blockade, the RN suffers heavier losses BUT the blockade remains intact and the German fleet skulks back to port never to show its face again (except when it was surrendering to the RN at Scapa Flow).
4
-
4
-
@WorshipinIdols I've only just spotted your first reply.
The "ALL" of the "all or nothing" armour scheme refers to the "box" that covers the machinery spaces, magazines, shell handling, barbettes and turrets, and the "NOTHING" refers to the rest of the ship. Its pretty self explanatory really. Compare a diagram of the armour distribution on KGV and Nelson classes to that of the German ships. you'll notice that apart from the armoured "box" of the citadel (and one or two minor localised areas on their superstructure) the British battleships have virtually NO thinner armoured areas, as opposed to the German ships using the outdated "incremental" armour scheme, where multiple decks and vertical surfaces have armour of between 1 and 4 inches of armour just ripe enough to activate the fuses of incoming shells whilst not being proof to those same shells, as well as sizeable chunks of much heavier armour dotted around her superstructure.
The hit on PoW's bridge as the photos you have no doubt already viewed will attest (they'll be there with the photos of PoW's perforated rear funnel) CLEARLY show the torn splinter plating on BOTH sides of the "flying" bridge and NOT the small area of 4 inch armour you suggest that actually faced the sides of the armoured conning tower 1 deck below.
You're ALMOST correct in saying that the main armoured belt of the KGVs covered the area between the front of the A turret barbette and the rearmost point of the Y turret barbette in the same manner as Bismarck, but like Bismarck it did actually extend BEYOND those points with both fore & aft lower belt extensions, as well as having much heavier horizontal deck armour both fore and aft of the main turrets than Bismarck.
I thought that we'd established that the idea of picking specific areas of a ship to target from 9 miles away was very much in the realm of "fantasy land", as the target you're aiming for is simply "the ship", with the precise point of impact being in the lap of the gods. Your erroneous "one bullseye is a lucky hit, 2 bullseye’s is skill and quality"s is once again drifting into the area of "nazi fanboism". You do realise that buying 2 lottery tickets does not halve the odds of winning, it merely gives you two chances at exactly the SAME outlandish odds that one ticket gives you. in the same manner two lucky shots are exactly that... two lucky shots. You cannot use a blunderbus of 8 x 15in shells to "snipe a bullseye" from 9 miles away.
I'm glad you've given a fair appraisal of Bismarck's design, I'd equally like to state that I am NOT ignorantly attempting to diminish the quality of the German gunnery at Denmark Strait, but merely hoping to "keep it real".
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
The Fairey Swordfish were designed & built in Britain from 1935 onwards, originally for the Greek navy, But when trialled prior to delivery they were seen to be so capable that the Royal Navy bought them instead.
They were biplanes for a very good reason. At the time they were designed existing aircraft engines were of relatively low power (especially for the British fleet air arm which was ALWAYS low down on the engine & aircraft "priority list") so to enable a carrier aircraft to carry aloft heavy loads needed a large wing area. Their biplane wing area was SO great that they could take off fully loaded WITHOUT the use of a carrier's catapult. This meant that in the stormy North Atlantic where the Royal Navy mainly intended to operate them, instead of being forced to take off at the carrier's bows (where the catapults are) and which is the part of a ship that rises and falls by the greatest amount in heavy seas, the Swordfish could take of from the middle of the carrier's decks close to the bridge where the pitching and rolling was the least.
It was for this reason in May 1941 that they were able to take off from HMS Ark Royal to attack Bismarck when the Ark Royal was struggling through an Atlantic gale in MOUNTAINOUS seas, with her bows rising and falling by nearly 60ft !!! Try to imagine how terrifying it must have been for the brave young crews flying them in those conditions. Those weather conditions would have prevented all other allied carrier aircraft of the era from flying and instead seen them safely lashed down inside the hangar deck.
They were also incredibly adaptable and throughout WW2 they were adapted to carry, bombs, depth charges, torpedoes, extra fuel tanks and even eight anti ship rockets as well as the world's very first naval airborne radars, and its for THAT reason they were nicknamed "stringbags" as they seemed to be able to carry ANYTHING. They are widely regarded to have ended the war as the aircraft with the GREATEST amount of enemy shipping tonnage sunk, and were HUGELY loved by their crews.
They WERE to have been replaced mid war by a succesor, the Fairey Albacore, but the "stringbags" were so ubiquitous that they outlasted the Albacore in service.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@MrAkurvaeletbe Oh so moral relativism rears its thick, slow witted head.... its okay to murder 600 civilians but beyond the pale to murder 20,000? Murder is murder, the Germans initiated the terror bombing in Spain (Guernica), Poland, the Netherlands, the UK, Yugoslavia, Greece and across the whole of the eastern front, but when they themselves are shown how to do it properly only THEN is it a "crime".
Ever heard the saying "what goes round, comes round"?
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
"She might not have been sinking at the time"? Nonsense.
Lets look at some survivor testimonies (people who actually witnessed the events of Bismarck's sinking first hand), and not some winsome fantasy shall we?
From "Battleship Bismarck: A survivor's story" Written by Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's senior ranking survivor.
Page 211 "Our list to port had increased a bit while firing was going on" followed by "Around 9:30am gas and smoke began to drift through our station" This means that prior to 9:30am Bismarck was already flooding, not something that happens to a healthy seaworthy ship, in other words she was already starting to sink.
Then from an interview conducted for the highly regarded weekly history journal "Purnell's history of the second world war" in the late 1960's with Gerhard Junack (who was Bismarck's only surviving engineering officer and the survivor who supposedly enacted the "scuttle order"). He stated that...
"Somewhere about 1015 hours, I received an order over the telephone from the Chief Engineer (Korvettenkapitän (Ing.) Walter Lehmann) to 'Prepare the ship for sinking.' That was the last order I received on the Bismarck. Soon after that, all transmission of orders collapsed."
Heading back to the account of Mullenheim-Rechberg, on Page 212 he states that (before 10:00am) "I was using all the telephone circuits and calling all over the place in an effort to find out as much as possible about the condition of the ship. I got only one answer. I reached the messenger in the damage control centre and asked "who has and where is the command of the ship? Are there new orders in effect?".... The man said he was in a great hurry. He told me that everyone had abandoned the damage control centre, adding that he was the last one in the room and had to get out... then he hung up".
This vain search for contact & information over the Bismarck's internal comms happened BEFORE 10:00am which throws some mild doubt on Junack's testimony where he says he was contacted by the chief engineer who supposedly gave him the "scuttle order" over the phone at 10:15am... Hmmmmm.
If taken at face value these survivor testimonies show that there was at least a 45 minute gap between Bismarck starting to sink and the first mention of a "scuttle order" being given. Even if Bismarck's crew had done nothing, Bismarck was going to sink, and if the beaten crew want to help the RN, then all the better... But face it, Bismarck's crew weren't going to scuttle a perfectly seaworthy ship in the middle of the storm tossed North Atlantic of their own free will, it was only for the fact that the RN had already dismantled Bismarck and initiated the sinking process. In other words in every sense the sinking of Bismarck was the result of actions dictated by the Royal Navy.
Anything else is just hurt German pride, bolstered by modern day delusional wehraboos. Germany was well known for trying to hide its national humiliations, such as when they scuttled their "grand fleet" at the end of WW1, like illogically saying "We lost.. but you didn't win", or a pathetic "You didn't beat us because we killed ourselves first" sort of idiocy.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan fell to ruin. The operation had been smashed in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
I wonder if the citizens of Cologne, Hamburg, Berlin and Dresden thought the "battle of Britain" was a "draw" in 1945?
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Individual cases of honourable treatment of enemy combattants exist within ALL nations. When HMS Dorsetshire picked up 86 Bismarck survivors after it's sinking on 27th May 1941, one of the men rescued was seriously injured, and sadly died on the operating table in the ship's medical bay that evening. The following day, 28th May 1941, on a bleak, steely grey North Atlantic morning, the unfortunate sailor, his body draped in a flag of the German Imperial navy (as there was no swastika flag in the ship's flag lockers, the old imperial German flag was substituted with the permission of the senior ranking German survivor), he was then "committed to the deep" from the deck of HMS Dorsetshire with full military honours provided by both his German colleagues AND Royal Navy sailors of HMS Dorsetshire, complete with a Royal Marine armed guard of honour and a bugler for "the last post"..... this was just 3 days after the sinking of HMS Hood with the loss of 1415 British lives. Sailors of all nations generally share a brotherhood that is largely unknown in land and air forces.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
A great post by Ian above, I'd just like to add that soon after the Dunkirk evacuation the vast majority of French troops that had been evacuated to the UK (~100,000) were quickly shipped back to France via the Normandy, Brittany and French Atlantic ports, to rejoin the fighting to the south of the German's "Ardennes thrust", though the armistice was signed between the French and Germans before most of those repatriated French troops were redeployed.
The second evacuation that Ian alludes to was named "Operation Aerial". This as well as evacuating troops and a large number of civilians also managed to re-embark a fair amount of British supplies and equipment to be taken back to the UK. Most of the second evacuations also took place at the same Normandy, Brittany and Atlantic ports that I mentioned above.
During the evacuation of British troops from the French port of St Nazaire on 17th June 1940 a British troopship, the requisitioned "RMS Lancastria", was taking onboard thousands of evacuees when it was attacked in the Loire estuary by luftwaffe bombers. It was hit by a number of bombs, and sank within 15-20 minutes, resulting in the deaths of 6000 - 7500 people (The accurate figure will never be known due to the chaos of the events and the resultant lack of boarding documentation). It was the largest single loss of life in a shipwreck in history at the time it happened by a LONG chalk, but is almost completely unknown today.... unlike the later losses of the German ships "KDF Wilhelm Gustloff", "M.V Goya", "S.S General von Steuben" and "S.S Cap Arcona" which are regularly covered by contemporary history books and programs.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Neil-yg5gm Neil, I COMPLETELY agree with your feelings.... I'm from the UK, my own father took a close part in the "Bismarck hunt", and witnessed it sink, his ship was dive bombed and sunk by the Japanese in the Indian ocean in April 1942 and he survived 2 days clinging to wreckage hundreds of miles from the nearest land before a miraculous rescue (luckily by the RN and not the IJN), he then narrowly avoided death a second time when he was a stoker onboard HMS Warspite in Sept 1943 when it was hit by 2 "Fritz X" bombs off the coast of Salerno.
My own kids inspite of my own pride in his service, and my own relating to them of what "grandad did during the war" have only the slightest understanding of his, and indeed the UK's suffering during WW2. And there's a part of me that agrees that they should not be forced into "worshipping" the past, people have lives to get on with, and I'm fairly sure that my own father in 1939 didn't sit pondering on the sacrifices made by English and other troops who defeated Napoleon in the early 19th century.
I agree social history disappearing into the sands of time is a sad phenomena, that's why it's called "nostalgia", do you know what that word means? It's rooted in Latin and literally means "our pain".
Added to which the current globalist powers that be that have ruined YOUR country and MINE don't want young people to be learning about their national histories and heritage, it won't be of any use when the future "one world government" is foisted upon us. I come on YT to discuss 20th century British military history with anyone whose interested in the hope of keeping a "guttering flame" alive. Its a worthwhile past time instead of watching the shit that's now pumped out on the "idiot box" or reading the BS in the papers.
All the best to you from the UK...
P.S Prewar Leslie Morshead was also a teacher and headmaster !!! What an absolute rock of a man he must have been. Such a pity his type have been "gayed" out of society.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
And another thing, I've just re-read a post of yours above, sobbing about the Poles having to pay "millions in gold" for the weapons & supplies etc they received from Britain during WW2. The Polish government in exile AGREED in July 1940 to pay for ALL its equipment & supplies provided by Britain in EXACTLY the same way that Britain agreed to repay TENS OF BILLIONS of dollars to the US for equipment and services it supplied to us during WW2, and which we only finished repaying in 2006. Is modern day Poland a country of freeloaders?
Contrary to what uninformed commenters on youtube think, fighting a war does not come cheap. EVERYTHING required to fight a conflict HAS to be paid for, the equipment, supplies & food etc are not kindly donated by private enterprise. In the 20th century Britain bankrupted itself fighting 2 world wars, moving from the world's biggest lender to the world's biggest debtor in the space of 4 decades. When Britain fought to overcome the tyrants who had destroyed your country, did you expect them to provide you with weapons, ammunition, food, and bases for free? Was the British taxpayer supposed to write out a blank cheque to re-equip and sustain the defeated Polish armed forces?
Would you expect ME to repay YOUR debts?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Hahaha... "the Germans won" indeed... what COMPLETE nonsense.
I only need to provide a SINGLE piece of verifiable information to prove my point. What better than the order issued by none other the Adolf Hitler himself? Below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the Reichchancellery on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW).
The directive was transmitted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to initmidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know, the first phase of the planned invasion, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed by the RAF, with the Luftwaffe losing 1700 aircraft, as well as PERMANENTLY losing the very best of its prewar aircrew. Because they'd had their arses handed to them the nazis called off the rest of their planned invasion. Seelowe had been stopped in its tracks at the first hurdle. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@simonpitt8145 For some reason YT did not notify me of your reply 5 months ago, I've only spotted it now due to a notification of Geoff's comment above.
1. By "easy" I assume you mean the million to one golden shot? Hood had the same armour protection as a Queen Elizabeth battleship such as HMS Warspite that had survived everything the Kaiser's navy could throw at her when during WW1 at Jutland her steering motors overheated and she circled alone twice in front of the entire German battle fleet, and then went on into WW2 surviving encounters with Italian battleships and nazi glider bombs. The effort required to bring Bismack to task was as much governed by the operational / geographical situation, as it was down to the combat effectiveness of Bismarck. Consider how earlier in the year Scharnhorst & Gneisenau had roamed the North Atlantic during "Operation Berlin" for weeks without being brought to combat. it's easy from the comfort of an armchair to underestimate the effort required to find a fast ship at sea that doesn't want to be found.
2. Refer to my response to Geoff Barney above.
3. "Half the RN" you say? The ships involved in the search for Bismarck represented less than 20% of the RN establishment, and as I say above they were required to corral a fast battleship in the vastness of the 41 million square mile North Atlantic in the era before satelittes, GPS, advanced radar and comprehensive long range aircraft coverage were "a thing". Once Bismarck had been located and slowed down, she was rapidly dismantled in short order by two better armed and armoured RN battleships. Also I'll freely correct my "full speed" comment to the more factually correct "as fast as her damaged hull and reduced fuel bunkerage would allow".
4. We both know that a single Japanese torpedo hit the support strut of PoW's outer port propellor shaft which then enabled the unsupported propellor shaft to destroy the water integrity of over 40% of her hull and bring down her main electrical systems. If you read some more about the actual events of that day you'll see that the Japanese aircrew were so impressed by the handling of the 2 doomed ships in an insurmountable situation that their commander overflew the scene the following day to drop a wreath in their honour. No operational battleship on earth in the same (ridiculous) situation at that time (Dec 1941) would have performed any better.
5. I fully understand the various reasons for Bismarck's poor performance on 27th May (apart from the usual uninformed parrotted "she was sailing round in circles" nonsense) including her being harangued all night by the 5th destroyer flotilla to break down her crew, an effective tactical decision made by Admiral Tovey, but when you say "a million to one lucky shot" to her rudders, as Gary Player once said "the more I practice the luckier I get", and the FAA practiced quite a lot seeing as they also put a torpedo into the rudders of Vittorio Veneto at the battle of Cape Matapan, (and indeed as the equally skillful Japanese torpedo bomber pilots did to PoW at Singapore) The rudders of a ship were the hard to hit but "destination of choice" for an aerial torpedo seeing as 75% of the rest of the hull was protected by elaborate torpedo defence systems. Also please don't view my critique of Bismarck purely as trying to diminish her combat worthiness, but as a balance to the gushing pre-pubescent nonsense spouted by legions of impressionable wehraboo children in ALL Bismarck comment sections.
6. Agreed that the choice of unreliable magnetic detonators was questionable in the first place, (As I'm sure you know ALL navies at the time were having their own problems with the relatively new technology of influence fuses), but if you're talking luck, then if Bismarck's "lucky strike" on Hood had not likely impacted her 4in HA magazine and set off the domino effect, then she would have completed her turn to port, and then engaged in a bloody, close in "knife fight" that would have seen both of them crippled or sunk, with the result that Bismarck would not have got as far as she did.
All the best Simon.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
While enjoying Mark's work as ever, AND fully sympathising with the tragic plight of Poland both during AND post WW2, I wonder if maybe Mark himself would've been so eager to be in the front lines in mid 1945, spoiling for another fight with the soviets at the start of WW3 in a Europe already bled white by five and a half years of bloody tumult. How exactly apart from ANOTHER round of unimaginable blood letting was "the west" meant to free Poland from the thieving hands of the massively powerful Soviet regime then entrenched in eastern and central Europe, nuclear weapons maybe?
How exactly do you construe that we "handed over Poland", when we never had possession of the country in the first place, it having been "liberated" from the horrors of nazism by the communists? Then further considering that the Soviets had reneged on the hard fought for agreement at the Feb 1945 Yalta conference to the forming of a postwar democratic "Polish provisional government of national unity", then when the time came they refused to carry out their part in the agreement? I'd suggest that "Faced down" by the Soviets is a more accurate description of the postwar European situation, than the cosy and slightly devious "handed over" nonsense.
If someone was to steal your TV set and when you catch them, the well muscled and aggresive perpetrator threatens to harm you if you take it back, is it YOUR fault that the TV set has been stolen?
I'm also surprised to see how Mark failed to even mention the 1947 UK Polish resettlement act, the act passed by Clement Attlee's labour government that gave hundreds of thousands of Polish ex-service personnel (and their families) full UK citizenship and residency rights complete with access to the newly instituted benefits of the UK welfare system, then coming "online", saving them from becoming "stateless" people after, as Mark says, the land of their birth had been stolen from them by the soviets. As far as I'm aware Britain was the first country to pass such a law post WW2, with France following suit in 1948 before the shamefaced US was embarrassed into doing likewise in 1949.
Life after war is bloody awful for most people. Of course the Polish generals were treated poorly, just as millions of all nationalities were. Should being "a general" automatically entitle you to better treatment than "others" who also suffered injury, loss & sacrifice? My own father, conscripted into the Royal Navy from his job in "civvy street" in 1939 was, in late 1945, handed a "demob suit" and told unceremoniously to "f*ck off", after having suffered the lasting emotional trauma of the sinking of his ship (HMS Dorsetshire) in the Indian ocean in 1942, and narrowly avoiding death during the Salerno landings when HMS Warspite was hit by "Fritz X" bombs, leaving him with permanently damaged hearing.... indeed he had to wait 45 years until 1988 to receive any form of compensation for the injury that he carried to his grave, a paltry "disablement pension" from the UK government, inspite of working all his life paying his taxes until his retirement. The expectation that "generals" are somehow automatically worthy of better treatment is complete nonsense, and of course the British establishment looked after its own, just as ANY country would do the same.
I'd really like to see the spotlight of Mark's excellent research shone onto that "kicked over ant's nest" of post WW2 European geo politics, as my own knowledge is admittedly patchy, but from what I've read over various sources it rarely matches up to the popular perception of the events (as witnessed by a fair proportion of the uninformed comments in sections such as these on YT).... it could make an entire series all by itself.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Complete bollocks. Bismarck's crew actually scuttled a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken and penetrated in several places, her command staff obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater, a thousand of her crew dead, and further hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All the scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer AFTER he has been punched senseless by a more skillful & powerful opponent, and only a deluded child would say, "the victor didn't win, his opponent gave in before he lost.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off and handed back to him on a plate.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
"No French official was privy to the British plans"
Below is the vebatim British ultimatum delivered to Adm Bruno-Marcel Gentoul at Mers-El-Kebir on the 3rd July 1940
"It is impossible for us, your comrades up to now, to allow your fine ships to fall into the power of the German or Italian enemy. We are determined to fight on until the end, and if we win, as we think we shall, we shall never forget that France was our Ally, that our interests are the same as hers, and that our common enemy is Germany. Should we conquer, we solemnly declare that we shall restore the greatness and territory of France. For this purpose, we must make sure that the best ships of the French Navy are not used against us by the common foe. In these circumstances, His Majesty’s Government have instructed me to demand that the French Fleet now at Mers-el-Kébir and Oran shall act in accordance with one of the following alternatives:
(a) Sail with us and continue the fight until victory against the Germans and Italians.
(b) Sail with reduced crews under our control to a British port. The reduced crews would be repatriated at the earliest moment. If either of these courses is adopted by you, we will restore your ships to France at the conclusion of the war or pay full compensation, if they are damaged meanwhile.
(c) Alternatively, if you feel bound to stipulate that your ships should not be used against the Germans or Italians unless these break the Armistice, then sail them with us with reduced crews, to some French port in the West Indies—Martinique for instance—where they can be demilitarised to our satisfaction, or perhaps be entrusted to the United States and remain safe until the end of the war, the crews being repatriated.
If you refuse these fair offers, I must, with profound regret, require you to sink your ships within 6 hours.
Finally, failing the above I have orders of His Majesty's Government to use whatever force may be necessary to prevent your ships us from falling into German or Italian hands."
Even I can follow the clearly laid out options available in the ultimatum.... surely a French Admiral (Even a pompous, inadequate one such as Gensoul) would if in any doubt immediately consult his superior (Darlan) with the FULL text of the ultimatum he's been handed.
Instead the idiot Gensoul, promoted above his ability, pissed about at a CRUCIAL point in European history and caused the death of 1300 French sailors.
He was SO ashamed and embarrased about his handling of the whole episode that he never wrote a postwar account of it, OR took part in any interviews regarding the tragedy, right up to his death in 1970.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I thought I'd create a simple "visual aid" in order to assist people learning about the history of the battle of Britain. There is much ongoing debate about the nationalities and proportions of RAF fighter pilots who took part in the battle, with occasionally a furtive aspect which attempts to portray the battle as a victory of "mostly Foreign pilots". Below is an accurate graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940.
Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the actual number of pilots from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%)
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%)
🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%)
🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%)
🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%)
🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%)
(And just to preempt any wandering idiot lefty "Identity warriors" from protesting about "The lack of credit given to the black pilots who fought in the battle of Britain"... the pilots from South Africa, Rhodesia & the Caribbean were all of white descent).
3
-
3
-
3
-
@andrewavila8682 "attempted to have peace talks", do you mean after invading and enslaving most of continental Europe?
Yes "unprovoked attacks" like the unprovoked toppling of the Austrian government complete with the assasination of its president. The unprovoked subjugation of the entirety of Czechoslovakia, followed by the unprovoked assault on Poland.
So when a serial rapist grabs its third victim do you accuse the person who attempts to stop them of being "the aggressor"?
As for the first bombs dropped, not a single RAF bomb landed on the German mainland until 11th May 1940, as the RAF was forbidden to bomb Germany up until that date (instead preferring to supply Germany's demand for toilet paper by dropping only propaganda leaflets). The guff about a "bombing attack on Wilhelmshaven" on the night of 3/4th september 1939 sometimes offered up as "the first civilian bombing of Germany during WW2" is complete BS. There were NO bombs dropped at all on the city, the attack that uninformed nazi apologists attempt to pass of as "civilian bombing" was actually an attack by 10 Blenheim bombers directed at Kreigsmarine naval vessels in the Jade estuary off the coast of Wilhelmshaven (I.E a legitimate military target far away from the nearest civilians). The RAF was even forbidden from attacking the German warships in port for fear of hitting civilians, and the RAF bombing attack even took place in broad daylight so as to avoid the possiblity of bombing neutral merchant shipping in the area. Unsurprisingly the unescorted RAF light bombers were savaged by defending fighters.
The first bombs dropped by either side onto the actual land of the other was on 13th November 1939 when the luftwaffe bombed RAF Sullom Voe a seaplane base with port facilities in the Shetland Isles (with the resultant death of a rabbit, and no hits on the 9 seaplanes or 2 RN vessels stationed there). The RAF retaliated by hitting the nazi seaplane base at Hörnum on the island of Sylt on 19th March 1940... the very first RAF bombs to land on German soil....4 months AFTER the first German bombs had landed on British soil.
The first civilian fatalities of either side from bombing during WW2 were inflicted by the luftwaffe during an attack on Scapa Flow in the Orkney Islands on 16th March 1940 when German bombs hit the village of Waithe on Orkney killing a 27 year-old County Council employee, James Isbister (luckily, his wife, baby son, and the neighbour James was endeavouring to rescue from her bombed cottage all survived).
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Lets look at some survivor testimonies (people who actually witnessed the events of Bismarck's sinking first hand), and not some unresearched, modern day nonsense written by the "hard of thinking" shall we?
From "Battleship Bismarck: A survivor's story" Written by Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's senior ranking survivor.
Page 211 "Our list to port had increased a bit while firing was going on" followed by "Around 9:30am gas and smoke began to drift through our station" This means that prior to 9:30am Bismarck was already flooding, not something that happens to a healthy seaworthy ship, in other words she was already starting to sink.
Then from an interview conducted for the highly regarded weekly history journal "Purnell's history of the second world war" in the late 1960's with Gerhard Junack (who was Bismarck's only surviving engineering officer and the survivor who supposedly enacted the "scuttle order"). He stated that...
"Somewhere about 1015 hours, I received an order over the telephone from the Chief Engineer (Korvettenkapitän (Ing.) Walter Lehmann) to 'Prepare the ship for sinking.' That was the last order I received on the Bismarck. Soon after that, all transmission of orders collapsed."
Heading back to the account of Mullenheim-Rechberg, on Page 212 he states that (before 10:00am) "I was using all the telephone circuits and calling all over the place in an effort to find out as much as possible about the condition of the ship. I got only one answer. I reached the messenger in the damage control centre and asked "who has and where is the command of the ship? Are there new orders in effect?".... The man said he was in a great hurry. He told me that everyone had abandoned the damage control centre, adding that he was the last one in the room and had to get out... then he hung up".
This vain search for contact & information over the Bismarck's internal comms happened BEFORE 10:00am which throws some mild doubt on Junack's testimony where he says he was contacted by the chief engineer who supposedly gave him the "scuttle order" over the phone at 10:15am... Hmmmmm.
If taken at face value these survivor testimonies show that there was at least a 45 minute gap between Bismarck starting to sink and the first mention of a "scuttle order" being given. Even if Bismarck's crew had done nothing, Bismarck was going to sink, and if the beaten crew want to help the RN, then all the better... But face it, Bismarck's crew weren't going to scuttle a perfectly seaworthy ship in the middle of the storm tossed North Atlantic of their own free will, it was only for the fact that the RN had already dismantled Bismarck and initiated the sinking process. In other words in every sense the sinking of Bismarck was the result of actions dictated by the Royal Navy.
Anything else is just hurt German pride, bolstered by modern day delusional wehraboos. Germany was well known for trying to hide its national humiliations, such as when they scuttled their "grand fleet" at the end of WW1, like illogically saying "We lost.. but you didn't win", or a pathetic "You didn't beat us because we killed ourselves first" sort of idiocy.
P.S "unmatched and unparalleled" Hahahah, comedy gold.
3
-
3
-
Thats one hot crock of BS. Luckily for the US the UK SAVED your self serving asses from being isolated and sandwiched between a nazi dominated Europe and a Japanese dominated Asia.
As for Bismarck she was spit roasted and tag teamed by two superior British battleships. IF any scuttling actually took place then all that was scuttled was a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken and penetrated in several places, her command staff physically obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater, a thousand of her crew dead, and further hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All that any scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer AFTER he has been punched senseless by a more skillful & powerful opponent, and only a deluded child would say, "the victor didn't win because his opponent killed himself before he lost.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off by the victor and handed back to him on a plate.
Imagine the ignominy of being forced to commit suicide by your opponent?
P.S Have they stopped teaching punctuation to the rednecks nowadays?
3
-
Bit like Germany then... of course they took on the world alone.. (We'll forget about the Italians, Japanese, Hungarians, Bulgarians, Dutch, Danes, Belgians, Vichy French, Spanish, Yugoslavs, Ukrainians, Belorussians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians, and even Russians who took part as their "supporting cast").
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Whilst I'm not arguing that the original concept of battlecruisers were an equal of Bismarck, they plainly weren't, HMS Hood was an evolution of battlecruiser theory. Post Jutland her uparmoured redesign took her into the new realm of the fast battleship. a THIRD of her 46000 displacement was armour, she was as well armoured as the Queen Elizabeth class battleships, such as HMS Warspite that had survived everything the Kaiser's navy could throw at her when at Jutland her steering motors overheated and she circled alone twice in front of the entire WW1 German battle fleet, and then went on into WW2 surviving encounters with Italian battleships and nazi glider bombs. Hood was as far removed from the likes of the WW1 Tiger and Indefatigable class battlecruisers as I am from a ballet dancer (and thats a VERY long way). The RN's nomenclature for Hood as a "battlecruiser" was entirely down to her speed, which outstripped all her WW1 battleship cohort by a factor of 8-9 knots, and not based on her being "lightly armoured".
Hood top speed = 32 knots (although in 1941 nearer to 30 knots)
Bismarck top speed = 30 knots
Hood main armament = 8 x 15in
Bismarck main armament = 8 x 15in
Bismarck belt armour = 12.6 inches
Hood belt armour = 12 inches (Though angled so as to give 13 inches of protection).
Bismarck armoured deck = 3.75 inches
Hood armoured deck = 3 inches
Prior to the Denmark Strait engagement there was every reason to believe that HMS Hood would give as good as she got. Hood's vertical armour was well upto the average standard of contemporary battleships, her weakest aspect was her horizontal deck armour, but Holland had raced to close on Bismarck and had escaped the "danger zone" of plunging fire, only to be then hit by a million to one shot that found an obscure "Achilles heel" in her vertical armour.
All the best.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Not ANOTHER insidious neo nazi. How come when you dupes say "Hitler never wanted war with Britain and France" you ALWAYS miss off the part that says "until he was ready for it on his OWN terms".
Because of course Hitler laid all his hopes on being left to expand the nazi empire EASTWARDS in peace, assimilate his new found conquests with their collective economies and resources, further build up his military power and only THEN conquer Britain & France, as they had already attempted TWICE BEFORE in the previous 70 years, once in 1870 and again in 1914, the THIRD attempt in 1940 was precipitated by the British and French not sitting and waiting for it to happen on Hitler's terms. If we had've waited the outcome would have been much MUCH different from the destruction of nazism in 1945.
Not confronting Hitler in 1939 would have resulted with Britain by the late 1940s onwards having:
A puppet nazi government, a nazi supporting King Edward VIII restored to the throne, and the UK as a nazi satellite state.
Extermination camps in the Cotswolds, Pennines & Scottish Highlands.
SS Einsatzgruppen stalking the shires looking to find "undesirables" to summarily execute.
All UK males of working age being deported to the reich to be slaved to death in nazi armaments factories or infrastructure projects.
And now, slimy nazi fanbois and other devious loons want the uninformed to think that letting Hitler conduct his plans undisturbed would mean that we would have a Britain today filled with rose cottages, warm beer, bar skittles, morris dancers & village cricket.
How utterly devious those people are, people with greater awareness of the situation don't fall for their nazi apologist nonsense.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
"Bulls eye precision".... meanwhile, in reality.
A full salvo of main gun fire from a battleship is analogous to a scatter of lead shot from a shotgun. During the battle of Denmark Strait, the Bismarck aimed at Hood from 8-9 nautical miles away. At that range the 38 cm SK C/34 (Bismarck's main armament) had a CEP (circular error probability - effectively the radius of a circle within which 50% of its shots would be expected to fall) of 100m. That means that if 8 of Bismarck's 15in guns fired at a single point 8-9 nm away, 4 of her shells would be expected to land (with completely random distribution) within an ellipse (think of it as a stretched circle, due to the angle of fall of the shells) measuring approximately 200m (660ft) wide, (or to put it another way 76% of HMS Hood's 860ft length), by more than two thousand feet long (Giving an area in the region of 5 hectares or around 8 - 9 US football fields). The other 4 shots would land even FURTHER away from the aiming point. That being the case, how can an individual shell be aimed "with bull's eye precision" at a tiny part of HMS Hood's structure, namely the 4in HA magazine, that its believed triggered off Hood's detonation? I'll give you a hint, there's a little clue in my paragraph above....where it says "completely random distribution".
A simplified analogy is that if you prop a dartboard up 50 yards away and can consistently knock it over with a shotgun at that range then that is pretty good shooting, just as Bismarck / PE achieved during the Denmark Strait encounter.
Now you can "knock the dartboard over" all day long with the shotgun and STILL NOT hit the bullseye (magazine) with an individual pellet. As opposed to being a skillful shot by knocking over the dartboard, whether you hit the bullseye with an individual pellet is complete luck.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Mark never mentioned it because what you say is completely wrong.
With regard to the non-appearance of Polish forces during the London "1946 Victory parade" the problem lay SQUARELY with POLAND. The first invites sent out by the UK Labour Govt of Clement Attlee to ALL the nations who had fought for the Allied cause during WW2 (INCLUDING Poland, USSR & Yugoslavia) were sent out weeks in advance of the parade. The Polish invite in particular was quite understandably delivered to the Polish "Provisional Government of National Unity" ( the "TRJN" or Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) based in Warsaw, which was the OFFICIAL Polish govt as recognised by the international community in the form of the "United Nations", and NOT just by Britain alone. The TRJN was the same govt that it was intended the London based Polish nationalist Govt in exile would become an intrinsic part of, as agreed to by ALL sides at the Yalta conference in Feb 1945.... (although the soviets subsequently saw to it that this never actually happened).
This invite sent directly to Warsaw immediately raised a storm of protest from the Polish nationalist govt in exile based in London who, with some justification, felt they had been sidelined in the matter, their anger was supported by many British MPs, senior ranks within the UK armed forces & members of the British public.
With only days left before the parade was due to take place, and with no reply or even acknowledgement of the British invite from the OFFICIAL Polish TRJN govt in Warsaw, the British govt then hurriedly & belatedly sent out a SECOND INVITE to the Polish Govt in Exile in London, (as well as directly to many individual Polish service personnel), but as one united group they CHOSE to ignore the British invite to register their anger and disgust at being treated as "second fiddle" to the Warsaw govt.
And the final Ignominy? The Warsaw TRJN govt never did answer or even acknowledge the original invite from the UK (as neither did the USSR or Yugoslavia) and never attended the parade either.
As you can see the Polish "non appearance" was solely down to a poisonous bitter mix of political hatred (from Warsaw) and hubris (from the London Poles), and NOTHING to do with this imaginary "Poles weren't invited to the parade" nonsense. As I've described above the Polish nation was actually the ONLY allied nation to receive TWO invites to the parade.
Now please go and burn the communist schoolbooks your country was forced to read between 1945 and 1990.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I thought I'd create a simple "visual aid" in order to assist people learning about the history of the battle of Britain. There is much ongoing debate about the nationalities and proportions of RAF fighter pilots who took part in the battle, with occasionally a furtive aspect which attempts to portray the battle as a victory of "mostly foreign pilots". Below is a graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940.
Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the ACTUAL number of aircrew from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented.
The figures are taken from the RAF records of the awards of the highly coveted "Battle of Britain clasp" to the British 1939-45 Campaign Star. Which was SCRUPULOUSLY only awarded to RAF & Fleet Air Arm aircrew who flew at least one active sortie in the UK in any RAF fighter aircraft between 10th July 1940 and 31st Oct 1940.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%)
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%)
🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%)
🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%)
🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%)
🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%)
(And just to preempt any wandering idiot lefty "Identity warriors" from protesting about "The lack of credit given to the black pilots who fought in the battle of Britain"... the pilots from South Africa, Rhodesia & the Caribbean were all of white descent).
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I thought I'd create a simple "visual aid" in order to assist people learning about the history of the battle of Britain. There is much ongoing debate about the nationalities and proportions of RAF fighter pilots who took part in the battle, with occasionally a furtive aspect which attempts to portray the battle as a victory of "mostly foreign pilots". Below is a graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940.
Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the ACTUAL number of aircrew from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented.
The figures are taken from the RAF records of the awards of the highly coveted "Battle of Britain clasp" to the British 1939-45 Campaign Star. Which was SCRUPULOUSLY only awarded to RAF & Fleet Air Arm aircrew who flew at least one active sortie in the UK in any RAF fighter aircraft between 10th July 1940 and 31st Oct 1940.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%)
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%)
🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%)
🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%)
🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%)
🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%)
(And just to preempt any wandering idiot lefty "Identity warriors" from protesting about "The lack of credit given to the black pilots who fought in the battle of Britain"... the pilots from South Africa, Rhodesia & the Caribbean were all of white descent).
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Jeremy-y1t You forgot to mention the major part that French miltary intelligence played in the prewar Polish decryption efforts. Poland broke into the German army and luftwaffe enigma nets, but NEVER cracked the German navy enigma. In Dec 1938 your nazi heroes introduced a further two encryption rotors to the existing 5, meaning that from then on the Polish decrypters lost access to a large part of the German networks.
Not to worry, the Poles handed their largely non-working foundation effort to the British and French before the nazis and communists massacred their country, France did next to nothing with the work in the short time they had it before their own surrender, but us BRITS broke back into the 3 rotor networks, (Including the Kriegsmarine's which the Poles had never cracked), before going on to crack the improved Kriegsmarine M4 networks, the far more complex Lorenz networks used by the German army and navy high commands, before finally breaking into the equally complex "Geheimeschreiber" network used by the luftwaffe high command as well as the German government.
The intelligence we pilfered from your nazi idols turned the war in the east, saw the kriegsmarine decimated, and cut years off the 12 tragic years of the "glorious 1000 year reich".
Hahahaha.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I can only imagine the emotional torment that must have tore at Josef Goebbels' soul after he realised that the luftwaffe had burned and destroyed the "cultural historic centre" of Coventry on the night of 14th Nov 1940 in Operation Moonlight Sonata, where the German's premier "pathfinding" bomber unit KGr 100 used its "X-gerat" precision bombing sytem, which the German's themselves stated could place "target indicators" with a precision of 50 meters at a range of 200 miles, to spread 30,000 incendiaries and 500 tons of bombs on sleeping British civilians, killing hundreds, destroying schools, hospitals and the vital military target of the city's 700 year old cathedral.
Oh wait a minute, no!!! He wasn't tormented at all, instead he light heartedly joked that a new word had entered the dictionary... To "Coventrate", used as the verb to indicate the complete destruction of a town by heavy bombing. Seems that Goebbels forgot the word he'd invented 5 years earlier as in Feb 1945 he failed to announce on German radio that "Dresden has been coventrated".
Did the good burghers of Dresden rise up as one in 1940 to protest at the heinous regime they'd helped to vote into power in 1933 and which had inflicted such unprovoked evil on innocent civilians in that far away English city (and 50 others) in 1940 - 41? No, back then it was all part of the fun game of "total European domination" that the vast majority of the Germany public thought would make them the "master race", but it didn't quite work out did it, no instead it came back to bite them all right on the arse?
"What goes round, comes round", "wind and whirlwind" and all that.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
First German bombs dropped on the British mainland?
16th October 1939 saw the very first bombs dropped on Britain when the Germans launched scattered air attacks over port and industrial facilities around the Scottish city of Edinburgh, and the RN naval base at Rosyth.
First bombs dropped by the RAF on German soil?
Although the RAF had launched bomber attacks on Kriegsmarine naval units in the North sea from Sept 3rd 1939 onwards, it was actually the 19th March 1940 that the FIRST RAF bombs landed on German soil... When on 13th November 1939 the luftwaffe bombed RAF Sullom Voe a seaplane base with port facilities in the Shetland Isles (with the resultant death of a rabbit, and no hits on the 9 seaplanes or 2 RN vessels stationed there), the RAF retaliated by hitting the nazi seaplane base at Hörnum on the island of Sylt in the North Sea. These were THE VERY FIRST RAF bombs to land on German soil....5 months AFTER the first German bombs had landed on British soil.
The first British or German civilian casualty caused by the bombing of the opposing side during WW2?
16th March 1940 when German bombs hit the village of "Bridge of Waithe" near Stenness on the Orkney Islands during an attack on the Home Fleet anchorage at Scapa Flow, which killed a 27 year-old County Council employee, James Isbister (luckily, his wife, baby son, and the neighbour James was endeavouring to rescue from her bombed cottage all survived).
First British bombs to drop on the actual German mainland?
11th May 1940, when the British air ministry for the first time allowed the bombing of railway yards, communication centres and bridges west of the Rhine River to interrupt German supply lines supporting their undeclared assault into the NEUTRAL Low countries and France on 10th May 1940. Previous to this date the British air ministry in an effort to stop the inflaming of the conflict had refused to allow the RAF to drop ANY bombs on the German mainland, instead the RAF supplied the German demand for toilet paper by dropping propaganda leaflets on German cities. The RAF attacks on 11th May 1940 had also come after REPEATED attacks against RN installations on the British mainland, most notably at Rosyth near Edinburgh, Cromarty Firth & Scapa Flow all in Scotland throughout the winter of 1939/40.
First British bombs dropped EAST of the Rhine River?
On the night of 23/24th August 1940 the RAF launched an attack on Berlin. This attack directed at the Klingenberg Power Station in Eastern Berlin & Templehof airport was in RETALIATION for REPEATED luftwaffe raids on RAF Fighter Command Sector Airfields within the suburbs of Greater London throughout July and August 1940 that had already caused HUNDREDS of innocent British civilian deaths & casualties (euphemistically known nowadays as "collateral damage") this was inspite of Hitler's previous decrees that no bombs should be dropped within the boundary of Greater London. Obviously that decree had never reached the ears of Herman Goering.
German retaliation for the one night of bombing of Berlin on 23/24th August 1940? The launching of the all out assault against British cities from 7th Sept 1940 onwards, culminating in the world's first attempt to create a "firestorm" during operation "moonlight sonata" on the British city of Coventry on the night of 14/15th Nov 1940, where the luftwaffe sent 575 bombers using their world beating "X-gerat" bombing system (in the Germans own words capable of placing "target indicator" flares with an accuracy of 50 meters at 200 miles range) over the civilian city centre of Coventry dropping 550 tons of high explosive (including hundreds of "flammen" (oil) bombs) followed by over 30,000 incendiary bombs. The final death toll of that single raid? A previously unheard of 568 innocent civilians, this was in addition to the thousands of other British civilians already killed & injured in other cities across Britain over the previous 2 months.
The first British bombing raid directly targetted at German civilians?
"Operation Abigail" on the night of 16/17th December 1940, (3 months AFTER the opening of the nazi "blitz" on British cities) the Dec 16th attack by the RAF was launched against the German city of Mannheim where 100 RAF bombers dropped 100 tons of HE and 14,000 incendiaries inflicting a death toll on the German population of 34 dead and 81 injured.
Not to worry though , the RAF eventually "upped its game" and showed the Germans how to do it properly a year or two later.
Don't try to hide the fact that the Germans enjoyed dropping HE on the cities of its neighbours from the earliest days of flight. The first aerial bombs dropped in history were from a zeppelin raid on Liege in Belgium on 4th August 1914... just 11 years after the invention of powered flight. Since WW2, they've learned the lesson NOT to do it again.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Do you naively believe that countries maintain ruinously expensive standing armies, ready at a moments notice to spring into action anywhere in the world?
Britain and France reacted as quickly as they could to mobilise their armies to the surprise assault on Poland on 1st Sept 1939.
The British Royal Navy IMMEDIATELY instigated the "North sea blockade" that had effectively strangled Germany out of WW1.
The RAF did not have the range to attack nazi forces in Poland and refused to bomb the German mainland as they did not want to spread the war but contain Germany. Though they did IMMEDIATELY attack German naval units at sea.
The British army IMMEDIATELY initiated the transfer of its regular army units to France as the BEF (British Expeditionary Force). By Dec 1939 it had just 3 full strength divisions ready in France. It took till April 1940 for us to asemble 10 full divisions and 3 reserve divisions on the borders of Belgium. Poland collapsed after 5 weeks.
The French army, which was by FAR the largest of the two nations, bungled its own mobilisation. It conscripted so many of its population that it crippled its own economy, and had to release countless thousands of soldiers to man her factories again.
But remember this..... if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need", or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, bankrupted themselves as nations, and ended up losing their empires) absolutely NO ONE ELSE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism from June 1940 onwards, opposition which bankrupted the UK and cost her 460,000 of her citizen's lives, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Yes, Bismarck was a heavier ship, though Hood was longer.
No, Bismarck did NOT have "more guns" Hood fielded 8 x 15in guns the same number & calibre as Bismarck (actually 1mm larger calibre but whose arguing?) and she also fired had a heavier weight of broadside.
As for their respective armour here are some basic stats
Bismarck belt armour 12.6 inches
Hood belt armour 12 inches (but angled to provide 13 inches)
Bismarck deck armour Upto 4.7 inches
Hood deck armour Upto 3 inches
Considering that Bismarck was launched 20 years after Hood she certainly wasn't 20 years more advanced than Hood. Even the "Nelson" class RN battleships launched 13 years earlier than Bismarck sported FAR better armour and heavier firepower in a package that was 30% lighter than Bismarck, although they were 7 knots slower than her, but that was the price you pay for keeping within international naval treaty limitations, something that the Germans never bothered honouring.
"Bismarck would've been even greater threat if not for their own crew scuttling her"
Dear oh dear.... by the time any supposed scuttling of Bismarck was taking place she was already a 51,000 ton mountain of flaming scrap metal, ALL guns silenced, her superstructure shredded, her command staff physically obliterated, aflame from stem to stern, her stern and port gunwales were already underwater, and hundreds of her crew had already "gone over the side". She was a threat to no-one BEFORE any scuttling had taken place, in fact her last 50 minutes the only purpose she served was that of a floating target for the RN to practice on.
Hood was a fairly reasonable match for Bismarck, not so far out of her league as you seem to believe. Yes she had a weakness of deck armour, but her commander was aware of that and had raced to close to a range where it was no longer a problem. Her belt armour was a close match for Bismarck's, but having closed to a range where the two battlewagons were about to slug it out, one of Bismarck's shells found an obscure "Achilles heel" in her side protection and the rest was history.
If you'd like to look further into the situation, I can recommend this video,
https://youtu.be/CLPeC7LRqIY
Which will give you plenty of further information on Hood's destruction.
All the best.
3
-
"Choosing such an idiot for the position", You seem to be forgetting that 3 months eariler Lütjens had commanded "operation Berlin", where he took the Kriegsmarine's "twins" into the Atlantic, sinking / capturing 22 allied merchant ships, and successfully evading the RN's efforts to engage.
As for Dorsetshire's torpedoes, listen to what one of the world's most experienced and knowledgeable marine forensic experts, Bill Jurens, thinks about the matter. https://youtu.be/9xX8XGMMXhE?t=3887
I'm no wehraboo apologist, but the failure was FAR from solely caused by Lütjens but mainly by the Kriegsmarine top brass ordering Rhineübung to take place inspite of it being under supported against a FAR stronger enemy, at a time when the German surface fleet was already losing the technology & resources battle. Lütjens suspected that was the case, but was duty bound to follow his orders.
3
-
3
-
3
-
Inspite of being the world's largest navy at the time, the RN's assets were spread across the enormity of the North and South Atlantic, the Mediterranean and the Far East. The RN Home Fleet had 4 capital ships with sufficient speed to cover the 2 northern entry points to the North Atlantic and fast enough to engage the German task force. How would you have positioned those ships keeping in mind that the major transatlantic convoy routes ran right past those two entry points? The Admiralty decided to put their best ship (HMS KGV - Modern, powerful and well trained) with the weakest (HMS Repulse - Old, less heavily armed & armoured, but fast) to cover between Iceland and the UK, with HMS Hood (old, but fast and powerful) together with HMS PoW (Modern & powerful but only just completed and so inexperienced and untested) to cover the Denmark Strait between Iceland & Greenland.
Also as for your smart idea of "using carriers" What do you think HMS Victorious and Ark Royal were doing? As the RN had learned 11 months earlier with HMS Glorious, RN aircraft carriers were NOT to be unaccompanied by RN capital ships at sea when unlocated enemy capital ships were also at large. The RN Carriers were used EXACTLY for the purpose for which they had been designed.... to damage fast ships to enable the more powerful but slower RN ships to close and engage. EXACTLY as happened.
There was no desire to go "one on one", hence why the Admiralty diverted as many ships as possible. Hood / PoW engaged when they did because the Denmark Strait is on the very threshhold of the convoy routes, and seeing as there were SEVEN convoys at sea at that point, they did NOT have the luxury to be able to shadow the Germans and "await events", plus on paper they stood EVERY chance of stopping Bismarck & PE. But history, hindsight & "Murphy's law" show us that there is no accounting for "million to one" shots.
Oh by the way the "absolute idiots" lost a <10% of their operational capital ships which was subsequently replaced many times over, the Germans on the other hand lost 50% of their battleship fleet, which was NEVER replaced.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
When devious nazi fanboi idiots and other assorted uninformed loons such as yourself say "Hitler never wanted war with Britain and France" they ALWAYS miss off the part that says "until he was ready for it on his OWN terms".
Because of course Hitler laid all his hopes on being left to expand the nazi empire EASTWARDS in peace, assimilate his new found conquests with their collective economies and resources, further build up his military power and only THEN conquer France followed by Britain (or possibly impose a crushing "pax Germanica" on the UK as they did with Vichy France), they had already attempted such a feat TWICE BEFORE in the previous 70 years, once in 1870 and again in 1914, the THIRD attempt in 1940 was precipitated by the British and French not sitting and waiting for it to happen on Hitler's terms. If we had've waited the outcome would have been much MUCH different from the destruction of nazism in 1945.
Not confronting Hitler in 1939 would have resulted with Britain by the late 1940s onwards having:
A puppet nazi government, a nazi supporting King Edward VIII restored to the throne, and the UK as a nazi satellite state.
Extermination camps in the Cotswolds, Pennines & Scottish Highlands.
SS Einsatzgruppen stalking the shires looking to find "undesirables" to summarily execute.
All UK males of working age being deported to the reich to be slaved to death in nazi armaments factories or infrastructure projects.
And now, slimy nazi fanbois and other devious loons want the uninformed to think that letting Hitler conduct his plans undisturbed would mean that we would have a Britain today filled with Rose cottages, warm beer, bar skittles, Morris dancers & village cricket.
How utterly devious those people are, people with greater awareness of the situation don't fall for their nazi apologist nonsense.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@MarquisVincentBissetdeGramont I thought I'd create a simple "visual aid" in order to assist people learning about the history of the battle of Britain. There is much ongoing debate about the nationalities and proportions of RAF fighter pilots who took part in the battle, with occasionally a furtive aspect which attempts to portray the battle as a victory of "mostly Foreign pilots". Below is an accurate graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940.
Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the actual number of pilots from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%)
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%)
🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%)
🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%)
🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%)
🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%)
(And just to preempt any wandering idiot lefty "Identity warriors" from protesting about "The lack of credit given to the black pilots who fought in the battle of Britain"... the pilots from South Africa, Rhodesia & the Caribbean were all of white descent).
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@arunta5 Are you aware that Hood as originally conceived was an improvement on the earlier Lion, Indefatigable & Tiger class battlecruisers that you allude to in your OP, but as a result of the events at Jutland in 1916 she was FURTHER redesigned while still being constructed to include an extra 5000 tons of armour, which resulted in her armour levels being on a par with contemporary WW1 battleships, while STILL being 7-8 knots faster?
The earlier battlecruisers had belt thicknesses of 4 - 6in and decks in the region of 1 - 2 in. Hood sported an angled belt of 12in (effectively 13 inches due to the angling) and a main 3 inch armoured deck which was sufficiently thick to protect her from gunnery of the WW1 period, but due to improvements in range finding and gun technology throughout the 1920s and 30s, longer range gunnery with steeper plunging fire angles at those longer ranges meant that Hood's deck armour was rendered less and less effective. She did receive a number of refits during her 20 year career, but due to the demans placed on her during the interwar years, she was the last of the battlecruisers to receive a major redesign of her armour, which had been scheduled to tke place in 1942, had not WW2 & Bismarck intervened.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@mikeholton3914 I'm not arguing that the original battlecruisers as conceived during WW1 were an equal of Bismarck, they plainly weren't, but Hood as completed was NOTHING like the other RN battlecruisers, she was an evolution of battlecruiser theory. Post Jutland her uparmoured redesign took her into the new realm of the fast battleship. a THIRD of her 46000 displacement was armour, she was as well armoured as the Queen Elizabeth class battleships, such as HMS Warspite that had survived everything the Kaiser's navy could throw at her when at Jutland her steering motors overheated and she circled alone twice in front of the entire WW1 German battle fleet, and then went on into WW2 surviving encounters with Italian battleships and nazi glider bombs. Hood was as far removed from the likes of the WW1 Tiger and Indefatigable class battlecruisers as I am from a ballet dancer (and thats a VERY long way). The RN's nomenclature for Hood as a "battlecruiser" was entirely down to her speed, which outstripped all her WW1 battleship cohort by a factor of 7-8 knots, and not based on her being "lightly armoured".
Bismarck belt armour = 12.6 inches
Hood belt armour = 12 inches (Though angled at outwards at 12° so as to give 13 inches of protection).
Bismarck deck armour = 4 inches
Hood deck armour = 3 inches
Hood's vertical armour was well upto the standard of contemporary battleships, her weakest aspect was her horizontal deck armour. Hood HAD closed the distance sufficiently to escape the "danger zone" of plunging fire. Its the very reason that V/Adm Holland had chosen to "open his arcs" by executing a second turn to port at the time of her destruction. Prewar testing of 3in horizontal armour had shown that it was effective against 15in gunfire at angles of fall less than 20°. The range from Bismarck at the time of Hood's destruction meant that Bismarck's incoming shells had an angle of fall in the region of 10°-13°. Hood HAD escaped the "danger zone" of plunging fire, only to be then hit by a million to one shot that found an obscure "achilles heel" in her vertical armour.
The British did NOT have the luxury of choosing NOT to engage. The situation at 6am on the 23rd May was the BEST chance the RN had of forcing an engagement on the Germans who with orders to avoid engagement with heavy units of the Home Fleet, 2 heavy crusiers following them, the Greenland pack ice to the west and the approaching RN Home Fleet to the east, had at that time the least options for evasion available to them. There was a FAR greater chance of the Germans throwing off their pursuers in the wide open expanses of the North Atlantic... just as they did 2 days later, but luckily by that time Bismarck did not have the option to sail anywhere except the French Atlantic ports due to her critical fuel situation, which had been caused by? The Denmark Strait engagement.
The Germans on the 23rd May were also on the very threshold of the Atlantic convoy lanes, if they had allowed the Germans to continue unopposed there was no telling where they would have headed, and there were at that very moment SEVEN convoys steaming in various positions and directions across the Atlantic,
As for "PoW had no business being in a fight" the RN Home Fleet had no option but to employ her. They had no other capital ships fast enough to intercept, they used what the had to hand, and as it turned out the unready PoW and her green crew performed FAR better than was to have be expected, having landed the first hit of the engagement which effectively caused the cancellation of "Rhineübung".
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@PhilipLeitch I don't demonstrate my point? Have you demonstrated YOUR point? I've provided FIRST hand accounts of it happening, but you choose to ignore it. You're ANOTHER self appointed "expert" making ridiculous blanket statements to make you sound authoratative, but failing miserably.
When does a sailor bobbing momentarily under the water have to hold his lungs to bursting point as described in the example I provided you, by Ted Briggs?
You even display your lack of understanding, by stating a case, that of Titanic (in which you make the seemingly groundless assumption that none of the 1512 deaths were caused by drowning by suction, can you direct me to where that is stated by a reputable source?), and even IF what you state was true then you baselessly extrapolate out from that to conclude that it somehow proves that suction NEVER happens, whereas I quite correctly state that while it may not happen in every situation, that it can and does happen when all of the myriad factors & forces in a complex dynamic system, i.e a large sinking ship, create the right conditions for it to happen.
Its the same as concluding that inspite of all the lightning strikes I've witnessed in my life, that because I've NEVER seen or know of anyone who has been struck by lightning, that proves that all the cases where people say they've been struck can be safely discounted as hearsay.
3
-
3
-
3
-
The WHOLE strategy of fire protection in high rise buildings is one based on "compartmentation and containment", pre installed firefighting equipment namely what are called "wet" or "Dry" "Risers" to get firefighting water quickly to the scene of the fire, together with fire and smoke protected "means of escape", this complete strategy was finally enshrined in law in the 1970s after several fatal fires in high rise buildings in the UK in the 50s, 60s & 70s.
Each and every flat built in the UK from the 1960s onwards had fireproof reinforced concrete boundary walls and floors/ceilings. Window frames were originally steel, there were fireprotected stairways/landings aka "means of escape", and there was to be NO uncertified comprimise of the structural compartmentation between adjacent flats. That meant if an individual flat was involved in a fire it would NOT spread sideways or downwards, with only a possible small secondary involvement of the single flat immediately above at most. The resident affected by the fire would obviously evacuate, while all the rest of the block's residents were to safely stay in their flats. A system which worked on COUNTLESS occasions during my own 30 years of service in the UK Fire Brigade many many years ago.
ALL of this fire safety planning was protected by UK law and building regulations, and enforced by the HIGHLY trained and experienced Fire Safety officers of the individual county Fire Brigades.
Fast forward to the early 1990s when the UK fire safety regulation & enforcement powers were REMOVED by the govt from the British fire services, and placed into the hands of clueless local councils. This was followed by the "deregulation" of fire safety in public buildings with many of the carefully thought out rules quietly ignored, as they were a "hinderance" to private businesses.... "Deregulation to reduce "troublesome red tape" & streamline the business environment" as it was euphemistically described. but known to the rest of us as "cutting corners on safety".
The Fire Brigades Union and firemen were crying out about this thoughout the 1990s and onwards, but the corporate media ensured that it was NOT brought to the wider public attention.
From then on, UPVC windows were fitted into high rise buildings which deform in heat and allow the entry of flames and smoke from external fire sources, MANY unregulated holes were drilled through solid reinforced concrete walls and floors to allow the installation of new electrical wiring/phone cabling/central heating systems. External cladding that had NOT been properly tested for combustibility, and which in some cases chemically resembled "rocket fuel" was fitted to the outside of many blocks. Such cladding could cynically be described as "polishing turds with rocket fuel".
ALL of which was largely unregulated and went unreported.
Then at Grenfell, Much the same happened as with people who don't bother with "insurance" get caught out. All went well until someone has a fire and all the wrong factors line up and then "all of a sudden" the long enforced sound & logical structural methods of fire control and safety via compartmentation and containment are suddenly not there anymore..... and LOTS of people then die.
The clueless fire service management was also TOO slow to realise that the whole original system of fire compartmentation had been comprimised and was so and spineless that NO-ONE was prepared to order the full evacuation of residents because of the alternate known risks that that action entails.
So in short OUR politicians both nationally AND locally completely undermined public safety legislation that was laid down many years ago for ALL of our protection, and they undermined that legislation for the benefit of their CORPORATE financiers.
So once again the powerful shaft the poor to enrich the powerful..... then blame it on the poor victims.
And you lot STILL vote for "the major political parties"?
You all need to wake up to how they all REALLY see us.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@wesleyjarboe9571 Likening HMS Hood to the "Invincible" and "indefatigable" class battlecruisers that took part in Jutland is akin to suggesting a Keonigsegg Gemera is the same as a Honda S2000. Yes, both are considered "super cars" but their handling & performance and specifications are leagues apart.
I realise Arizona was hit by more than 1 bomb, but it had shrugged off the others, just as Hood had shrugged of a number of previous hits in Denmark Strait, but like Hood its sinking was not attributable to progressive damage from multiple hits, but directly as the result of catastrophic damage from one single hit on Arizona's forward magazine.
I illustrate the "million to one" shot with the following explanation & analogy of long range naval gunnery.
A full salvo of main gun fire from a battleship is analogous to a scatter of lead shot from a shotgun. During the battle of Denmark Strait, the Bismarck aimed at Hood from 8-9 nautical miles (Approx 17-18,000 yards) away. The German's own naval gunnery data tables provided by their AVKS ("Artillerie Versuchs Kommando für Schiff" or naval artillery evaluation command) show that at that range of 18000 yards the 38 cm SK C/34 (Bismarck's main armament) had a CEP (circular error probability - effectively the RADIUS of a circle within which 50% of its shots would be expected to fall) of 100m. That means that if 8 of Bismarck's 15in guns fired at a single point 8-9 nm away, 4 of her shells would be expected to land (with completely random distribution) within an ellipse (think of it as a stretched circle, due to the angle of fall of the shells) measuring approximately 200m (660ft) wide, (or to put it another way 76% of HMS Hood's 860ft length), by more than two thousand feet long. The other 4 shots would probably land even FURTHER away from the aiming point. That being the case, how can an individual shell be aimed specifically at a tiny part of HMS Hood's structure, namely the 4in HA magazine, that its believed triggered off the "domino effect" of Hood's detonation? I'll give you a hint, there's a little clue in my paragraph above....where it says "completely random distribution".
A simplified analogy is that if you prop a dartboard up 50 yards away and can consistently knock it over with a shotgun at that range then that is pretty good shooting, just as Bismarck / PE achieved during the Denmark Strait encounter.
Now you can "knock the dartboard over" with the shotgun all day long and STILL NOT hit the bullseye (magazine) with an individual pellet. As opposed to being a skillful shot by knocking over the dartboard, whether you hit the bullseye with an individual pellet is complete "million to one" luck.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
My father was onboard the Royal Navy cruiser HMS Dorsetshire during the "Bismarck saga". He took part in the rescues of the 86 Bismarck sailors that were picked up by her after the sinking. One of the rescued survivors, a badly injured German sailor named Gerhard Lüttich, died on the operating table in Dorsetshire's sick bay that evening. The following morning, 28th May 1941, his body was then "committed to the deep" with full military honours provided by BOTH his German comrades AND sailors from HMS Dorsetshire, with the last post played by a Royal Marine bugler. The remaining surviving crew were treated EXCELLENTLY by the crews of HMS Dorsetshire & HMS Maori, being given the same bunking arrangements as the crew (under guard of course), and provided with 3 hot meals a day for the 4 days they were on board. They were also given Grog (rum and water) which was only normally issued to the RN sailors, the survivors were also provided with sweets, chocolate and cigarettes by the RN crews, and this was just 3 days after the sinking of HMS Hood.
Human decency does still exist sometimes in the middle of abject horror.
3
-
Its life Jim, but not as we know it.
IF any scuttling actually took place then all that was scuttled was a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken and penetrated in several places, her command staff physically obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater, a thousand of her crew dead, and further hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All that any scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer AFTER he has been punched senseless by a more skillful & powerful opponent, and only a deluded child would say, "the victor didn't win because his opponent killed himself before he lost.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off by the victor and handed back to him on a plate.
Imagine the ignominy of being forced to commit suicide by your opponent?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Churchill was NOT the author of Dowding's dismissal. The main culprits were Trafford Leigh-Mallory, Sholto Douglas and the chiefs of the air staff, Cyril Newhall followed to a lesser degree by Charles Portal.
After the battle of Britain, the British Air Ministry asked ACM Dowding to write an authorised history of the battle of Britain. He duly did so and provided it to the air ministry for their perusal. Such was the internal emnity of some of the RAF "top brass" towards him, that his account was rejected and the Air Ministry commisioned another account from Dowding's replacement & nemesis Sholto Douglas, in which ACM Dowding's name was not mentioned even ONCE.
On reading the finished Document, Churchill, who was actually a tacit supporter of Hugh Dowding, returned it to the minister for air, Archibald Sinclair annotated with the following comment : “The jealousies and cliquism which have led to the committing of this offence are a discredit to the Air Ministry, and I do not think any other Service Department would have been guilty of such a piece of work. What would have been said if … the Admiralty had told the tale of Trafalgar and left Lord Nelson out of it?”
But Churchill was also aware of the range of powerful figures within the RAF & govt that were arrayed against ACM Dowding, and also that he was LONG overdue for retirement, and so acquiesced to his dismissal and subsequent posting to the US.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@MarkHarrison733 That's not what Adolf Hitler said Mark......
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan was academic. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
2
-
2
-
The gratings were seawater intakes. Large ships need water for various purposes, saltwater could be used for personal hygiene, general swabbing of decks and firefighting purposes, but the main reason that a constant supply of seawater was required would be for the ship's evaporators, these are boiler devices that produce a supply of freshwater from seawater, the freshwater being essential for two purposes, drinking water for the crew and just as important, feedwater for the ship's boilers to produce the steam to drive the ship's turbines. If you attempted to use sea (salt) water to produce steam for the ship's propulsion then the boilers would very quickly clog up with salt scale (potentially leading to a boiler explosion) and salt contamination in the system would also cause terrible corrosion on the ship's finely engineered turbine blades.
My father was an RN stoker who operated the boilers and evaporators on various ships during WW2, and he said that the ship's boilers had first call on the fresh water supply... and only freshwater surplus to the boilers requirements was then allowed to the crew. Propulsion first, men second..... The salinity (saltiness) of feedwater was constantly measured, with the boilers requiring even purer water than the men themselves, but if you weren't producing enough freshwater in the first place then a swift kick up the arse from the Stoker Petty Officer would usually remedy the situation.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
"(The Hood) ships were not worth their industrial cost"
Great Britain had FAR greater ship building capacity than did Germany. Germany had only TWO shipyards with the requisite capacity to construct the Bismarck class, which means Bismarck took up 50% of Germany's major slipways for 5 YEARS (and Tirpitz occupied the other), and all for 7 days of active service. Compare that to Hood, who utilised only a small percentage of GB's capacity and provided over 20 years of outstanding value to her mother country.
Then if you use "financial outlay" as the yardstick, then Bismarck qualifies as possibly the "worst buy" in naval history.
193,000,000rm for 7 days of active service, compared to Hood's £6,000,000 for 20 years of CEASELESS service.
Thats the same as buying a Bugatti Veyron and writing it off on its first outing, against buying a Rolls Royce Silver Ghost and getting 20 years of unstinting, loyal and prestigious service from it..... before the idiot in the Veyron crashed into it.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@GremlinPL Let me make it simple for you with an everyday analogy.
If some mad brute passing by you in the street, without warning, punches you in the face then rapes you, do you then get angry and abusive towards the ONLY "good samaritan" who rushed from across the street to your aid, but never made it in time to stop the initial assault?
Britain and France assured Poland that if the Wehrmacht crossed the Polish frontier, that they would declare war on nazi Germany, which as good as their word, they did.
Instead the UK and France could have done what the ENTIRE rest of the world did and just "walked on by", simply ignoring the nazi / communist dismemberment of Poland in Sept 1939.
What do you imagine would have happened to Poland then? Would Poland somehow rise up on her own and miraculously overthrow her nazi & soviet conquerors alone? Who knows what would happen in hundreds of years time, but rest assured in OUR lifetimes Poland would STILL to this day have a swastika flying over Warsaw, and the chimneys of nazi death camps would STILL to this day be belching out human ashes into Polish skies.
Adolf Hitler explicitly wanted more than anything else for the UK to join his "crusade", and support his "vision" for a nazi dominated Europe while we controlled the world's seas and kept our Empire.... what an unbeatable alliance that would have been !!!
But Instead of looking out for our own selfish interests, the largely unprepared UK and France declared war on Hitler's Germany for Poland & Europe's sake, NOT OUR OWN, What benefit did the UK receive from declaring war on Germany? That selfless act alone set in train the events that eventually led to the fall of nazism 5½ years later.... only then for the communists and Americans to betray Poland and NOT allow democracy to flourish there postwar (but keep in mind that Poland had NOT been a democracy before WW2 anyway).
After the fall of France in June 1940 the UK, against the expectations of the ENTIRE world, then fought on ALONE in Europe & North Africa from June 1940 to June 1941 & continued the opposition to nazism when absolutely NO-ONE else in the world was interested.
Who ELSE do you imagine was going to save Poland?
The USSR? They'd eagerly joined the nazis in raping Poland, and then happily executed 22,000 of your countrymen in one fell swoop, followed by countless others.
The USA? Their chosen neutrality meant they were NEVER going to get drawn into a European war (it was only nazi Germany's declaration of war on the US in Dec 1941 that dragged their backsliding arses into the conflict), in fact US businesses were only TOO happy to do business with BOTH sides, and happily supplied Britain AND Germany with raw materials, fuel and war equipment while the nazis raped Poland and then continued to do so THROUGHOUT the rest of WW2.
Poland's eastern European neighbours? They all pretended not to notice Poland being raped and murdered in front of their very eyes and instead all of them quickly signed up with the nazis.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire ALONE to nazism from June 1940 onwards, opposition which bankrupted the UK and cost her 460,000 of her citizen's lives, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources away from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps would STILL be operating on Polish soil today.
There's no need for you to thank me for my efforts to reduce your complete ignorance of the European situation from the 1940s onwards.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@GreatPolishWingedHussars I ask contemporary Poles within YT comments these questions below repeatedly and have NEVER received a straight answer. Maybe YOU can help?
1. In Sept 1939, what exactly could Britain's peacetime, unmobilised army of 225,000 (large parts of which was also spread across her empire) do to support Poland in the 6 weeks it took the combined 3.3 million troops of the German and Soviet armies to devour it?
2. In February 1945 the USSR promised to hold free & open elections post-war in Poland and then when the time came said "no". Why is there no tidal wave of anger at the Soviet/Russians for their treachery from Poland nowadays?
3. What do modern day Poles suggest could have been done to evict the +10 million strong Red army ensconced in Eastern Europe in 1945 and restore Poland's much deserved democracy to its people?
4. Were the western allies meant to launch a potential nuclear WW3 in central Europe to achieve this?
Great Britain & France had spent 20 years bending over backwards to avoid a repeat of the carnage of WW1, and were consequently poorly prepared to confront a Germany that had spent 7 years from 1933 onwards rearming and preparing for war at a ferocious rate.
Britain being FAR more a maritime world power immediately imposed a North sea blockade to cut Germany's economic trade (A strategy btw which had virtually strangled Germany out of WW1), and started to move its small contingent of troops across the channel to France. The French army which was FAR larger than Britain's, and superbly placed to take offensive action with its +160 divisions on the French mainland, did almost NOTHING. France had long standing economic, political and military treaties with Poland since the early 1920's, as opposed to Britain (whose only previous treaties with Poland were at the time of the Napoleonic wars) who had only recently guaranteed Poland's borders during August 1939, and yet strangely we NEVER hear any criticism of France during these continually published Brit-hating videos.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Another clueless Pole whinging that "Britain & France betrayed us".
If it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need", or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism from June 1940 onwards, opposition which bankrupted the UK and cost her 460,000 of her citizen's lives, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s.
For those Ignorant modern day Poles, on your way out, please remember to kneel at the altar dedicated to the combined 1.1 million lives sacrificed by the UK and France in order to topple the nazism that was murdering and torturing YOUR country when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
And for all current honourable, and deeper thinking Poles, please accept our best wishes from the UK.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Terribly sad news, Deepest sympathy for Michael's family.
It's SO bloody easy to make a casual misjudgement, over reach your endurance and inadvertently stumble into a very dangerous situation.
A few years back I was on holiday in Portugal. We were on the beach at Praia de Falecia under a hired sunshade for the afternoon. Bit of swimming.... bit of sunbathing... and I thought I'll go for a walk along the beach as there was a light breeze on a warm day.... it was beautiful.
I'd walked for just over an hour in the direction of Faro with the sun behind me, when I though, I'd best turn back. As soon as I turned around and walked for a minute I realised that the sun was blisteringly hot, inspite of my sun hat and light summer clothing, I'd drank two thirds of my water, and there was a stretch of beach probably a mile and a half where there was nobody and no facilities that I then had to traverse.
I'm NOT stupid, I've been a serving frontline fireman for 30 years and KNOW the symptoms of heat syncope & stress, and I very quickly realised I was in trouble, but suffice to say I made it back to where my wife was starting to worry about me, and when she saw me she knew that I'd taken a beating off the sun.... even though my hat the skin of my forehead had blistered and has started to bleed. If I had not been on a beach where I had only to determinedly follow the waterline to return to my starting point, and instead been on a featureless landscape such as that that Michael appears to have traversed then I think I may well have succumbed the same way that Michael and many others have sadly done. How a beautiful sunny day with family can unexpectedly slip into a fatal tragedy.
It is SO easy to underestimate the conditions, overestimate your own endurance, and if you have no awareness of the symptoms of the onset of heat stroke, then your thinking and judgement processes VERY quickly become impaired. I can see that is EXACTLY what has happened to unfortunate Mr Mosley. It does surprise me somewhat that with his apparently deep understanding of the human body that he was not more self aware of the danger he had stumbled into. Just to have stopped for a drink at one of the cafes at Pedi.... a sad loss of such a positive force in the world.
Once again, deepest sympathy for Michael's Family.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@JagerFrostTroll Ok, try this on for size.
You say "(Hitler) wanted to show goodwill to the British by letting them go".
Here are the opening paragraphs of "Fuhrer Directive 13" ("Fuhrer Directives" were Hitler's direct orders to the OKW, or German armed forces high command). This one (number 13) was issued on 24th May, 1940, 2 days before the start of the Dunkirk evacuation.
"The Leader And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters.
24th May, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 13
1. The next object of our operations is to annihilate the French, English, and Belgian forces which are surrounded in Artois and Flanders, by a concentric attack by our northern flank and by the swift seizure of the Channel coast in this area.
The task of the Air Force will be to break all enemy resistance on the part of the surrounded forces, to prevent the escape of the English forces across the Channel, and to protect the southern flank of Army Group A.
The enemy airforce will be engaged whenever opportunity offers."
While you naively believe "(Hitler) wanted to show goodwill to the British by letting them go", Hitler himself told his generals that he wanted to "annihilate the French, English, and Belgian forces which are surrounded in Artois and Flanders, by a concentric attack".
The ball as they say is in your court.... I await your response.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
When devious nazi fanbois & other idiots say "Hitler never wanted war with Britain and France" they ALWAYS miss off the part that says "until he was ready for it on his OWN terms".
Because of course he was putting all his hopes on being left to expand the nazi empire EASTWARDS in peace, assimilate his new found conquests with their collective economies and resources, further build up his military power and THEN conquer Britain & France. Luckily for us all today the British and French were not prepared to allow Hitler to get his way.
Not confronting Hitler in 1939 would have resulted with Britain by the mid 1940s onwards having:
A puppet nazi government, with a nazi supporting King Edward VIII restored to the throne.
Extermination camps in the Cotswolds, Pennines & Scottish Highlands.
SS Einsatzgruppen stalking the shires looking to find "undesirables" to summarily execute.
All UK males of working age being deported to the reich to be slaved to death in nazi armaments factories or infrastructure projects.
And now, slimy nazi fanbois want the uninformed to think that letting Hitler conduct his plans undisturbed would mean that we would have a Britain today filled with Rose cottages, warm beer, bar skittles & village cricket.
As it is, for all its faults today, YOU live in a country where you are free to express your opinions, no matter how uninformed they are and NOT have to worry about being executed for it.
How utterly devious those people are, people with greater awareness of the situation don't fall for their nazi apologist nonsense.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@BenjaminASmith-WWIII A full salvo of main gun fire from a battleship is analogous to a scatter of lead shot from a shotgun. During the battle of Denmark Strait, the Bismarck aimed at Hood from 8-9 nautical miles (Approx 17-18,000 yards) away. The German's own naval gunnery data tables provided by their AVKS (or "Artillerie Versuchs Kommando für Schiff") show that at that range the 38 cm SK C/34 (Bismarck's main armament) had a CEP (circular error probability - effectively the radius of a circle within which 50% of its shots would fall) of 100m. That means that if 8 of Bismarck's 15in guns fired at a single point 8-9 nm away, 4 of her shells would be expected to land (with completely random distribution) within an ellipse (think of the circle being stretched, due to the angle of fall of the shells) measuring approximately 200m (660ft) wide, (or to put it another way 76% of HMS Hood's 860ft length), by around 1000 meters long. The other 4 shots would be expected to land even FURTHER away from the aiming point, and outside that ellipse. That being the case, how can an individual shell be aimed specifically at a tiny part of HMS Hood's structure, namely the 4in HA magazine, that its believed triggered off Hood's detonation? I'll give you a hint, there's a little clue in my paragraph above....where it says "completely random distribution".
A simplified analogy is that if you prop a dartboard up 50 yards away and can consistently knock it over with a shotgun at that range then that is pretty good shooting, just as Bismarck / PE achieved during the Denmark Strait encounter.
Now you can "knock the dartboard over" with the shotgun all day long and STILL NOT hit the bullseye (magazine) with an individual pellet. As opposed to being a skillful shot by knocking over the dartboard, whether you hit the bullseye with an individual pellet is complete luck.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I only need to provide a SINGLE piece of verifiable information to show how the nazis had their arses handed to them by the British in 1940.
What better than the order issued by none other the Adolf Hitler himself? Below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler's "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the Reichchancellery on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW).
The directive was transmitted over landlines encrypted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to initmidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed meaning the rest of the plan was academic. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
The Luftwaffe lost close to 2000 aircraft, the majority of which were lost with their entire prewar "experten" air crews, while British losses were of just over 900.
Hahahaha.... suck it up lad, suck it up !!!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Eagerly awaiting the follow up programs of the contemporary French, Belgian, German and Portuguese colonisations of Africa. Oh didn't you know? The French and Belgian episodes in particular will be ESPECIALLY interesting viewing. (I wont be holding my breath, seeing as this appears to be another anti-Brit lefty propaganda channel)
Maybe we can look forward to other episodes looking at other empires from history.... Mongol, Persian, Roman, Macedonian, Chinese, Aztec, Incan, Khmer, Soviet, Malian, Spanish to name but a few. All of which had deeply unsavoury aspects in their dealings when viewed in a modern light. No need to just concentrate on the British empire and pretend everyone else is "clean". Unless you're a clueless lefty dupe that is.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Dear oh dear.
More "Britain bombed first" nonsense.
First German bombs dropped on the British mainland?
16th October 1939 saw the very first bombs dropped on Britain when the Germans launched scattered air attacks over port and industrial facilities around the Scottish city of Edinburgh, and the RN naval base at Rosyth.
First bombs dropped by the RAF on German soil?
Although the RAF had launched bomber attacks on Kriegsmarine naval units in the North sea from Sept 3rd 1939 onwards, it was actually the 19th March 1940 that the FIRST RAF bombs landed on German soil... When on 13th November 1939 the luftwaffe bombed RAF Sullom Voe a seaplane base with port facilities in the Shetland Isles (with the resultant death of a rabbit, and no hits on the 9 seaplanes or 2 RN vessels stationed there), the RAF retaliated by hitting the nazi seaplane base at Hörnum on the island of Sylt in the North Sea. These were THE VERY FIRST RAF bombs to land on German soil....5 months AFTER the first German bombs had landed on British soil.
The first British or German civilian casualty caused by the bombing of the opposing side during WW2?
16th March 1940 when German bombs hit the village of "Bridge of Waithe" near Stenness on the Orkney Islands during an attack on the Home Fleet anchorage at Scapa Flow, which killed a 27 year-old County Council employee, James Isbister (luckily, his wife, baby son, and the neighbour James was endeavouring to rescue from her bombed cottage all survived).
First British bombs to drop on the actual German mainland?
11th May 1940, when the British air ministry for the first time allowed the bombing of railway yards, communication centres and bridges west of the Rhine River to interrupt German supply lines supporting their undeclared assault into the NEUTRAL Low countries and France on 10th May 1940. Previous to this date the British air ministry in an effort to stop the inflaming of the conflict had refused to allow the RAF to drop ANY bombs on the German mainland, instead the RAF supplied the German demand for toilet paper by dropping propaganda leaflets on German cities. The RAF attacks on 11th May 1940 had also come after REPEATED attacks against RN installations on the British mainland, most notably at Rosyth near Edinburgh, Cromarty Firth & Scapa Flow all in Scotland throughout the winter of 1939/40.
First British bombs dropped EAST of the Rhine River?
On the night of 23/24th August 1940 the RAF launched an attack on Berlin. This attack directed at the Klingenberg Power Station in Eastern Berlin & Templehof airport was in RETALIATION for REPEATED luftwaffe raids on RAF Fighter Command Sector Airfields within the suburbs of Greater London throughout July and August 1940 that had already caused HUNDREDS of innocent British civilian deaths & casualties (euphemistically known nowadays as "collateral damage") this was inspite of Hitler's previous decrees that no bombs should be dropped within the boundary of Greater London. Obviously that decree had never reached the ears of Herman Goering.
German retaliation for the one night of bombing of Berlin on 23/24th August 1940? The launching of the all out assault against British cities from 7th Sept 1940 onwards, culminating in the world's first attempt to create a "firestorm" during operation "moonlight sonata" on the British city of Coventry on the night of 14/15th Nov 1940, where the luftwaffe sent 575 bombers using their world beating "X-gerat" bombing system (in the Germans own words capable of placing "target indicator" flares with an accuracy of 50 meters at 200 miles range) over the civilian city centre of Coventry dropping 550 tons of high explosive (including hundreds of "flammen" (oil) bombs) followed by over 30,000 incendiary bombs. The final death toll of that single raid? A previously unheard of 568 innocent civilians, this was in addition to the thousands of other British civilians already killed & injured in other cities across Britain over the previous 2 months.
The first British bombing raid directly targetted at German civilians?
"Operation Abigail" on the night of 16/17th December 1940, (3 months AFTER the opening of the nazi "blitz" on British cities) the Dec 16th attack by the RAF was launched against the German city of Mannheim where 100 RAF bombers dropped 100 tons of HE and 14,000 incendiaries inflicting a death toll on the German population of 34 dead and 81 injured.
Not to worry though , the RAF eventually "upped its game" and showed the Germans how to do it properly a year or two later.
Don't try to hide the fact that the Germans enjoyed dropping HE on the cities of its neighbours from the earliest days of flight. The first aerial bombs dropped in history were from a zeppelin raid on Liege in Belgium on 4th August 1914... just 11 years after the invention of powered flight. Since WW2, they've learned the lesson NOT to do it again.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Lets look at some survivor testimonies (people who actually witnessed the events of Bismarck's sinking first hand), and not some poorly researched, modern day revisionist TV nonsense made for the "hard of thinking" shall we?
From "Battleship Bismarck: A survivor's story" Written by Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's senior ranking survivor.
Page 211 "Our list to port had increased a bit while firing was going on" followed by "Around 9:30am gas and smoke began to drift through our station" This means that prior to 9:30am Bismarck was already flooding, not something that happens to a healthy seaworthy ship, in other words she was already starting to sink.
Then from an interview conducted for the highly regarded weekly history journal "Purnell's history of the second world war" in the late 1960's with Gerhard Junack (who was Bismarck's only surviving engineering officer and the survivor who supposedly enacted the "scuttle order"). He stated that...
"Somewhere about 1015 hours, I received an order over the telephone from the Chief Engineer (Korvettenkapitän (Ing.) Walter Lehmann) to 'Prepare the ship for sinking.' That was the last order I received on the Bismarck. Soon after that, all transmission of orders collapsed."
Heading back to the account of Mullenheim-Rechberg, on Page 212 he states that (before 10:00am) "I was using all the telephone circuits and calling all over the place in an effort to find out as much as possible about the condition of the ship. I got only one answer. I reached the messenger in the damage control centre and asked "who has and where is the command of the ship? Are there new orders in effect?".... The man said he was in a great hurry. He told me that everyone had abandoned the damage control centre, adding that he was the last one in the room and had to get out... then he hung up".
This vain search for contact & information over the Bismarck's internal comms happened BEFORE 10:00am which throws some mild doubt on Junack's testimony where he says he was contacted by the chief engineer who supposedly gave him the "scuttle order" over the phone at 10:15am... Hmmmmm.
If taken at face value these survivor testimonies show that there was at least a 45 minute gap between Bismarck starting to sink and the first mention of a "scuttle order" being given. Even if Bismarck's crew had done nothing, Bismarck was going to sink, and if the beaten crew want to help the RN, then all the better... But face it, Bismarck's crew weren't going to scuttle a perfectly seaworthy ship in the middle of the storm tossed North Atlantic of their own free will, it was only for the fact that the RN had already dismantled Bismarck and initiated the sinking process. In other words in every sense the sinking of Bismarck was the result of actions dictated by the Royal Navy.
Anything else is just hurt German pride, bolstered by modern day delusional wehraboos. Germany was well known for trying to hide its national humiliations, such as when they scuttled their "grand fleet" at the end of WW1, like illogically saying "We lost.. but you didn't win", or a pathetic "You didn't beat us because we killed ourselves first" sort of idiocy.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@helloScuffed Yes, the Poles fought well, they should have done, all the "average" Polish pilots had already been killed or captured over the previous year, so only the most skillful and resourceful Poles had filtered through to the UK. They were not some genetically bred "super pilots", they had simply had much more combat experience than the vast majority of British pilots at the time of the battle. Check out kill tallies at wars end, you'll see an even distribution amongst the nations. Plus dont forget the majority of the highest scorers during the battle were British, its only to be expected, we comprised 80% of Fighter Command..
"303 shot down 126 aircraft". You missed out 1 important word there "claimed". Do some research about the battle, 303's "confirmed" kill tally was 58.5 kills, of which 17 were by the man you mentioned, the Czech "lone wolf" pilot Josef František. I'm not suggesting that the Poles were lying, ALL squadrons had inflated kill tallies, due to confusion in combat, multiple claims on the same kill etc. And I freely acknowledge that even when the "confirmed squadron tally" scorecard is viewed, 303 Sqd still came out on top.
I understand that the Poles are rightfully proud of their fighting prowess and determination (just as I am obviously proud of us Brits), I don't hide or deny the Poles contribution, indeed EVERY year at the remembrance day parades I've attended I see honours and tributes to the Poles specifically (but few if any made to the other nationalities), I just hate to see the facts distorted, to benefit one nation at another expense.
Keep it real madet, keep it real.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
IF any "scuttling" actually took place then all that was scuttled was a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken and penetrated in several places, her command staff physically obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater, a thousand of her crew dead, and further hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All that any scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer AFTER he has been punched senseless by a more skillful & powerful opponent, and only a deluded child would say, "the victor didn't win because his opponent killed himself before he lost.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off by the victor and handed back to him on a plate.
If she actually was scuttled by her own crew to "make the big boys leave her alone" then Imagine the ignominy of being forced to commit suicide by your opponent?
2
-
On a sunny afternoon in April 1915, outside the Belgian city of Ypres, the wind began blowing in the direction the German troops wanted – toward the French lines. German soldiers set up over 5,000 barrels of chlorine gas along their position, and let loose a rolling cloud of thick, yellow death. More than 6,000 French troops died in what was the first systematic use of poison gas on the battlefield. Its effectiveness caught even the Germans off guard. Willi Siebert, a German soldier, noted in his diary, “When we got to the French lines, the trenches were empty, but in a half mile the bodies of French soldiers were everywhere.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
A lot of people in the UK are getting TIRED of CONSTANT current day Polish bitching and insults directed at Britain for perceived historical "betrayal" as was taught to the Polish people for 45 years after WW2 by the communist authorities.
They seem to have utterly NO idea that they OWE their ENTIRE current existence to the British Empire ALONE.
What do they imagine would have happened to Poland if Britain and France did as the ENTIRE rest of the world did in 1939 and completely IGNORED the nazi / soviet dismemberment of Poland in 1939? Or if the isolated British Isles had instead decided to seek an armistice with the nazis after the fall of France in 1940?
Let me tell you what would have happened. Today Poland would not exist. It would simply be a footnote in modern history books, a former nation that would now be divided between nazi Prussia and the "General Government" region of the nazi Empire. The former Polish cities would now be "Germanised" and each would STILL today have swastikas flying above them, and most chillingly of all, the likes of Sobibor, Chelmno, Belzec, Treblinka, Majdanek & Auschwitz would STILL be operating and belching human ashes into formerly Polish skies.
Please give over with the almost CONSTANT insults at the UK, the nation that made a sacrifice of 460,000 of it's citizen's lives, which ENTIRELY bankrupted itself and lost its empire ALL in the selfless effort to prevent a nazi domination of Europe, and saved your asses from extinction.
Best wishes to all intelligent, decent Poles from the UK. To all the idiot Polish commenters please leave your messages of thanks & gratitude to your saviours below.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The Fairey Swordfish were designed & built in Britain from 1935 onwards, originally for the Greek navy, But when trialled prior to delivery they were so capable that the Royal Navy bought them instead. They were biplanes for a very good reason. At the time they were designed existing aircraft engines were of relatively low power (especially for the British fleet air arm which was low down on the engine "priority list" at the time) so to enable a carrier aircraft to carry aloft heavy loads needed a large wing area. Their biplane wing area was SO great that they could take off fully loaded WITHOUT the use of a carrier's catapult. This meant that in the stormy North Atlantic where the Royal Navy mainly intended to operate them, instead of being forced to take off at the carrier's bows (where the catapults are) and which is the part of a ship that rises and falls by the greatest amount in heavy seas, the Swordfish could take of from the middle of the carrier's decks close to the bridge where the pitching and rolling was the least.
It was for this reason in May 1941 that they were able to take off from HMS Ark Royal to attack Bismarck when the Ark Royal was struggling through an Atlantic gale in MOUNTAINOUS seas, with her bows rising and falling by nearly 60ft !!! Try to imagine how terrifying it must have been for the brave young crews flying them in those conditions. Those weather conditions would have prevented all other allied carrier aircraft of the era from flying and instead seen them safely lashed down inside the hangar deck.
They were also incredibly adaptable and throughout WW2 they were adapted to carry, bombs, depth charges, torpedoes, extra fuel tanks and even eight anti ship rockets as well as the world's very first naval airborne radars that we're talking about. They are widely regarded to have ended the war as the aircraft with the GREATEST amount of enemy shipping tonnage sunk, and were HUGELY loved by their crews.
They WERE to have been replaced mid war by a succesor, the Fairey Albacore, but the "stringbag" (as the Swordfish were affectionately known) were so ubiquitous that they outlasted the Albacore in service.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
In a November 1943 report to Congress, President Roosevelt said of British supplies provided to the US via "Reverse Land-lease"
... the expenditures made by the British Commonwealth of Nations for reverse lend-lease aid furnished to the United States, and of the expansion of this program so as to include exports of materials and foodstuffs for the account of United States agencies from the United Kingdom and the British colonies, emphasizes the contribution which the British Commonwealth has made to the defense of the United States while taking its place on the battle fronts. It is an indication of the extent to which the British have been able to pool their resources with ours so that the needed weapon may be in the hands of that soldier—whatever may be his nationality—who can at the proper moment use it most effectively to defeat our common enemies.
While in April 1944 the US Congress was briefed by the US Foreign Economic Administrator, Leo T Crowley;
"Just as the RAF's operations against Germany and the invasion coasts would not have been possible on their present scale without lend-lease so the United States Eighth and Ninth air forces daylight missions from Britain would not have been possible without reverse lend-lease. Our Fortresses and Liberators take off from huge air bases built, equipped and serviced under reverse lend-lease at a cost to them of hundreds of millions of dollars. Many of our pilots fly Spitfires built in England, many more are flying American fighter planes powered by British Rolls-Royce Merlin engines, turned over to us by the British. And many of the supplies needed by our Air Force are procured for us without cost by reverse lend-lease. In fact our armed forces in Britain, ground as well as air, receive as reverse lend-lease, with no payment by us, one third of all the supplies and equipment they currently require, Britain furnishes 90% of their medical supplies and in spite of her food shortage, 20% of their food."
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Sounds like my upbringing, Roof over your head, Food on the table, Clothes on your back. That's how to live... forget your alcohol/smokes/drugs/streaming TV and the rest of the shit... get the basics covered, discipline yourself, keep your shit in order, ditch those who don't do likewise and guess what? Life's not too bad when you get all that done.
"They don't seem to be educating the kids as well as they should"... 2024 - "Right children, today we're going to learn about all 372 genders".
If you're 18 and not a socialist (democrat), then you haven't got a heart.
If you're 60 and not a conservative (republican), you haven't got a brain.
Unfortunately now ALL mainstream political parties have been bought and paid for by corporate globalism, and now simply exist to make the rest of us THINK we have some form of "say" in what goes on.
2
-
I thought I'd create a simple "visual aid" in order to assist people learning about the history of the battle of Britain. There is much ongoing debate about the nationalities and proportions of RAF fighter pilots who took part in the battle, with occasionally a furtive aspect which attempts to portray the battle as a victory of "mostly Foreign pilots". Below is an accurate graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940.
Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the actual number of pilots from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%)
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%)
🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%)
🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%)
🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%)
🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%)
(And just to preempt any wandering idiot lefty "Identity warriors" from protesting about "The lack of credit given to the black pilots who fought in the battle of Britain"... the pilots from South Africa, Rhodesia & the Caribbean were all of white descent).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Instead of talking such bollocks why not go and do some reading. Look I'll even save you the trouble and give you a rundown of reality instead of the nosense you've been told by lefties.
With regard to the non-appearance of Polish forces during the "1946 Victory parade" the problem lay SQUARELY with POLAND. The first invites sent out by the UK Labour Govt of Clement Attlee to ALL the nations who had fought for the Allied cause during WW2 (INCLUDING Poland, USSR & Yugoslavia) were sent out weeks in advance of the parade. The Polish invite in particular was quite understandably delivered to the Polish "Provisional Government of National Unity" ( the "TRJN" or Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) based in Warsaw, which was the OFFICIAL Polish govt as recognised by the international community in the form of the "United Nations", and NOT just by Britain alone, the TRJN was the same govt that it was intended the London based Polish nationalist Govt in exile would become an intrinsic part of, as agreed to by ALL sides at the Yalta conference in Feb 1945.... (although the soviets subsequently saw to it that this never actually happened).
This invite sent to Warsaw immediately raised a storm of protest with the Polish nationalist govt in exile based in London who, with some justification, felt they had been sidelined in this matter, their anger was supported by many British MPs and members of the British public.
With only days left before the parade was due to take place, and with no reply or even acknowledgement of the British invite from the OFFICIAL Polish TRJN govt in Warsaw, the British govt then belatedly sent out a SECOND INVITE to the Polish Govt in Exile in London, (as well as directly to individual senior Polish service personnel), but as one united group they CHOSE to shun the invites to register their anger and disgust at being treated as "second fiddle" to the Warsaw govt.
And the final Ignominy? The Warsaw TRJN govt never answered or even acknowledged the original invite from the UK (as neither did the USSR or Yugoslavia) and never attended the parade either.
As you can see the Polish "non appearance" was solely down to a poisonous bitter mix of political hatred (from Warsaw) and hubris (from the London Poles), and NOTHING to do with this imaginary "Poles weren't invited to the parade" BS. As I've described above the Polish nation was actually the ONLY allied nation to receive TWO invites to the parade.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Mark seems to believe that the Allies, and Britain in particular initiated the bombing of civilians.
Lets look at some other facts....
The VERY first bombs to fall on the land of EITHER country during WW2?
The Luftwaffe attack on RAF Sullom Voe in the Shetland Islands on 13th November 1939. The RAF RESPONDED by dropping their VERY FIRST bombs on German soil by attacking the German seaplane base on the island of Sylt in the North sea on 19th March 1940, FOUR MONTHS after the first of repeated German air attacks on RAF and Royal Navy bases on the British mainland. Prior to the RAF's attack on Sylt in March 1940, they had been prohibited by the British government from dropping ANY bombs on German soil whatsoever, instead preferring to avoid civilian casualties by supplying the German demand for toilet paper and dropping propaganda leaflets over German cities instead.
The first civilian casualty of either Britain or Germany?
On 16th March 1940 a Mr James Isbister was killed in the village of Brig o' Waithe in the Orkney islands during a luftwaffe attack on Scapa Flow. The first RAF bombs to land on the German mainland fell on May 11th 1940, and were likewise ostensibly directed at military targets such as Bridges and railyards west of the river Rhine to disrupt the supply of the German armies then attacking France and the NEUTRAL Low countries. Both sides in striking designated non civilian targets regularly caused what are quaintly known as "collateral civilian casualties" (Remember while we're discussing the comparison of Great Britain and Germany we're ignoring the direct aerial assaults of the Germans on prewar Spain & Polish towns and cities in the east and the bombing of Rotterdam and the aerial attacks executed against the roads of France clogged with hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing from the invading German armies in the west).
The first large scale infliction of civilian casualties between Germans and the British?
(once again we're disregarding the bombing by Germany of other nation's civilians, and concentrating on their attacks solely against Britain) During the second phase of the "battle of Britain" the Luftwaffe attacked multiple RAF fighter stations within the boundary of Greater London such as RAF Biggin Hill, Hornchurch, Kenley & Northolt through the first 2 weeks of August 1940. During these attacks HUNDREDS of "collateral" civilian deaths were inflicted on the British populace. On the night of 23/24th August 1940 the RAF once again RESPONDED to these German air attacks by launching their FIRST bombing of targets within a city, by attacking Templehof airport and Klingenberg Power Station in the suburbs of Berlin. Again with a relatively small number of German civilian casualties.
This precipitated the first widespread air attacks on civilian targets when the German launched their "blitz" against London and 50 other British towns and cities from 7th Spet 1940 onwards, culminating in the first attempt by humanity to create an "aerial firestorm", that being the Luftwaffe bombing of Coventry on the night of 13/14th November 1940.
Once again the British RESPONDED by launching their VERY FIRST aerial attack directed intentionally at German civilians, that being "Operation Abigail" the RAF attack on the German city of Mannheim on the night of 16/17th Dec 1940. (For comparisons sake the Luftwaffe murdered 568 innocent British cvilians during their attack on Coventry, the British for their part murdered 34 innocent German civilians during their bombing of Mannheim).
Do you see the pattern that has formed? Initial (and repeated) luftwaffe aerial attacks on Britain that caused a British response & escalation.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Seems you were taught wrong lad. The nazis launched air attacks to destroy the RAF as a precursor to invasion. When they had their arses kicked, like spoilt fucking children they then attempted to terror bomb the country into submission, as they had already done at Guernica, Weilun, Warsaw, Rotterdam, before going on to attempt the same thing at Belgrade, Leningrad, Stalingrad and countless other soviet cities.
Fucking the nazis off was the best thing the UK could have done, This idiot imagines "peace on German terms" with a nazi puppet govt, all males of working age deported to the reich to be slaved to death in nazi armaments factories and concentration camps in the Cotswolds and Pennines.
Its hard not to gag at the stench of nazi apologist in this channel. Pity you never got to see the insides of one of your political heroes death camps. Mind you by the sound of it, you'd have been marching round the camp in field gray uniform.
2
-
2
-
2
-
Are you thinking straight? You start by saying that the "British considered Hood the best battleship in the 1920s and 30s", and then compare it to the South Dakotas, the earliest of which was commisioned in 1942? Also while Nagato exceeded Hood in firepower, prior to her 1937 refit she was not nearly as well armoured as Hood, while at 26 knots top speed she was positively LETHARGIC compared to Hood, who with her 6 knot speed advantage could choose whether or when to engage Nagato.
If you'd like an individual example of the esteem with which HMS Hood was held by other nations, look no further than the account of Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, the Bismarck's senior ranking survivor, and her 4th gunnery officer. Here's an excerpt of his account of the start of the battle of Denmark Strait.
"The British ships were turning slightly to port, the lead ship showing an extremely long forecastle and two heavy twin turrets. On the telephone I heard Albrecht (Another of Bismarck's gunnery officers) shout, "The HOOD...... it's the HOOD!" (his capitalisation), It was an unforgettable moment. There she was, the famous warship, once the largest in the world, that had been the "terror" of so many of our war games."
Later he made these remarks following Hood's demise....
"At first the Hood was nowhere to be seen: in her place was a colossal pillar of black smoke reaching into the sky. Gradually at the foot of the pillar, I made out the bow of the battle cruiser projecting upwards at an angle, a sure sign that she had broken in two. Then I saw something I could hardly believe: A flash of orange coming from her forward guns! Although her fighting days had ended, the Hood was firing a last salvo. I felt a great respect for those men over there"
Sounds as if the Kriegsmarine and her gunnery experts were more impressed by HMS Hood than you appear to be.
2
-
2
-
Neil Oliver.... I liked him in "Coast", but as his documentaries became more frequent on TV it was hard not to notice that in ALL of them he preferred to have the camera focussed more on his flowing mane than on the particular subject matter he was talking about, and so over the years he began to slide down my list of "watchable" presenters on TV, and had largely been written off in our household. BUT...... Over the last couple of years he mysteriously appeared less and less on mainstream TV, and now its become clear why.... The man has got spirit....the courage of his convictions.... he refuses to regurigate the narrative thats ENDLESSLY parroted by the vast majority of worthless, globalist financed "slebs" in the media, and he possesses a very rare attribute, that is the power of critical, independent thought.
Good god almighty !!! I never thought I'd utter these words, but Neil is in danger of becoming a NATIONAL TREASURE !!! Please Neil, keep on with the EXCELLENT work you're doing.... I've never been afraid of airing my own views even when contrary to the vast majority shared in public, but someone with more access to media channels is worth their weight in GOLD. The more divergent opinions are heard in public the more we free ourselves from the globalist hegemony thats sweeping the world.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I thought I'd create a simple "visual aid" in order to assist people learning about the history of the battle of Britain. There is much ongoing debate about the nationalities and proportions of RAF fighter pilots who took part in the battle, with occasionally a furtive aspect which attempts to portray the battle as a victory of "mostly foreign pilots". Below is a graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940.
Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the ACTUAL number of aircrew from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented.
The figures are taken from the RAF records of the awards of the highly coveted "Battle of Britain clasp" to the British 1939-45 Campaign Star. Which was SCRUPULOUSLY only awarded to RAF & Fleet Air Arm aircrew who flew at least one active sortie in the UK in any RAF fighter aircraft between 10th July 1940 and 31st Oct 1940.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%)
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%)
🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%)
🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%)
🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%)
🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%)
(And just to preempt any wandering idiot lefty "Identity warriors" from protesting about "The lack of credit given to the black pilots who fought in the battle of Britain"... the pilots from South Africa, Rhodesia & the Caribbean were all of white descent).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
More of the same uninformed nonsense. Here's some more of the "history that is never talked about".
1. Britain still thanks Poland at every remembrance day parade across the country to this day. We appreciate the 58.5 confirmed kills that 303 Sqd contributed to the 2900 luftwaffe aircraft destroyed during the Battle of Britain, incl the 17 scored by the Czechoslovakian ace Josef František who flew with 303 Sqd. Also take note that 303 sqd were not "all Polish pilots", as well as Josef František I've already mentioned, the squadron commander and most of the flight commanders were British during the battle of Britain.
2. With regard to the 1946 Victory parade when it came to Britain handing out the national invites to all of the countries that had fought on the side of the Allies in WW2, The British Labour government of Clement Attlee handed the Polish invitation to the Warsaw based Polish provisional government of national unity (which was after all the official government of Poland, as recognised by the United Nations). The now effectively powerless & stateless nationalist Polish government in exile based in London took great offence at their sidelining in this matter, and raised a torrent of indignation that was backed by many British MPs and ordinary people. A few days before the parade was due to take place a belated invitation was sent both to the Polish Govt in Exile in London as well as directly to various Polish generals who had fought with the allies, ALL of who felt so disgusted with the perceived disrespect shown by the INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY (I.E being made to play "second fiddle" to the official Warsaw Polish government) that they CHOSE not to attend the parade. And the final ignomy? The Soviet backed Warsaw government neither acknowledged the British invite, or attended the parade either.
Britain sacrificed 450000 of her citizens in a war started to aid Poland which, due to her quick conquest, evolved into a meatgrinder of a war to topple her oppressors. At war's end it was the treachery of Britain's "enemy's enemy" (Josef Stalin) that strangled any possibility of a postwar democratic Poland. The western allies were reluctant to start WW3 in a central Europe already bled white by 6 years of murderous tyranny and warfare, a WW3 entailing probably millions more deaths that would have been necessary to remove the 12.4 million strong red army from the countries of Eastern Europe.
Oops, Bi Ling !!! You've forgotten to tell us how YOU would have removed the 12.4 million strong red army from central & Eastern Europe?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Yes after the battle of Britain, the British Air Ministry asked ACM Dowding to write an authorised history of the battle of Britain. He duly did so and provided it to the air council. Such was the internal emnity within the RAF "top brass" towards him, that his account was rejected and the Air ministry commisioned their own account, in which ACM Dowding's name was not mentioned even ONCE. On reading the finished Document, Churchill, who was a tacit supporter of Hugh Dowding, returned it to the minister for air, Archibald Sinclair annotated with the following comment :
“The jealousies and cliquism which have led to the committing of this offence are a discredit to the Air Ministry, and I do not think any other Service Department would have been guilty of such a piece of work. What would have been said if … the Admiralty had told the tale of Trafalgar and left Lord Nelson out of it?”
But Churchill was also aware of the range of powerful figures within the RAF & govt that were arrayed against ACM Dowding, and also that he was overdue for retirement, and so acquiesced to his dismissal and subsequent posting to the US.
But to say he "was not recognised" is taking it a bit too far. After the battle of Britain Hugh Dowding was elevated to the English peerage with the title "Baron Dowding of Bentley Priory" on 2 June 1943, the first airman to be raised to the peerage since Lord Trenchard in 1930.
He also had various orders of nobility bestowed on him... these included being inducted to the
Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the Bath
Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order
Companion of the Order of St Michael and St George
And after his death his cremated remains were buried below the "Battle of Britain Memorial Window" in Westminster Abbey.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Seems you're forgetting the periscope alert that forced the RN rescue efforts to be brought to an early conclusion.
You're obviously not aware that Bismarck had for at least 24 hours prior to her sinking been transmitting beacon signals on known U-boat frequencies, and if you were aware of the war diary of U-74, you would see that she reported that she was in the vicinity of the sinking as it took place.
If you're so angry about sailors, lost at sea, and abandoned to slow, agonising, lonely deaths, You should also read about the contemporary German Admiral Wilhelm Marschall, who on 6th June 1940, after his ships Scharnhorst & Gneisenau sank the British aircraft carrier HMS Glorious and her two accompanying destroyers HMS Acasta and Ardent, chose not to make even the slightest attempt to mount ANY rescue operations even though there were no allied ships or submarines nearby, his completely callous decision consigned 1566 Royal Navy sailors to the same agonising lonely death from hypothermia and drowning as befell the Bismarck survivors, the difference being that Capt Martin of Dorsetshire had just cause to abandon his ongoing rescue efforts due to nearby enemy units, where Admiral Marschall had NO reason to abandon 1566 sailors to their deaths.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The British saved THEMSELVES....... INSPITE of the US as much as BECAUSE of the US.
If the US had REALLY wanted to "help Britain" in its hour of need, then instead of bleeding the British empire dry and causing its collapse, they could have for example sold a production license for Tetra Ethyl Lead (or TEL - The compound required for the production of hi-octane fuels) to Britain when we applied to purchase one from the "Standard Oil of Jersey City Company" prewar.... Instead they & the US Govt refused to sell one to "their British cousins"... So much for the nonsense idea of a "special relationship" between the UK & US.
Standard Oil and the US Govt had NO qualms though about providing the exact same licence to the nazis when they applied to purchase one prewar. But when it came to Britain the US preferred to strip the British of ALL their gold, cutting edge technology and military bases around the world during the British "hour of need" in return for a supply of amongst other things, US produced hi-octane fuel.
Where there nazi sympathies in the Standard Oil boardroom and in some parts of the US Govt? The truth is so unsavoury were the business practices of the US "Standard Oil" company (such as seeking furtive routes and brokering shady deals to supply nazi Germany with fuel and oil via neutral nations during the war) that it's activities were investigated and closely monitored by the US Govt... but only AFTER the they had been DRAGGED into WW2 in Dec 1941 by the German declaration of war on the US!!!
The US "business community" engaged in VERY profitable business dealings with BOTH sides throughout WW2. US corporations such as Ford, General Motors, US Standard Oil, IBM, Kodak, Chase Bank (to name but a few) carried on "business as usual" with nazi Germany THROUGHOUT WW2.
Ford's auto production facility in Cologne and General Motor's Opel subsiduary plant in Berlin were both busy working 24/7 THROUGHOUT WW2 furnishing the nazis with approximately 60% of the Wehrmacht's military transportation needs, as well as a sizeable chunk of the Luftwaffe's aero engine requirements... all the better for attacking Britain with eh, and all the while providing US companies with BILLIONS of dollars in profit, and the US govt with millions of dollars of tax revenue
The "ALuminum COrporation of America" (ALCOA) for instance supplied SO much aircraft grade aluminium to nazi Germany in the late 1930s and into the early 1940s that it actually caused shortfalls within the US government's own military aircraft production schedules during the same period, so much so that in June 1941 the situation prompted Harold Ickes, US Secretary of the Interior, to go on record as saying “If America loses this coming war, it can thank the Aluminum Corporation of America”.
The US sat profiteering from BOTH sides of the European war... until one of their customers DECLARED WAR ON THEM and dragged them kicking and screaming into the conflict against their will.
With "friends" like the US who needs enemies?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@gabbyjonson3498 Lets look at some Bismarck survivor testimonies (people who actually witnessed the events of Bismarck's sinking first hand), and not some poorly researched, modern day revisionist nonsense made for the "hard of thinking" shall we?
From the account of Bismarck's final battle taken from "Battleship Bismarck: A survivor's story" written by Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's senior ranking survivor.
Page 211 "Our list to port had increased a bit while firing was going on...." the following paragraph then states "At around 9:30am gas and smoke began to drift through our station" This means that prior to 9:30am Bismarck was already flooding, not something that happens to a healthy seaworthy ship, in other words she was already starting to sink.
Then from an interview conducted for the highly regarded weekly history journal "Purnell's history of the second world war" in the late 1960's with Gerhard Junack (who was Bismarck's only surviving engineering officer and the survivor who supposedly enacted the "scuttle order"). He stated that...
"Somewhere about 1015 hours, I received an order over the telephone from the Chief Engineer (Korvettenkapitän (Ing.) Walter Lehmann) to 'Prepare the ship for sinking.' That was the last order I received on the Bismarck. Soon after that, all transmission of orders collapsed."
Heading back to the account of Mullenheim-Rechberg, on Page 212 he states that prior to 10:00am "I was using all the telephone circuits and calling all over the place in an effort to find out as much as possible about the condition of the ship. I got only one answer. I reached the messenger in the damage control centre and asked "who has and where is the command of the ship? Are there new orders in effect?".... The man said he was in a great hurry. He told me that everyone had abandoned the damage control centre, adding that he was the last one in the room and had to get out... then he hung up".
This vain search for contact & information over the Bismarck's internal comms happened BEFORE 10:00am which throws some mild doubt on Junack's testimony where he says he was contacted by the chief engineer who supposedly gave him the "scuttle order" over the phone at 10:15am... Hmmmmm.
If taken at face value these survivor testimonies show that there was at least a 45 minute gap between Bismarck starting to sink and the first mention of a "scuttle order" being given. Even if Bismarck's crew had done nothing, Bismarck was going to sink, and if the beaten crew want to help the RN, then all the better... But face it, Bismarck's crew weren't going to scuttle a perfectly seaworthy ship in the middle of the storm tossed North Atlantic of their own free will, it was only for the fact that the RN had already destroyed Bismarck and initiated the sinking process. In other words in every sense the sinking of Bismarck was the result of actions dictated by the Royal Navy.
Anything else is just hurt German pride, bolstered by modern day delusional wehraboos. Germany was well known for trying to hide its national humiliations, such as when they scuttled their "grand fleet" at the end of WW1, like illogically saying "We lost.. but you didn't win", or a pathetic "You didn't beat us because we killed ourselves first" sort of idiocy.
2
-
2
-
I only need to provide a SINGLE piece of verifiable information to prove my point. What better than the order issued by none other the Adolf Hitler himself? Below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler's "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the "Berghof" (Hitler's "holiday home" in Bavaria) on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW).
The directive was transmitted over secure landlines encrypted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to initmidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan was academic. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
When devious nazi fanbois and other assorted uninformed loons say "Hitler never wanted war with Britain and France" they ALWAYS miss off the part that says "until he was ready for it on his OWN terms".
Because of course Hitler laid all his hopes on being left to expand the nazi empire EASTWARDS in peace, assimilate his new found conquests with their collective economies and resources, further build up his military power and only THEN conquer Britain & France, as they had already attempted TWICE BEFORE in the previous 70 years, once in 1870 and again in 1914, the THIRD attempt in 1940 was precipitated by the British and French not sitting and waiting for it to happen on Hitler's terms. Have you never wondered why Hitler's regime was called the "THIRD Reich" before?.
If we had've waited the outcome would have been much MUCH different from the destruction of nazism in 1945. Not confronting Hitler in 1939 would have resulted with Britain by the late 1940s onwards having:
A puppet nazi government, a nazi supporting King Edward VIII restored to the throne, and the UK as a nazi satellite state.
Extermination camps in the Cotswolds, Pennines & Scottish Highlands.
SS Einsatzgruppen stalking the shires looking to find "undesirables" to summarily execute.
All UK males of working age being deported to the reich to be slaved to death in nazi armaments factories or infrastructure projects.
And now, slimy nazi fanbois and other devious loons want the uninformed to think that letting Hitler conduct his plans undisturbed would mean that we would have a Britain today filled with Rose cottages, warm beer, bar skittles, Morris dancers & village cricket.
How utterly devious those people are, people with greater awareness of the situation don't fall for their nazi apologist nonsense.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Dear oh dear.
Bismarck's crew actually scuttled a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken and penetrated in several places, her command staff obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater, a thousand of her crew dead, and further hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All the scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer when he has been punched senseless by a more skillful & powerful opponent, and only a deluded child would say, "the victor didn't win, his opponent gave in before he lost.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off and handed back to him on a plate.
Imagine the ignominy of being forced to commit suicide by your opponent?
2
-
@TinaHollner Lets look at some survivor testimonies (Y'know, people who actually witnessed the events of Bismarck's sinking first hand), and not some poorly researched, modern day revisionist nonsense purveyed by a hard of thinking "wehraboo" shall we?
From "Battleship Bismarck: A survivor's story" Written by Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's senior ranking survivor.
Page 211 "Our list to port had increased a bit while firing was going on" followed by "Around 9:30am gas and smoke began to drift through our station" This means that prior to 9:30am Bismarck was already flooding, not something that happens to a healthy seaworthy ship, in other words she was already starting to sink.
Then from an interview conducted for the highly regarded weekly history journal "Purnell's history of the second world war" in the late 1960's with Gerhard Junack (who was Bismarck's only surviving engineering officer and the survivor who supposedly enacted the "scuttle order"). He stated that...
"Somewhere about 1015 hours, I received an order over the telephone from the Chief Engineer (Korvettenkapitän (Ing.) Walter Lehmann) to 'Prepare the ship for sinking.' That was the last order I received on the Bismarck. Soon after that, all transmission of orders collapsed."
Heading back to the account of Mullenheim-Rechberg, on Page 212 he states that (before 10:00am) "I was using all the telephone circuits and calling all over the place in an effort to find out as much as possible about the condition of the ship. I got only one answer. I reached the messenger in the damage control centre and asked "who has and where is the command of the ship? Are there new orders in effect?".... The man said he was in a great hurry. He told me that everyone had abandoned the damage control centre, adding that he was the last one in the room and had to get out... then he hung up".
This near fruitless seach for contact & information over Bismarck's internal comms system happened BEFORE 10:00am which throws some mild doubt on Junack's testimony where he says he was contacted by the chief engineer who supposedly gave him the "scuttle order" over the phone at 10:15am... Hmmmmm.
But regardless of that these survivor testimonies show that there was at least a 45 minute gap between Bismarck starting to sink and the first mention of a "scuttle order" being given. Even if Bismarck's crew had done nothing, Bismarck was going to sink, and if the beaten crew want to help the RN, then all the better... But face it, Bismarck's crew weren't going to scuttle a perfectly seaworthy ship in the middle of the storm tossed North Atlantic of their own free will, it was only for the fact that the RN had already dismantled Bismarck and initiated the sinking process. In other words in every sense the sinking of Bismarck was the result of actions dictated by the Royal Navy.
Anything else is just hurt German pride, bolstered by modern day delusional wehraboos. Germany was well known for trying to hide its national humiliations, such as when they scuttled their "grand fleet" at the end of WW1, like illogically saying "We lost.. but you didn't win", or a pathetic "You didn't beat us because we killed ourselves before you killed us" sort of idiocy.
Hopefully you're not too publicly embarrassed that first hand accounts of the action don't bear out your fantasy story.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
So much the same as the Greeks, Persians, Romans, Egyptians, Vikings, Normans, Mongols, Ottomans, Khmers, Aztecs, Mayans, Incas and each and every Eurpoean power over the last 500 years then.
P.S Please tell me... out of ALL the empires that have existed through the last 3 or 4 millenia of human history which was the ONLY one that outlawed human slavery? Please leave your answer below.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@TTTT-oc4eb 1. A full salvo of main gun fire from a battleship is analogous to a scatter of lead shot from a shotgun. During the battle of Denmark Strait, the Bismarck aimed at Hood from 8-9 nautical miles away. At that range the 38 cm SK C/34 (Bismarck's main armament) had a CEP (circular error probability - effectively the radius of a circle within which 50% of its shots would fall) of 100m. That means that if 8 of Bismarck's 15in guns fired at a single point 8-9 nm away, 4 of her shells would be expected to land (with completely random distribution) within an ellipse (think of it as a stretched circle, due to the angle of fall of the shells) measuring approximately 200m (660ft) wide, (or to put it another way 76% of HMS Hood's 860ft length), by more than three thousand feet long. The other 4 shots would land even FURTHER away from the aiming point. That being the case, how can an individual shell be aimed specifically at a tiny part of HMS Hood's structure, namely the 4in HA magazine, that its believed triggered off Hood's detonation? I'll give you a hint, there's a little clue in my paragraph above....where it says "completely random distribution".
A simplified analogy is that if you prop a dartboard up 50 yards away and can consistently knock it over with a shotgun at that range then that is pretty good shooting, just as Bismarck / PE achieved during the Denmark Strait encounter.
Now you can "knock the dartboard over" all day long with the shotgun and STILL NOT hit the bullseye (magazine) with an individual pellet. As opposed to being a skillful shot by knocking over the dartboard, whether you hit the bullseye with an individual pellet is complete luck.
2. Where did you get the "Rodney didn't straddle until her 18th salvo" nonsense from? If you're just going to make complete nonsense up there's no point continuing the discussion.
As was recorded in HMS Norfolk's war diary HMS Rodney obtained hits with both her 3rd and 4th ranging salvoes at 08:48. Please refer to "Battleship BIsmarck - A Design and Operational History" (Produced by the US Naval Institute) Appendix "B" Pg 518.
3. A heavy cruiser is neither a capital ship or a "heavy unit" in a firefight against a battleship. Trying to portray an 8" cruiser as a "RN heavy unit" is simply trying to make Bismarck's final drubbing look even more one sided. Even James Cameron's description of Bismarck's battle damage illustrated the point thus "On her main belt was counted HUNDREDS of shell gouges and splashmarks, almost all of which were from secondary and cruiser hits".
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The whole paradox regarding "diversity" for me is that, while screaming it at everyone, the despots who now direct modern "global culture" appear to be intent on an ultimate aim of undermining and eventual destruction of individual and distinct national and ethnic identities & cultures. Witness the current corruption of historic western culture with african and asian material (does the reverse happen? Which would be also EQUALLY corrupting), coupled with the homogenisation of the races and nationalities via the economic migration being pushed across the globe with the accompanying undermining of effective border controls, all heading towards the eventual final production of a mocha coloured "one world population". Why not produce films about the rich and varied histories and cultures of each and every continent and race? Maybe an intelligent and thought provoking epic of the spread of the Malian empire across africa from the 13th to the 17th centuries? or the an engaging franchise set during histories within the spread of cultures of Asia, showcasing the wonders, achievements and character of each and every ethnicity?
Its like having a "world buffet" comprising of a myriad all the different flavours, colours, aromas and textures of world cuisine arrayed before us, a veritable smorgasbord of differing delights, all with something different for our palates to experience.
Then come along the corporate globalist elites shouting "we need more diversity", before sweeping the entire table clear of its individual wondrous delights, all being swept into a industrial sized cement mixer at the end of the table, where the previously truly diverse ingredients are then "blended" into an unpalatable and nondescript beige slop, before they announce to the assembled "eat up mofos, its all you've got left to eat" !!!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
This just highlights EXACTLY the lie of "multiculturalism". It has utterly NOTHING to do with "cultural diversity", instead aiming for a homogenised, distinctly individual culture free, mocca coloured population... you have only to look at the mainstream media programming to see the airwaves flooded with it. compare it to TV of just 5 or 6 years ago... and then the fuckers deny their hidden agenda.
Its like the world was a smorgasbord of different cultures, all different, all unique, with a myriad mixture of tastes, aromas, textures & colours... ALL varied & interesting and all with something to tempt the palate with.
Then along come the fucking globalist gatecrashers..... sweep that wonderful array of would cultures off the end of the table into a 45 gallon oil drum.... stick in the industrial paint stirrer, and then ladle out the nondescript brown mush to the masses.... cmon eat this shite up,... its all you're getting.
Fucking globalism.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The UK continues to honour the Poles who served in the west during WW2 to this day at each and every Remembrance day parade across the UK.... BUT the ignorance of modern day Poles as witnessed in so many of the comments in this thread is quite incredible. Their ignorance of the fact that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need" or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s. For those Ignorant modern day Poles, please feel free to thank the UK (and France) for that commitment and resolve when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
And for all current honourable Poles, best wishes from the UK.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
That's YOUR ignorance Sara. During WW2 when Britain still ruled India, 2,500,000 Indians, a large proportion of whom were Sikhs, volunteered to join the British Army of India, fought against the Japanese and Germans defending British Interests, and in doing so earned a right to be British citizens. I'm ALL for stopping this tidal wave of sub Saharan Africans and middle easterners VERY few of whom have ever fought for our benefit, or seek to abide by our rules, but the Sikhs, like the Nepalese Gurkhas are NOT a part of that grouping who have no right to be here.
2
-
2
-
Save all your "US saved Britain" BS for the uninformed. Britain saved ITSELF, INSPITE of the US as much as it did BECAUSE of the US.
If the US had REALLY wanted to "help Britain" in its "hour of need", then instead of bleeding the British empire dry and causing its collapse, they could have for example sold a production license for Tetra Ethyl Lead (or TEL - The compound required for the production of hi-octane fuels) to Britain when we applied to purchase one from the "Standard Oil of Jersey City Company" prewar.... Instead they & the US Govt refused to sell one to "their British cousins"... So much for the nonsense idea of a "special relationship" between the UK & US.
Standard Oil and the US Govt had NO qualms though about providing the exact same licence to the nazis when they applied to purchase one prewar. But when it came to Britain the US preferred to strip the British of ALL their gold, cutting edge technology and military bases around the world during the British "hour of need" in return for a supply of amongst other things, US produced hi-octane fuel.
Where there nazi sympathies in the Standard Oil boardroom and in some parts of the US Govt? The truth is so unsavoury were the business practices of the US "Standard Oil" company (such as seeking furtive routes and brokering shady deals to supply nazi Germany with fuel and oil via neutral nations during the war) that it's activities were investigated and closely monitored by the US Govt... but only AFTER the they had been DRAGGED into WW2 in Dec 1941 by the German declaration of war on the US!!!
The US "business community" engaged in VERY profitable business dealings with BOTH sides throughout WW2. US corporations such as Ford, General Motors, US Standard Oil, IBM, Kodak, Chase Bank (to name but a few) carried on "business as usual" with nazi Germany THROUGHOUT WW2.
Ford's auto production facility in Cologne and General Motor's Opel subsiduary plant in Berlin were both busy working 24/7 THROUGHOUT WW2 furnishing the nazis with approximately 60% of the Wehrmacht's military transportation needs, as well as a sizeable chunk of the Luftwaffe's aero engine requirements... all the better for attacking Britain with eh, and all the while providing US companies with BILLIONS of dollars in profit, and the US govt with millions of dollars of tax revenue
The "ALuminum COrporation of America" (ALCOA) for instance supplied SO much aircraft grade aluminium to nazi Germany in the late 1930s and into the early 1940s that it actually caused shortfalls within the US government's own military aircraft production schedules during the same period, so much so that in June 1941 the situation prompted Harold Ickes, US Secretary of the Interior, to go on record as saying “If America loses this coming war, it can thank the Aluminum Corporation of America”.
With "friends" like the US who needs enemies?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@nevyn_karres The British DID ask the French ships.
Below is the vebatim British ultimatum delivered to Adm Bruno-Marcel Gentoul at Mers-El-Kebir on the 3rd July 1940
"It is impossible for us, your comrades up to now, to allow your fine ships to fall into the power of the German or Italian enemy. We are determined to fight on until the end, and if we win, as we think we shall, we shall never forget that France was our Ally, that our interests are the same as hers, and that our common enemy is Germany. Should we conquer, we solemnly declare that we shall restore the greatness and territory of France. For this purpose, we must make sure that the best ships of the French Navy are not used against us by the common foe. In these circumstances, His Majesty’s Government have instructed me to demand that the French Fleet now at Mers-el-Kébir and Oran shall act in accordance with one of the following alternatives:
(a) Sail with us and continue the fight until victory against the Germans and Italians.
(b) Sail with reduced crews under our control to a British port. The reduced crews would be repatriated at the earliest moment. If either of these courses is adopted by you, we will restore your ships to France at the conclusion of the war or pay full compensation, if they are damaged meanwhile.
(c) Alternatively, if you feel bound to stipulate that your ships should not be used against the Germans or Italians unless these break the Armistice, then sail them with us with reduced crews, to some French port in the West Indies—Martinique for instance—where they can be demilitarised to our satisfaction, or perhaps be entrusted to the United States and remain safe until the end of the war, the crews being repatriated.
If you refuse these fair offers, I must, with profound regret, require you to sink your ships within 6 hours.
Finally, failing the above I have orders of His Majesty's Government to use whatever force may be necessary to prevent your ships us from falling into German or Italian hands."
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
If you'd like an individual example of the esteem with which HMS Hood was held by other nations, look no further than the account of Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, the Bismarck's senior ranking survivor, and her 4th gunnery officer. Here's an excerpt of his account of the start of the battle of Denmark Strait.
"The British ships were turning slightly to port, the lead ship showing an extremely long forecastle and two heavy twin turrets. On the telephone I heard Albrecht (Another of Bismarck's gunnery officers) shout, "The HOOD...... it's the HOOD!" (his capitalisation), It was an unforgettable moment. There she was, the famous warship, once the largest in the world, that had been the "terror" of so many of our war games."
Later he made these remarks following Hood's demise....
"At first the Hood was nowhere to be seen: in her place was a colossal pillar of black smoke reaching into the sky. Gradually at the foot of the pillar, I made out the bow of the battle cruiser projecting upwards at an angle, a sure sign that she had broken in two. Then I saw something I could hardly believe: A flash of orange coming from her forward guns! Although her fighting days had ended, the Hood was firing a last salvo. I felt a great respect for those men over there"
Sounds as if the Kriegsmarine and her gunnery experts were more impressed by HMS Hood than you appear to be.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Have a read of Hitler's "Fuhrer Directive 16", issued on the 16th June 1940. I've even provided the preamble for you below.
"The Führer and Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces Führer Headquarters, 16th July 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 On preparations for a landing operation against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
Of COURSE it was vital you silly left wing dupe. Hitler himself considered it important enough to smash his previously undefeated air force against the UK, and continued to do so inspite of losing nearly 1900 aircraft a and LARGE proportion of his prewar "experten" aircrews, who were PERMANENTLY removed from the German order of battle, and unable to provide much needed ground support during Barbarossa.
Without the LONE continued opposition of the British empire to nazism from June 1940 onwards, opposition which bankrupted the UK and cost her 460,000 of her citizen's lives, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps would STILL be operating on European soil today.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Jeremy-y1t I KNOW you know this already Mark, but JUST in case some unfortunate is reading your BS and is unaware of your sickening nazi fantasist credentials I shall spell it out again.
"Hitler never intended to invade the UK"......
Hitler says....
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan was academic. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I thought I'd create a simple "visual aid" in order to assist people learning about the history of the battle of Britain. There is much ongoing debate about the nationalities and proportions of RAF fighter pilots who took part in the battle, with a furtive aspect which attempts to portray the battle as a victory of "mostly Foreign pilots". Below is an accurate graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940.
Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the actual number of pilots from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%)
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%)
🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%)
🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%)
🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%)
🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%)
(And just to preempt any wandering idiot lefty "Identity warriors" from protesting about "The lack of credit given to the black pilots who fought in the battle of Britain"... the pilots from Rhodesia & the Caribbean were all of white British descent).
P.S There were NO Greek, Dutch or Danish pilots in RAF Fighter Command during the battle of Britain.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
What a complete pile of utter nonsense you've presented here.. From 3rd Sept 1939 until May 11th 1940 NO RAF bombs fell on the German mainland. Her cities were littered with propaganda leaflets, but the British air ministry forbade ANY bombing of Germany. Even German munitions factories were declared as "private property" by the British air ministry, and not permissible targets. Bomber command was not even allowed to attack German ships in port for fear of causing civilian casualties, and when the RAF attacked German naval units outside of German ports in 1939-40 (Such as in the "Jade" and "Schilling roads" outside of Wilhelmshaven in Sept 1939) they even did so in broad daylight so as to avoid the possibility of mistakenly attacking neutral civilian merchant shipping in the area. The daylight attacks on the kriegsmarine caused such terrible losses to the RAF light bomber units that they ceased to attack the German navy in the north sea.
First German bombs dropped on the British mainland?
16th October 1939 saw the very first bombs dropped on Britain when the Germans launched scattered air attacks over port and industrial facilities around the Scottish city of Edinburgh, and the RN naval base at Rosyth.
First bombs dropped by the RAF on German soil?
19th March 1940... When on 13th November 1939 the luftwaffe bombed RAF Sullom Voe a seaplane base with port facilities in the Shetland Isles (with the resultant death of a rabbit, and no hits on the 9 seaplanes or 2 RN vessels stationed there), the RAF retaliated by hitting the nazi seaplane base at Hörnum on the island of Sylt in the North Sea. These were THE VERY FIRST RAF bombs to land on German soil....5 months AFTER the first German bombs had landed on British soil.
The first British or German civilian casualty caused by the bombing of the opposing side during WW2?
16th March 1940 when German bombs hit the village of Waithe on Orkney during an attack on the Home Fleet anchorage at Scapa Flow, which killed a 27 year-old County Council employee, James Isbister (luckily, his wife, baby son, and the neighbour James was endeavouring to rescue from her bombed cottage all survived).
First British bombs to drop on the actual German mainland?
11th May 1940, when the British air ministry for the first time allowed the bombing of railway yards, communication centres and bridges west of the Rhine River as interdiction of German supply lines for the German assault into the NEUTRAL Low countries and France on 10th May 1940. Previous to this date the British air ministry in an effort to stop the spreading of the conflict had refused to allow the RAF to drop ANY bombs on the German mainland, instead the RAF supplied the German demand for toilet paper by dropping propaganda leaflets on German cities. This attack on 11th May 1940 had also come after REPEATED attacks against RN installations on the British mainland, most notably at Rosyth near Edinburgh, and the Cromarty Firth, both in Scotland throughout the winter of 1939/40.
First British bombs dropped EAST of the Rhine River?
23/24th August 1940. This attack ostensibly directed at the Klingenberg Power Station in Eastern Berlin & Templehof airport was in RETALIATION for REPEATED luftwaffe raids on RAF stations within the suburbs of Greater London throughout July and August 1940 that had already caused HUNDREDS of innocent British civilian deaths & casualties (euphemistically known nowadays as "collateral damage") this was inspite of Hitler's previous decrees that no bombs should be dropped within the boundaries of Greater London. Obviously that decree had never reached the ears of Herman Goering.
German retaliation for the one night of bombing of Berlin on 23/24th August 1940? The launching of the all out assault against British cities from 7th sept 1940 onwards, culminating in the world's first attempt to create a firestorm during operation "moonlight sonata" on the British city of Coventry on the night of 14/15th Nov 1940, where the luftwaffe sent 575 bombers using their world beating "X-gerat" bombing system (in the Germans own words capable of placing "target indicator" flares with an accuracy of 50 meters at 200 miles range) over the civilian city centre of Coventry dropping 550 tons of high explosive (including hundreds of "flammen" (oil) bombs) followed by over 30,000 incendiary bombs. The final death toll of that single raid? A previously unheard of 568 innocent civilians, this was in addition to the thousands of other British civilians already killed in other cities across Britain over the previous 2 months.
The first British bombing raid directly targetted at German civilians? "Operation Abigail" on the night of 16/17th December 1940, (3 months AFTER the opening of the nazi "blitz" on British cities) the Dec 16th attack by the RAF was launched against the German city of Mannheim where 100 RAF bombers dropped 100 tons of HE and 14,000 incendiaries inflicting a death toll on the German population of 34 dead and 81 injured.
Not to worry though , the RAF eventually "upped its game" and showed the Germans how to do it properly a year or two later.
Don't try to hide the fact that the Germans enjoyed dropping HE on the cities of its neighbours from the earliest days of flight. The first aerial bombs dropped in history were from a zeppelin raid on Bruges in Belgium in August 1914... just 11 years after the invention of powered flight. Since WW2, they've learned the lesson NOT to do it again.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler's "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the "Berghof" (Hitler's "holiday home" in Bavaria), on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW).
The directive was transmitted over secure landlines encrypted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to initmidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
My father served onboard HMS Dorsetshire during these events and took part in the rescues of the 86 Bismarck survivors picked up by Dorsetshire, one of the survivors who had been picked up, a badly injured German sailor named Gerhard Lüttich, died on the operating table in Dorsetshire's sick bay that evening. The following day (28th May 1941) his body was "committed to the deep" with full military honours provided by both his German comrades AND sailors from HMS Dorsetshire together with a Royal Marine bugler. The remaining crew were treated EXCELLENTLY by the crews of HMS Dorsetshire & HMS Maori, being given the same bunking arrangements as the crew (under guard of course), and provided with 3 hot meals a day for the 4 days they were on board. They were also given Grog (rum and water) which was usually issued normally to the RN sailors, the survivors were also provided with sweets, chocolate and cigarettes by the RN crews, and this was just 3 days after the sinking of HMS Hood.
How do I know this? because my father was a crewman onboard HMS Dorsetshire at the time. He later survived Dorsetshire's own sinking and along with the rest of the "HMS Dorsetshire association" members post war, was invited to various reunions with the Bismarck survivors through the 1960s and 70s, because as you expressed above, such was the level of respect and comradeship that was experienced between the crews of both sides.
Here is what Mullenheim-Rechberg wrote of British treatment of the Bismarck survivors.
""The fight that the Bismarck put up to the bitter end earned the admiration of British seamen, which probably accounts for the good accommodations we were given and the way we were treated onboard ship. The fact that Captain Martin was well treated as a prisoner of war in Germany in World War One may also have had something to do with this. When he made his rounds among our men he always told them, "As long as you are here with me, you'll have it just as good." And the attitude of his crew was the same. The British seamen were always pleasant and helpful. "You today, us tomorrow," they said."
During dad's participation in the rescues, one of the sailors that he helped haul from the water gave dad his "Erkennungsmarke" (dogtag) in thanks... Dad kept it until in 1973 he decided he was going to return the tag to the gentleman at their first postwar reunion together in Hamburg, but 3 months before the meeting took place the German sailor, named Friedrich Junghans, passed away. Dad tried for years to trace Friedrich's family who settled in Canada after the war, but to no avail, so he donated the tag and various other items to the Merseyside Maritime Museum in 1993. Dad passed away in 2013 and I decided to restart the search for Friedrich's family and 18 months ago after many years of my own searching I eventually found them and they are still endeavouring to claim the tag from the museum.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@brianjones5379 I thought I'd create a simple "visual aid" in order to assist people learning about the history of the battle of Britain. There is much ongoing debate about the nationalities and proportions of RAF fighter pilots who took part in the battle, with occasionally a furtive aspect which attempts to portray the battle as a victory of "mostly foreign pilots". Below is a graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940.
Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the ACTUAL number of aircrew from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented.
The figures are taken from the RAF records of the awards of the highly coveted "Battle of Britain clasp" to the British 1939-45 Campaign Star, which was SCRUPULOUSLY only awarded to RAF & Fleet Air Arm aircrew who flew at least one active sortie in the UK in any RAF or Fleet Air Arm fighter aircraft between 10th July 1940 and 31st Oct 1940.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%)
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%)
🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%)
🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%)
🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%)
🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%)
(And just to preempt any wandering idiot lefty "Identity warriors" from protesting about "The lack of credit given to the black pilots who fought in the battle of Britain"... the pilots from South Africa, Rhodesia & the Caribbean were all of white descent).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
As I've been saying for YEARS the flooding of Europe with third world migrants thereby destabilising western societies and placing untold strain on our national infrastructures has a distinct parallel to the rise of communism throughout Europe the early 20th century. What is happening in the west today has very strong echoes of the German Weimar republic, political instability..... rapidly increasing cost of living making many feel desperate.... an external force bringing with it an impending national doom, an incompetent and corrupted political class wringing their hands in helplessness as things are being intentionally spiralled out of control..... and then though the darkness and chaos emerges "the man for the moment"..... in each country a potential Hitler in the making, calling out the causes of the choas and promising to lead us back to a better past where we were in control of our own national destinies.
All completely orchestrated by those at the VERY top..... the new authoritarian framework of the WEF, UN, WHO, WB who want to impose RIGID control over the whole of mankind.... corporate globalism. They couldn't just have announced their intentions and taken over multiple, formerly stable, sovereign nations, and so over the last 50 years they've had their "long march through the institutions" and have now subverted those former sovereign govts like a fungus, now those subverted governments intentionally enacted policies to bring each nation to its knees, have instigated a needless "war without end" in Ukraine all with the intention of diverting TRILLIONS of dollars and pounds worth of public taxpayer's money into private globalist corporate MIC bank accounts, terrifying an increasingly poorly educated and subservient population with "fake plagues" of "winter sniffles".... do as you're told, come and get your untested, debilitating "vaccines"... or else !!!!
The old process of "Ordo ab chao" or "Order from the chaos"..... more commonly known as "problem - reaction - solution" who knows? It may end up to be the "final solution"?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The truth is that 145 Polish Pilots (the most skillful and resourceful survivors of the former "Polish Air Force") who'd, to put it bluntly, had their arses kicked in both Poland and France arrived at the shores of Britain through late 1939 and into 1940, desperate for refuge from that nazism that had conquered their country and chased many of them for over 1000 miles.
The vast majority of them spoke absolutely no English and had previously been flying the airborne equivalent of a moped.
They had arrived at a country with the world's FIRST real time, radar based, air defence, command and control system that depended on radio direction of its aircraft via English speaking ground controllers, and which was fielding the airborne equivalent of 1000cc superbikes.
Imagine young lads who'd only ever riden mopeds around their local Polish town centre being let loose in the middle of London on 1000cc superbikes?
The Poles were first taught (as you said literally on bicycles) the discipline and formations that Britain's air defence system required to operate, because "freelancing" pilots & standing patrols, such as the Polish & French air forces had previously employed had TWICE proved completely incapable of providing an effective air defence against the Luftwaffe, once in Poland and again in France.
While they were learning that discipline, they also learned rudimentary English to be able to follow the orders of the British ground controllers, they simultaneously had to complete "operational conversion" training to learn how to pilot the far more powerful and complex Hurricanes that they were to pilot in the battle ahead.
Quite understandably their English language skills were by September 1940 still insufficient for them to accurately follow ground controller's orders over the radio, and so English speaking officers were originally appointed to the squadron until their English language was of a standard to be able to accurately communicate with the RAF's controllers, where upon Polish officers, who had been "shadowing" their British counterparts, were then placed in command of the squadron.
Once they'd completed that they provided a small but valuable part of the defence of the refuge they'd been given.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@virginiawolf6431 What is it with clueless modern day Poles? They seem to have utterly NO idea that ultimately modern day Poland OWES its ENTIRE current existence to the British Empire ALONE.
What do they imagine would have happened to Poland if Britain and France did as the ENTIRE rest of the world did in Sept 1939 and completely IGNORED the nazi / soviet dismemberment of Poland? Or if the isolated British Isles had instead decided to seek an armistice with the nazis after the fall of France in 1940? Do you all stupidly believe that you would liberate yourselves from nazi tyranny? Dream on.
Let me tell you what would have happened in reality. Today Poland would not exist. It would simply be a footnote in modern history books, a former nation that would now be divided between nazi East Prussia and the "General Government" region of the nazi Empire. The former Polish cities would now be "Germanised" and each would STILL today have swastikas flying above them, and most chillingly of all, the likes of Sobibor, Chelmno, Belzec, Treblinka, Majdanek & Auschwitz would STILL be operating and belching human ashes into formerly Polish skies.
Please give over with the almost CONSTANT insults at the UK, the nation that made a sacrifice of 460,000 of it's OWN citizen's lives, which ENTIRELY bankrupted itself, and which financed the Polish war effort in the west with UK tax payer's money, and due to those ruinous costs also lost its empire, ALL in the selfless effort to prevent a nazi domination of Europe, and saving YOUR Polish asses from extinction.
Sincerest best wishes to all intelligent, decent Poles who understand the reality of the situation in WW2 from us in the UK. To all the idiot Polish commenters please leave your messages of thanks & gratitude to your British saviours below.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I thought I'd create a simple "visual aid" in order to assist people learning about the history of the battle of Britain. There is much ongoing debate about the nationalities and proportions of RAF fighter pilots who took part in the battle, with occasionally a furtive aspect which attempts to portray the battle as a victory of "mostly foreign pilots". Below is a graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940.
Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the ACTUAL number of aircrew from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented.
The figures are taken from the RAF records of the awards of the highly coveted "Battle of Britain clasp" to the British 1939-45 Campaign Star. Which was SCRUPULOUSLY only awarded to RAF & Fleet Air Arm aircrew who flew at least one active sortie in the UK in any RAF fighter aircraft between 10th July 1940 and 31st Oct 1940.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%)
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%)
🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%)
🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%)
🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%)
🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%)
(And just to preempt any wandering idiot lefty "Identity warriors" from protesting about "The lack of credit given to the black pilots who fought in the battle of Britain"... the pilots from South Africa, Rhodesia & the Caribbean were all of white descent).
But keep in mind that at this early stage of the war the UK was defended by +95% British troops.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@hajoos.8360 Do I think Opeartion Berlin was a success? Dislocation of the convoy system, the capturing and sinking of 22 merchant ships and running the Home Fleet ragged for 2 months, for no loss to the Kriegsmarine fleet? It certainly was a success!!!
You're confusing poor german strategical resource planning with a small but successful commerce raiding operation. Of course the men and materiel of the KM surface fleet would have been better used elsewhere, but that wasn't Lütjens fault. He was given a task in difficult conditions and carried it out relatively successfully. The Strategic overview was not of his making.
All very well calling them cowards, but when all you've got is the post "weserübung" remains of a piddling little fleet, you have to nip at the much stronger enemy when he is weak and run away when he isn't. Face it, ANY KM surface ship losses were NOT going to be made good, the RN easily replaced its losses and MORE.
It's true that Britain was on the sea what Germany was on land. The British army could NEVER have landed on the continent again, never mind liberate Europe, but on the other hand she was NEVER going to be cut off by the German Navy. A premier land power against a premier sea power... the classic stand off.
As for your assertion that the "scuttle order" was given between 09:15 and 09:21, Yes, I DO have a question.
Where did you get your (incorrect) information from?
Lets look at some survivor testimonies (people who actually witnessed the events of Bismarck's sinking first hand), and not some poorly researched, modern day revisionist TV nonsense made for the "hard of thinking" shall we?
From "Battleship Bismarck: A survivor's story" Written by Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's senior ranking survivor.
Page 211 "Our list to port had increased a bit while firing was going on" followed by "Around 9:30am gas and smoke began to drift through our station" This means that prior to 9:30am Bismarck was already flooding, not something that happens to a healthy seaworthy ship, in other words she was already starting to sink.
Then from an interview conducted for the highly regarded weekly history journal "Purnell's history of the second world war" in the late 1960's with Kpt Lt Gerhard Junack (who was Bismarck's only surviving engineering officer and the survivor who supposedly enacted the "scuttle order"). He stated that...
"Somewhere about 1015 hours, I received an order over the telephone from the Chief Engineer (Korvettenkapitän (Ing.) Walter Lehmann) to 'Prepare the ship for sinking.' That was the last order I received on the Bismarck. Soon after that, all transmission of orders collapsed."
Heading back to the account of Mullenheim-Rechberg, on Page 212 he states that (before 10:00am) "I was using all the telephone circuits and calling all over the place in an effort to find out as much as possible about the condition of the ship. I got only one answer. I reached the messenger in the damage control centre and asked "who has and where is the command of the ship? Are there new orders in effect?".... The man said he was in a great hurry. He told me that everyone had abandoned the damage control centre, adding that he was the last one in the room and had to get out... then he hung up".
If taken at face value these survivor testimonies show that there was at least a 45 minute gap between Bismarck starting to sink and the first mention of a "scuttle order" being given. Even if Bismarck's crew had done nothing, Bismarck was going to sink, and if the beaten crew want to help the RN, then all the better... But face it, Bismarck's crew weren't going to scuttle a perfectly seaworthy ship in the middle of the storm tossed North Atlantic of their own free will, it was only for the fact that the RN had already dismantled Bismarck and initiated the sinking process. In other words in every sense the sinking of Bismarck was the result of actions dictated by the Royal Navy.
Anything else is just hurt German pride, bolstered by modern day delusional wehraboos. Germany was well known for trying to hide its national humiliations, such as when they scuttled their "grand fleet" at the end of WW1, like illogically saying "We lost.. but you didn't win", or a pathetic "You didn't beat us because we killed ourselves before you killed us" sort of idiocy.
2
-
@hajoos.8360 Rechberg was in the after range finding station not buried in the bowels of the ship he would have had VERY clear indications of Bismarck's pitch and roll trim as part of his rangefinding apparatus, so trying to "poo poo" his account of events is wishful ignorance of cold hard facts. Part of your misinformation comes from relying on wikipedia.... the page regarding Bismarck as well as the other covering her final battle are littered with errors, as well as the omission of various facts that are supported by primary documentation which are repeatedly deleted by "wikipedia preferred editors" who have their own, biased opinions on the matter. You need to read more widely than that. First hand survivor accounts are valuable, as well as some of the better researched works produced since. To pit an unsourced wikipedia statement against that of Rechberg & Bismarck's senior surviving engineering officer is unwise.
You talk of "supporting" strategic decisions, Lütjens wasn't part of naval planning, but a commander who would have had little to no input regarding the orders he'd been given. His, as the old saying goes, was to "do or die".
All that BS about being "shot on the quarterdeck" after Denmark Strait, you seem to be oblivious to the fact that Lütjens' orders forbade his seeking engagement with enemy capital ships, and the impetuous Lindemann wanting to chase PoW eastwards was EXPRESSLY against the SKL orders that Lütjens was forced to abide by, as well as ill-advised in as far as the Germans were aware that further major units of the RN would be heading westwards from the direction of Scapa Flow. (Also not forgetting the fact that Bismarck was unable to chase PoW who was still steaming at full speed while Bismarck was forced to lower speed due to the damage to her bows causing trim problems and her loss of two boilers due to flooding, as well as ignoring the concerns of the now critical fuel situation Lütjens faced as a result of PoW's hit on her fuel tanks).
The "oh she sould have sunk PoW as well" is just fanciful, uninformed wehraboo fantasy.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@datredhat "Hitler allowed the troops trapped at Dunkirk to evacuate". Nonsense. Hitler would like to disagree with you.
"Fuhrer Directive No. 13. 24th May 1940
1. The next object of our operations is to annihilate the French, English, and Belgian forces which are surrounded in Artois and Flanders, by a concentric attack by our northern flank and by the swift seizure of the Channel coast in this area.
The task of the Air Force will be to break all enemy resistance on the part of the surrounded forces, to prevent the escape of the English forces across the Channel, and to protect the southern flank of Army Group A.
The enemy airforce will be engaged whenever opportunity offers."
The truth is that the German army was, contrary to the perception created by their own propaganda films, very poorly mobilised. Apart from its 10 Panzer and a small number of "motorised" regiments in 1940, 90% of its army and supporting combat logistics depended on foot and horse transport.
Its panzer formations had by 24th May WELL over extended and outrun their supply and supporting infantry, even though the infantry had been provided with MILLIONS of German manufactured "Pervitin" methamphetamine tabets, known today as "crystal meth" to enable the advance to continue. The effect of the drug use was to enable the foot soldiers to march day and night with reduced food requirements for the 2 weeks of the initial French campaign.
By the time of the battle of the Dunkirk perimeter, the infantry were burned out and STILL had the conquest of the rest of France ahead of them.
It was actually the commander of "Panzer Gruppe Kleist" (Ewald von Kleist) who aware of the wide dispersal of his armoured divisions, and the heavy losses his panzers had absorbed (in many cases reduced to <50% by combat and mechanical breakdowns) who had requested from his superior von Rundstedt, that a halt to the advance be requested. Von Rundstedt concurred with the request and forwarded it via von Brauchitsch at OKH to Hitler who then authorised the halt.
The simple fact is that the German infantry (and also to a slightly lesser degree the German panzers) were completely shagged out. They were UNABLE to close the Dunkirk pocket, as a large part of the perimeter was marshy boggy ground unsuitable for tanks, which put more of the onus for the final assault onto its already shagged out foot soldiers.
Step forward Feldmarschall Hermann Goering, with his promise to Hitler that his Lufwaffe alone would prevent the evacuation of the allied forces trapped within the Dunkirk perimeter..... and we all know what happened there.
The rest as they say is history.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Since 1932 the Polish codebreakers Marian Rejewski, Henryk Zygalski & Jerzy Różycki worked within BS4 ("Biuro Szyfrów 4" the Polish general staff cipher Bureau focussed on German decryption & intelligence), and together with VITAL assistance given by the French intelligence officer Gustave Bertrand (who had cultivated a German informant codenamed "Asché" who had provided French Intelligence with tons of vital data including a full nazi "Enigma" procedural manual & a list of full daily key settings for use of the enigma encryption device), had by the purchase of a commercial version of the early enigma device and LOTS of analysis eventually broken into German army and air force 3 rotor encryption networks, this was a fantastic achievement, but it is true to say that they at no time did they crack German Kriegsmarine encryption due to the additional layers of security employed by the German navy.
In December 1938 the nazis introduced a further 2 interchangeable encryption rotors to the enigma system, which immediately brought the vast majority of Polish decryption efforts to a grinding halt, which is where it remained up until the outbreak of WW2. In the weeks prior to the outbreak of WW2 the Polish research work was passed to the French, who in the six months they had it in their possession added little to the accumulated knowledge, and to the UK where the British government seized it with both hands, and made its study top priority. So was instigated the British "ULTRA" project.
Jerzy Różycki elected to stay behind and work in Vichy France where, unknown to the Germans he worked on a seperate secret encryption system, which bore no tangible fruit before his death in 1942.
Marian Rejewski & Henryk Zygalski were, for security reasons, not included in the UK "ULTRA" project, and so took no further part in British decryption efforts.
The British "ULTRA" project took the non working foundation research of the Polish decrypters and from there MASSIVELY expanded that research to once again break into nazi 3 rotor enigma, this was followed in 1942 by the cracking of the improved kriegsmarine M4 enigma (the 4 rotor enigma device, codenamed "SHARK"), as well as simultaneously breaking into the FAR more complex "lorenz" cipher device used by the German army & navy high commands (TUNNY), before finally cracking the "Geheimschreiber" encryption device used by both the Luftwaffe high command as well as the top level of the nazi government (STURGEON), on top of these British achievements another product of the ULTRA program was the building of the world's first programmable electronic computer (COLOSSUS) to speed up the breaking of German codes. This was designed and built by a British team led by Alan Turing and the telephone engineer Tommy Flowers, which transformed British decryption from a process which often only gave results days or even weeks after the message was eavesdropped on by the British, to a state of affairs towards the end of WW2 where the British were reading a LOT of top level communications at the same time as the intended German recipient.
The early Polish codebreakers did indeed provide the "acorn" from which the British cultivated the "mighty oak" of ULTRA.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@DrGerard66 Please Gerard, do point exactly where I stated that the "RAF eliminated the Luftwaffe"?
But rest assured the Luftwaffe, having lost close to 2000 aircraft during the battle of Britain, the vast majority of them complete with the highly trained prewar "experten" aircrews, WAS severely weakened by their failed attempt to wipe out the RAF. The RAF won by NOT being wiped out and indeed gave the Germans such a bloody nose that they cancelled their intended invasion of the UK.
As for the RAF, inspite of losing just over 900 aircraft, (with a majority of the pilots NOT being lost from duty) indeed ended the battle with FAR more aircraft than it began the battle with, and with the prewar "British Empire Air Training Plan" now churning out ever increasing numbers of well trained pilots, its pilot establishment, inspite of taking a short term hit during the battle, never again fell short. Indeed by mid 1944 the Allies began winding down their pilot training programs as they had been so successful.
As for the "military position", I only need to provide a SINGLE piece of verifiable information to prove my point. What better than the order issued by none other the Adolf Hitler himself? Below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler's "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the Reichchancellery on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW).
The directive was transmitted over secure landlines encrypted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to initmidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan was academic. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
Glad to have been of service unburdening you of your deep ignorance on the subject.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Hooibeest2D "Explain how the battle of Britain was a turning point"
Ok then try this.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire ALONE to nazism from June 1940 to April 1941, opposition which bankrupted the UK and cost her 460,000 of her citizen's lives, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps would STILL be operating on European soil today.
A nazi dominated Europe, with no remaining "bastion of democracy" of a free UK to act as a toehold for US forces, would have left the USA sandwiched between a Europe controlled by the nazis and an Asia controlled by the Japanese militarists. The world today would have been unrecognisably darker and more strife torn that it is today.
And nowadays all we seem to get are clueless, ignorant modern day Brit haters such as yourself pissing over those sacrifices and effort. No wonder the ongoing constant flow of lefty globalist insults and ingratitude towards the UK leads some British people to think we should have saved our own citizen's lives, economy and empire and instead left the nazis to it, and let them carry on raping and murdering the rest of Europe.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@BlindPidePiper Without question the US was the MAJOR player on land in Europe, then again thats a result of national populations, 149 million US citizens in 1939 with the UK having 47 million at the same time, of course thats without taking the "Empire troops" into account, but in as much the same way as the US was contesting the pacific, the British empire was also providing the majority forces is the Mediterranean, East Africa, middle east, India and Burma, and once again it should be remembered that D-day would never have been able to take place without the majority UK/Canadian naval aspect of the amphibious landings in addition to the 3 landing beaches that they covered. So its entirely understandable that the "average Joe" in the UK looking at history doesn't immediately consider the Pacific war / China, the same as the average American doesn't immediately think of the middle east, India and Burma, and more often than not considers "D-day" as a purely American effort.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
So much the same as the Greeks, Persians, Romans, Egyptians, Vikings, Normans, Mongols, Ottomans, Khmers, Aztecs, Mayans, Incas and each and every Eurpoean power over the last 500 years then.
P.S Please tell me... out of ALL the empires that have existed through the last 3 or 4 millenia of human history which was the ONLY one that outlawed human slavery? Please leave your answer below.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Complete bollocks. Bismarck's crew actually scuttled a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken and penetrated in several places, her command staff obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater, a thousand of her crew dead, and further hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All the scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer AFTER he has been punched senseless by a more skillful & powerful opponent, and only a deluded child would say, "the victor didn't win, his opponent gave in before he lost.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off and handed back to him on a plate.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@finnberglander7816 First German bombs dropped on the British mainland?
16th October 1939 saw the very first bombs dropped on Britain when the Germans launched scattered air attacks over port and industrial facilities around the Scottish city of Edinburgh, and the RN naval base at Rosyth.
First bombs dropped by the RAF on German soil?
19th March 1940... When on 13th November 1939 the luftwaffe bombed RAF Sullom Voe a seaplane base with port facilities in the Shetland Isles (with the resultant death of a rabbit, and no hits on the 9 seaplanes or 2 RN vessels stationed there), the RAF retaliated by hitting the nazi seaplane base at Hörnum on the island of Sylt in the North Sea. These were THE VERY FIRST RAF bombs to land on German soil....5 months AFTER the first German bombs had landed on British soil.
The first British or German civilian casualty caused by the bombing of the opposing side during WW2?
16th March 1940 when German bombs hit the village of Waithe on Orkney during an attack on the Home Fleet anchorage at Scapa Flow, which killed a 27 year-old County Council employee, James Isbister (luckily, his wife, baby son, and the neighbour James was endeavouring to rescue from her bombed cottage all survived).
First British bombs to drop on the actual German mainland?
11th May 1940, when the British air ministry for the first time allowed the bombing of railway yards, communication centres and bridges west of the Rhine River as interdiction of German supply lines for the German assault into the NEUTRAL Low countries and France on 10th May 1940. Previous to this date the British air ministry in an effort to stop the spreading of the conflict had refused to allow the RAF to drop ANY bombs on the German mainland, instead the RAF supplied the German demand for toilet paper by dropping propaganda leaflets on German cities. This attack on 11th May 1940 had also come after REPEATED attacks against RN installations on the British mainland, most notably at Rosyth near Edinburgh, and the Cromarty Firth, both in Scotland throughout the winter of 1939/40.
First British bombs dropped EAST of the Rhine River?
23/24th August 1940. This attack ostensibly directed at the Klingenberg Power Station in Eastern Berlin & Templehof airport was in RETALIATION for REPEATED luftwaffe raids on RAF stations within the suburbs of Greater London throughout July and August 1940 that had already caused HUNDREDS of innocent British civilian deaths & casualties (euphemistically known nowadays as "collateral damage") this was inspite of Hitler's previous decrees that no bombs should be dropped within the boundaries of Greater London. Obviously that decree had never reached the ears of Herman Goering.
German retaliation for the one night of bombing of Berlin on 23/24th August 1940? The launching of the all out assault against British cities from 7th sept 1940 onwards, culminating in the world's first attempt to create a firestorm during operation "moonlight sonata" on the British city of Coventry on the night of 14/15th Nov 1940, where the luftwaffe sent 575 bombers using their world beating "X-gerat" bombing system (in the Germans own words capable of placing "target indicator" flares with an accuracy of 50 meters at 200 miles range) over the civilian city centre of Coventry dropping 550 tons of high explosive (including hundreds of "flammen" (oil) bombs) followed by over 30,000 incendiary bombs. The final death toll of that single raid? A previously unheard of 568 innocent civilians, this was in addition to the thousands of other British civilians already killed in other cities across Britain over the previous 2 months.
The first British bombing raid directly targetted at German civilians? "Operation Abigail" on the night of 16/17th December 1940, (3 months AFTER the opening of the nazi "blitz" on British cities) the Dec 16th attack by the RAF was launched against the German city of Mannheim where 100 RAF bombers dropped 100 tons of HE and 14,000 incendiaries inflicting a death toll on the German population of 34 dead and 81 injured.
Not to worry though , the RAF eventually "upped its game" and showed the Germans how to do it properly a year or two later.
Don't try to hide the fact that the Germans enjoyed dropping HE on the cities of its neighbours from the earliest days of flight. The first aerial bombs dropped in history were from a zeppelin raid on Bruges in Belgium in August 1914... just 11 years after the invention of powered flight. Since WW2, they've learned the lesson NOT to do it again.
2
-
2
-
2
-
@BulletproofPastor Can you pplease point out to me where I used the word "insignificant"? Where did you get the BS idea from that Poles were forcibly repatriated after WW2? Look dry your misplaced tears and go and google for "1947 UK Polish Resettlement Act". Its the act of UK Parliament that granted FULL UK citizenship and residency rights to ALL Polish ex-service personnel who had served alongside the British armed forces AND their families. In fact nearly 300,000 Poles took up the offer and elected to stay in Britain after WW2, hence why even today the UK has suck a large Polish ex-pat community. The SMALL number who understandably but naively returned to Poland did so of their own free will.
Instead of believing the communist drivel you've been drip fed over the last 70 years, remember this.
If it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need" or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism from June 1940 onwards, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s.
Ignorant modern day Poles should, on their way out, please remember to kneel at the altar dedicated to the combined 1.1 million lives sacrificed by the UK and France in order to topple the nazism that was murdering and torturing YOUR country when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
2
-
2
-
2
-
I only need to provide a SINGLE piece of verifiable information to prove my point. What better than the order issued by none other the Adolf Hitler himself? Below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler's "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the "Berghof" (Hitler's "holiday home" in Bavaria) on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW).
The directive was transmitted over secure landlines encrypted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to initmidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan was academic. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place,
which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice.
Ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government.
Ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.
Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess?
Ye have no more religion than my horse. Gold is your God. Which of you have not bartered your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?
Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defiled this sacred place, and turned the Lord's temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices?
Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation. You were deputed here by the people to get grievances redressed, are yourselves become the greatest grievance.
Your country therefore calls upon me to cleanse this Augean stable, by putting a final period to your iniquitous proceedings in this House; and which by God's help, and the strength he has given me, I am now come to do.
I command ye therefore, upon the peril of your lives, to depart immediately out of this place.
Go, get you out! Make haste! Ye venal slaves be gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors.
In the name of God, go!
Oliver Cromwell - 20 April 1653, London, England
Who will take his place now?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
What about the UNPRECEDENTED atrocity of the firebombing of Coventry 2½ years earlier? The nazis made the FIRST EVER attempt to burn an entire city to the ground in Nov 1940 during "Operation Moonlight Sonata". They sent the largest force of bombers they could muster (over 500 bombers) and did not hold back one bit.... 500 tons of HE bombs..... 33,000 incendiaries.... 50 high capacity landmines.... plus 50 "Flammenbombe" large oil filled bombs especially designed to encourage a firestorm.
But being the first people to ever attempt to burn an entire city to the ground, the evil Germans made a few mistakes in their planning, and the British national fire service managed to contain the fires and so just 600 innocent men women and children Coventonians were burned to death by the nazis, as well as the heart of the city being burned down.
The following day Josef Goebbels, the nazi propaganda minister, joyously gloated on German state radio that "the English city of Coventry has been destroyed", and jokingly commented that a new verb had entered the German language "coventrierten" which in English was "to coventrate" meaning to destroy a city by means of a firestorm.
The British on the receiving end of this murderous attack studied the result of the attack, understood where the German planning had failed and learned from it. 2½ years later it was the British turn to coventrate Hamburg. The difference being that we showed the Germans how to do it properly, and yet today we Brits are encouraged to wring our hands and consider "are we bad people?". I myself sleep soundly at night.
"What goes around, comes around" or as the great man Arthur Harris said "the Germans have sowed the wind, now they are going to reap the whirlwind".
If the Germans and devious lefties are looking for sympathy tell them it's in the dictionary.... between "shit" and "syphilis".
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@bookaufman9643 Worry not Boo, the reply above took me 2 minutes, no trouble at all.
Dont forget Boo, Naval gunnery is not the same as firing a rifle at a target. Rifle shooting at "normal" ranges means that the bullet trajectory is close to flat, and the bullet may have a flight time of a couple of seconds or so, therefore with correctly set sights and fair conditions reasonably good accuracy is a matter of the shooter's individual skill. Naval gunnery at 12 miles distance means shells being fired with an arcing trajectory with the time between the moment of firing and impact of the shell being 30 - 40 seconds or more. In that time both ships may have moved hundreds of meters (Hood moving at 29 knots would cover nearly 600m in 40 seconds), changed course, the wind may have strengthened or weakened and so on. A ship's fire control system has to take its range estimate from its rangefinders, then factor in a large number of variables (including the obvious ones mentioned above, but also many others less obvious) and then the spotters have to observe the fall of shot (30-40 seconds or more later) and then pass on corrective information to the fire control team, who then "rinse and repeat" the above process until hits are observed. This is why I said that Hood had effectively wasted a good number of salvoes directing her fire onto Prinz Eugen, before she realised her mistake and had to start again on Bismarck. It must be remembered that the first 4 salvoes from Bismarck also missed completely, as they were also ranging the British ships, but that said to land hits with her 5th salvo was excellent shooting (Though the inexperienced crew of Prince of Wales landed the first hit in the encounter with their 6th salvo hitting Bismarck).
HMS Hood (and Royal Navy warships in general) had what might be considered as "last gen" coincidence rangefinding equipment when compared to Bismarck / PE with their stereoscopic rangefinding equipment, though Hood & PoW did also have working gunnery radar fitted.
If you'd like a "crash course" in naval rangefinding and fire control theory and practice, then another of Drachinifel's vids here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbXyAzGtIX8 will give you a far better understanding of the problems faced by naval gunners than most people watching YT naval vids.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
After the battle of Britain, the British Air Ministry asked ACM Dowding to write an authorised history of the battle of Britain. He duly did so and provided it to the air council. Such was the internal emnity of the RAF "top brass" towards him, that his account was rejected and the Air ministry commisioned another account, in which ACM Dowding's name was not mentioned even ONCE.
On reading the finished Document, Churchill, who was actually a tacit supporter of Hugh Dowding, returned it to the minister for air, Archibald Sinclair annotated with the following comment : “The jealousies and cliquism which have led to the committing of this offence are a discredit to the Air Ministry, and I do not think any other Service Department would have been guilty of such a piece of work. What would have been said if … the Admiralty had told the tale of Trafalgar and left Lord Nelson out of it?”
But Churchill was aware of the range of powerful figures within the RAF & govt that were arrayed against ACM Dowding, and also that he was overdue for retirement, and so acquiesced to his dismissal and subsequent posting to the US.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@charlescoleman4017 Your grasp of English comprehension is top flight Charles, commenters of less rigorous logic and comprehension (as well as the many programmed lefty "Brit haters") either cannot or choose not to understand. One category deserves our help, the other, our contempt.
I have NEVER diminished the contribution of other nationalities (indeed even though I am obviously a Brit I had a Canadian 1st cousin from Golden, BC who as a tank driver in the 28th Canadian armd regt was killed during "Operation Totalise" on 8th August 1944) and I am aware of the massive contribution towards the security of the UK's "Atlantic lifeline" that the Royal Canadian Navy provided together with the RCAF and its part in the air war and the BCATP as well as Canada's unending supply of resources, and will argue till I'm blue in the face in defence of their honour and service they provided, but I REFUSE to see the stoicism and resolve of the British general public be diminished or mocked without challenge.
Likewise the Poles, Aussies, Kiwis, Indians, Czechs and Free forces etc, EACH deserve the honour, recognition and credit for their own war effort & war dead... but I won't see it done by misrepresenting what the British public went through, including the >450,000 British citizens whose lives were lost in opposition to fascism & Japanese militarism... NOT that that was your purpose.... but for PLENTY of others it is.
All the best Charles.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Thats some utter nonsense you've wasted your time typing in there.... "Hitler never realy intent to invade the UK" indeed.
Please read below the opening preamble of "Fuhrer Directive No. 16" issued on 16th July 1940 from the Fuhrer HQ to OKW.
"16 Jul 1940
The Führer and Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces.
Führer Headquarters,
16th July 1940.
7 copies
Directive No. 16 On preparations for a landing operation against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
Of course in your addled mind Hitler sacrificed close to 2000 luftwaffe aircraft, and the creme of his prewar luftwaffe "Experten" aircrews, and stripped his inland waterways of 2500 vital large canal barges to carry over the 13 wehrmacht divisions, including 2 panzer divisions, for a laugh.
2
-
2
-
The only "stupid person" here seems to be you.
I only need to provide a SINGLE piece of verifiable information to prove my point. What better than the order issued by none other the Adolf Hitler himself? Below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler's "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the Reichchancellery on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW).
The directive would have been sent over landlines encrypted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to intimidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan was academic. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
There were NO operational "Indian" pilots in RAF Fighter Command during the battle of Britain.
I thought I'd create a simple "visual aid" in order to assist people learning about the history of the battle of Britain. There is much ongoing debate about the nationalities and proportions of RAF fighter pilots who took part in the battle, with occasionally a furtive aspect which attempts to portray the battle as a victory of "mostly foreign pilots". Below is a graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940.
Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the ACTUAL number of aircrew from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented.
The figures are taken from the RAF records of the awards of the highly coveted "Battle of Britain clasp" to the British 1939-45 Campaign Star. Which was SCRUPULOUSLY only awarded to RAF & Fleet Air Arm aircrew who flew at least one active sortie in the UK in any RAF or Fleet Air Arm fighter aircraft between 10th July 1940 and 31st Oct 1940.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%)
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%)
🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%)
🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%)
🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%)
🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%)
(And just to preempt any wandering idiot lefty "Identity warriors" from protesting about "The lack of credit given to the black pilots who fought in the battle of Britain"... the pilots from South Africa, Rhodesia & the Caribbean were all of white descent).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
You seem oblivious that the UK Govt passed the "1947 Polish Resettlement Act" which granted FULL UK citizenship and residency rights to nearly 300,000 Polish ex service personnel and their families. The UK was the FIRST country to pass such legislation, an act which saved those Poles from torture and death at the hands of Polish communists after WW2.
With regard to the non-appearance of Polish forces during the "1946 Victory parade" the problem lay SQUARELY with POLAND. The first invites sent out by the UK Labour Govt of Clement Attlee to ALL the nations who had fought for the Allied cause during WW2 (INCLUDING Poland, USSR & Yugoslavia) were sent out weeks in advance of the parade. The Polish invite in particular was quite understandably delivered to the Polish "Provisional Government of National Unity" ( the "TRJN" or Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) based in Warsaw, which was the OFFICIAL Polish govt as recognised by the international community in the form of the "United Nations", and NOT just by Britain alone, the TRJN was the same govt that it was intended the London based Polish nationalist Govt in exile would become an intrinsic part of, as agreed to by ALL sides at the Yalta conference in Feb 1945.... (although the soviets subsequently saw to it that this never actually happened).
This invite sent to Warsaw immediately raised a storm of protest with the Polish nationalist govt in exile based in London who, with some justification, felt they had been sidelined in this matter, their anger was supported by many British MPs and members of the British public.
With only days left before the parade was due to take place, and with no reply or even acknowledgement of the British invite from the OFFICIAL Polish TRJN govt in Warsaw, the British govt then belatedly sent out a SECOND INVITE to the Polish Govt in Exile in London, (as well as directly to individual senior Polish service personnel), but as one united group they CHOSE to shun the invites to register their anger and disgust at being treated as "second fiddle" to the Warsaw govt.
And the final Ignominy? The Warsaw TRJN govt never answered or even acknowledged the original invite from the UK (as neither did the USSR or Yugoslavia) and never attended the parade either.
As you can see the Polish "non appearance" was solely down to a poisonous bitter mix of political hatred (from Warsaw) and hubris (from the London Poles), and NOTHING to do with this imaginary "Poles weren't invited to the parade" BS. As I've described above the Polish nation was actually the ONLY allied nation to receive TWO invites to the parade.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Where do you get this "Enslaves" nonsense from? Trying to slip that lefty BS in quietly eh?
Of ALL the empires throughout the last 3-4 millenia of human history the British Empire was the ONLY one to outlaw human slavery.... and did so when it was in its apogee and without peer. It then set its most powerful armed force, that being the Royal Navy to break the transportation of human slaves from around the world. Much against the wishes of other European imperialists.
Please name me another empire that when it finally ended then happily maintained, as it does to this day, a happy and mutually beneficial friendship with its former colonies in the form of the Commonwealth.
As for your "the soviets did more to save Europe" You seem completely ignorant of the fact that the USSR was the nazis FIRST ally, and eagerly divided up Poland before invading the Baltic states, then Eastern Romania.
Adolf Hitler explicitly wanted more than anything else for the UK to join his "crusade", and support his "vision" for a nazi dominated Europe while we controlled the world's seas and kept our Empire.... what an unbeatable alliance that would have been !!!
But Instead of looking out for our own selfish interests, the largely unprepared UK and France declared war on Hitler's Germany for Poland & Europe's sake, NOT OUR OWN, What benefit did the UK receive from declaring war on Germany? That selfless act alone set in train the events that eventually led to the fall of nazism 5½ years later.... only then for the communists and Americans to betray eastern Europe and NOT allow democracy to flourish there postwar. Yes, I suggest you go and air your uninformed views in Eastern Europe and see if the populations that were crushed by the yoke of your "soviet heroes" think the Russkis "saved Europe".
After the fall of France in June 1940 the UK, against the expectations of the ENTIRE world, then fought on ALONE in Europe from June 1940 to June 1941 & continued the opposition to nazism when absolutely NO-ONE else in the world was interested.
Who ELSE do you imagine was going to save Europe?
The USSR? They'd eagerly joined the nazis in raping Poland, and then happily executed 22,000 of their countrymen in one fell swoop, followed by countless others, after which as I said they militarily crushed the Baltic states and invaded Romania.
The USA? Their chosen neutrality meant they were NEVER going to get drawn into a European war (it was only nazi Germany's declaration of war on the US in Dec 1941 that dragged their backsliding arses into the conflict), in fact US businesses were only TOO happy to do business with BOTH sides, and happily supplied Britain AND Germany with raw materials, fuel and war equipment while the nazis raped Poland and THROUGHOUT the rest of WW2.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire ALONE to nazism from June 1940 onwards, opposition which bankrupted the UK and cost her 460,000 of her citizen's lives, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps would STILL be operating on European soil today, and Stalin would have been left eating his borscht out of a wooden bowl, sat in a cave in Mongolia.
There's no need for you to thank me for my efforts to reduce your complete ignorance of the European situation from the 1940s onwards.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Talk about COMPLETE nonsense !!!
You want evidence? I got Evidence !!! Where better to look than "the survivors" whose words you hold so dearly. Lets look at the testimonies of people who actually witnessed the events of Bismarck's sinking first hand, and not some unresearched, modern day revisionist nonsense written for those who know no better. The survivor's statements below are all with regard to Bismarck's final battle on the morning of 27th May 1941.
From "Battleship Bismarck: A survivor's story" Written by Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's fourth gunnery officer, and her senior ranking survivor.
Page 211 "Our list to port had increased a bit while firing was going on" followed by "Around 9:30am gas and smoke began to drift through our station" This means that prior to 9:30am Bismarck was already flooding, not something that happens to a healthy seaworthy ship, in other words she was already starting to sink.
Then from an interview conducted for the highly regarded weekly history journal "Purnell's history of the second world war" in the late 1960's with Gerhard Junack (who was Bismarck's only surviving engineering officer and the survivor who SUPPOSEDLY enacted the "scuttle order"). He stated that...
"Somewhere about 1015 hours, I received an order over the telephone from the Chief Engineer (Korvettenkapitän (Ing.) Walter Lehmann) to 'Prepare the ship for sinking.' That was the last order I received on the Bismarck. Soon after that, all transmission of orders collapsed."
Heading back to the account of Mullenheim-Rechberg, on Page 212 he states that (before 10:00am) "I was using all the telephone circuits and calling all over the place in an effort to find out as much as possible about the condition of the ship. I got only one answer. I reached the messenger in the damage control centre and asked "who has and where is the command of the ship? Are there new orders in effect?".... The man said he was in a great hurry. He told me that everyone had abandoned the damage control centre, adding that he was the last one in the room and had to get out... then he hung up".
This vain search for contact & information over the Bismarck's internal comms happened BEFORE 10:00am which throws some mild doubt on Junack's testimony where he says he was contacted by the chief engineer who supposedly gave him the "scuttle order" over the phone at 10:15am... Hmmmmm.
If taken at face value these survivor testimonies show that there was at least a 45 minute gap between Bismarck starting to sink and the first mention of a "scuttle order" being given. Even if Bismarck's crew had done nothing, Bismarck was going to sink, and if the beaten crew want to help the RN, then all the better... But face it, Bismarck's crew weren't going to scuttle a perfectly seaworthy ship in the middle of the storm tossed North Atlantic of their own free will, it was only for the fact that the RN had already dismantled Bismarck and initiated the sinking process. In other words in every sense the sinking of Bismarck was the result of actions dictated by the Royal Navy.
Just remember IF any "scuttling" actually took place then all that was scuttled was a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken and penetrated in several places, her command staff physically obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater, a thousand of her crew dead, and further hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All that any scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer AFTER he has been punched senseless by a more skillful & powerful opponent, and only a deluded child would say, "the victor didn't win because his opponent killed himself before he lost.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off by the victor and handed back to him on a plate.
Imagine the ignominy of being forced to commit suicide by your opponent?
Anything else is just hurt German pride, bolstered by modern day delusional wehraboos. Germany was well known for trying to hide its national humiliations, such as when they scuttled their "grand fleet" at the end of WW1, like illogically saying "We lost.. but you didn't win", or a pathetic "You didn't beat us because we killed ourselves first" sort of idiocy.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ejmproductions8198 So saving the FINAL foothold in the WHOLE of Europe (as well as the hub of the global British empire) was less important than losing the last foothold on the continent? Well its an opinion, a poorly conceived one, but an opinion nonetheless.
After the nazis failed to "schmooze" Britain out of the war, it then attacked by sea and air with the intention of knocking it out of the war, what happened to that plan? Oh that's right, it failed, and Britain continued the fight. I.E The Germans lost the battle intended to eliminate Britain as a "base for future operations".
You need to brush up on some history.... Britain was "fighting one country".... Was it? Seems you've forgotten that Britain was also kicking the Italian's arses in North Africa at the very same time. Who else was Germany attacking in the summer of 1940? Er....NO-ONE !!!! The nazis in the summer of 1940 were 100% poised in NW Europe to attack Great Britain ALONE by land, sea & air, meanwhile Britain & its commonwealth had its forces defending a world wide empire, in Africa, the Middle East, and SE Asia.
You appear to be the same sort of biased, uninformed commenter who would opine that "it was not just Britain", but also its empire and the US which won the battle of Britain against "poor little ol' Germany", while simultaneously completely ignoring the fact that the nazis (who were in summer 1940 by FAR the largest military in Western Europe and arguably the most capable in the world) had their Italian allies, and were supplied with MILLIONS of tons of raw and finished war materiel, food and fuel from their "non-aggression pact" partner the USSR, as well as Finland, Sweden, Romania & the raped economies of her European conquests.
As much as you try, you CAN'T diminish the importance of Britain's STRATEGIC triumph in the summer of 1940. Maybe in future just type "I hate Britain"... instead of giving comment on a subject you seem to have limited understanding of.
Its strange we've come to this impasse as I agreed with your initial theoretical appraisal of the European situation in 1940.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@dovetonsturdee7033 I was aware of US officers being onboard, but not of his convening of a "war council", but that still reinforces my impression of Capt Dalrymple-Hamilton. A highly regarded RN captain of a high profile capital ship in a desperate situation being cool headed & not too haughty to be able to convene a "council of juniors" and take account of their advice, while he alone, as a captain usually does carried, the sole responsibility.
My perception of Lancelot Holland is not quite so favourable.... I realise he and Hood were on the receiving end of extremely bad luck, but in all my reading of the accounts of the Bismarck saga, I've formed a vague impression that he was more autocratic, with possibly a hint of arrogance? Maybe I'm wrong, I know you'll have much more information to fill out my understanding of the man.
I'd be more than happy to hear your own appraisal of Holland, Doveton.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
If you'd like an individual example of the esteem with which HMS Hood was held by other nations, look no further than the account of Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, the senior ranking survivor of Bismarck, and her 4th gunnery officer, here's an excerpt of his account of the start of the battle of Denmark Strait.
"The British ships were turning slightly to port, the lead ship showing an extremely long forecastle and two heavy twin turrets. On the telephone I heard Albrecht shout, "The HOOD...... it's the HOOD!" (his capitalisation), It was an unforgettable moment. There she was, the famous warship, once the largest in the world, that had been the "terror" of so many of our war games."
Later he made these remarks following Hood's demise....
"At first the Hood was nowhere to be seen: in her place was a colossal pillar of black smoke reaching into the sky. Gradually at the foot of the pillar, I made out the bow of the battle cruiser projecting upwards at an angle, a sure sign that she had broken in two. Then I saw something I could hardly believe: A flash of orange coming from her forward guns! Although her fighting days had ended, the Hood was firing a last salvo. I felt a great respect for those men over there"
Sounds as if the Kriegsmarine and her gunnery experts were more impressed by HMS Hood than you appear to be.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@PhilipLeitch Wouldn't it be logical Philip that those Titanic passengers who survived to give evidence were obivously not subject to localised down currents, what about the +1500 dead Titanic passengers? While obviously a large number of them died due to hypothermia, who knows how many died due to other causes?
Why did you ignore Ted Briggs' account of his leaving the wreck of the Hood? Actually spoken by him? How do you explain that? Was the man a liar?
Look, Philip, the crux of the matter is you're making a unsubstantiated blanket statement that it can NEVER happen, as in you have utterly no conclusive evidence. I am saying that while it will not happen in every situation, there are enough first hand accounts of the phenomena to show that it might very well happen.
I'll happily take the word of people who've demonstrably experienced the phenomena over self appointed "online experts", with no scientific background, but only too eager to jump on any "bandwagon meme" that they come across while surfing. You don't believe the world is flat as well do you?
We both know I'm right, be a man and say, "yes, your point is correct".
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The nazis had planned for a short war, and had built up a large prewar bank of excellent pilots, but made insufficient planning for long term maintenance of those numbers, so as the initial cadre of excellent pilots inevitably got "whittled down" through 1939-42, due to the Germans lack of strategic planning those losses were replaced with a flow of ever lower quality pilots, with the result that those remaining experienced pilots were forced to fly till either a nervous breakdown or death removed them from duty, though a tiny percentage of their very best pilots racked up hundreds of kills (mostly against the early poorly trained and equipped soviet VVT pilots) but as an organisation the luftwaffe was bled dry and ended up from 1944 onwards sending barely trained Hitler Youth lads up to face the ever increasing onslaught of the well prepared allied air forces.
The Allied air forces for their part routinely rotated their pilots out of combat and into training posts here in the UK & the Americas, with the result that while individual pilots racked up far lower scores, the allied airforces as a whole quickly overtook the luftwaffe numbers of excellently trained pilots, so much so that by mid 1944 the allies were massively scaling back their fighter pilot training programs due to the large surplus of very capable allied pilots.
The result was the luftwaffe had a MUCH smaller number of "aces" (+5 kills) but with a tiny number of much higher kill tallies, the allies had many MANY times more "aces" (with 5 kills or more) than the luftwaffe, but with no outlandish kill tallies.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Totally different weapons with a totally different modus operandi. Tallboys / Grand Slams were NOT for city bombing but instead were deep penetration earthquake bombs for individual specialised targets (such as you mentioned German battleships, Geman U-boat pens & other "hardened" targets, and also for hard to hit targets such as railway bridges & canal locks, when it was nigh on impossible to hit the structure, a tallboy or Grand Slam would only have to hit within a hundred yards and would penetrate upto 150 ft under ground before detonation, causing a localised mini "earthquake" which would literally shake target buildings off their foundations and cause then to collapse.
And though bombs such as these 5,500lb thin walled, high capacity, surface blast bombs which were designed to explode at ground level for maximum wide surface devastation and killing were eventually used by ALL sides during the war, at the time that these German bombs were first being dropped by the Luftwaffe in 1939/40, the RAF and USAAF did not have even possess such bombs in their inventories.
But the Germans soon found out the meaning of the old saying "What goes around, comes around".
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@dumpit3583 Lets talk about where all the bombing started, in a small Spanish Basque town called Guernica in 1937. On the town's weekly market day, which meant that farmers from the surrounding countryside would flock into the town to sell their produce, the Luftwaffe's "Kondor Legion" PLASTERED the town with high explosives despite there being absolutely NO military targets present. The German bombing caused the deaths of over 300 completely innocent Spaniards, and caused WORLDWIDE outrage at their nazi callousness. Now lets talk about the Luftwaffe's "Operation Moonlight Sonata" which had the avowed intention of creating the world's FIRST "firestorm" in the heart of the English city of Coventry. It took the nazis to ORIGINALLY conceive the idea of an aerial firestorm. What sane, rational person would even consider doing such a thing?
The raid was carried out by over 500 Luftwaffe bombers which delivered 500 tons of HE bombs, 36000 incendiaries, as well as 50 large parachute mines and a similar number of high capacity incendiary "flammenbombe" or "oil bombs", with the desired intention of creating the huge inferno, the attack claimed the lives of nearly 600 innocent English civilians, which was an UNPRECEDENTED amount of deaths in a single raid at that point in human history.
The day after the raid, Josef Geobbels, the nazi's propaganda minister, joyously announced on national German radio that the English city of Coventry had been destroyed, and jokingly suggested a new word to be entered into the German lexicon.... the verb "Coventrierten" ("to Coventrate" in English) meaning to destroy a city in the same manner as the firebombing of Coventry.
All reports suggest that Geobbels wasn't being so light hearted when 2½ years later the RAF after having studied the effects of "Moonlight Sonata" on Coventry, showed the Germans how to do it properly on the night of 27th July 1943 at Hamburg during "operation Gomorrah".
As for Dresden, who cares? As an old man once said many years ago....
"If the Germans want 'sympathy' tell them they can find it in the dictionary..... it's between 'shit' & 'syphilis'.... "
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
For those who believe Poland was "excluded" from the 1946 London victory parade, here is a brief timeline of what actually happened to give some context to the oft repeated nonsense that "Brits never invited the Poles" or "the Brits banned the Poles".
Since before the end of WW2 in Europe, Britain and the US had been negotiating with the Soviets over the future of eastern Europe and especially Poland in post WW2 Europe. The UK & US wanted a democratic Polish government that would by way of democracy include both the Polish communists of the existing Moscow backed "Lublin committee", and the Polish nationalists from the Polish Govt in exile that had been based in London during most of WW2. This proposed "Polish provisional government of national unity" (Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) was to be setup in Warsaw, and was agreed to by all of the "Big 3" (UK / US / USSR) at the Feb 1945 Yalta conference, but from the outset the Soviets then occupying Poland did everything they practically could to bar the inclusion of the "London Poles" within the "unity govt", and to intimidate the small number of nationalists that did eventually make it into the provisional govt.
With regard to the 1946 Victory parade when Britain sent out its invites to all of the countries that had fought on the side of the Allies during WW2, The British Labour government of Clement Attlee, quite correctly handed the Polish invitation to the newly constituted Warsaw based "Polish provisional government of national unity" which was after all now the official government of Poland, as recognised by the United Nations.
The now effectively powerless & stateless nationalist Polish government in exile in London took great offence at their sidelining in this matter, and raised a torrent of indignation within the UK Parliament that was backed by many British MPs and ordinary people. A few days before the parade was due to take place, and with no response having been forthcoming from the Warsaw government, a belated invitation was hurriedly sent both to the Polish Govt in Exile in London as well as directly to various Polish generals who had fought with the allies, ALL of whom felt so disgusted with the perceived public disrespect shown by the INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY (That is, being made to play "second fiddle" to the official Warsaw Polish government on the world stage) that they CHOSE not to attend the parade to register their fury and resentment at not being consulted first.
And the final ignominy? The Soviet backed Warsaw government neither acknowledged the British invite, or attended the parade either.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
When devious nazi fanboi idiots or assorted uninformed idiots say "Hitler never wanted war with Britain and France" they ALWAYS miss off the part that says "until he was ready for it on his OWN terms".
Because of course Hitler laid all his hopes on being left to expand the nazi empire EASTWARDS in peace, assimilate his new found conquests with their collective economies and resources, further build up his military power and only THEN conquer Britain & France, as they had already attempted TWICE BEFORE in the previous 70 years, once in 1870 and again in 1914, the THIRD attempt in 1940 was precipitated by the British and French not sitting and waiting for it to happen on Hitler's terms. If we had've waited the outcome would have been much MUCH different from the destruction of nazism in 1945.
Not confronting Hitler in 1939 would have resulted with Britain by the late 1940s onwards having:
A puppet nazi government, a nazi supporting King Edward VIII restored to the throne, and the UK as a nazi satellite state.
Extermination camps in the Cotswolds, Pennines & Scottish Highlands.
SS Einsatzgruppen stalking the shires looking to find "undesirables" to summarily execute.
All UK males of working age being deported to the reich to be slaved to death in nazi armaments factories or infrastructure projects.
And now, slimy nazi fanbois and other devious loons want the uninformed to think that letting Hitler conduct his plans undisturbed would mean that we would have a Britain today filled with Rose cottages, warm beer, bar skittles & village cricket.
How utterly devious those people are, people with greater awareness of the situation don't fall for their nazi apologist nonsense.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
U-boats had a distillation unit on board which could produce about 60 litres of fresh water a day, this was stored in a fresh water tank, but the U-boats batteries had first call on the fresh water supply, the men had second call, this was yet another matter that every day weighed heavily on the mind of the U-boat's "LI" (Leitender Ingenieur or "Chief Engineer").
Fresh water for the men was almost always for hydration/cooking etc, Crew hygiene was a low priority, in tropical climes in the early war years in areas of low aircraft risk, showers could be set up on deck using pumped sea water, and "special" salt water soap, but it was a rare luxury, with the result that submariners would more often than not douse themselves in "eau de cologne" to try to mask their collective stench.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Lies, damned lies, and wehraboo posters on YT comments sections.
Why have you chosen to "cherry pick" your figures from different sources, was it to show the RAF at its strongest, and the Luftwaffe at its weakest? Why have you chosen to represent RAF defensive strength to include bomber and coastal command? They were NOT defending and took NO part in the defensive airwar over England in 1940.
Lets look at some official figures shall we?
AIR 40/1207 - Air Ministry: Periodical Returns, Intelligence Summaries and Bulletins. Dated 10th July 1940 (officially the first day of the battle of Britain). Total fighter command returns 645 aircraft to include all Spitfire / Hurricane / Blenheim / Defiants. That is 645 serviceable fighter aircraft to DEFEND the whole of Britain, NOT the 1963 you try to suggest which included the likes of defensively useless types such as Battles, Hampdens, Wellingtons & Whitleys.
Facing the 645 fighters of RAF Fighter Command were the assembled forces of Luftflottes 2, 3 & 5. As you may imagine, Luftwaffe records from 1940 are piecemeal and hard to correlate, but a fair aggregation of serviceable aircraft (Which does NOT include the Do 18s / FW 200s etc of the Küstenfliegers or Ju52s etc of KG zbV1 or other assorted offensive units stationed in Germany / Poland) as of July / August 1940 are as follows.
Single-engined fighters 787
Twin-engined fighters 219
Night fighters 63
Fighter-bombers 119
Dive-bombers 294
Twin-engined bombers 960
Four-engined bombers 7
Long-range reconaissance aircraft 185
Total Offensive A/C available in France
the Low Countries, and Scandinavia 2,634
Which gives an offensive luftwaffe strength (2634) to defensive RAF strength (645) ratio of 4.08 luftwaffe aircraft to every 1 RAF fighter.
Save your slanted, biased nonsense for those who can't read facts for themselves.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Prinz Eugen, which fired HE shells throughout the engagement, had NO potential to destroy Hood, though she did start a fire on Hood's boat deck.
"Beating the hell out of PoW".... you mean a total of SEVEN hits on PoW, NONE of which did serious damage.... so much so that after PoW had withdrawn due to the ongoing problems with her main armaments, she was, within 25 minutes of withdrawing from the engagement, once again shadowing Bismarck at full speed, and engaged in a further TWO exchanges of fire with Bismarck before being forced to make for Iceland due to shortage of fuel.
"Hood was never going to survive"?
Hood top speed = 32 knots (although in 1941 probably nearer to 30 knots)
Bismarck top speed = 30 knots
Hood main armament = 8 x 15in
Bismarck main armament = 8 x 15in
Bismarck belt armour = 12.6 inches
Hood belt armour = 12 inches (Though angled so as to give 13 inches of protection).
Bismarck armoured deck = 3.75 inches
Hood armoured deck = 3 inches
There was every expectation that Hood would "give as good as she took" prior to the engagement. Hood's vertical armour was well upto the average standard of contemporary battleships, her weakest aspect was her horizontal deck armour, but Holland had raced to close on Bismarck and had escaped the "danger zone" of plunging fire, only to be then hit by a million to one shot that found an obscure "Achilles heel" in her vertical armour.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
My father was onboard the Royal Navy cruiser HMS Dorsetshire during the "Bismarck saga". He took part in the rescues of the 86 Bismarck sailors that were picked up by her after the sinking. One of the rescued survivors, a badly injured German sailor named Gerhard Lüttich, died on the operating table in Dorsetshire's sick bay that evening. The following morning, 28th May 1941, his body was then "committed to the deep" with full military honours provided by BOTH his German comrades AND sailors from HMS Dorsetshire, with the last post played by a Royal Marine bugler. The remaining surviving crew were treated EXCELLENTLY by the crews of HMS Dorsetshire & HMS Maori, being given the same bunking arrangements as the crew (under guard of course), and provided with 3 hot meals a day for the 4 days they were on board. They were also given Grog (rum and water) which was only normally issued to the RN sailors, the survivors were also provided with sweets, chocolate and cigarettes by the RN crews, and this was just 3 days after the sinking of HMS Hood.
Human decency does still exist sometimes in the middle of abject horror.
2
-
2
-
2
-
Using the rationale of your "All the colonies and their RAW MATERIALS,SLAVE SOLDIERS Specially From INDIA Had Make sure that Britain was not alone against Germany" argument actually means that Britain survived the onslaught of the nazis supported by Italy, the USSR, Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Romania, Denmark, Norway, the Nertherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg and France. Thank you for highlighting the sheer extent of Britain's victory against the assembled economies of all those nations.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Yet ANOTHER clueless, commenter.
Please provide us with the details of the luftwaffe air assaults on Canberra, Ottawa, Delhi and Wellington? Or how the Wehrmacht stood poised to launch its invasion of the Indian sub continent or the British west African colonies? Or how the Kriegsmarine attempted to strangle the British Empire out of the war by enforcing a u-boat blockade of Australia and New Zealand?
Oh news just coming in...... NONE OF THOSE THINGS HAPPENED because the ONLY nation facing ALL of those threats between July 1940 and April 1941 was the United Kingdom ALONE.
The Commonwealth was in 1940 mostly a distant vocal supporter. The defence of the UK in 1940 was maintained by 95% British troops and citizens. It was another year or so before the commonwealth contribution in Europe REALLY began to kick in.
And if you want to correctly argue that Britain was supplied by its empire and the US then remember to add that nazi Germany was also supplied by its OWN empire of its recent European conquests (including some of the most heavily industrialised nations on the planet), as well as MILLIONS of tons of food, fuel and raw materials from their "best friend forever" the USSR (well, at least until 22nd June 1941), and also from Spain, Finland, Sweden & the Balkan countries... oh and not forgetting that US owned companies also supplied HUGE amounts of raw and finished materials to the nazis AS WELL as it did to the British, being a neutral profiteering bystander as it was until Dec 1941!!!
In 1940 Britain saved itself INSPITE of the US as much as it did BECAUSE of the US.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Complete nonsense. Bismarck's crew actually scuttled a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken in several places along her port side, her command staff obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater a thousand of her crew dead and hundreds more already in the water behind her.... All the scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer when he has been punched senseless by a more powerful opponent, and only a deluded wehraboo child would say, "the loser wasn't beaten, he gave in before he was annihilated.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off and handed to him on a plate.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Just to give some input to your post, remember that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need" or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism from June 1940 onwards, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s.
It was interesting to read your account of rich Germans flooding into Poland after the fall of communism. In EXACTLY the same fashion, at the end of the American civil war, rich northern businessmen and politicians flooded into the impoverished southern states to prey upon the poverty stricken southerners, buying up their valuables, land, and political favour. They became known as "carpetbaggers", and its a constant facet of human behaviour, the rich preying upon the poor, so the experience you had, while it is certainly DEEPLY distasteful, it is sadly nothing new.
Thank you for your own insight.
1
-
@piotrsie5465 Piotr, I TOTALLY concur with your appraisal of the situation after the collapse of communism. One amendment I would make to your post is that every time you say "the west" please substitute the words "corporate globalism". After the collapse of communism it was agreed that central Europe would be left politically unaligned to act as a "buffer zone" between "east" and "west". Fast forward 30 years, and the borders of globlalist directed NATO now runs along the very borders of Russia herself having moved 1000 miles eastwards, all by using the "magic" of "corporate globalist soft power", that is by the use of untold financial power to place complicit puppet politicos in the governments of individual countries of "the west" including central Europe (Are you listening Zelensky?) who take their orders NOT from their respective electorates but from the growing global hegemony of the WEF, UN, WHO, World Bank etc. The current proxy war being fought in Ukraine is between the globalist directed forces of the "west" and the equally disagreeable regime in Moscow.,all with the aim of effecting "regime change" in Russia to install another puppet regime that is beholden to the same corporate globalists who are already slowly crushing the populations of "the west".
If you think "the west" is preferable, remember that when in twenty years time your family is huddled aound a feeble fire in the dead of winter chewing on a raw turnip. For that is what corporate globalism has in store for the world populations, while they live the high life setting about raping the VAST natural resources of Russia to increase their own wealth.
P.S I have good friends from Lithuania who now live in Britain, who have also suffered under decades of brutal communist rule, and as you say inspite of their outwardly dour demeanour they are some of the most decent and kind people I know.
Best wishes to you from the UK (From a Brit who holds NO hatred of other countries... there's PLENTY of us about.)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@druisteen Below is the vebatim British ultimatum delivered to Adm Bruno-Marcel Gentoul at Mers-El-Kebir on the 3rd July 1940
"It is impossible for us, your comrades up to now, to allow your fine ships to fall into the power of the German or Italian enemy. We are determined to fight on until the end, and if we win, as we think we shall, we shall never forget that France was our Ally, that our interests are the same as hers, and that our common enemy is Germany. Should we conquer, we solemnly declare that we shall restore the greatness and territory of France. For this purpose, we must make sure that the best ships of the French Navy are not used against us by the common foe. In these circumstances, His Majesty’s Government have instructed me to demand that the French Fleet now at Mers-el-Kébir and Oran shall act in accordance with one of the following alternatives:
(a) Sail with us and continue the fight until victory against the Germans and Italians.
(b) Sail with reduced crews under our control to a British port. The reduced crews would be repatriated at the earliest moment. If either of these courses is adopted by you, we will restore your ships to France at the conclusion of the war or pay full compensation, if they are damaged meanwhile.
(c) Alternatively, if you feel bound to stipulate that your ships should not be used against the Germans or Italians unless these break the Armistice, then sail them with us with reduced crews, to some French port in the West Indies—Martinique for instance—where they can be demilitarised to our satisfaction, or perhaps be entrusted to the United States and remain safe until the end of the war, the crews being repatriated.
If you refuse these fair offers, I must, with profound regret, require you to sink your ships within 6 hours.
Finally, failing the above I have orders of His Majesty's Government to use whatever force may be necessary to prevent your ships us from falling into German or Italian hands."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nickarnold814 Sorry for the late reply, YT increasingly does not bother to notify me of replies, and I just stumbled on your question.
The reason that Britain and France drew that final "line in the sand" at the Polish border for Germany (after the German re-militarisation of the Rhineland, the Anscluss of Austria, the Sudeten deal and the subsequent occupation of the rest of Czechoslovakia) was quite simple, they believed that the nazi leadership would be intimidated by the prospect of war with the combined economic might of the British & French empires, a potential repeat of the bloodbath of WW1, and hoped that it would cause the Germans to think again about crossing the Polish border.
When the Germans ignored the warning, the two tired and unprepared nations were forced to make good on their threat of war. Rest assured if they hadn't then Germany would have then gone on to cement it's alliances in the Balkans, assimilated the economies and resources of its new found acquisitions, further strengthened it's military and only THEN attacked France and Britain on it's own German terms, the same as it had already TWICE done in the previous 70 years.... once in 1870 and again in 1914.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@emergenthub305 Where do you get this "Enslaves" nonsense from? Trying to slip that lefty BS in quietly eh?
Of ALL the empires throughout the last 3-4 millenia of human history the British Empire was the ONLY one to outlaw human slavery.... and did so when it was in its apogee and without peer. It then set its most powerful armed force, that being the Royal Navy to break the transportation of human slaves from around the world. Much against the wishes of other European imperialists.
Please name me another empire that when it finally ended then happily maintained, as it does to this day, a happy and mutually beneficial friendship with its former colonies in the form of the Commonwealth.
As for your "the soviets did more to save Europe" You seem completely ignorant of the fact that the USSR was the nazis FIRST ally, and eagerly divided up Poland before invading the Baltic states, then Eastern Romania.
Adolf Hitler explicitly wanted more than anything else for the UK to join his "crusade", and support his "vision" for a nazi dominated Europe while we controlled the world's seas and kept our Empire.... what an unbeatable alliance that would have been !!!
But Instead of looking out for our own selfish interests, the largely unprepared UK and France declared war on Hitler's Germany for Poland & Europe's sake, NOT OUR OWN, What benefit did the UK receive from declaring war on Germany? That selfless act alone set in train the events that eventually led to the fall of nazism 5½ years later.... only then for the communists and Americans to betray eastern Europe and NOT allow democracy to flourish there postwar. Yes, I suggest you go and air your uninformed views in Eastern Europe and see if the populations that were crushed by the yoke of your "soviet heroes" think the Russkis "saved Europe".
After the fall of France in June 1940 the UK, against the expectations of the ENTIRE world, then fought on ALONE in Europe from June 1940 to June 1941 & continued the opposition to nazism when absolutely NO-ONE else in the world was interested.
Who ELSE do you imagine was going to save Europe?
The USSR? They'd eagerly joined the nazis in raping Poland, and then happily executed 22,000 of their countrymen in one fell swoop, followed by countless others, after which as I said they militarily crushed the Baltic states and invaded Romania.
The USA? Their chosen neutrality meant they were NEVER going to get drawn into a European war (it was only nazi Germany's declaration of war on the US in Dec 1941 that dragged their backsliding arses into the conflict), in fact US businesses were only TOO happy to do business with BOTH sides, and happily supplied Britain AND Germany with raw materials, fuel and war equipment while the nazis raped Poland and THROUGHOUT the rest of WW2.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire ALONE to nazism from June 1940 onwards, opposition which bankrupted the UK and cost her 460,000 of her citizen's lives, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps would STILL be operating on European soil today, and Stalin would have been left eating his borscht out of a wooden bowl, sat in a cave in Mongolia.
There's no need for you to thank me for my efforts to reduce your complete ignorance of the European situation from the 1940s onwards.
1
-
@emergenthub305 Where do you get this "Enslave" nonsense from? Trying to slip that lefty BS in quietly eh?
Of ALL the empires throughout the last 3-4 millenia of human history the British Empire was the ONLY one to outlaw human slavery.... and did so when it was in its apogee and without peer. It then set its most powerful armed force, that being the Royal Navy to break the transportation of human slaves from around the world. Much against the wishes of other European imperialists.
Please name me another empire that when it finally ended then happily maintained, as it does to this day, a happy and mutually beneficial friendship with its former colonies in the form of the Commonwealth.
As for your "the soviets did more to save Europe" You seem completely ignorant of the fact that the USSR was the nazis FIRST ally, and eagerly divided up Poland before invading the Baltic states, then Eastern Romania.
Adolf Hitler explicitly wanted more than anything else for the UK to join his "crusade", and support his "vision" for a nazi dominated Europe while we controlled the world's seas and kept our Empire.... what an unbeatable alliance that would have been !!!
But Instead of looking out for our own selfish interests, the largely unprepared UK and France declared war on Hitler's Germany for Poland & Europe's sake, NOT OUR OWN, What benefit did the UK receive from declaring war on Germany? That selfless act alone set in train the events that eventually led to the fall of nazism 5½ years later.... only then for the communists and Americans to betray eastern Europe and NOT allow democracy to flourish there postwar. Yes, I suggest you go and air your uninformed views in Eastern Europe and see if the populations that were crushed by the yoke of your "soviet heroes" think the Russkis "saved Europe".
After the fall of France in June 1940 the UK, against the expectations of the ENTIRE world, then fought on ALONE in Europe from June 1940 to June 1941 & continued the opposition to nazism when absolutely NO-ONE else in the world was interested.
Who ELSE do you imagine was going to save Europe?
The USSR? They'd eagerly joined the nazis in raping Poland, and then happily executed 22,000 of their countrymen in one fell swoop, followed by countless others, after which as I said they militarily crushed the Baltic states and invaded Romania.
The USA? Their chosen neutrality meant they were NEVER going to get drawn into a European war (it was only nazi Germany's declaration of war on the US in Dec 1941 that dragged their backsliding arses into the conflict), in fact US businesses were only TOO happy to do business with BOTH sides, and happily supplied Britain AND Germany with raw materials, fuel and war equipment while the nazis raped Poland and THROUGHOUT the rest of WW2.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire ALONE to nazism from June 1940 onwards, opposition which bankrupted the UK and cost her 460,000 of her citizen's lives, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps would STILL be operating on European soil today, and Stalin would have been left eating his borscht out of a wooden bowl, sat in a cave in Mongolia.
There's no need for you to thank me for my efforts to reduce your complete ignorance of the European situation from the 1940s onwards.
1
-
@emergenthub305 Where do you get this "Enslave" nonsense from? Trying to slip that lefty BS in quietly eh?
Of ALL the empires throughout the last 3-4 millenia of human history the British Empire was the ONLY one to outlaw human slavery.... and did so when it was in its apogee and without peer. It then set its most powerful armed force, that being the Royal Navy to break the transportation of human slaves from around the world. Much against the wishes of other European imperialists.
Please name me another empire that when it finally ended then happily maintained, as it does to this day, a happy and mutually beneficial friendship with its former colonies in the form of the Commonwealth.
As for your "the soviets did more to save Europe" You seem completely ignorant of the fact that the USSR was the nazis FIRST ally, and eagerly divided up Poland before invading the Baltic states, then Eastern Romania.
Adolf Hitler explicitly wanted more than anything else for the UK to join his "crusade", and support his "vision" for a nazi dominated Europe while we controlled the world's seas and kept our Empire.... what an unbeatable alliance that would have been !!!
But Instead of looking out for our own selfish interests, the largely unprepared UK and France declared war on Hitler's Germany for Poland & Europe's sake, NOT OUR OWN, What benefit did the UK receive from declaring war on Germany? That selfless act alone set in train the events that eventually led to the fall of nazism 5½ years later.... only then for the communists and Americans to betray eastern Europe and NOT allow democracy to flourish there postwar. Yes, I suggest you go and air your uninformed views in Eastern Europe and see if the populations that were crushed by the yoke of your "soviet heroes" think the Russkis "saved Europe".
After the fall of France in June 1940 the UK, against the expectations of the ENTIRE world, then fought on ALONE in Europe from June 1940 to June 1941 & continued the opposition to nazism when absolutely NO-ONE else in the world was interested.
Who ELSE do you imagine was going to save Europe?
The USSR? They'd eagerly joined the nazis in raping Poland, and then happily executed 22,000 of their countrymen in one fell swoop, followed by countless others, after which as I said they militarily crushed the Baltic states and invaded Romania.
The USA? Their chosen neutrality meant they were NEVER going to get drawn into a European war (it was only nazi Germany's declaration of war on the US in Dec 1941 that dragged their backsliding arses into the conflict), in fact US businesses were only TOO happy to do business with BOTH sides, and happily supplied Britain AND Germany with raw materials, fuel and war equipment while the nazis raped Poland and THROUGHOUT the rest of WW2.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire ALONE to nazism from June 1940 onwards, opposition which bankrupted the UK and cost her 460,000 of her citizen's lives, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps would STILL be operating on European soil today, and Stalin would have been left eating his borscht out of a wooden bowl, sat in a cave in Mongolia.
There's no need for you to thank me for my efforts to reduce your complete ignorance of the European situation from the 1940s onwards.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AFGuidesHD When devious nazi fanboi idiots and other assorted uninformed loons such as yourself suggest that "Hitler never wanted war with Britain and France" they ALWAYS miss off the part that says "until he was ready for it on his OWN terms".
Because of course Hitler laid all his hopes on being left to expand the nazi empire EASTWARDS in peace, assimilate his new found conquests with their collective economies and resources, further build up his military power and only THEN conquer France followed by Britain (or possibly impose a crushing "pax Germanica" on the UK as they did with Vichy France), they had already attempted such a feat TWICE BEFORE in the previous 70 years, once in 1870 and again in 1914, the THIRD attempt in 1940 was precipitated by the British and French not sitting and waiting for it to happen on Hitler's terms (have you never wondered why nazi Germany was known as the THIRD reich?). If we had've waited the outcome would have been much MUCH different from the destruction of nazism in 1945.
Not confronting Hitler in 1939 would have resulted with Britain by the late 1940s onwards having:
A puppet nazi government, a nazi supporting King Edward VIII restored to the throne, and the UK as a nazi satellite state.
Extermination camps in the Cotswolds, Pennines & Scottish Highlands.
SS Einsatzgruppen stalking the shires looking to find "undesirables" to summarily execute.
All UK males of working age being deported to the reich to be slaved to death in nazi armaments factories or infrastructure projects.
And now, slimy nazi fanbois and other devious loons want the uninformed to think that letting Hitler conduct his plans undisturbed would mean that we would have a Britain today filled with Rose cottages, warm beer, bar skittles, Morris dancers & village cricket.
How utterly devious those people are, people with greater awareness of the situation don't fall for their nazi apologist nonsense.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheDogGeneral For ALL your words, Hood after her redesign was considered by the RN DNC as well armoured as the "Queen Elizabeth" battleships, such as Warspite who had survived everything the Kaiser's navy could throw at her when at Jutland her steering motors overheated and she circled ALONE twice in front of the entire WW1 German battle fleet, and then went on into WW2 surviving encounters with Italian battleships and nazi glider bombs. Hood was as far removed from the likes of the WW1 Tiger and Indefatigable class battlecruisers as I am from a ballet dancer (and thats a VERY long way). The RN's nomenclature for Hood as a "battlecruiser" was entirely down to her speed, which outstripped all her WW1 battleship cohort by a factor of 7-8 knots, and not based on her being "lightly armoured".
Bismarck belt armour = 12.6 inches
Hood belt armour = 12 inches (Though angled so as to give 13 inches of protection).
Bismarck armoured deck = 4 inches
Hood armoured deck = 3 inches
Hood's vertical armour was well upto the average standard of contemporary battleships, her weakest aspect was her horizontal deck armour, but Holland had raced to close on Bismarck and had escaped the "danger zone" of plunging fire, only to be then hit by a million to one shot that found an obscure "achilles heel" in her vertical armour.
I couldn't care a rat's ass what YOU think, If a ship possesses battleship armour and battleship armament and is 7-8 knots faster than her battleship cohort, she is by ANY definition a "fast battleship" in ALL but name.
As Shakespeare said, "That which we call a "rose" would by any other name smell as sweet"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bobsakamanos4469 They were good quality pilots, but that quality was not because of their Polish training regime, or some form of superior Polish spacial awareness, but simply due to the fact that all the mediocre, poor & less resourceful Polish pilots had already been "filtered out" of the Polish aircrew cadre by 2 previous campaigns and by having had to make their way right across Europe living on their wits. The Polish pilots flying in the battle of Britain were the creme of the prewar PAF and not a random selection, which in Poland had been hammered out of existence within days of the start of the campaign.
Set against that "filtration process" was the fact that they had less experience in British fighter aircraft, and the world beating British air defence system, so that while they were more able than novice British pilots then replacing battle losses, they were completely average when compared to experienced pilots of other nations.... as is testified to by the highest kill tallies achieved during the battle.
Top RAF Fighter Command "kill tallies" during the battle of Britain.
Flt Lt Eric Stanley Lock (English) - 21½ confirmed kills (in Spitfires)
Sgt James Harry Lacey (English) - 18 confirmed kills. (In Hurricanes)
Flt Lt Archie Ashmore McKellar (Scottish) - 17½ confirmed kills. (In spitfires)
Sgt Josef František (Czechoslovakian) - 17 confirmed kills. (In Hurricanes)
Pilot Off Colin Falkland Gray (New Zealand) - 15½ confirmed kills. (In Spitfires)
Fl Off Brian Carbury (New Zealand) - 15½ confirmed kills (In Spitifres)
Flt Lt Witold Urbanowicz (Poland) - 15 confirmed kills. (In Hurricanes)
I assume you will also roll out the " 303 was the highest scoring squadron during the battle" statement, but while you do that you will need to look into that fact more deeply.
Polish "Kościuszko" 303 Sqd total kill tally - 58.5 confirmed kills (NOT the 127 CLAIMED kills widely quoted.)
Which included the confirmed kills of the following pilots.
Squadron commander, Sqd Ldr Ronald Gustave Kellett (British) - 5 confirmed kills
"A" Flight commander, Fl Lt John Alexander Kent (Canadian) - 6 confirmed kills
"B" Flight commander, Fl Lt Athol Stanhope Forbes (British) - 7 confirmed kills.
Sgt pilot Josef František (Czechoslovakian) - 17 confirmed Kills.
The only pilots being disparaged in all of this are the British pilots, who you appear to be trying to portray as somehow generally less able than other pilots.
P.S Where are you getting this "very poor Hurricane kill ratio" nonsense from?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Since 1932 the Polish codebreakers Marian Rejewski, Henryk Zygalski & Jerzy Różycki worked within BS4 (the Polish general staff cipher Bureau focussed on German decryption & intelligence), and together with VITAL assistance given by the French intelligence officer Gustave Bertrand (who had cultivated a German informant codenamed "Asché" who had provided French Intelligence with tons of vital data including a full nazi procedural manual for use of the enigma encryption device), had by the purchase of a commercial version of the early enigma device and LOTS of analysis eventually broken into German army and navy 3 rotor encryption networks, this was a fantastic achievement, but it is true to say that they at no time did they crack German Kriegsmarine encryption due to the additional layers of security employed by the German navy.
In December 1938 the nazis introduced a further 2 interchangeable encryption rotors to the enigma system, which immediately brought the vast majority of Polish decryption efforts to a grinding halt, which is where it remained up until the outbreak of WW2. In the weeks prior to the outbreak of WW2 the Polish research work was passed to the French, who in the six months they had it in their possession added little to the accumulated knowledge, and to the UK where the British government seized it with both hands, and made its study top priority. So was instigated the British "ULTRA" project.
Jerzy Różycki elected to stay behind and work in Vichy France where, unknown to the Germans he worked on an a seperate secret encryption system, which bore no tangible fruit before his death in 1942.
Marian Rejewski & Henryk Zygalski were, for security reasons, not included in the UK "ULTRA" project, and so took no further part in British decryption efforts.
The British "ULTRA" project took the non working foundation research of the Polish decrypters and from there massively expanded that research to once again break into nazi 3 rotor enigma, this was followed in 1942 by the cracking of the improved kriegsmarine 4 rotor enigma network (SHARK), as well as simultaneously breaking into the FAR more complex "lorenz" cipher device used by the German army & navy high commands (TUNNY), before finally cracking the "Geheimschreiber" encryption device used by both the Luftwaffe high command as well as the top level of the nazi government (STURGEON), on top of these British achievements another product of the ULTRA program was the building of the world's first programmable electronic computer (COLOSSUS) to speed up the breaking of German codes. This was designed by a British telephone engineer (Tommy Flowers), which transformed British decryption from a process which often only gave results weeks after the message was eavesdropped on by the British, to a state of affairs where the British were reading top level communications at the same time as the intended German recipient.
The early Polish codebreakers did indeed provide the "acorn" from which the British cultivated the "mighty oak" of ULTRA.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JohnSmith-ei2pz Since 1932 the Polish codebreakers Marian Rejewski, Henryk Zygalski & Jerzy Różycki worked within BS4 (the Polish general staff cipher Bureau focussed on German decryption & intelligence), and together with VITAL assistance given by the French intelligence officer Gustave Bertrand (who had cultivated a German informant codenamed "Asché" who had provided French Intelligence with tons of vital data including a full nazi procedural manual for use of the enigma encryption device), had by the purchase of a commercial version of the early enigma device and LOTS of analysis eventually broken into German army and air force 3 rotor encryption networks, this was a fantastic achievement, but it is true to say that they at no time did they crack German Kriegsmarine encryption due to the additional layers of security employed by the German navy.
In December 1938 the nazis introduced a further 2 interchangeable encryption rotors to the enigma system, which immediately brought the vast majority of Polish decryption efforts to a grinding halt, which is where it remained up until the outbreak of WW2. In the weeks prior to the outbreak of WW2 the Polish research work was passed to the French, who in the six months they had it in their possession added little to the accumulated knowledge, and to the UK where the British government seized it with both hands, and made its study top priority. So was instigated the British "ULTRA" project.
Jerzy Różycki elected to stay behind and work in Vichy France where, unknown to the Germans he worked on a seperate secret encryption system, which bore no tangible fruit before his death in 1942.
Marian Rejewski & Henryk Zygalski were, for security reasons, not included in the UK "ULTRA" project, and so took no further part in British decryption efforts.
The British "ULTRA" project took the non working foundation research of the Polish decrypters and from there MASSIVELY expanded that research to once again break into nazi 3 rotor enigma, this was followed in 1942 by the cracking of the improved kriegsmarine M4 enigma (the 4 rotor enigma device, codenamed "SHARK"), as well as simultaneously breaking into the FAR more complex "lorenz" cipher device used by the German army & navy high commands (TUNNY), before finally cracking the "Geheimschreiber" encryption device used by both the Luftwaffe high command as well as the top level of the nazi government (STURGEON), on top of these British achievements another product of the ULTRA program was the building of the world's first programmable electronic computer (COLOSSUS) to speed up the breaking of German codes. This was designed and built by a British team led by Alan Turing and the telephone engineer Tommy Flowers, which transformed British decryption from a process which often only gave results days or even weeks after the message was eavesdropped on by the British, to a state of affairs towards the end of WW2 where the British were reading a LOT of top level communications at the same time as the intended German recipient.
The early Polish codebreakers did indeed provide the "acorn" from which the British cultivated the "mighty oak" of ULTRA.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The initial torpedo hit on the HMS Prince of Wales, was even more fortuitous that the one that struck the rudders of the Bismarck 7 months earlier. If it had struck anywhere else than where it actually did, it's likely that PoW's torpedo defence design would have shrugged off the blast. As it was the torpedo hit the support stanchion of the port outermost propeller shaft. This relatively unimportant looking piece of steelwork actually kept the propeller shaft in solid, correct alignment as it passed through various bearings, seals and "stuffing boxes" as it made its way from the ship's engines out of the hull to the propeller itself.
With the support stanchion blown away, the now unsupported rapidly spinning propeller shaft oscillated and flexed wildly and in doing so tore apart all of the various hull seals and bearings along its length, destroying the water integrity of sealed compartment after sealed compartment throughout the aft of the ship, meaning that as opposed to one or two compartments/tanks being flooded, a far greater proportion of PoW's integrity was destroyed, on top of which the flooding shut down multiple electrical generators thereby knocking out of action many of PoW's systems, the most vital of which in the emergency flooding situation she then faced being her pumping and ballast systems.
Also the absence of the RN armoured aircraft carrier HMS Indomitable, which on the 3rd November 1941, had been damaged in the Carribean as she was about to redeploy to Singapore was a major contributory factor to these events.
1
-
1
-
@maxn.7234 I know that the long held German national policy of "drang nach Osten" was still uppermost in Hitler's mind, BUT he was not happy with the western European situation in summer 1940. He first tried to "soft soap" the UK into submission, which failed, and then hoped he could cause the collapse of the UK govt, if necessary by effecting a landing in the south of England. When he failed in achieving this, it wasn't the end of the matter. He only moved on the USSR because he believed that the communists would fall within a year, and then he would have moved back to Britain for another attempt.
It's utter nonsense to say "no one in Germany was serious about it". The simple fact of the economic dislocation that Germany exposed herself to by the stripping of her entire canal system of barges, the marshalling of nearly 30 army divisions (including 4 panzer Divs) just in the initial assault wave, and the creation of 2 regiments of amphibious assault tanks was no "bluff", but most telling of all was the damage that the luftwaffe elected to inflict on itself by its efforts in the skies over Britain. Close to 2000 aircraft destroyed with the majority of the aircrews lost to the luftwaffe. They were only prepared to make that sacrifice because it was their full intention to knock Britain out of the war and welcome those thousands of highly trained aircrew back into the ranks of the luftwaffe after their liberation from British PoW camps, something which obviously never happened.
1
-
@maxn.7234 What part of the world's then largest navy interdicting German merchant naval traffic, and an air force that was increasingly starting to relatiate against German cities, on top of the UK's potential to act as the western allies's largest unsinkable aircraft carrier do you not understand?
I think the Luftwaffe bombing of British cities went a LONG way towards keeping the British public's interest focussed on the ongoing struggle. Of course Hitler made appeals to the UK to accept a "Pax Germanica", What makes you think that the UK was going to settle for that, when every other promise made by Hitler had turned out to be a complete lie?
Remember When the nazis wanted to reintegrate the Sudeten Germans back into the greater German reich.... and then a few months later marched right the way through Czechoslovakia to "Sub Carpathian Ruthenia"? There weren't any "ethnic Germans" there.... or Hitler's "I have no more territorial demands in Europe" shortly before sending the Wehrmacht into Poland.
2000 Barges in Denmark? There wouldn't be any land left for all the canals they have to build to moor them!!! The barges actually employed by the wehrmacht to be adapted as troop carriers were not little narrow boats, but large flat bottomed cargo carrying Rhine barges known as prahms which were used for carrying coal and other bulk cargoes, each one capable of carrying many hundreds of tons of bulk cargo, so a sudden removal of large numbers of them would have had a palpable short term effect on German industry. How do you make out that "none of the barges were sent west" when there are historic photographs of RAF bombers dumping their bombloads over hundreds of them in Ostend, Calais, Boulogne, and Dieppe during August and September 1940?
Also Germany doubled the number of the panzer divisions it possesed by reducing the panzer contingent of each existing divisions to 1 panzer regiment and doubling the number of largely horse drawn panzer grenadier regiments in each division. The Panzer divisions assisgned to "Seelöwe" were of the non-watered down 2 panzer regiment type.
Of course Sealion was a dumb plan... but when you've blustered at your enemy in his bolt hole and he's told you to "get stuffed" what else is there for you to do but attempt to make good your threats, as you KNOW he is going to get stronger and stronger and cause you big problems in the future? As I said above quite simply that the luftwaffe was prepared to lose a few thousand highly trained aircrew into British captivity clearly illustrates that they fully believed that they were going to cause the downfall of Great Britain and recoup their temporarily lost fliers.
1
-
@maxn.7234 Hence why I specifically said the POTENTIAL to become the unsinkable carrier. Do pay attention.
What makes you think Germany controlled all of Europe apart from Spain in 1940? You seem to be forgetting the entire Balkans and Greece were still independent countries, and Italy although part of the "pact of Steel" was NOT under German control, witness their kack handed invasions of Greece & Egypt which were most definitely NOT part of German strategic planning. Also there was NO chance that Spain was going to ally with Germany. The head of German military intelligence Adm Canaris, who had Franco's ear, had secretly advised him NOT to fall in with Hitler, and also the supply of US food which kept the devastated post civil war Spanish population alive was in NO uncertain terms supplied to them on the condition of Spanish neutrality.
While Germany did indeed receive MASSIVE support from the USSR up until the Germans foolishly bit the hand that was feeding them, they did NOT supply the Germans with everything they needed, hence why Germany struggled throughout the entire war for materials such as copper, tungsten, manganese, rubber and other vital supplies. Even during 1940 Germany which had built up prewar stockpiles of many commodities and had benefitted from the ravaged economies of her recent European conquests was already having to re plan her economy after the supply of US materials and fuel dried up because of the unexpected British & French declaration of war in sept 1939. Even after the fall of France the RN stopped most German ships from attempting to trade with the US.... Hence why the early US Policy of "Cash and Carry" so benefitted the UK and hindered nazi Germany... even though the Germans were quite at liberty to trade with the US (because of US neutrality) they had virtually no chance to do so because of RN interdiction.
Of course Britain didn't pose a direct threat to Germany during the summer of 1940, I at no point have said it did, but it WAS a nasty thorn in the side of the nazis and DID pose a threat for the future. The nazis knew that the post Dunkirk evacuation period was THE best opportunity they were ever going to have to remove that problem. Hence why they chose to dash their much vaunted airforce against Fighter Command. Of course Britain could not win the war alone.... but it could not be beaten into submission, and it acted as the SOLE catalyst that carried on the fight that was eventually to see the fall of nazism. IF the UK had surrendered in Summer 1940 as the ENTIRE world expected us to then a nazi Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals would have been the most likely outcome.
Of course there were pacifist anti war voices in Britain, BUT they were in a minority. Being a democracy such voices were not herded into concentration camps as they were in Germany, even potential British traitors such as Oswald Mosley and members of "the Right club" amongst others lived safely at "His Majesty's pleasure" in Great Britain for the duration and then freely in the peace of post war Europe.
You have also ignored the massing of over 30 German army divisions in North Eastern France in Summer/Autumn 1940 and the assembling of thousands of converted maritime craft for their transport across the channel... Don't think because the Kriegsmarine understood the naval reality of Sealion, that the German army and air force concurred with their appraisal. A hamfisted improvised attempt at something is still an attempt.
And remember the German's postwar mindset over their failed first phase of "Operation Sealion"..... "if at first you don't succeed, deny all evidence that you ever attempted it in the first place".
1
-
1
-
1
-
@geoffbarney5914 Seems I missed the other replies above, not that I've missed much, but I'll address your point Geoff.
The Bismarck aimed at Hood from 8-9 nautical miles away. A battleship's broadside was analogous to a shotgun "scatter" in that at that range the 38 cm SK C/34 (Bismarck's main armament) had a CEP (circular error probability - effectively the radius of a circle within which 50% of its shots would be expected to fall) of 100m. That means that if 8 of Bismarck's 15in guns fired at a single point 8-9 nm away, 4 of the shells would be expected to land (with completely random distribution) within an ellipse measuring a couple of thousand feet long and just over 200m (660ft) wide, 76% of HMS Hood's 860ft length. The other 4 shots would land even further away from the aiming point. That being the case, how can an individual shell be aimed specifically at a tiny part of HMS Hood's structure, namely the 4in HA magazine, that triggered off Hood's detonation? I'll give you a hint, there's a little clue in my paragraph above....where it says "completely random distribution".
A simplified analogy is that if you prop a dartboard up 50 yards away and can consistently knock it over with a shotgun at that range then that is pretty good shooting, just as Bismarck / PE achieved during the Denmark Strait encounter.
Now you can "knock the dartboard over" all day long with the shotgun and still not hit the bullseye (magazine) with an individual pellet. As opposed to being a skillful shot by knocking over the dartboard, whether you hit the bullseye with an individual pellet is complete luck and nothing else.
P.S Why were the RN facing "half of (Bismarck's) normal armament"? Bismarck's arsenal was FULLY operational on the morning of 27th May, well it was for the first few minutes of the engagement at least.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Andy I enjoy watching your videos and totally share your views, BUT I would suggest that you open your eyes to the reality of the political establishments of the "west".
The age old, and formerly useful labels of "left", "right", "tory" & "socialist" are now nothing more that legacy labels or "smoke and mirrors" to keep the "masses" convinced that they have an effective choice to make at election time.
The truth is that more and more over the decades the mainstream political partiers, EVER hungry for funding for their individual organisations, have year on year been receiving less & less from individual party memberships as more and more people lose faith in the old certainties, such as "labour is the party of the working man" or "The Tories will fight for Britain and the rule of law and order".
To counter the continual loss of party funding, all parties as well as individual politicians across the west receive ever more of their party funds and personal "inducements" from multinational globalist corporate sources....
ALL the mainstream parties are taking the majority of their funding from big business and a pittance from their membership.
Remember the old saying? "He who pays the piper calls the tune"? Well it's the WEF, Klaus Schwab, George Soros, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg etc who are paying the pipers nowadays, and the mainstream parties are each and EVERY one of them now puppets of the same masters, but parading as "opponents" when really they are the opposite ass cheeks of the same gloabalist arsehole.
Understand this and the source of the chaos that increasingly reigns over the last few decades becomes suddenly clear as day.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I thought I'd create a simple "visual aid" in order to assist people learning about the history of the battle of Britain. There is much ongoing debate about the nationalities and proportions of RAF fighter pilots who took part in the battle, with occasionally a furtive aspect which attempts to portray the battle as a victory of "mostly foreign pilots". Below is a graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940.
Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the ACTUAL number of aircrew from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented.
The figures are taken from the RAF records of the awards of the highly coveted "Battle of Britain clasp" to the British 1939-45 Campaign Star. Which was SCRUPULOUSLY only awarded to RAF & Fleet Air Arm aircrew who flew at least one active sortie in the UK in any RAF or Fleet Air Arm fighter aircraft between 10th July 1940 and 31st Oct 1940.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%)
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%)
🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%)
🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%)
🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%)
🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%)
(And just to preempt any wandering idiot lefty "Identity warriors" from protesting about "The lack of credit given to the black pilots who fought in the battle of Britain"... the pilots from South Africa, Rhodesia & the Caribbean were all of white descent).
Top 10 scoring RAF Fighter Command Sdqs during the battle of Britain.
1st - 603 (City of Edinburgh) Sqd (Spitfire) - 57½ confirmed kills.
2nd - 609 (West Riding) Sqd (Spitfire) - 51½ confirmed kills.
3rd - 303 (Kościuszko) Sqd (Hurricane) - 45 confirmed kills.
4th - 41 Sqd (Spitifre) - 44¾ confirmed kills.
5th - 501 (County of Gloucester) Sqd (Hurricane) - 40½ confirmed kills.
6th - 92 (East India) Sqd (Spitfire) - 40.2 confirmed kills.
7th - 602 (City of Glasgow) Sqd (Spitfire) - 36 confirmed kills.
7th - 54 Sqd (Spitfire) - 36 confirmed kills.
9th - 43 (The Fighting Cocks) Sqd (Hurricane) - 35.2 confirmed kills.
10th- 601 (County of London) Sqd (Hurricane) - 35 confirmed kills.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Luckily more intelligent people than yourself were directing the war aims of the British Empire at the time.
When devious nazi fanboi idiots and other assorted uninformed loons such as yourself say "Hitler never wanted war with Britain and France" they ALWAYS miss off the part that says "until he was ready for it on his OWN terms".
Because of course Hitler laid all his hopes on being left to expand the nazi empire EASTWARDS in peace, assimilate his new found conquests with their collective economies and resources, further build up his military power and only THEN conquer France followed by Britain (or possibly impose a crushing "pax Germanica" on the UK as they did with Vichy France), they had already attempted such a feat TWICE BEFORE in the previous 70 years, once in 1870 and again in 1914, the THIRD attempt in 1940 was precipitated by the British and French not sitting and waiting for it to happen on Hitler's terms. If we had've waited the outcome would have been much MUCH different from the destruction of nazism in 1945.
Not confronting Hitler in 1939 would have resulted with Britain by the late 1940s onwards having:
A puppet nazi government, a nazi supporting King Edward VIII restored to the throne, and the UK as a nazi satellite state.
Extermination camps in the Cotswolds, Pennines & Scottish Highlands.
SS Einsatzgruppen stalking the shires looking to find "undesirables" to summarily execute.
All UK males of working age being deported to the reich to be slaved to death in nazi armaments factories or infrastructure projects.
And now, slimy nazi fanbois and other devious loons want the uninformed to think that letting Hitler conduct his plans undisturbed would mean that we would have a Britain today filled with Rose cottages, warm beer, bar skittles, Morris dancers & village cricket.
How utterly devious those people are, people with greater awareness of the situation don't fall for their nazi apologist nonsense.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Let me help out where your daughter's teacher was found wanting
Your daughter's teacher was ignorant of the fact that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need" or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries
NO interdiction of nazi german sea trade by the Royal Navy
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s.
When you say the allies "discarded (Poland) to the Commies" I think we in the west prefer to see it as, we refused to sacrifice further countless millions of lives (including many further millions of POLISH lives) as well as probably having to resort to the use of US nuclear weapons in central Europe in an effort to push the soviet behemoth back to its pre 1939 borders.
I think I missed my calling as a history teacher, don't you agree?
1
-
@leighchmura6501 The UK continues to honour the Poles who served in the west during WW2 to this day at each and every Remembrance day parade across the UK.... BUT the ignorance of SOME modern day Poles (and lefty agitators) as witnessed in so many of the comments in this thread is quite shameless. Their ignorance of the fact that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need" or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s.
For those Ignorant modern day Poles, on your way out, please remember to kneel at the altar dedicated to the combined 1.1 million lives sacrificed by the UK and France in order to topple the nazism that was murdering and torturing YOUR country when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
And for all current honourable, and deeper thinking Poles, please accept our best wishes from the UK.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ReflectedMiles You're forgetting about Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, various central American US military "expeditions" Iraq, Afghanistan, as well as British actions across the globe including Aden, Malaya, India, Palestine, North Africa, South Africa with of course the countries of western Europe still to this day digging up endless British and American (as well as German) explosives from two world wars. Add into that mess the BILLIONS of dollars worth of arms sold to third world proxies by the British , US and the rest of the "first world" and you can see that the relatively tiny amount of UXO within Britain is NOTHING compared to what we would have to clean up across the planet. Rest assured there is many MANY times more British, US and soviet hardware lying around the planet than nazi.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
More gushing nonsense. Here's the real story.
ORP Piorun was one of the 5 ships of the RN's 4th Destroyer Flotilla, the other British ships being HMS Cossack, Maori, Sikh & Zulu. The commander of the flottilla was Captain Philip Vian.
On discovering that contact had been temporarily lost with Bismarck, Vian ordered his 5 destroyers to "fan out" and search for her. Purely by chance Piorun's search "finger" crossed Bismarck's path first. Ignoring Vian's orders to wait for all 5 to make a co-ordinated attack together, Piorun charged in alone to take part in a gun duel with Bismarck, Piorun's six 4.7 inch guns Vs Bismarck's eight 15 and twelve 6 inchers, Whilst simultaneously flashing its now famous signal "I AM A POLE".
After Bismarck landed a couple of main gun straddles close to Piorun, Piorun withdrew and managed to lose contact with Bismarck, taking no further part in the action that carried on through the night of 26/27th May.
Luckily the other 4 ships of the flotilla (Cossack, Maori, Sikh & Zulu) had now made it to the scene and then engaged Bismarck in unison, also with their 4.7 inch guns, but with the added tactic of synchronised torpedo attacks (Which Piorun had forgotten to use). In the rapidly falling light and difficult sea conditions the torpedo attacks are not thought to have landed any hits, but as you say the 4 remaining ships of the flotilla did engage Bismarck all night, and exhaust her crew.... while Piorun remained out of contact.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Lassisvulgaris With regard to the non-appearance of Polish forces during the "1946 Victory parade" the problem lay SQUARELY with POLAND. The first invites sent out by the UK Labour Govt of Clement Attlee to ALL the nations who had fought for the Allied cause during WW2 (INCLUDING Poland, Yugoslavia & USSR) were sent out weeks in advance of the parade. The Polish invite in particular was quite understandably delivered to the Polish "Provisional Government of National Unity" ( the "TRJN" or Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) based in Warsaw, which was the OFFICIAL Polish govt as recognised by the international community in the form of the "United Nations", and NOT just by Britain alone, the TRJN was the same govt that it was intended the London based Polish nationalist Govt in exile would become an intrinsic part of, as agreed to by ALL sides at the Yalta conference in Feb 1945.... (although the soviets subsequently saw to it that this never actually happened).
This invite sent to Warsaw immediately raised a storm of protest with the Polish nationalist govt in exile based in London who, with some justification, felt they had been sidelined in this matter, their anger was supported by many British MPs and members of the British public.
With only days left before the parade was due to take place, and with no reply or even acknowledgement of the British invite from the OFFICIAL Polish TRJN govt in Warsaw, the British govt then belatedly sent out a SECOND INVITE to the Polish Govt in Exile in London, (as well as directly to individual senior Polish service personnel), but as one united group they CHOSE to shun the invites to register their anger and disgust at being treated as "second fiddle" to the Warsaw govt.
And the final Ignominy? The Warsaw TRJN govt never answered or even acknowledged the original invite from the UK (as neither did the USSR or Yugoslavia) and never attended the parade either.
As you can see the Polish "non appearance" was solely down to a poisonous bitter mix of political hatred (from Warsaw) and hubris (from the London Poles), and NOTHING to do with this imaginary "Poles weren't invited to the parade" BS. As I've described above the Polish nation was actually the ONLY allied nation to receive TWO invites to the parade.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Just to erase any doubt, the Merlin engine was named after the bird of prey "Falco Columbarius", this is demonstrated when you consider the names of the Merlin engine's forerunners from WW1 onwards, those being the Rolls Royce Eagle, Falcon, Hawk, Condor, Peregrine, Goshawk, Kestrel, Buzzard and Vulture aero engines. The later spitfires were powered by the Rolls Royce Griffon engine. A "Griffon" being a mythological beast comprised of a lion's body surmounted with an eagle's head and wings.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Totally different weapons with a totally different modus operandi. Tallboys / Grand Slams were NOT for city bombing but instead were deep penetration earthquake bombs for individual specialised targets (such as you mentioned German battleships, Geman U-boat pens & other "hardened" targets, and also for hard to hit targets such as railway bridges & canal locks, when it was nigh on impossible to hit the structure, a tallboy or Grand Slam would only have to hit within a hundred yards and would penetrate upto 150 ft under ground before detonation, causing a localised mini "earthquake" which would literally shake target buildings off their foundations and cause then to collapse.
And though bombs such as these 5,500lb thin walled, high capacity, surface blast bombs which were designed to explode at ground level for maximum wide surface devastation and killing were eventually used by ALL sides during the war, at the time that these German bombs were first being dropped by the Luftwaffe in 1939/40, the RAF and USAAF did not have even possess such bombs in their inventories.
But the Germans soon found out the meaning of the old saying "What goes around, comes around".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The only ones who benefitted from "white privilege" were those in the upper echelons of British society. Industrialists, investors, bankers, the political establishment and their families. The 99% were condemned to as much exploitation and hardship as any slave.
For example, the reality is that the rich and powerful in Britain (Lord & Lady Loadsamoney) struck a deal with the rich and powerful in India (Mughal Moneybags & Maharahja ManyMillions) to sell their impoverished populations into the slavery of Lord and Lady Moneybags. BOTH of the rich and powerful parties make OBSCENE amounts of profit, while the poor and exploited of BOTH Britain and India continued to fester and die in poverty.
Fast forward 250 years to today and the rich and powerful (Globalist MSM Chief Executive "Filthy Cash" & International Chief banker "StealTheirMoney") finance a slew of "useful idiots" in "Soshal meeeeedya" to set one country's poor / exploited against the other country's poor / exploited.
WAKE UP FFS !!!! The REAL battle has NEVER been British Vs Indigenous colonists, but RICH Vs POOR !!!!!
I have two great grandparents who died in the slums of Liverpool in 1903 from TYPHUS !!! That along with 3 of my 4 grandparents who were dead before the age of 50 from military service & ailments and illnesses of poverty and exploitation.
We and millions others of working class white people in the UK (and across Europe) lived through that, and then filled the armed forces to escape from the destitution of the masses, only to end up defending that system that shat over us in the first place. We never asked for recognition or sympathy (and unsurprisingly got very little of it anyway), but to have the young trendy lefty kids of today's upper and upper middle class families and the current clueless puppet political establishment and civil service whose ancestors probably DID benefit from the largesse of empire telling you that you & your ancestors are the beneficiaries of "white privilege" need a SERIOUS talking to, (and perhaps a good kicking as well).
KNOW your own history and understand where you come from, then tell these clueless faux bleeding heart lefties where to get off !!!
1
-
Whilst concurring with most of your comment, I'd like to add some of my own thoughts.
Yes, in the engagement of Bismarck / PE Vs Hood / PoW there was on paper a superiority in RN firepower BUT.
1. The 2 RN heavy cruisers were at no time in gunnery range of the Denmark Strait engagement, being in a tail chasing position and with V/Adm Holland electing to retain radio silence and not communicating his intentions to Wake-Walker in HMS Norfolk. Norfolk did fire a couple of wishful salvoes at the German ships which fell woefully short.
2. The Destroyer escort that had accompanied Hood / PoW had been detached to search northwards for the German ships when Suffolk / Norfolk had temporarily lost contact with the German ships earlier in the night, and as a consequence of their detachment were NOT at the scene of the battle... Though they did arrive shortly after the engagement had concluded and it was the destroyer HMS Electra that finally rescued the three Hood survivors.
It's all very easy to make a charge of a "poor management of resources" in hindsight. But I wonder how the many armchair admirals that haunt comments would have handled a high speed interception at long range with the enemy on the very border of his intended scene of operations, in an era before satellites, over the horizon radars, GPS or even comprehensive air coverage, and then just as the plan was falling into place as planned through the "fog of war" the shadowing cruisers lose contact with the quarry shortly before contact, and all the careful plotting of the interception course has come to nought.
Sitting on the sidelines picking fault, is a universe away from being in sole command of major units in a bleak stormy North Atlantic with imperfect intelligence to base your decisions on.
Holland was not alone in making a "wrong call", Lütjens was in hindsight equally faulty in some of his decisions, in the immediacy of a fast moving dynamic engagement snap decisions have to be made. Make the right one and its "V/Adm Holland, the Hero of Denmark Strait"... make the wrong call and its "Why did the fool do that"?
1
-
@VincentComet-l8e Don't for one second think I'm justifying Holland's decisions, yes they were flawed especially with the advantage of cool, unpressured hindsight... but he's not alone in making such bad calls, when the chips are down, the pressure is very much on, and a fluid situation calls for an immediate decision.
I'm aware of and agree with the points you make. On the other side of the scales of history is the fact that the inexperienced and mechanically imperfect HMS PoW singlehandedly stopped the German's plans to wreck the Atlantic convoy system, and that whereas the RN lost a revered and venerable 20 year old battlecruiser which comprised a relatively small part of the RN capital ship establishment and whose loss was replaced manifold, in exchange the Germans due to events precipitated at Denmark Strait lost a much vaunted nazi "uberschiff" who after 9 days at sea was put on the bottom of the ocean, a loss of 25% of the Kriegsmarine's capital ship force which was never replaced.
In all likelihood this only happened because of Holland's initially unplanned interception at Denmark Strait. Unplanned in the sense that his force was originally tasked to sail to Reykjavik to refuel and from there backup the Norfolk & Suffolk, but instead had to plot a long range, high speed interception course "on the fly", which as we know would have been a perfect interception but for the temporary loss of contact with the German ships at a CRUCIAL moment just hours before battle was joined.
What would have been the outcome if Holland complete with his attendant destroyer screen (which had been detached earlier to attempt to regain contact with the Germans, and as a consequence took no part in the action) had instead crossed the German's "T" at Denmark Strait, something that could easily have been achieved had it not been for the unfortunate crucial loss of contact in the early hours of 23rd May which threw all of his planning to the wind?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
If the USA were not so intent on fighting proxy wars, they could easily have joined in to crush the evils of nazism instead of bleeding their proxy to death while they fought off evil alone, the result of their inaction has been that the US has been inwardly ashamed of itself ever since, you have only to read YT comments to see the ranks of yanks trying to make out that they took an active part in the fighting. Face it your country did f*ck all until the nazis stupidly declared war on you.
At the same time the US was profiteering from the war in Europe, the forces of evil were conspiring to gain world domination, with the Soviets supplying the other side of the european proxy war with millions of tons of raw materials, fuel and food. Germany also depended on imports from Finland, Sweden, Romania, and the raped economies of her European conquests, in fact as you know ALL developed countries, even America, depend on international trade, so all your isolated representation of Britain's supply network does is point to your true agenda.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Complete bollocks from the OP. Another uninformed dupe of the political left.
With regard to the non-appearance of Polish forces during the "1946 Victory parade" the problem lay SQUARELY with POLAND.
There is an ongoing belief that Britain somehow "cared what Stalin thought", That is complete nonsense. The first invites sent out by the UK Labour Govt of Clement Attlee to ALL the nations who had fought for the Allied cause during WW2 (including POLAND, Yugoslavia AND the USSR) were sent out weeks in advance of the parade. The Polish invite in particular was quite understandably delivered to the Polish "Provisional Government of National Unity" ( the "TRJN" or Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) based in Warsaw, which was the OFFICIAL Polish govt as recognised by the international community in the form of the "United Nations", and NOT just by Britain alone, the TRJN was the same govt that it was intended the London based Polish nationalist Govt in exile would become an intrinsic part of, as agreed to by ALL sides at the Yalta conference in Feb 1945.... (although the soviets subsequently saw to it that this never actually happened).
This invite sent to Warsaw immediately raised a storm of protest with the Polish nationalist govt in exile based in London who, with some justification, felt they had been sidelined in this matter, their anger was supported by many British MPs and members of the British public.
With only days left before the parade was due to take place, and with no reply or even acknowledgement of the British invite from the OFFICIAL Polish TRJN govt in Warsaw, the British govt then belatedly sent out a SECOND INVITE to the Polish Govt in Exile in London, (as well as directly to individual senior Polish service personnel), but as one united group they CHOSE to shun the invites to register their anger and disgust at being treated as "second fiddle" to the Warsaw govt.
And the final Ignominy? The Warsaw TRJN govt never answered or even acknowledged the original invite from the UK (as neither did the USSR or Yugoslavia) and never attended the parade either.
As you can see the Polish "non appearance" was solely down to a poisonous bitter mix of political hatred (from Warsaw) and hubris (from the London Poles), and NOTHING to do with this imaginary "Poles weren't invited to the parade" BS. As I've described above the Polish nation was actually the ONLY allied nation to receive TWO invites to the parade.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The UK continues to honour the Poles who served in the west during WW2 to this day at each and every Remembrance day parade across the UK.... BUT the ignorance of modern day Poles as witnessed in so many of the comments in this thread is quite incredible. Their ignorance of the fact that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need" or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s. For those Ignorant modern day Poles, please feel free to thank the UK (and France) for that commitment and resolve when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
And for all current honourable Poles, best wishes from the UK.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Bracus.Reghusk The numbers evacuated from the Dunkirk pocket were.
205,000 British troops,
110,000 French troops
23,000 Belgian troops.
The BEF suffered 66,426 casualties, that was 11,014 killed or died of wounds, 14,074 wounded and 41,338 men missing or taken prisoner
The BEF lost one seventh of its personnel killed and captured, because the TEN BEF divisions on the Belgian border were left isolated by the unannounced withdrawal of the French first army on their right flank, and collapse of the Belgian forces on their left.
The Perimeter of the Dunkirk pocket was manned by British, French and Belgian troops, which fought to allow British French and Belgian troops be evacuated MOSTLY by the RN and British "little ships".
Don't try to blame the DREADFUL performance of the >140 divisions of the French home army on the 10 BEF divisions. They were seconded to the PISS POOR French high Command, and it was THEY who lost the battle.
Luckily We Brits fought on and saved you from the 1000 year nazi reich, while the majority of the French population quietly acquiesced and collaborated with nazi rule.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@GM-fh5jp They did indeed find themselves master of the eastern Indian ocean for the short time they were there, but as I said they almost immediately withdrew due to the perimeter of sea they were trying to control being beyond their means. The RN on the other hand kept control of the Arctic, North Atlantic (with the RCN), South Atlantic, Mediterranean, Indian, and eventually projected into the Pacific, on outside lines of comms & supply. The Japanese controlled half the pacific on internal lines of comms and suppply, and found that it couldn't expand further.
(P.S I know about the RN losses, my own father was a survivor of HMS Dorsetshire, sunk on April 5th south of India, he also took part in the rescues of the Bismarck survivors a year earlier).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Seems your lifetime of study has left you none the wiser, and instead STILL parroting left wing nonsense. Here let me help you get upto speed.
With regard to the non-appearance of Polish forces during the London "1946 Victory parade" the problem lay SQUARELY with POLAND. The first invites sent out by the UK Labour Govt of Clement Attlee to ALL the nations who had fought for the Allied cause during WW2 (INCLUDING Poland, USSR & Yugoslavia) were sent out weeks in advance of the parade. The Polish invite in particular was quite understandably delivered to the Polish "Provisional Government of National Unity" ( the "TRJN" or Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) based in Warsaw, which was the OFFICIAL Polish govt as recognised by the international community in the newly created form of the "United Nations", and NOT just by Britain alone. The TRJN was the same govt that it was intended the London based Polish nationalist Govt in exile would become an intrinsic part of, as agreed to by ALL sides at the Yalta conference in Feb 1945.... (although the soviets subsequently saw to it that this never actually happened).
This invite sent directly to Warsaw immediately raised a storm of protest from the Polish nationalist govt in exile based in London who, with some justification, felt they had been sidelined in the matter, their anger was supported by many British MPs, senior ranks within the UK armed forces & members of the British public.
With only days left before the parade was due to take place, and with no reply or even acknowledgement of the British invite from the OFFICIAL Polish TRJN govt in Warsaw, the British govt then hurriedly & belatedly sent out a SECOND INVITE directly to the Polish Govt in Exile in London, (as well as to many individual Polish service personnel), but as one united group they CHOSE to shun the invites to register their anger and disgust at being treated as "second fiddle" to the Warsaw govt.
And the final Ignominy? The Warsaw TRJN govt neither responded to or even acknowledged the original invite from the UK (as neither did the USSR or Yugoslavia) and never attended the parade either.
As you can see the Polish "non appearance" was solely down to a poisonous bitter mix of political hatred (from Warsaw) and hubris (from the London Poles), and NOTHING to do with this "Poles weren't invited to the parade" communist propaganda nonsense. As I've described above the Polish nation was actually the ONLY allied nation to receive TWO invites to the parade.
I do hope that'll assist you in not spreading incorrect lefty BS in future. All the best.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Why are you suggesting that Hood was the equivalent of the RN battlecruisers at Jutland? Even suggesting that indicates your complete lack of knowledge of what you're talking about.
Mike Tyson who was an undisputed world boxing champion was a human being.
I am also a human being.
Does it necessarily follow that I am world class boxer?
Also in what way do you imagine German rangefinders were magnitudes better than the British?
The British Admiralty had assessed both coincidence & stereoscopic rangefinders during the interwar period, and concluded that while stereoscopic rangefinders tended to establish range more quickly, it equally quickly struggled to maintain a solid "firing range" due to the levels of operator eye fatigue. The Barr & Stroud coincidence rangefinders the British decided upon displayed the opposite characteristics.... slightly longer to establish a correct range, but easier and more capable of maintaining the correct range over time.
Also your assertion of "better German rangefinders" isn't supported by any evidence during Bismarck's short career. Apart from HMS Hood who targetted the wrong ship with 7 salvoes (straddling Prinz Eugen with the 4th and 5th salvoes) before realising her error and having to "start all over again" with Bismarck, the other 3 ships involved in the battle of Denmark Strait all achieved roughly the same hit rate with their main armaments... with one of Bismarck's hits being the "million to one golden shot" on Hood.
HMS Hood achieved No hits (but had straddled PE before realising her targetting error, having to reacquire on Bismarck, and subsequent sinking).
Prince of Wales achieved 3 hits from 55 x 14" rounds fired. (5.5% hit rate) (All on Bismarck)
Bismarck achieved 5 hits from 93 x 15" rounds fired. (5.3% hit rate) (2 on Hood and 3 on PoW)
Prinz Eugen achieved 7 hits from 157 x 8" rounds fired. (4.5% hit rate) (3 on Hood and 4 on PoW)
When you take into account the multiple problems HMS PoW's green, inexperienced crew was having with her untested & troublesome main armament throughout the engagement, it makes her 1st place hit rate even more remarkable !!!
Also Bismarck's AA gunnery, and her main armament gunnery performance during her final battle was, inspite of any factors you will cite, startlingly less than stellar !!!!
Which "heavier units" should HMS Hood have waited for to arrive? Seeing as she was the RN's HEAVIEST warship at the time. V/Adm Holland did NOT have the luxury to "shadow Bismarck" which was already on the threshold of the British transatlantic convoy lanes.... especially when SEVEN convoys were at that very time making the transit journey between the old world and the new.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@asmodeus0454 Was it just the British who built empires lefty? While completely ignoring the Roman, Persian, Mongol, Spanish, Dutch, German, French, Italian, Mayan, Incan, Malian, Khmer and countless other avaricious regimes throughout human civilisation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Below is the vebatim British ultimatum delivered to Adm Bruno-Marcel Gentoul at Mers-El-Kebir on the 3rd July 1940
"It is impossible for us, your comrades up to now, to allow your fine ships to fall into the power of the German or Italian enemy. We are determined to fight on until the end, and if we win, as we think we shall, we shall never forget that France was our Ally, that our interests are the same as hers, and that our common enemy is Germany. Should we conquer, we solemnly declare that we shall restore the greatness and territory of France. For this purpose, we must make sure that the best ships of the French Navy are not used against us by the common foe. In these circumstances, His Majesty’s Government have instructed me to demand that the French Fleet now at Mers-el-Kébir and Oran shall act in accordance with one of the following alternatives:
(a) Sail with us and continue the fight until victory against the Germans and Italians.
(b) Sail with reduced crews under our control to a British port. The reduced crews would be repatriated at the earliest moment. If either of these courses is adopted by you, we will restore your ships to France at the conclusion of the war or pay full compensation, if they are damaged meanwhile.
(c) Alternatively, if you feel bound to stipulate that your ships should not be used against the Germans or Italians unless these break the Armistice, then sail them with us with reduced crews, to some French port in the West Indies—Martinique for instance—where they can be demilitarised to our satisfaction, or perhaps be entrusted to the United States and remain safe until the end of the war, the crews being repatriated.
If you refuse these fair offers, I must, with profound regret, require you to sink your ships within 6 hours.
Finally, failing the above I have orders of His Majesty's Government to use whatever force may be necessary to prevent your ships us from falling into German or Italian hands."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Maybe look at any empire from history.... Mongol, Persian, Roman, Macedonian, Chinese, Aztec, Incan, Khmer, Soviet, Malian, Spanish to name but a few. All of which had deeply unsavoury aspects in their dealings when viewed in a modern light. No need to just concentrate on the British empire and pretend everyone else is "clean". Unless you're a clueless lefty dupe that is.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Complete and utter bollocks from OP.
While Britain had done EVERYTHING to prevent the escalation of civilian terror bombing from the outset of war, from 1st Sept 1939 onwards Germany had bombed, Wieluń, Warsaw, Lublin, Rotterdam, and MANY British cities. During the same period the British government had ordered that non-military targets (including population areas) in Germany could NOT be attacked, this incredibly included armaments factories which were designated as private property and NOT nazi state property. The vast majority of British bombing attacks from Sept 1939 to May 1940 were against the ships of the Kriegsmarine, and even then the RAF were not allowed to bomb them in harbour to avoid the probability of civilian casualties, but only off the coast, and so from 3 Sept 1939 until 24 Aug 1940 the only things that were dropped on German cities were propaganda leaflets.
The "poor victim" Germans were in fact the VERY FIRST nation to carry out civilian terror bombing when they bombed Liege in Belgium on 6th aug 1914 using their Zeppelin force, just 11 years after the invention of powered flight.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@WizzRacing Ultra was SO much more than Alan Turing. It's like saying that Wilbur and Orville Wright built Concord.
Since 1932 the Polish codebreakers Marian Rejewski, Henryk Zygalski & Jerzy Różycki worked within BS4 (the Polish general staff cipher Bureau focussed on German decryption & intelligence), and together with VITAL assistance given by the French intelligence officer Gustave Bertrand (who had cultivated a German informant codenamed "Asché" who had provided French Intelligence with tons of vital data including a full nazi procedural manual for use of the enigma encryption device), had by the purchase of a commercial version of the early enigma device and LOTS of analysis eventually broken into German army and air force 3 rotor encryption networks, this was a fantastic achievement, but it is true to say that they at no time did they crack German Kriegsmarine encryption due to the additional layers of security employed by the German navy.
In December 1938 the nazis introduced a further 2 interchangeable encryption rotors to the enigma system, which immediately brought the vast majority of Polish decryption efforts to a grinding halt, which is where it remained up until the outbreak of WW2. In the weeks prior to the outbreak of WW2 the Polish research work was passed to the French, who in the six months they had it in their possession added little to the accumulated knowledge, and to the UK where the British government seized it with both hands, and made its study top priority. So was instigated the British "ULTRA" project.
Jerzy Różycki elected to stay behind and work in Vichy France where, unknown to the Germans he worked on a seperate secret encryption system, which bore no tangible fruit before his death in 1942.
Marian Rejewski & Henryk Zygalski were, for security reasons, not included in the UK "ULTRA" project, and so took no further part in British decryption efforts.
The British "ULTRA" project took the non working foundation research of the Polish decrypters and from there MASSIVELY expanded that research to once again break into nazi 3 rotor enigma, this was followed in 1942 by the cracking of the improved kriegsmarine M4 enigma (the 4 rotor enigma device, codenamed "SHARK"), as well as simultaneously breaking into the FAR more complex "lorenz" cipher device used by the German army & navy high commands (TUNNY), before finally cracking the "Geheimschreiber" encryption device used by both the Luftwaffe high command as well as the top level of the nazi government (STURGEON), on top of these British achievements another product of the ULTRA program was the building of the world's first programmable electronic computer (COLOSSUS) to speed up the breaking of German codes. This was designed and built by a British team led by Alan Turing and the telephone engineer Tommy Flowers, which transformed British decryption from a process which often only gave results days or even weeks after the message was eavesdropped on by the British, to a state of affairs towards the end of WW2 where the British were reading a LOT of top level communications at the same time as the intended German recipient.
The early Polish codebreakers did indeed provide the "acorn" from which the British cultivated the "mighty oak" of ULTRA.
1
-
1
-
1
-
While tailgating is undoubtedly often carried out by aggressive, overbearing drivers, it is also increasingly caused by a section of drivers, young and old, who seem intent on driving 10-15 mph under the limit.
For example there is a straight, rural, single carriageway road with no residential properties or businesses on it close to me with a 50 mph limit.... I cannot remember the last time I drove at anywhere near 50 mph along it. EVERY time I take that road there is ALWAYS someone driving at 30-40mph along it, with a clear stretch of road hundreds of yards long in front of them and with a LINE of cars sometimes 10-15 behind them. They are without a doubt a COMPLETE bloody nuisance to other road users, especially when there is a road which runs parallel to it half a mile away that IS a 30 mph road...but the fact is if they were on that road, they would be driving at 15-20 mph. I've been driving for 40 years (many years of which were as an emergency services driver) and I originally though these drivers were probationers probably with black boxes fitted, but more and more I find drivers of all ages driving in this manner, its as if the wits and awareness of many in the general population appears to be dropping through the floor, and whats more on many occasions their road positioning, observations & behaviour at junctions and risk areas appears to be massively deficient.
They cause stress and frustration that is FAR more likely to result in an accident than if they had the had the confidence and ability to drive in a more considerate and competent manner.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@apzaluska8615 Please save your nonsense. Rest assured a handful of Polish service men did NOT prevent the nazi invasion of Britain. I think that was more down to the fact that the Wehrmacht was too frightened of the world's then largest navy to even dip a toe in the English channel.
The Poles who made it to Britain did make a small and valued contribution to the defence of the refuge they'd been given in 1940, their efforts have been long celebrated and even rewarded by the UK, but they were NOT a decisive element.
The truth is that if it were not for the UK then it is actually POLAND that would be speaking German today.
The largely unprepared UK and France declared war on Hitler's Germany for Poland & Europe's sake, NOT OUR OWN, What benefit did the UK receive from declaring war on Germany? That selfless act alone set in train the events that eventually led to the fall of nazism 5½ years later.... only then for the communists and Americans to betray Poland and NOT allow democracy to flourish there postwar (but keep in mind that Poland had NOT been a democracy before WW2 anyway).
After the fall of France in June 1940 the UK, against the expectations of the ENTIRE world, then fought on ALONE in Europe from June 1940 to June 1941 & continued the opposition to nazism when absolutely NO-ONE else in the world was interested.
Who ELSE do you imagine was going to save Poland?
The USSR? They'd eagerly joined the nazis in raping Poland, and then happily executed 22,000 of their countrymen in one fell swoop, followed by countless others.
The USA? Their chosen neutrality meant they were NEVER going to get drawn into a European war (it was only nazi Germany's declaration of war on the US in Dec 1941 that dragged their backsliding arses into the conflict), in fact US businesses were only TOO happy to do business with BOTH sides, and happily supplied Britain AND Germany with raw materials, fuel and war equipment while the nazis raped Poland and THROUGHOUT the rest of WW2.
Poland's eastern European neighbours? They all pretended not to notice Poland being raped and murdered in front of their very eyes and instead all of them quickly signed up with the nazis.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire ALONE to nazism from June 1940 onwards, opposition which bankrupted the UK and cost her 460,000 of her citizen's lives, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps would STILL be operating on Polish soil today.
There's no need for you to thank me for my efforts to reduce your complete ignorance of the European situation from the 1940s onwards.
1
-
1
-
Where do you get the nonsense idea that the UK and USA "handed over Poland"? Have you ANY knowledge of the basics of WW2? Due to the national geography of Europe the USSR was the ONLY country that was in a position to kick the nazis out of Poland, and they did so at the cost of several million soviet lives. They had physical possession of Poland from mid 1944 onwards... so where was the "handing over" precisely? In February 1945 at Yalta on the Black Sea coast, the allied powers reached many agreements, one of which was that after the end of WW2, Poland would have a temporary government comprised of ALL viewpoints, but mainly the communists of the de facto "Lublin Committee", and the nationalists of the London based "Polish Government-in-exile". They would oversee the holding of further democratically held elections that would see Poland's first independent government since 1939. This temporary Polish government was called the "Provisional Government of National Unity" ( the "TRJN" or Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) based in Warsaw, which was the OFFICIAL Polish govt as recognised by the international community in the form of the "United Nations", and NOT just by Britain & the US alone.
When the war in Europe finally ended, it quickly became obvious that the Soviets were doing everything in their power to inhibit and control the work of the Polish TRJN govt, fast forward to the August 1945 Potsdam conference, when the British and US pressed Stalin to ask him for a deadline for the organising of the democratic elections in Poland, he flatly refused, thereby reneging on his earlier agreement at Yalta 6 months earlier.
What would YOU do then to push the +10 million strong fully armed Red Army then stationed in central & eastern Europe back to its pre-1939 borders? Its such a pity that you and the legions of other clueless commenters in threads such as these, were not personally there on the front line in central Europe in Summer 1945, eager to sacrifice YOUR own lives for the good of eastern Europe, instead of sitting behind your keyboard 80 years later complaining that MILLIONS of other people didn't sacrifice THEIR lives for the good of eastern Europe.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@martin-hall-northern-soul Just discovered that YT have "ghosted" my previous completely polite and reasonable response made 1 month ago, so here goes with another attempt.
Let me make it simple for you with an everyday analogy.
If some mad person passing by in the street, out of the blue, punches you in the face then attempts to rape you, do you then get angry and abusive towards the person who rushed from across the street to your aid, but never made it in time to stop the initial assault?
The UK and France could have, like the rest of the ENTIRE world did, just ignored the nazi / communist dismemberment of Poland in Sept 1939. What do you imagine would have happened then? Would Poland rise up to miraculously overthrow its conquerors alone? Who knows what would happen in 300 years time, but rest assured today Poland would STILL have a swastika flying over Warsaw together with nazi death camps spewing human ashes into Polish skies.
Adolf Hitler explicitly wanted more than anything else for the UK to join his "crusade", and support his "vision" for a nazi dominated Europe while we controlled the seas and kept our Empire.... what an unbeatable alliance that would have been !!!
But Instead a largely unprepared UK and France declared war for Poland, NOT for ourselves. That act alone set in train the events that eventually led to the fall of nazism 5½ years later.... only then for the communists to betray Poland and NOT allow democracy to flourish after WW2 (which had NOT happened before WW2 anyway).
After the fall of France in June 1940 the UK, against the expectations of the ENTIRE world, then faced the nazi threat ALONE and with the growing support of her commonwealth fought on from June 1940 to June 1941 & continued the opposition to nazism when NO-ONE else wanted to, not YOUR left wing "heroes" in the USSR (who had helped rape and dismember Poland with nazi Germany), not the USA (Who was making such VAST profits from BOTH sides of the European war that she had utterly NO intention of "picking sides" and joining the fight) & not Poland's eastern European neighbours (who were all so terrified of what had happened to Poland that they pretended not to notice her being raped and murdered, and instead all signed up with the nazis).
In continuing the fight the UK....
Sacrificed 460,000 of its citizens lives,
Utterly bankrupted itself,
Lost its empire
ALL in the effort to topple the nazi tyranny that had murdered and raped its way across continental Europe including Poland.
And nowadays all we seem to get are clueless modern day Poles, and easily duped young lefties like yourself pissing over those sacrifices and effort.
The ridiculous lefty BS that you spout is the very same "gaslighting" BS that was taught to generations of Polish children by communists from 1945 onwards.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The UK continues to honour the Poles who served in the west during WW2 to this day at each and every Remembrance day parade across the UK.... BUT the ignorance of SOME modern day Poles (and lefty agitators) as witnessed in so many of the comments in this thread is quite shameless. Their ignorance of the fact that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need", or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism from June 1940 onwards, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s.
For those Ignorant modern day Poles, on your way out, please remember to kneel at the altar dedicated to the combined 1.1 million lives sacrificed by the UK and France in order to topple the nazism that was murdering and torturing YOUR country when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
And for all current honourable, and deeper thinking Poles, please accept our best wishes from the UK.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What a complete pile of utter nazi apologist nonsense you've typed in there Cinerary.
First German bombs dropped on the British mainland?
16th October 1939 saw the very first bombs dropped on Britain when the Germans launched scattered air attacks over port and industrial facilities around the Scottish city of Edinburgh, and the RN naval base at Rosyth.
First bombs dropped by the RAF on German soil?
Although the RAF had launched bomber attacks on Kriegsmarine naval units in the North sea from Sept 3rd 1939 onwards, it was actually the 19th March 1940 that the FIRST RAF bombs landed on German soil... When previously on 13th November 1939 the luftwaffe bombed RAF Sullom Voe a seaplane base with port facilities in the Shetland Isles (with the resultant death of a rabbit, and no hits on the 9 seaplanes or 2 RN vessels stationed there), the RAF retaliated by hitting the nazi seaplane base at Hörnum on the island of Sylt in the North Sea. These were THE VERY FIRST RAF bombs to land on German soil....5 months AFTER the first German bombs had landed on British soil.
The first British or German civilian casualty caused by the bombing of the opposing side during WW2?
16th March 1940 when German bombs hit the village of "Bridge of Waithe" near Stenness on the Orkney Islands during an attack on the Home Fleet anchorage at Scapa Flow, which killed a 27 year-old County Council employee, James Isbister (luckily, his wife, baby son, and the neighbour James was endeavouring to rescue from her bombed cottage all survived).
First British bombs to drop on the actual German mainland?
11th May 1940, when the British air ministry for the first time allowed the bombing of railway yards, communication centres and bridges west of the Rhine River to interrupt German supply lines supporting their undeclared assault into the NEUTRAL Low countries and France on 10th May 1940. Previous to this date the British air ministry in an effort to stop the inflaming of the conflict had refused to allow the RAF to drop ANY bombs on the German mainland, instead the RAF supplied the German demand for toilet paper by dropping propaganda leaflets on German cities. The RAF attacks on 11th May 1940 had also come after REPEATED attacks against RN installations on the British mainland, most notably at Rosyth near Edinburgh, Cromarty Firth & Scapa Flow all in Scotland throughout the winter of 1939/40.
First British bombs dropped EAST of the Rhine River?
On the night of 23/24th August 1940 the RAF launched an attack on Berlin. This attack directed at the Klingenberg Power Station in Eastern Berlin & Templehof airport was in RETALIATION for REPEATED luftwaffe raids on RAF Fighter Command Sector Airfields within the suburbs of Greater London throughout July and August 1940 that had already caused HUNDREDS of innocent British civilian deaths & casualties (euphemistically known nowadays as "collateral damage") this was inspite of Hitler's previous decrees that no bombs should be dropped within the boundary of Greater London. Obviously that decree had never reached the ears of Herman Goering.
German retaliation for the one night of bombing of Berlin on 23/24th August 1940? The launching of the all out assault against British cities from 7th Sept 1940 onwards, culminating in the world's first attempt to create a "firestorm" during operation "moonlight sonata" on the British city of Coventry on the night of 14/15th Nov 1940, where the luftwaffe sent 575 bombers using their world beating "X-gerat" bombing system (in the Germans own words capable of placing "target indicator" flares with an accuracy of 50 meters at 200 miles range) over the civilian city centre of Coventry dropping 550 tons of high explosive (including hundreds of "flammen" (oil) bombs) followed by over 30,000 incendiary bombs. The final death toll of that single raid? A previously unheard of 568 innocent civilians, this was in addition to the thousands of other British civilians already killed & injured in other cities across Britain over the previous 2 months.
The first British bombing raid directly targetted at German civilians?
"Operation Abigail" on the night of 16/17th December 1940 was a response to the bombing of Coventry (above) and took place 3 months AFTER the opening of the nazi "blitz" on British cities. The Dec 16th attack by the RAF was launched against the German city of Mannheim where 100 RAF bombers dropped 100 tons of HE and 14,000 incendiaries inflicting a death toll on the German population of 34 dead and 81 injured.
Not to worry though , the RAF eventually "upped its game" and showed the Germans how to do it properly a year or two later.
Don't try to hide the fact that the Germans enjoyed dropping HE on the cities of its neighbours from the earliest days of flight. The first aerial bombs dropped in history were from a zeppelin raid on Liege in Belgium on 4th August 1914... just 11 years after the invention of powered flight. Since WW2, they've learned the lesson NOT to do it again.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
During the battle of Denmark Strait, the Bismarck's killer blow was fired at Hood from 8-9 nautical miles away. At that range the 38 cm SK C/34 (Bismarck's main armament) had a CEP (circular error probability - effectively the radius of a circle within which 50% of its shots would fall) of 100m. That means that if 8 of Bismarck's 15in guns fired at a single point 8-9 nm away, 4 of the shells would be expected to land (with completely random distribution) within an ellipse measuring approximately 100m (330ft) wide, (or 38% of HMS Hood's 860ft length), by more than two thousand feet long (an ellipse due to the angle of fall). The other 4 shots would land even further away from the aiming point. That being the case, how can an individual shell be aimed specifically at a tiny part of HMS Hood's structure, namely the 4in HA magazine, that triggered off Hood's detonation? I'll give you a hint, there's a little clue in my paragraph above....where it says "completely random distribution".
A simplified analogy is that if you prop a dartboard up 50 yards away and can consistently knock it over with a shotgun at that range then that is pretty good shooting, just as Bismarck / PE achieved during the Denmark Strait encounter.
Now you can "knock the dartboard over" all day long with the shotgun and STILL NOT hit the bullseye (magazine) with an individual pellet. As opposed to being a skillful shot by knocking over the dartboard, whether you hit the bullseye with an individual pellet IS COMPLETE LUCK.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"Not a serious proposition"?
Hitler begs to differ.
What better than the order issued by none other the Adolf Hitler himself? Below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler's "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the "Berghof" (Hitler's "holiday home" in Bavaria) on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW).
The directive was transmitted over secure landlines encrypted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to initmidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan was academic. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@stephenchallen1385 The only thing "infamous" about HMS Hood was it's sinking, for 20 years she had been lauded as one of the most powerful warships in the world.
As for Bismarck, IF any scuttling actually took place then all that was scuttled was a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken and penetrated in several places, her command staff physically obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater, a thousand of her crew dead, and further hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All that any scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer AFTER he has been punched senseless by a more skillful & powerful opponent, and only a deluded child would say, "the victor didn't win because his opponent killed himself before he lost.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off by the victor and handed back to him on a plate.
Imagine the ignominy of being forced to commit suicide by your opponent?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
When people say "Hitler never wanted war with Britain and France" they ALWAYS miss off the part that says "until he was ready for it on his OWN terms".
Because of course Hitler laid all his hopes on being left to expand the nazi empire EASTWARDS in peace, assimilate his new found conquests with their collective economies and resources, further build up his military power and only THEN conquer France followed by Britain (or at least imposing a crushing "pax Germanica" on the UK as they did with Vichy France), they had already attempted such a feat TWICE BEFORE in the previous 70 years, once in 1870 and again in 1914, the THIRD attempt in 1940 was precipitated by the British and French not sitting and waiting for it to happen on Hitler's terms. If we had've waited the outcome would have been much MUCH different from the destruction of nazism in 1945.
Not confronting Hitler in 1939 would have more than likely resulted with Britain by the late 1940s onwards having:
A puppet nazi government, a nazi supporting King Edward VIII restored to the throne, and the UK as a nazi satellite state.
Extermination camps in the Cotswolds, Pennines & Scottish Highlands.
SS Einsatzgruppen stalking the shires looking to find "undesirables" to summarily execute.
All UK males of working age being deported to the reich to be slaved to death in nazi armaments factories or infrastructure projects.
And now the uninformed want the rest of us to think that letting Hitler conduct his plans undisturbed would mean that we would have a Britain today filled with Rose cottages, warm beer, bar skittles, Morris dancers & village cricket.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@gayprepperz6862 MY father at the age of 20, completed his RN basic training at the naval shore station HMS Royal Arthur (Which was actually Butlin's prewar Skegness holiday camp) following his call up on 27 Feb 1940. While there it was so cold during the winter of 1939-40 that 2 of his course mates died from carbon monoxide poisoning, after seeking warmth and sleeping in the camp boiler rooms at night. Dad was then posted to HMS Dorsetshire on 5th June 1940 at Devonport, where she was completing a refit.
He was still serving onboard Dorsetshire at the time of the final Bismarck action on 27th May 1941. Dad was "off watch" from his stoker's station in the boiler rooms, and was at his action station in a damage control party. Part way through the action the ratings that comprised the DC party took turns to go "up top" to see what was happening, and dad witnessed the smoke shrouded wreck of Bismarck being pounded before its sinking, knowing even then that he was witnessing first hand history in the making..
After being stood down from action stations, all available hands onboard were called to "man the sides" and help in the rescue of the Bismarck's survivors. Dad took part in this and after assisting in the rescues one particular survivor, a german sailor called Friedrich Junghans, gave dad his "erkennungsmarke" or "dogtag" as a token of his appreciation to dad as it was the only thing he possessed at that moment. It is still on display in the Merseyside maritime museum in Liverpool, UK after dad donated it to the museum in 1993.
11 months after the Bismarck action, on 5th April 1942 it was Dorsetshire's own turn to be sunk, Dad again was "off-watch" and again called to action stations, at this time he was a leader of a damage control party up near the Dorsetshire's bows adjacent to the ships "paint locker". Very shortly after the commencement of the Japanese air attack on the Dorsetshire and it's sister ship HMS Cornwall, all comms in the ship were lost, though it was still all too apparent that Dorsetshire was receiving a heavy pounding, with the ship heeling over and quaking from the impact of the Japanese bombs.
During the chaos and din, one concussion dislodged a length of heavy suction hose, known as an "elephant's foot", which hit dad on the head, knocking him senseless for several seconds. On regaining his wits in the now blacked out darkness of the compartment. Sensing that the ship was starting to list heavily, he ordered the party to get on the upper deck via a ladder leading to the "bosun's hatch" in the compartment roof. The first man up the ladder shouted that he couldn't unlatch the hatch "dogs", so dad used a crowbar to release the latches and the party crawled out into the burning sunlight on the rapidly inclining foredeck. One party member, a South African named David van Zyl, confided to dad that he couldn't swim and despite pleas from dad and the rest of the party for him to jump overboard, he tragically went down with the ship, the rest of the party all survived.
Dad went on to serve on the battleships Warspite (During the Salerno landings, where he again narrowly avoided death when Warspite was struck by two German radio guided bombs), then served onboard HMS Valiant and Malaya, and ended the war in Perth (Fremantle), Australia onboard the submarine tender, HMS Adamant.
After his return from Australia to the UK onboard the ship "S.S Maidstone Castle" and his subsequent demobilisation in 1946, Dad was a tram then a bus driver in Liverpool until his retirement in 1984, and passed away on 4th July 2013, aged 93.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ignore that left wing BS.
With regard to the non-appearance of Polish forces during the London "1946 Victory parade" the problem lay SQUARELY with POLAND. The first invites sent out by the UK Labour Govt of Clement Attlee to ALL the nations who had fought for the Allied cause during WW2 (INCLUDING Poland, USSR & Yugoslavia) were sent out weeks in advance of the parade. The Polish invite in particular was quite understandably delivered to the Polish "Provisional Government of National Unity" ( the "TRJN" or Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) based in Warsaw, which was the OFFICIAL Polish govt as recognised by the international community in the form of the "United Nations", and NOT just by Britain alone. The TRJN was the same govt that it was intended the London based Polish nationalist Govt in exile would become an intrinsic part of, as agreed to by ALL sides at the Yalta conference in Feb 1945.... (although the soviets subsequently saw to it that this never actually happened).
This invite sent directly to Warsaw immediately raised a storm of protest from the Polish nationalist govt in exile based in London who, with some justification, felt they had been sidelined in the matter, their anger was supported by many British MPs, senior ranks within the UK armed forces & members of the British public.
With only days left before the parade was due to take place, and with no reply or even acknowledgement of the British invite from the OFFICIAL Polish TRJN govt in Warsaw, the British govt then hurriedly & belatedly sent out a SECOND INVITE to the Polish Govt in Exile in London, (as well as directly to many individual Polish service personnel), but as one united group they CHOSE to shun the invites to register their anger and disgust at being treated as "second fiddle" to the Warsaw govt.
And the final Ignominy? The Warsaw TRJN govt never answered or even acknowledged the original invite from the UK (as neither did the USSR or Yugoslavia) and never attended the parade either.
As you can see the Polish "non appearance" was solely down to a poisonous bitter mix of political hatred (from Warsaw) and hubris (from the London Poles), and NOTHING to do with this imaginary "Poles weren't invited to the parade" nonsense. As I've described above the Polish nation was actually the ONLY allied nation to receive TWO invites to the parade.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Raptorman0909 No "Sending" implies that it was the US who paid for & conveyed the supplies to the UK, when it was more correctly BROUGHT and paid for by the UK. I guess your grasp of the English language isn't all it could be.
NO material was "given". The US first drained the UK national gold reserve into the US federal reserve, then when that had all been accounted for it weedled all the world leading British scientific research it could get its hands on (such as the VT fuse, Cavity magnetron and the majority of the "Manhattan project" research from the pioneering British "Tube Alloys" nuclaer weapon program) to power the forthcoming US war effort, as well as the British provision of basing rights on Empire territory across the world, and then when all of that had been accounted for, we then were forced to run our war effort and postwar economy on US loans, which we only finished repaying in 2006.
I'm not complaining so much of the bankrupting of the UK, it was after all our own decision to put European liberty and our own existence infront of greedy profiteering, but to then have clueless, backsliding yanks try to portray the 1940 situation as them "helping" Britain is beyond taking the piss.
If the US had REALLY wanted to "help Britain", then instead of bleeding the British empire dry and causing its collapse, they could have for example sold a production license for Tetra Ethyl Lead (The compound required for the production of hi-octane fuels) to Britain when we applied to purchase one prewar. ... instead they refused to sell one to "their British cousins"... A "special relationship" indeed. At the same time the US govt had NO objection to Standard oil selling the very same production licence to the nazi regime.
Where there nazi sympathies in the Standard Oil boardroom? The truth is so unsavoury were the business practices of the US "Standard Oil of Jersey city" company (such as seeking furtive routes and brokering shady deals to supply nazi Germany with fuel and oil via neutral nations THROUGHOUT the war) that it's activities were investigated and closely monitored by the US Govt... but only AFTER the they had been DRAGGED into WW2 in Dec 1941 by the German delcaration of war on the US!!!
The "Standard Oil of Jersey City" company had NO qualms though about providing the exact same licence to the nazis prewar. But when it came to Britain the US preferred to strip the British of ALL their gold, cutting edge technology and military bases around the world during the British "hour of need" in return for a supply of amongst other things, US produced hi-octane fuel.
The US "business community" engaged in VERY profitable business dealings with BOTH sides throughout WW2. US corporations such as Ford, General Motors, US Standard Oil, IBM, Kodak, Chase Bank (to name but a few) carried on "business as usual" with nazi Germany THROUGHOUT WW2.
Ford's auto production facility in Cologne and General Motor's Opel subsiduary plant in Berlin were both busy working 24/7 THROUGHOUT WW2 furnishing the nazis with approximately 60% of the Wehrmacht's military transportation needs, as well as a sizeable chunk of the Luftwaffe's aero engine requirements... all the better for attacking Britain with eh?
The "ALuminum COrporation of America" (ALCOA) for instance supplied SO much aircraft grade aluminium to nazi Germany in the late 1930s and into the early 1940s that it actually caused shortfalls within the US government's own military aircraft production schedules, so much so that in June 1941 the situation prompted Harold Ickes, US Secretary of the Interior, to go on record as saying “If America loses this coming war, it can thank the Aluminum Corporation of America”.
With "friends" like the US "business community" who needs enemies?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Another clueless lefty.... the UK DID stand alone, that is unless you can provide us with the details of the luftwaffe air assaults on Canberra, Ottawa, Delhi and Wellington? Or how the Wehrmacht stood poised to launch its invasion of the Indian sub continent or Canada? Or how the Kriegsmarine attempted to strangle the British Empire out of the war by enforcing a u-boat blockade of Australia and New Zealand?
Oh news just coming in...... NONE OF THOSE THINGS HAPPENED because the ONLY nation facing ALL of those threats between July 1940 and April 1941 was the United Kingdom ALONE.
And if you want to correctly argue that Britain was supplied by its empire and the US then remember to add that nazi Germany was also supplied by its OWN empire of its recent European conquests (including some of the most heavily industrialised nations on the planet), as well as MILLIONS of tons of food, fuel and raw materials from their "best friend forever" the USSR (well, at least until 22nd June 1941), and also from Spain, Finland, Sweden & the Balkan countries... oh and not forgetting that US owned companies also supplied HUGE amounts of raw and finished materials to the nazis AS WELL as it did to the British, being a neutral profiteering bystander as it was until Dec 1941!!!
In 1940 Britain saved itself INSPITE of the US as much as it did BECAUSE of the US.
1
-
@czeroxd "Roosevelt redoubled his efforts before Congress to increase the manufacture of weapons and to be able to send them directly to those who fought against Germany"
What nonsense. Roosevelt oversaw the enrichment of US corporations and subsequently the US itself as they supplied both raw materials AND finished equipment and services to BOTH sides of the European war.
The US "saved" NO-ONE. We in the UK BOUGHT supplies from the US, who were also at the same time selling supplies to the nazi regime and made massive profits off the nazis through Ford's auto factory in Cologne and General Motor's Opel subsiduary in Berlin who were amongst the MANY other US corporations who continued to deal with nazi Germany THROUGHOUT WW2.
We in the UK bought supplies in exactly the same way as Germany bought millions of tons of raw and finished materials, food and fuel from the US, USSR, Romania, Finland, Sweden, the Balkans, and the collective raped economies of her European conquests.
Meanwhile Britain survived ALONE against the full might of the Wehrmacht for a full TWELVE MONTHS, without a single US serviceman helping, thereby saving the idiot US from it's own "isolationist's nightmare" of being sandwiched between a nazi controlled Europe and a Japense controlled Asia.
The UK saved ITSELF, INSPITE of the US as much as it did BECAUSE of the US.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
How come we're constantly exhorted to differentiate between "nazis" and "Germans" especially when addressing matters of a "war against humanity" nature, but meanwhile when it comes to similar aspects of British history, the term "British" is freely bandied about without any further differentiation? My family is for generations British born, and yet never willingly took part in any actions against colonials, or benefitted from the largesse raked in by the British aristocracy who orchestrated the siphoning off of the treasures of the empire for themselves. Indeed the "benefits" gained by 2 of my own English G Grandparents was to have died of typhus in the slums of Liverpool at the turn of the 20th century, while 3 of my 4 grandparents were dead in their 40s through ailments of poverty and exploitation. Are they and the millions others of the "lower classes" of British society to be lumped in with the British "elites" and held responsible of the crimes orchestrated by those at the top of British society?
"Nazis" in the context of WW2 were the "ruling class" of the German national socialist regime (together with their fervent, avowed followers) . Seeing as how we are all meant to be rightly concerned with correct terms of address in media productions, then how about refining "British" in these videos to the "British ruling class", "British aristocracy", "rich thieves and vagabonds of the British elites" or whatever other name you choose to specifcally identify them, so as to seperate them from the millions of ordinary British who had neither the power to decide on, nor benefitted from the rewards of, the actions (and sometimes crimes) directed by those at the top of British society.
Or will revisionist historians quietly acquiesce that we can all justifiably interchange "nazi" & "German" from now on uncontested, as in "the Germans carried out the holocaust and were responsible for the deaths of countless millions"? You can't have it both ways.....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@vincentlavallee2779 During the battle of Denmark Strait, Bismarck's "killing shot" was fired at Hood from 8-9 nautical miles away. At that range the 38 cm SK C/34 (Bismarck's main armament) had a CEP (circular error probability - effectively the radius of a circle within which 50% of its shots would fall) of 100m. That means that if 8 of Bismarck's 15in guns fired at a single point 8-9 nm away, 4 of the shells would be expected to land (with completely random distribution) within an ellipsis (due to the angle of fall) measuring approximately 100m (330ft) wide, (or to put it another way 38% of HMS Hood's 860ft length), by close to 2500 feet long. The other 4 shots would land even further away from the aiming point. That being the case, how can an individual shell be aimed specifically at a tiny part of HMS Hood's structure, namely the 4in HA magazine, that is believed to have triggered off Hood's detonation? I'll give you a hint, there's a little clue in my paragraph above....where it says "completely random distribution".
A simplified analogy is that if you prop a dartboard up 50 yards away and can consistently knock it over with a shotgun at that range then that is pretty good shooting, just as Bismarck / PE achieved during the Denmark Strait encounter.
Now you can "knock the dartboard over" all day long with the shotgun and STILL NOT hit the bullseye (magazine) with an individual pellet. As opposed to being a skillful shot by knocking over the dartboard, whether you hit the bullseye with an individual pellet IS complete luck.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I feel slightly bad in pointing this out, but it must be done to enlighten the clueless "The Poles won the battle of Britain" revisionists.
The Poles were not some breed of "superior" pilot, they'd simply accrued more combat experience since Sept 1939, and as a result of their previous battles with the luftwaffe only the most succesful Polish pilots had made it to Great Britain, the less successful ones had already perished. As soon as the rest of the RAF pilots had gained more experience there was NO difference in skill levels, as is witnessed by the kill tallies at the end of WW2. Luckily for the Poles they were provided with world class fighter aircraft with world beating radar and defensive control systems courtesy of the RAF and the British taxpayer, rather than flying to their deaths in the likes of the PZL P.7.
Though we Brits are nevertheless still appreciative of their contribution to our victory against the overconfident Luftwaffe, it must still be remembered that while Poles represented 7% of Fighter Command pilots, 75% of Fighter command pilots in the battle were of British birth.
Also please remember that contrary to uninformed, Brit-hating opinion, that ALL Polish service personnel who served in the British armed forces during WW2 (and their families) were given residency and citizenship rights in the UK, as witnessed by the 1947 Polish Resettlement Act.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
From an eyewitness account, (Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's fourth gunnery officer)
"The British ships were turning slightly to port, the lead ship showing an extremely long forecastle and two heavy twin turrets. On the telephone I heard Albrecht shout, "The HOOD...... it's the HOOD!" (his capitalisation), It was an unforgettable moment. There she was, the famous warship, once the largest in the world, that had been the "terror" of so many of our war games."
Later he made these remarks following Hood's demise....
"At first the Hood was nowhere to be seen: in her place was a colossal pillar of black smoke reaching into the sky. Gradually at the foot of the pillar, I made out the bow of the battle cruiser projecting upwards at an angle, a sure sign that she had broken in two. Then I saw something I could hardly believe: A flash of orange coming from her forward guns! Although her fighting days had ended, the Hood was firing a last salvo. I felt a great respect for those men over there"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thatdude3938 "When separate parts of German crew tried to surrender, Anglos just ignored that and blasted away."...... That's because "surrender" doesn't work like that. When you've personally had enough, and "wave the white flag", does that mean the whole ship has surrendered? No it doesn't. Others in the crew are still prepared to fight and are taking action against you. Undoubtedly its a shit state of affairs, but hey!!! That's war for you.
There are, believe it or not, conventions in warfare, and in naval warfare "striking the colours" (hauling down your battle ensign) is the historically understood sign of surrender. It's more than possible that Bismarck's command staff were "neutralised" and unable to order the "striking of the colours", but also equally possible that due to their "post Prussian military Honour" they were unwilling to do so.
P.S As for the "more civilized" part, The Royal Navy did attempt to rescue Bismarck's survivors, but their efforts were interrupted by a submarine alert. And before you suggest that "the alert" was made up, the war diary of U-74 clearly records that she was in the vicinity of the Bismarck's last battle.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
A lot of people in the UK are getting TIRED of the CONSTANT current day bitching and clueless insults from uninformed Poles and devious lefties directed at Britain for perceived historical "betrayal" as was taught to the Polish people for 45 years after WW2 by the communist authorities.
Another clueless commenter who chooses to ignore the "elephant in the room" that Poland owes the UK far FAR more than we owe them.
What is it with you clueless modern day Poles and thick headed lefties? You go out of your way to ignore the fact that modern day Poland OWES its ENTIRE current existence to the British Empire ALONE.
What do you all imagine would have happened to Poland if Britain and France did as the ENTIRE rest of the world did in Sept 1939 and completely IGNORED its nazi / soviet dismemberment in Sept/Oct 1939? Or if the isolated British Isles had instead decided to seek an armistice with the nazis after the fall of France in June 1940? Do you all stupidly believe that Poland would liberate herself from 1000 years of nazi tyranny? Dream on.
Let me tell you what would have happened in reality. Today Poland would not exist. It would simply be a footnote in modern history books, a former nation that would now be divided between nazi East Prussia and the "General Government" region of the nazi Empire. The former Polish cities would now be "Germanised" and each would STILL today have swastikas flying above them, and most chillingly of all, the likes of Sobibor, Chelmno, Belzec, Treblinka, Majdanek & Auschwitz would STILL be operating and belching human ashes into formerly Polish skies.
And thats before we even mention the sum of over £140 MILLION (at 1946 prices - Just under £4.8 BILLION adjusted for 2024) of Polish national debt to the UK that the British govt wrote off at the end of WW2.
Great Britain had borrowed heavily to fund its effort to oppose and destroy the nazi conquest of Europe and that of Japan in the far east. At the end of the 19th century Britain had been the RICHEST nation on the planet, by 1945 she was the world's LARGEST debtor. Britain was a staggering £21 billion (or nearly £770 BILLION in 2025) in debt, which was equivalent to over 75,000 tons of gold at 1945 exchange rates. This was more than 2.5 times the combined national gold reserves of every country on earth at the time! So to have 91.4% of the Polish war debt to the UK written off by the UK government at that point was nothing short of reckless generosity on behalf of the the UK taxpayer.
Please give over with the almost CONSTANT insults at the UK, the nation that made a sacrifice of 460,000 of it's OWN citizen's lives, which ENTIRELY bankrupted itself, and which financed the Polish war effort in the west with UK tax payer's money, and due to those ruinous costs also lost its empire, ALL in the selfless effort to prevent a nazi domination of Europe, and saving YOUR Polish asses from extinction.
Surely it's about time the brainwashed Polish nation now ditched the communist schoolbooks they were forced to "learn" from for 45 years after WW2.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@timwatts9371 Why would I choose not to use independent thought and avoid the "elephant in the room"? That "elephant" being the constant harping on about Alan Turing by the lefty, globalist, divisive "identity politics" pushing MSM as opposed to the almost complete anonymity of the rest of the team without who Mr Turing was nothing but a dusty old academic. Tommy Flowers, working class, self educated & self financed electronics technician par excellence who brought his planet sized understanding of practical electronics to turn Turing's academic ideas and concepts to practical fruition, he SHOULD be an icon for the left, with him being an ordinary man of working class "stock" which used to be so beloved of the left, but unfortunately he was white, heterosexual and very much a "Mr everyone", therefore not very useful for current lefties in highlighting differences between various social groups. Bill Tutte and Arne Buerling who through massive analytical insight respectively cracked the very foundation of the German's much tougher "Tunny" and "Sturgeon" ciphers with pen and paper and BOTH almost completely unknown, together with many others who through determined direction and teamwork TOGETHER brought WW2 to an earlier climax. Your defense of the elevation of the persecuted homeosexual Mr Turing to almost iconic god like status by the MSM marks you as just another low-level lefty dupe.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Please provide us with the details of the luftwaffe air assaults on Canberra, Ottawa, Delhi and Wellington? Or how the Wehrmacht stood poised to launch its invasion of the Indian sub continent? Or how the Kriegsmarine attempted to strangle "the British Empire" out of the war by enforcing a u-boat blockade of Australia and New Zealand?
Oh news just coming in...... NONE OF THOSE THINGS HAPPENED because the ONLY nation subjected to ALL of those threats by the nazis between July 1940 and April 1941 was GREAT BRITAIN ALONE.
I thought I'd create a simple "visual aid" in order to assist people learning about the history of the battle of Britain. There is much ongoing debate about the nationalities and proportions of RAF fighter pilots who took part in the battle, with a furtive aspect which attempts to portray the battle as a victory of "mostly Foreign pilots". Below is an accurate graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940.
Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the actual number of pilots from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%)
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%)
🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%)
🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%)
🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%)
🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%)
By the time of the expected invasion in Sept 1940 the British army was fielding
2 British Armoured divisions
2 British Armoured tank brigades
15 British infantry divisions (full strength)
7 British infantry divisions (under strength).
7 British infantry Brigades
2 British motor machine gun Brigades
1 Canadian infantry division (full strength)
2 Australian infantry brigades (BOTH under strength)
1 NZ infantry division (actually an understrength infantry Brigade but with an attached British motor machine gun brigade)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Do fans leave their brains at the door? Do they not have any instincts? I've never considered the concept of "fan baiting", which now it's been explained seems a logical but evil process, but yet fans feel they are duty bound to sit through a modern desecration of their favourite stories, and have the whole of their fictional world irreparably tainted by modern globalist BS.
All I know is that I seem to be able to see when someone is pissing in my face, for instance I have my whole life been fascinated with the book, and then the film "Das Boot" (about a German U-boat crew during WW2). I've read the book several times over the decades and watched the 5 hour TV miniseries it generated in the 1980s more times than I care to mention.
Then in 2018 I became aware that a new TV series "expanding" the story was being created, and was hugely eager to see the new material, though being guarded in my excitement as I was growingly aware of how old classics being exploited by modern day media companies usually turn out.
Still I sought out the first media clips of the new series, and within a couple of minutes was jaw-droppingly stopped in my tracks by just how utterly SHITE this new material was, and so even though I am a HUGE officianado of the material I chose NEVER to watch the new shit, and have for the last 3 years had my observations confirmed by endless monologues detailing how fecking awful the new stuff is.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Hahahaha... "The British didn't sink the Bismarck". IF any "scuttling" actually took place then all that was scuttled was a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken and penetrated in several places, her command staff physically obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater, a thousand of her crew dead, and further hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All that any scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer AFTER he has been punched senseless by a more skillful & powerful opponent, and only a deluded child would say, "the victor didn't win because his opponent killed himself before he lost.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off by the victor and handed back to him on a plate.
Imagine the ignominy of being forced to commit suicide by your opponent?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Hear hear !!! I find what should be equally true is that modern day Poles acknowledge the suffering and sacrifice that the UK went through in order to topple the nazi tyranny that was murdering their country. At a time when nazi Germany and the USSR devoured Poland, the rest of the world did utterly nothing, and continued on trading with the soviets and nazis as if nothing had happened, apparently unconcerned about the erasing of Poland from the map of Europe. The ONLY two countries that challenged the situation were the UK and France.... and don't allow yourself to be fooled that the "UK & France did nothing to help Poland".
After the conquest of France, without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism from June 1940 onwards, opposition which bankrupted the UK and cost her 460,000 of her citizen's lives, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, 70s or even beyond.
Respect to BOTH of our countries.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Same here NIck, my own father was onboard HMS Dorsetshire and witnessed Bismarck being sunk, survived the sinking of Dorsetshire in April 1942, and narrowly avoided death onboard HMS Warspite in 1943. At times through childhood, it felt in our closetted little minds as though we were serving in the RN during WW2 ourselves as he would recall incessantly things that had happened during the war, some truly terrible. It drove us mad, and inevitably we "switched off" to a lot of it. As I grew up and acquired some wisdom and empathy, it dawned on me that at war's end, after experiencing some truly traumatic events, Dad like millions of others was given a "demob suit" and told to "bugger off". They just had to "get on" with their lives with little or no support. It seems obvious to me now that we lived through dad's PTSD and we were his unwitting therapy.
We lost dad to dementia in 2013, but fortunately we made our amends before the end, and I spent much time with him in his final years, listening to his tales during his lucid times. Thank god our respective parents "stepped up to the plate" when the call was given. All the best Nick.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
If the US had REALLY wanted to "help Britain", then instead of bleeding the British empire dry and causing its collapse, they could have for example sold a production license for Tetra Ethyl Lead (The compound required for the production of hi-octane fuels) to Britain when we applied to purchase one prewar. ... instead they refused to sell one to "their British cousins"... A "special relationship" indeed. Where there nazi sympathies in the Standard Oil boardroom? The truth is so unsavoury were the business practices of the US "Standard Oil" company (such as seeking furtive routes and brokering shady deals to supply nazi Germany with fuel and oil via neutral nations during the war) that it's activities were investigated and closely monitored by the US Govt... but only AFTER the they had been DRAGGED into WW2 in Dec 1941 by the German delcaration of war on the US!!!
The "Standard Oil of Jersey City" company had NO qualms though about providing the exact same licence to the nazis prewar. But when it came to Britain the US preferred to strip the British of ALL their gold, cutting edge technology and military bases around the world during the British "hour of need" in return for a supply of amongst other things, US produced hi-octane fuel.
The US "business community" engaged in VERY profitable business dealings with BOTH sides throughout WW2. US corporations such as Ford, General Motors, US Standard Oil, IBM, Kodak, Chase Bank (to name but a few) carried on "business as usual" with nazi Germany THROUGHOUT WW2.
Ford's auto production facility in Cologne and General Motor's Opel subsiduary plant in Berlin were both busy working 24/7 THROUGHOUT WW2 furnishing the nazis with approximately 60% of the Wehrmacht's military transportation needs, as well as a sizeable chunk of the Luftwaffe's aero engine requirements... all the better for attacking Britain with eh?
The "ALuminum COrporation of America" (ALCOA) for instance supplied SO much aircraft grade aluminium to nazi Germany in the late 1930s and into the early 1940s that it actually caused shortfalls within the US government's own military aircraft production schedules, so much so that in June 1941 the situation prompted Harold Ickes, US Secretary of the Interior, to go on record as saying “If America loses this coming war, it can thank the Aluminum Corporation of America”.
With "friends" like the US "business community" who needs enemies?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Below is the vebatim British ultimatum delivered to Adm Bruno-Marcel Gensoul at Mers-El-Kebir on the 3rd July 1940
"It is impossible for us, your comrades up to now, to allow your fine ships to fall into the power of the German or Italian enemy. We are determined to fight on until the end, and if we win, as we think we shall, we shall never forget that France was our Ally, that our interests are the same as hers, and that our common enemy is Germany. Should we conquer, we solemnly declare that we shall restore the greatness and territory of France. For this purpose, we must make sure that the best ships of the French Navy are not used against us by the common foe. In these circumstances, His Majesty’s Government have instructed me to demand that the French Fleet now at Mers-el-Kébir and Oran shall act in accordance with one of the following alternatives:
(a) Sail with us and continue the fight until victory against the Germans and Italians.
(b) Sail with reduced crews under our control to a British port. The reduced crews would be repatriated at the earliest moment. If either of these courses is adopted by you, we will restore your ships to France at the conclusion of the war or pay full compensation, if they are damaged meanwhile.
(c) Alternatively, if you feel bound to stipulate that your ships should not be used against the Germans or Italians unless these break the Armistice, then sail them with us with reduced crews, to some French port in the West Indies—Martinique for instance—where they can be demilitarised to our satisfaction, or perhaps be entrusted to the United States and remain safe until the end of the war, the crews being repatriated.
If you refuse these fair offers, I must, with profound regret, require you to sink your ships within 6 hours.
Finally, failing the above I have orders of His Majesty's Government to use whatever force may be necessary to prevent your ships from falling into German or Italian hands."
When Gensoul was handed this ultimatum, Instead of immediately contacting his superior officer, Admiral Francois Darlan for advice and guidance, at a CRITICAL point in European history, this stupid jumped up little squirt of a French officer though he would piss about.
His idiotic petulant behaviour cost the lives of 1300 French sailors. He never ONCE discussed his handling of the tragedy up until his death in 1970. At least he had a rightful sense of shame.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The UK continues to honour the Poles who served in the west during WW2 to this day at each and every Remembrance day parade across the UK.... BUT the ignorance of SOME modern day Poles (and lefty agitators) as witnessed in so many of the comments in this thread is quite shameless. Their ignorance of the fact that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need" or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries
NO interdiction of nazi german sea trade by the Royal Navy
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s.
For those Ignorant modern day Poles, on your way out, please remember to kneel at the altar dedicated to the combined 1.1 million lives sacrificed by the UK and France in order to topple the nazism that was murdering and torturing YOUR country when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
And for all current honourable, and deeper thinking Poles, please accept our best wishes from the UK.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Postwar research showed that in total 558,032 people, (368,491 of them being British troops or 66%) were evacuated from France by operations "Dynamo" & "Aerial".
The numbers evacuated from the Dunkirk pocket alonewere.
203,000 British troops,
112,000 French troops
23,000 Belgian troops.
The BEF suffered 66,426 casualties, that was 11,014 killed or died of wounds, 14,074 wounded and 41,338 men missing or taken prisoner
The BEF lost one seventh of its personnel killed and captured, because the TEN BEF divisions on the Belgian border were left isolated by the unannounced withdrawal of the French first army on their right flank, and collapse of the Belgian forces on their left.
The Perimeter of the Dunkirk pocket was manned by British, French and Belgian troops, which fought to allow British French and Belgian troops be evacuated MOSTLY by the RN and British "little ships".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I've voted all my life, but in the last few years I have become one of those voters that I never understood as a young person.... The "spoiled ballot paper" voter.
When NONE of the parties on the ballot represent the things you feel most strongly about, when there is NO "clear blue / red / orange water" between the party manifestos (for what they're worth), only a big messy, meaningless "one size fits no-one" consensus, and when finally the general calibre of the candidates on offer is so inexecrably bad, and finally there is no "none of the above" tickbox on the ballot, then what can you do? Not vote? That is just easily discounted as "just a low turnout" & "voter apathy", surely better than not voting is to put your message and feeling on the paper, and then if the day ever arrived where 64.3% of the vote was spoiled ballots, it might then be interesting to see what would transpire from that result.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@balazsvarga1823 There was never ANY thought of boarding Bismarck its why the RN had flung so much firepower and torpedoes at her. You tend not to try to hole a ship below the waterline if you intend to board her, on top of which the RN Home Fleet was critically short of fuel, barely having enough to reach port.
Before she sank Bismarck was a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken and penetrated in several places, her command staff physically obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater, a thousand of her crew dead, and further hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All that any scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer AFTER he has been punched senseless by a more skillful & powerful opponent, and only a deluded child would say, "the victor didn't win because his opponent killed himself before he lost.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off by the victor and handed back to him on a plate.
Imagine the ignominy of being forced to commit suicide by your opponent?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tylershannon6593 Give over with your "UK betrayal of Poland" nonsense.
After the invasion of Poland, tell me exactly who else, APART from Britain and France, challenged the nazi regime? Then after the fall of France who else apart from Britain ALONE continued the struggle against the nazis.
If it wasn't SOLELY for the British, who continued the challenge to the nazi regime when utterly NO-ONE ELSE in the world cared to lift a finger, then today Poland would not exist. It would simply be a footnote in modern history books, a former nation that would now be divided between nazi Prussia and the "General Government" region of the nazi Empire. The former Polish cities would now be "Germanised" and each would STILL today have swastikas flying above them, and most chillingly of all, the likes of Sobibor, Chelmno, Belzec, Treblinka, Majdanek & Auschwitz would STILL be operating and belching human ashes into formerly Polish skies.
For the trouble of continuing our efforts to topple the nazi regime Britain sacrificed 460,000 of its citizens, its ENTIRE national wealth (transforming itself from the world's richest country in 1900 to the World's LARGEST debtor in 1945), and as a result of that RUINOUS expenditure lost our empire, and completely destroyed its own economy.
Then postwar when the US & USSR divided up Europe to their own benefit, it was BRITAIN who was FIRST to graciously grant a new safe national home for the stateless 250,000 Polish ex-service personnel who had continued the fight against nazism in the west by means of the 1947 Polish Resettlement Act, which granted them FULL UK citizenship and residency rights, thereby saving them (AND their families) from having to return to their cherished homeland to face Polish communist brutality and death.
Stop parrotting postwar communist propaganda.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Not a single RAF bomb landed on the German mainland until 11th May 1940, seeing as the RAF was forbidden to bomb Germany up until that date (instead preferring to supply Germany's demand for toilet paper by dropping only propaganda leaflets). Wehraboos usually mention guff about a "bombing attack on Wilhelmshaven" on the night of 3/4th september 1939 as "evidence" of RAF civilian bombing, but that too is complete BS. There were NO bombs dropped at all on the city, the attack that uninformed nazi apologists try to portray as "the first civilian bombing of Germany during WW2" was actually an attack by 10 Blenheim bombers directed at Kreigsmarine naval vessels in the Jade estuary off the coast of Wilhelmshaven (I.E a legitimate military target far away from the nearest civilians). The RAF was even forbidden from attacking the German warships in port for fear of hitting civilians, and the RAF bombing attack even took place in broad daylight so as to avoid the possiblity of bombing neutral merchant shipping in the area. Unsurprisingly the unescorted RAF light bombers were savaged by defending fighters.
The first bombs dropped by either side onto the actual land of the other was on 13th November 1939 when the luftwaffe bombed RAF Sullom Voe a seaplane base with port facilities in the Shetland Isles (with the resultant death of a rabbit, and no hits on the 9 seaplanes or 2 RN vessels stationed there). The RAF retaliated by hitting the nazi seaplane base at Hörnum on the island of Sylt on 19th March 1940... the very first RAF bombs to land on German soil....4 months AFTER the first German bombs had landed on British soil.
The first civilian fatalities of either side from bombing during WW2 were inflicted by the luftwaffe during an attack on Scapa Flow in the Orkney Islands on 16th March 1940 when German bombs hit the village of Waithe on Orkney killing a 27 year-old County Council employee, James Isbister (luckily, his wife, baby son, and the neighbour James was endeavouring to rescue from her bombed cottage all survived).
The first RAF bomber raid intentionally designed to hit German civilians was the attack on Mannheim on the 16th December 1940 (Operation Abigail), this was in direct response for the German Operation "Moonlight Sonata", the bombing of Coventry on November 14th 1940, although the nazis had been showering high explosive over British cities since August 1940.
1
-
@tomperkin2505 Thank you Tom for the "heads up" regarding my YT censored comment it's not the first time it's happened with my comments, I'm often "off-narrative" and those little globalist tykes will have their censorious, elitist fun, won't they?
Yes Tom, as for the bombing, does it matter to those innocents who are killed that their deaths weren't intended, and only "collateral"? The Luftwaffe had struck at RAF Biggin Hill, Kenley, and Croydon all of which are within the boundary of "Greater London", the boundary that Hitler himself had expressly forbade any bombs to be dropped in, and during those attacks, many locals surrounding the airfields had been killed.
Contrast this to the instance I give above of the British government forbidding attacks against Kriegsmarine units in port exactly for the reason that it was likely to create innocent civilian casualties, so the RAF flew unescorted light bombers (RAF fighters did not have the range to escort them) in broad daylight to attack the units at sea.... with resultant ruinous losses to the RAF light bomber units.
When it comes to the RAF attack on Berlin on the 24th August 1940, the targets for the RAF bombing were the Klingenberg Power Station and its adjacent railway marshalling yards in Eastern Berlin and Templehof airport, and as you would expect (when you read the Aug 1941 "Butt Report"), with RAF early war bombing accuracy being very poor, a small number of civilian casualties were incurred. It was obviously a sign to Hitler that "you're not impregnable... if you inflict "collateral damage" to us, we can also do it to you". Another interesting point about the accidental bombing of innocent civilians was in how the two respective governments handled the information....in the UK a "D-notice" was slapped on the reporting in the press of the deaths of British civilians due to concerns about lowering moral and instilling fear and panic in the pouplace, while in Germany footage of a hospital and school that were accidentally hit during the RAF bombing were broadcast nationwide, with a suitably blood-curdling narrator demanding retribution for the British crime.
Then when you consider the 14th November attack on Coventry by the Luftwaffe, they employed their premier "pathfinder" group "Kampfgruppe 100" equipped as it was at that time with its world leading "X-Gerät" bombing system, which the Germans themselves declared could place bombs (or in the case of Coventry "Target indicators") with a precision of 50 meters at 200 miles range, On the night of 14th Nov 1940 the final beams of the X-Gerät system did not intersect over the industrial districts on the outskirts of Coventry, but over the densely housed city centre and surrounding districts.
THERE is the irrefutable proof of intent.
All the best, Tom.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Absolutely GREAT to see level headed, erudite and capable people such as yourself, putting their head above the parapet and voicing their valid concerns about "the message". Thank Christ I left the Fire Brigade after 30 years of frontline service 10 years ago, I saw all this BS coming in for the last 10 years or so of that service (you would not BELIEVE some of the utterly ludicrous policies, complete with resultant unforeseen consquences, that were introduced), and to hear the sort of continual, irrational nonsense that is passed down from government to local authority to management to the "coal face" is SO dispiriting, you know the old saying that "shit rolls downhill"... but then when that shit hits the fan as its now doing in many different aspects of society, all the fecking pen pushers, the types who can't wipe their own arse without getting it in their hair, come pleading to exactly the kind of long serving experienced people that they had legislated against and undermined for the previous 20-30 years to pull their arses out of the shit.
I'm so sorry that you feel unable to serve in a vital job that you obviously have loved because of the constnat "message". But you're doing the right thing, finding your fulfilment elsewhere, better to serve yourself and your loved ones now than let these corporate globalist puppets take the piss out of you any longer.... leave them to stew in the shitpit that they created.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What a pile of disingenuous, lefty, revisionist garbage.
Why have you chosen to "cherry pick" your figures from different sources, was it to show the RAF at its strongest, and the Luftwaffe at its weakest? Why have you chosen to represent RAF defensive strength to include bomber and coastal command? They were NOT defending and took NO part in the defensive airwar over England in 1940.
Lets look at some official figures shall we?
AIR 40/1207 - Air Ministry: Periodical Returns, Intelligence Summaries and Bulletins. Dated 10th July 1940 (officially the first day of the battle of Britain). Total fighter command returns 645 aircraft to include all Spitfire / Hurricane / Blenheim / Defiants. That is 645 serviceable fighter aircraft to DEFEND the whole of Britain, NOT the 1963 you try to suggest which included the likes of defensively useless types such as Battles, Hampdens, Wellingtons & Whitleys.
Facing the 645 fighters of RAF Fighter Command were the assembled forces of Luftflottes 2, 3 & 5. As you may imagine, Luftwaffe records from 1940 are piecemeal and hard to correlate, but a fair aggregation of serviceable aircraft (Which does NOT include the Do 18s / FW 200s etc of the Küstenfliegers, Ju52s etc of KG zbV1, and other assorted offensive units stationed in Germany / Poland) as of July / August 1940 are as follows.
Single-engined fighters 787
Twin-engined fighters 219
Night fighters 63
Fighter-bombers 119
Dive-bombers 294
Twin-engined bombers 960
Four-engined bombers 7
Long-range reconaissance aircraft 185
Total Offensive A/C available in France
the Low Countries, and Scandinavia 2,634
Which gives an offensive luftwaffe strength (2634) to defensive RAF strength (645) ratio of 4.08 luftwaffe aircraft to every 1 RAF fighter.
Save your slanted, biased nonsense for those who can't read facts for themselves.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dariuszostaszewski8473 Britain and France had for 20 years bent over backwards to avoid another blood letting as in 1914-18. Well meaning leaders believed that if we all worked for peace then the world would be a safer place, which is a fine thought. The obvious problem being that when a small number of countries feel unhappy with their status in the world and so decide that they alone will start bullying neighbours and seek military conquest. Then all the well meaning nations in the world can only do one of two things.... bury their heads in the sand and hope all the nastiness will "go away", or prepare for war.
ALL the nations of the world except for two took the first option, and the two who stood up, Britain and France did so too late to have effective, fully readied armed forces in time to save Poland.
Peacetime armies do not just flick a switch and instantly turn into "combat mode"... Real life is not a computer game. Hundreds of thousands (millions in France's case) of reservists and conscripts have to be processed, transported to their training, equipped, trained, allocated and transported to their unit, then their unit needs transporting to their operational posting. Processing that huge number of people takes time.
Britain was the world's number 1 seapower prior to WW2 as we controlled a global empire highly dependent on maritime trade, We've NEVER possessed armies the size of France and Germany's. Instead on 3rd Sept 1939...
The Royal Navy instigated the North sea blockade to instantly cut off the vast majority of Germany's fuel and supply imports, the same blockade that strangled Germany to near starvation in WW1.
The RAF launched attacks against units of the Kriegsmarine in the North sea on the same day, suffering heavy losses in the process.
The British Army immediately began its mobilisation of reserves and the transporting of its small number of regular troops to France on 3rd Sept 1939. By Dec 1939 three, just THREE British army infantry divisions were in position in France. It took until April 1940 to have just 10 divisions of the BEF in position on the French/Belgian Border. Poland had collapsed by the middle of October 1939.... So what exaclty did you expect that the UK was going to do to assist Poland on land?
Whatever you may imagine Britain simply assured Poland that should the German army cross its borders then Britain would declare war on Germany....nothing more, and it did stand by its promise.
Now as for "Can you elaborate on the 1.1 million who died for the liberation of Poland" Yes I can. WW2 caused the death of 460,000 British citizens and 600,000 French, hence the 1.1 million. Now imagine if instead of declaring war on Germany in 1939, irrespective of our inability to render immediate assistance to Poland, we had instead done as the rest of the world did and said "Oh dear what a pity" and ignored the plight of Poland. In that circumstance, please explain how an independent Polish nation was EVER going to exist again?
The fact is that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination until today. Remember that apart from Britain and France (Who as well as sacrificing 1.1 million of their citizens also bankrupted themselves as nations, and ended up losing their empires) absolutely NO ONE ELSE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939. The USA in Sept 1939 did not even embargo nazi Germany as she was too valuable a trading partner for the US economy, and as you know the USSR willingly helped nazi Germany destroy your nation... so who was going to save Poland?
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism from June 1940 onwards, opposition which cost her so much of her blood and treasure, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, 70s or even beyond, and the Swastika would still be flying over Warsaw until today.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
My own father, a British citizen who was conscripted into the Royal Navy from his job in "civvy street" in 1939 was, in late 1945, handed a "demob suit" and told unceremoniously to "f*ck off", after having suffered the lasting emotional trauma of the sinking of his ship (HMS Dorsetshire) in the Indian ocean in 1942, and narrowly avoiding death during the Salerno landings when HMS Warspite was hit by "Fritz X" bombs, leaving him with permanently damaged hearing.... indeed he had to wait 45 years until 1988 to receive any form of compensation for the injury that he carried to his grave, a paltry "disablement pension" from the UK government, inspite of working all his life paying his taxes until his retirement.
The expectation that "generals" are somehow automatically worthy of better treatment is complete nonsense, and of course the British establishment looked after its own, just as ANY country would do the same.
1
-
Poverty in ANY country is caused by those at the top who organise and deceive to keep the power and wealth in the hands of the few. In short, Britain's aristocracy (the rich fuckers) basically bought the indentured populations of the Indian Mughals and Maharajas to work to make wealth for the British aristocracy.... The Poor of India were enslaved by the British aristocracy, who paid the Mughals and Maharajas vast amounts of wealth for the privilege, I.E The "elites" from BOTH countries made VAST profits, while those at the "bottom" of the countries died in their millions. Look at Britain through the time of the Raj, and maybe take my own family as an example. We are, for many generations, British born, and yet never willingly took part in any actions against colonials, or benefitted from the boundless wealth raked in by the British aristocracy who orchestrated the siphoning off of the treasures of the empire for themselves. Indeed the only "benefits" gained by my family were 2 of my G Grandparents who died of typhus in the slums of Liverpool at the turn of the 20th century, while 3 of my 4 grandparents were dead in their 40s through ailments of poverty and exploitation, and countless children through my family tree registered as dying in their early childhood, did THEY benefit from the untold wealth stolen from India? Are they and the millions others of the "lower classes" of British society to be lumped in with the British "elites" and held responsible of the crimes orchestrated by those at the top of British society?
To boil it down to its pure essence, the cause of poverty has NEVER been "British" Vs "Indian" but instead "rich" Vs "poor", as can be seen today when the excuse of misrule by the "Raj" causing India's poverty has worn very thin, no longer can we "the British" be held up as being responsible for India's continuing poverty, the truth is that it is now India's OWN rich and corrupt "elites" that perpetuate the inequalities of India society, just the same as in almost all countries of the world, but obviously to a much greater extent than most.
WAKE UP to the lie..... the true struggle has ALWAYS been rich Vs poor, don't let their complicit lackeys in the mainstream media try to fool you otherwise.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cosmicdisaster02 Absolutely agree Caleb. My own father who passed aged 93 in 2013 served in the Royal Navy throughout WW2, he witnessed terrible but truly awesome events, the sinking of the Bismarck, assisted in the rescue of the survivors, survived the sinking of his own ship one year later in the Indian ocean by the same aircraft that carried out the Pearl Harbour attack, and only just survived a "Fritz X" hit on HMS Warspite off Salerno in 1943. The stories from him and his "muckers" (Mates in the RN) when they came to visit, were a fascinating mix of boredom, terror, laughter, tragedy & escapades..... especially after a few "pusser's rums"... I so wish I'd had the forethought to record their tales, but it's too late and they're all gone now.
It sounds a bit corny but at my dad's funeral I couldn't help but remember Rutger Hauer's "tears in rain" monologue from the "bladerunner" film, which if you search it out and listen to it here on YT will, I'm sure, resonate with you, as you remember all your own father's tales of his service during the war.
Respects to all their memories, and best wishes to you from the UK.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@terryoneil6209 I know you're not "going to argue numbers"... instead you just make them up to justify the nonsense of your argument.
So what that Dowding never assigned the name "the battle of Britain"? The summer air battles that were the prelude to German invasion plans happened. End of.
As for your "Battles of little significance and no stratigic importance" I only need to provide a SINGLE piece of verifiable information to prove my point. What better than the order issued by none other the Adolf Hitler himself? Below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the Reichchancellery on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW).
The directive was transmitted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to initmidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan was academic. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
Lets then look at what would have happened if the United Kingdom, as the LAST power then opposing nazism in the world, had instead chosen to surrender, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, where their extermination camps would STILL be operating on European soil today, and the US would have been left isolated between a nazi dominated Europe and a Japanese dominated Asia.
And nowadays all we seem to get are clueless, ignorant modern day commenters such as yourself pissing over those sacrifices and effort. No wonder the ongoing constant flow of lefty insults and ingratitude towards the UK leads some British people to think we should have saved our own citizen's lives, economy and empire and instead left the nazis to it, and let them carry on raping and murdering their European conquests.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jackreacher5667 "Most aircraft carriers,(British and American) even the Iowa class ships had Teak decks" (You are aware the "Iowas" were NOT carriers, aren't you?)
WRONG. Most British WW2 aircraft carriers such as the "Illustrious", "Indomitable" & "Inplacable" classes did NOT have wooden decks, instead having 3in thick armour acting as horizontal protection and also as the actual flight deck, as well as a further 2in thick armoured deck protecting the hangars.
US "Yorktown" carriers had flightdecks of teak planking over standard three quarter inch plating. The "Essex" class had in parts 1.5in plating under the teak planking. It wasn't until after WW2 that the US "Midway" class carriers had deck armour comparable with RN carriers.
If you'd like the prime examples of the structural differences between RN and USN aircraft carriers, read about the resultant damage caused by a single bomb on USS Princeton ("Independence" class carrier) and kamikaze attacks against USS Bunker Hill (an Essex class carrier), HMS Illustrious, HMS Indomitable & HMS Indefatigable.
On USS Bunker Hill a single kamikaze on her deck wrecked her, killing over 400 crew and knocking her out of action for the rest of the war, as it took 6 months of repairs to make her operational again.
HMS Illustrious survived a kamikaze hit by a Japanese bomber as well as the detonation of its 1000kg bomb adjacent to her hull, Indomitable & Indefatigable on the other hand were both hit by kamikazes, and in each case the wreckage of the Japanese aircraft was "brushed overboard", and quick drying cement was used to fill in the resultant dent on their flight decks, meaning that both were flying aircraft off within 90 minutes of the attacks, in each case the number of crew lost was in the order of low 10s.
"A little bit of research can often be a wonderful thing." indeed, you should try it sometime.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Never needed ANYONE to tell me how awful the BBC has become over the last 20 years or so (hence why I now on a monthly basis I throw their quasi-threatening "red letter" demands about my non payment of the Licence tax straight in the bin)...... and Its not just the BBC, ALL the mainstream media has turned on the tap of shite "multiculturalism". The lefty globalists started their fungal like "march thorugh the institutions" back before I was born in the 60s... its only now they believe they have reached "critical mass" and are intent on toppling "old" society to be replaced with the brave new world or "multiculturalism" and "diversity".
The lie of "Diversity".... imagine the world as a smorgasbord of world cultures a veritable feast with a wide range of tastes, aromas, colours & textures... each interesting, and each with something to tempt the palette.... Hmmmm how DIVERSE !!!
Now the globalists rock up to the "world buffet" and announce, were going to make the world "multicultural" and increase "diversity".... before sweeping all the contents off the table, into a 45 gallon oil drum, inserting an industrial paint mixer, and then ladelling out the resultant mocha coloured slop to the rest of the guests.
Where exactly is the "diversity" in that? Where as before we could compare and contrast the merits of Pad Thai against those of Borscht against those of empanadas or even against those of fish and chips, we are now all served up an overflowing bowl of mocha "gloop"... a buffet where "one size suits nobody".
No the truth is that the destruction of national identities and the homogenisation of humanity makes a future "one world population! FAR easier for the future "one world government" to control and move about at THEIR whim. As the "elites" are the ONLY people whose purposes are served by the shite of multiculturalism.
One of the main defences we have is educating our OWN kids in "critical thinking".... and NOT leaving it to clueless young teachers who've been steeped & programmed at college in the poisonous lies of the globalist left. My kids can all think for themselves, have a healthy disregard for "soshal meeeedya" and are only too happy to speak their minds.... whether it agrees with vcurrent political "rightspeak" or not.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The ignorance of SOME modern day Poles (and lefty agitators) as witnessed in so many of the comments in this thread is quite shameless. Their ignorance of the fact that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need" or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries
NO interdiction of nazi german sea trade by the Royal Navy
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s.
For those Ignorant modern day Poles, on your way out, please remember to kneel at the altar dedicated to the combined 1.1 million lives sacrificed by the UK and France in order to topple the nazism that was murdering and torturing YOUR country when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
And for all current honourable, and deeper thinking Poles, please accept our best wishes from the UK.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@robo261 If you'd like a brief(ish) outline of the run up to the 1946 victory parade then read on, It's something I've written previously that I have saved ready to "copy and paste" in response to the oft repeated nonsense within YT regarding a supposed British "ban" on Poles at the victory parade.
For those who believe Poland was "excluded" from the 1946 London victory parade, here is a brief timeline of what actually happened to give some context to the devious nonsense that "Brits never invited the Poles".
Since before the end of WW2 in Europe, Britain and the US had been negotiating with the Soviets over the future of eastern Europe and especially Poland in post WW2 Europe. The UK & US wanted a democratic Polish government that would by way of democracy include both the Polish communists of the existing Moscow backed "Lublin committee", and the Polish nationalists from the Polish Govt in exile that had been based in London during most of WW2. This proposed "Polish provisional government of national unity" was to be setup in Warsaw, and was agreed to by all of the "Big 3" (UK / US / USSR) at the Feb 1945 Yalta conference, but from the outset the Soviets then occupying Poland did everything they practically could to bar the inclusion of the "London Poles", and intimidate and marginalise the small number of nationalists who did finally manage to get into the "unity govt".
With regard to the 1946 Victory parade when it came to handing out the national invites to all the countries that had fought on the side of the Allies in WW2, The British Labour government of Clement Attlee, trying to engender good will between the eastern and western allies, handed the Polish invitation to the Warsaw based "Polish provisional government of national unity" (which was after all the official government of Poland, as recognised by the United Nations). The now effectively powerless & stateless nationalist Polish government in exile in London took great offence at their sidelining in this matter, and raised a torrent of indignation that was backed by many British MPs and ordinary people. A few days before the parade was due to take place, and with no response being forthcoming from the Warsaw government, a belated invitation was hurredly sent both to the Polish Govt in Exile in London as well as directly to various Polish generals who had fought with the allies, ALL of who felt so disgusted with the perceived disrespect shown by the INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY (That is, being made to play "second fiddle" to the official Warsaw Polish government on a world stage) that they CHOSE not to attend the parade to register their fury at not being consulted first. And the final ignomy? The Soviet backed Warsaw government neither acknowledged the British invite, or attended the parade either.
With regard to the Polish generals and their pensions, there are numerous possiblities as to why they were not awarded a UK state pension, and without access to their personal UK "national insurance" records all that can be done is to speculate. If you or indeed Mark choose to conclude that there was some infernal conspiracy to deny the two gentlemen for whtever supposed reason then that is your choice and opinion. It is also quite possible that there were other reasons for the non award of their pensions, which only if they were born within the borders of Poland as they stood in 1945 (and not pre 1939) was one of the provisions of the 1947 UK Polish Resettlement Act.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Save all your "US saved Britain" BS for the uninformed. Britain saved ITSELF, INSPITE of the US as much as it did BECAUSE of the US.
If the US had REALLY wanted to "help Britain" in its "hour of need", then instead of bleeding the British empire dry and causing its collapse, they could have for example sold a production license for Tetra Ethyl Lead (or TEL - The compound required for the production of hi-octane fuels) to Britain when we applied to purchase one from the "Standard Oil of Jersey City Company" prewar.... Instead they & the US Govt refused to sell one to "their British cousins"... So much for the nonsense idea of a "special relationship" between the UK & US.
Standard Oil and the US Govt had NO qualms though about providing the exact same licence to the nazis when they applied to purchase one prewar. But when it came to Britain the US preferred to strip the British of ALL their gold, cutting edge technology and military bases around the world during the British "hour of need" in return for a supply of amongst other things, US produced hi-octane fuel.
Where there nazi sympathies in the Standard Oil boardroom and in some parts of the US Govt? The truth is so unsavoury were the business practices of the US "Standard Oil" company (such as seeking furtive routes and brokering shady deals to supply nazi Germany with fuel and oil via neutral nations during the war) that it's activities were investigated and closely monitored by the US Govt... but only AFTER the they had been DRAGGED into WW2 in Dec 1941 by the German declaration of war on the US!!!
The US "business community" engaged in VERY profitable business dealings with BOTH sides throughout WW2. US corporations such as Ford, General Motors, US Standard Oil, IBM, ITT, Kodak, Chase Bank, Coke-Cola (to name but a few) carried on "business as usual" with nazi Germany THROUGHOUT WW2.
Ford's auto production facility in Cologne and General Motor's Opel subsiduary plant in Berlin were both busy working 24/7 THROUGHOUT WW2 furnishing the nazis with approximately 60% of the Wehrmacht's military transportation needs, as well as a sizeable chunk of the Luftwaffe's aero engine requirements.
The "ALuminum COrporation of America" (ALCOA) for instance supplied SO much aircraft grade aluminium to nazi Germany in the late 1930s and into the early 1940s that it actually caused shortfalls within the US government's own military aircraft production schedules during the same period, so much so that in June 1941 the situation prompted Harold Ickes, US Secretary of the Interior, to go on record as saying “If America loses this coming war, it can thank the Aluminum Corporation of America”.
As an illustration of US government/corporate assistance to the nazi regime throughout WW2 consider the "Seibel ferries" that the Germans developed to assist their planned invasion of the UK in 1940 and which were all powered by US Ford V8 engines, Or how German bombers partially made from the above mentioned US ALCOA aluminium, with engines licence produced by Ford/General motors and partially fuelled by US Standard Oil, ferried bombs containing explosives produced with Dupont chemicals, and found their way to their British targets with navigation systems which included radio electronics built by the US ITT corporation. Imagine how many billions of dollars US corporations made in such lucrative deals, and what a huge resultant tax take the US government took grubbed from such deals.... all the time while British citizens were forced to shelter from death and destruction brought to them by nazi bombers which were ably assisted by the US govt and corporations.
With "friends" like that who needs enemies?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Its great that there is an attempt by SOME modern day US citizens to comprehend what Britain went through in WW2.
Just to correct a point, HCT Dowding was an Air CHIEF Marshall not Air VICE Marshall, which would have "busted" him TWO ranks.
Also you need to understand that it was NOT a "given" that Winston Churchill would succeed Neville Chamberlain... there was just as many within Britain at the time who wanted Chamberlain's foreign secretary, Edward Wood.... better known as Lord Halifax to succeed Chamberlain, and rest assured IF Halifax had taken Chamberlain's place instead of Churchill the the WHOLE of world history would be COMPLETELY different from what transpired.
Halifax was viewed as a realist (or as history now shows us a defeatist) As he STRONGLY believed that Britain had been beaten, he was fully committed to sign a peace deal with Hitler, which would have effectively ended the war in Europe in July / August 1940. Leaving Hitler to rebuild his armed forces after their losses in Poland, Scandinavia, the Low Countries & France, and prepare them for the invasion of the Soviet Union, but in this alternate timeline, the USSR would NOT have had a Germany
1. whose Merchant shipping was blockaded by the Royal Navy strangling the German war economy,
2. whose cities weren't being bombed by the RAF damaging their war production and keeping vital men and equipment from the war in the USSR,
3. who would NOT have been fighting in North Africa and later Italy as well as D-Day,
The USSR would also NOT have received thousands of tanks & aircraft & millions of tons of supplies via the uk, as well as NO CRUCIAL strategic intelligence courtesy of the BRITISH breaking of German codes (with a little Polish help), with the result that the communist regime & the USSR would have likely been conquered sometime in 1943/44.
We can only imagine what would have transpired from there..... it's likely that Europe would today either be a nuclear wasteland or still under nazi tyranny.
But instead, Churchill decreed that the fight against nazism would be continued which resulted in the crushing of nazism in 1945.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tadeuszczernia5422 Tadeusz, the UK continues to honour the Poles who served in the west during WW2 to this day at each and every Remembrance day parade across the UK.... BUT the ignorance of SOME modern day Poles (as well as lefty agitators) as witnessed in so many of the comments in this thread is quite shameless. Their ignorance of the fact that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need", or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
And before you rush in to say "But the British never raised a finger to help us anyway", remember that without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism from June 1940 onwards, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, 70s and possibly to the present day.
As for post WW2 "treatment" of our Polish allies, after the theft of Poland by the soviets, Britain was the FIRST country in the world to enact legislation to gift UK citizenship to nearly 300,000 statless Polish ex-service peronnel AND their families (1947 UK Polish Resettlement Act). The act provided those Polish troops who had served in the west a new national home, safe from the evils of communism, and prevented them from ending up dead in a ditch in a remote Polish forest with a soviet bullet in the backs of their heads. For a nation supposedly with a "long memory" it appears you've ALL forgotten that point.
For those Ignorant modern day Poles, on your way out, please remember to kneel at the altar dedicated to the combined 1.1 million lives sacrificed by the UK and France in order to topple the nazism that was murdering and torturing YOUR country when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
And for all current honourable, and deeper thinking Poles, please accept our best wishes from the UK.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
If you'd like an individual example of the esteem with which HMS Hood was held by other nations, look no further than the account of Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, the senior ranking survivor of Bismarck, and her 4th gunnery officer, here's an excerpt of his account of the start of the battle of Denmark Strait.
"The British ships were turning slightly to port, the lead ship showing an extremely long forecastle and two heavy twin turrets. On the telephone I heard Albrecht shout, "The HOOD...... it's the HOOD!" (his capitalisation), It was an unforgettable moment. There she was, the famous warship, once the largest in the world, that had been the "terror" of so many of our war games."
Later he made these remarks following Hood's demise....
"At first the Hood was nowhere to be seen: in her place was a colossal pillar of black smoke reaching into the sky. Gradually at the foot of the pillar, I made out the bow of the battle cruiser projecting upwards at an angle, a sure sign that she had broken in two. Then I saw something I could hardly believe: A flash of orange coming from her forward guns! Although her fighting days had ended, the Hood was firing a last salvo. I felt a great respect for those men over there"
Sounds as if the Kriegsmarine and her gunnery experts were FAR more impressed by HMS Hood than you, a clueless YT commenter, appears to be.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@iansneddon2956 The US didn't "export" from the US to Germany directly obviously, but many US corporations had possession of business interests across Europe and the world that provided AMPLE supplies to nazi Germany while Britain fought on alone in Europe.
The "ALuminum COrporation of America" (ALCOA) for instance supplied SO much aircraft grade aluminium to nazi Germany from its world wide business interests in the late 1930s and into the early 1940s that it actually caused shortfalls within the US government's own military aircraft production schedules during the same period, so much so that in June 1941 the situation prompted Harold Ickes, US Secretary of the Interior, to go on record as saying “If America loses this coming war, it can thank the Aluminum Corporation of America”.
As further examples of US corporations profitting from nazism while British cities burned, the Ford corporation's auto production facility in Cologne and General Motor's Opel subsiduary plant in Berlin were both busy working 24/7 THROUGHOUT WW2 furnishing the nazis with approximately 60% of the Wehrmacht's military transportation needs, as well as a sizeable chunk of the Luftwaffe's aero engine requirements... all the better for attacking Britain with eh, and all the while providing US companies with BILLIONS of dollars in profit, and the US govt with millions of dollars of tax revenue.
And we've not even begun to talk about the "Standard Oil company of Jersey city" brokereing deals to supply the nazis with fuel and chemicals and the US Govt's refusal to allow the sale of a production licence for tetra Ethyl Lead (the compound that makes the production of high octane fuels possible) to the UK when she applied to buy one from Standard Oil who held the production rights prior to WW2, but strangely allowed the exact same licence to be sold to the nazis when they applied for one.... geopolitics in practice eh?
The US govt even had to closely monitor Standard Oil's business dealings to prevent furtive shady deals being made with the nazis.... but only AFTER the German declaration of war on the US on 11th Dec 1941.
With "friends" like the "US business community" who needs enemies?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@petefluffy7420 I'd tell you if I was a "seppo" if I knew what one was.
Please let me unburden you of your youthful ignorance. Without the UK by 1943 Stalin and STAVKA (look it up) would have been living in a cave in outer Mongolia eating their beetroot soup with wooden spoons.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism after the fall of France in June 1940 (When the whole world expected us to surrender), at a time when both the USSR & the US were only too happy to trade with nazism, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, their extermination camps still operating on European soil into the 1950s, 60s, 70s or even beyond, and the US isolated between a nazi dominated Europe and a Japanese dominated Asia.
The USSR were unfortunately the sandbag wall that the German's flung themselves against, without the UK the sandbag wall would have toppled.
Please, no thanks is necessary for helping rid you of your cluelessness.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cantrait7311 First German bombs dropped on the British mainland?
16th October 1939 saw the very first bombs dropped on Britain when the Germans launched scattered air attacks over port and industrial facilities around the Scottish city of Edinburgh, and the RN naval base at Rosyth.
First bombs dropped by the RAF on German soil?
Although the RAF had launched bomber attacks on Kriegsmarine naval units in the North sea from Sept 3rd 1939 onwards, it was actually the 19th March 1940 that the FIRST RAF bombs landed on German soil... When on 13th November 1939 the luftwaffe bombed RAF Sullom Voe a seaplane base with port facilities in the Shetland Isles (with the resultant death of a rabbit, and no hits on the 9 seaplanes or 2 RN vessels stationed there), the RAF retaliated by hitting the nazi seaplane base at Hörnum on the island of Sylt in the North Sea. These were THE VERY FIRST RAF bombs to land on German soil....5 months AFTER the first German bombs had landed on British soil.
The first British or German civilian casualty caused by the bombing of the opposing side during WW2?
16th March 1940 when German bombs hit the village of "Bridge of Waithe" near Stenness on the Orkney Islands during an attack on the Home Fleet anchorage at Scapa Flow, which killed a 27 year-old County Council employee, James Isbister (luckily, his wife, baby son, and the neighbour James was endeavouring to rescue from her bombed cottage all survived).
First British bombs to drop on the actual German mainland?
11th May 1940, when the British air ministry for the first time allowed the bombing of railway yards, communication centres and bridges west of the Rhine River to interrupt German supply lines supporting their undeclared assault into the NEUTRAL Low countries and France on 10th May 1940. Previous to this date the British air ministry in an effort to stop the inflaming of the conflict had refused to allow the RAF to drop ANY bombs on the German mainland, instead the RAF supplied the German demand for toilet paper by dropping propaganda leaflets on German cities. The RAF attacks on 11th May 1940 had also come after REPEATED attacks against RN installations on the British mainland, most notably at Rosyth near Edinburgh, Cromarty Firth & Scapa Flow all in Scotland throughout the winter of 1939/40.
First British bombs dropped EAST of the Rhine River?
On the night of 23/24th August 1940 the RAF launched an attack on Berlin. This attack directed at the Klingenberg Power Station in Eastern Berlin & Templehof airport was in RETALIATION for REPEATED luftwaffe raids on RAF Fighter Command Sector Airfields within the suburbs of Greater London throughout July and August 1940 that had already caused HUNDREDS of innocent British civilian deaths & casualties (euphemistically known nowadays as "collateral damage") this was inspite of Hitler's previous decrees that no bombs should be dropped within the boundary of Greater London. Obviously that decree had never reached the ears of Herman Goering.
German retaliation for the one night of bombing of Berlin on 23/24th August 1940? The launching of the all out assault against British cities from 7th Sept 1940 onwards, culminating in the world's first attempt to create a "firestorm" during operation "moonlight sonata" on the British city of Coventry on the night of 14/15th Nov 1940, where the luftwaffe sent 575 bombers using their world beating "X-gerat" bombing system (in the Germans own words capable of placing "target indicator" flares with an accuracy of 50 meters at 200 miles range) over the civilian city centre of Coventry dropping 550 tons of high explosive (including hundreds of "flammen" (oil) bombs) followed by over 30,000 incendiary bombs. The final death toll of that single raid? A previously unheard of 568 innocent civilians, this was in addition to the thousands of other British civilians already killed & injured in other cities across Britain over the previous 2 months.
The first British bombing raid directly targetted at German civilians?
"Operation Abigail" on the night of 16/17th December 1940, (3 months AFTER the opening of the nazi "blitz" on British cities) the Dec 16th attack by the RAF was launched against the German city of Mannheim where 100 RAF bombers dropped 100 tons of HE and 14,000 incendiaries inflicting a death toll on the German population of 34 dead and 81 injured.
Not to worry though , the RAF eventually "upped its game" and showed the Germans how to do it properly a year or two later.
Don't try to hide the fact that the Germans enjoyed dropping HE on the cities of its neighbours from the earliest days of flight. The first aerial bombs dropped in history were from a zeppelin raid on Liege in Belgium on 4th August 1914... just 11 years after the invention of powered flight. Since WW2, they've learned the lesson NOT to do it again.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Your hero "der Fuhrer" disagrees with you Mark....
""The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan was academic. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
First German bombs to hit Britain Oct 1939
First British bombs to hit Germany May 1940.
1
-
1
-
1
-
While I agree with your sentiment, it's not really fair to say that the RAF pilots were "almost all posh". The RAF had a very robust pilot supply scheme, from 3 sources.
1. RAF career pilots, these being the peacetime, "full time" officer pilots of the RAF, relatively low numbers (but with a moderate degree of poshness)
2. (Royal) Auxiliary Air Force, a peacetime reserve force founded in 1924, whose pilots were mostly self financed, holding prewar private pilots licences etc. They provided 14 of Fighter Command's squadrons during the battle, but the combat losses of their posh prewar constituent pilot establishments were quickly made up with RAFVR pilots. (originally a VERY high degree of poshness).
3. RAF Volunteer Reserve (RAFVR), Created in 1936. This was a government sponsored program to bulk up pilot numbers, entry was open to ANYONE, and after being filtered through various aptitude tests candidates undertook part time pilot training. In 1939 RAFVR fielded over 6500 pilots for all commands of the RAF, with a large number being NCO aircrew. These RAFVR quickly became the majority of Fighter Command pilots during ther battle. (very low degree of poshness).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@charlieb308 Total Rubbish. U-74 reported having British battleships & cruisers in his sight but due to the terrible sea conditions was unable to get into a position to attack them, it was then forced to sit submerged and listen to the battle taking place and surfaced after the departure of the RN surface vessels, as detailed by Kpt Lt Kentrat in his war diary. What is known with certainty is that Bismarck had for the previous 24 hours been transmitting beacon signals on known u-boat radio wavelengths and the scene of the final action was 350 miles (a relative naval stone's throw) away from the Kriegsmarine's Atlantic u-boat bases on the French coast. Was Captain BCS Martin of Dorsetshire expected to gamble the lives of his 750 man crew that it was indeed a dolphin's fin or a broaching whale? Or that if it WAS a u-boat the sub's capt would hold fire while he carried out the rescues? As an RN captain Benjamin Martin would have been SORELY aware of the actions of Otto Weddigen in U-9 during WW1 and his attack on the British Cruisers HMS Aboukir, Cressy & Hogue. I suggest you look up the details of that incident.
I may act as if it was 500m away, whereas you act as if it was miles away. The fact is that NEITHER of us know exactly where it was, and NEITHER of us are Royal Navy captains responsible for major units of the RN together with the lives of nearly 1000 sailors.
I refer you to the account of Baron Burkhard von Müllenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's senior ranking survivor who in his book "Battleship Bismarck - a survivor's story" wrote this passage about a discussion he held with Capt Martin, commander of HMS Dorsetshire, after being rescued.
"Why," I burst out, "did you suddenly break off the rescue and leave hundreds of our men to drown?"
Martin replied that a U-boat had been sighted, or at least reported, and he obviously could not endanger his ship by staying stopped any longer.
The Bismarck's experiences on the night of 26 May and the morning of the 27th, I told him, indicated that there were no U-boats in the vicinity.
Farther away, perhaps, but certainly not within firing range of the Dorsetshire. I added that in war one often sees what one expects to see.
We argued the point back and forth until Martin said abruptly: "Just leave that to me. I'm older than you are and have been at sea longer. I'm a better judge."
What more could I say? He was the captain and was responsible for his ship.
Apparently some floating object had been mistaken for a periscope or a strip of foam on the water for the wake of a torpedo.
No matter what it was, I AM NOW CONVINCED THAT, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, CAPT MARTIN HAD TO ACT AS HE DID". (My caps)
What's your appraisal of the actions of Kriegsmarine Admiral Wilhelm Marschall who on the 8th June 1940 after his ships Scharnhorst and Gneisensau had sank the British aircraft carrier HMS Glorious and her two escorting destroyers HMS Acasta & Ardent, and despite NO other ships being in the vicinity, then made not even the SLIGHTEST effort to render assistance to over 1000 RN sailors left floating in the Norwegian sea and instead simply sailed away leaving them to their deaths?
As opposed to the RN who in hostile waters with KNOWN u-boat activity and on the edge of German airspace stopped TWO ships to render assistance. If the RN had only rescued ONE single German sailor, it would still have been INFINITELY more than the Germans bothered to rescue on 8th June 1940. As it was the RN saw to it that 111 Germans were rescued and then treated extremely well.
Or is it only German sailors left to drown who you get all "teared up" about?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You're referring to paper speeds. HMS PoW was indeed nominally the "slowest" ship in the engagement, but due to the prevailing sea conditions at the time of the engagement NONE of the ships were travelling (or indeed were capable) of travelling at anywhere near 30 knots, such was the sea state that the much faster destroyer escort of the British task force had earlier had to lower speed & drop astern to avoid the danger of inundation.
Lütjens in Bismarck desperately wanted to avoid action with the RN ships, indeed it was specifically written in his orders to do so, hence his initial hesitation to open fire... Lütjens was watching to see if he could open the range and refuse battle, but after the RN's opening salvoes his rangefinding officers reported that range was decreasing, and Lindemann (Bismarck's Captain) took it on himself to overstep his commanding officer and ordered a return of fire.
The British did NOT have the luxury of choosing NOT to engage. The situation at 6am on the 23rd May was the BEST chance they had of forcing an engagement on the Germans who with 2 heavy crusiers following them, the Greenland pack ice to the west and the approaching RN Home Fleet to the east had the least options for evasion. The Germans were also on the very threshold of the Atlantic convoy lanes, if they had allowed the Germans to continue unopposed there was no telling where they would have headed, and there was at that very moment SEVEN convoys steaming in various positions and directions across the Atlantic, there was also a FAR greater chance of them throwing off their pursuers in the wide open expanses of the North Atlantic... as they did 2 days later.
1
-
@santaclaus0815 Seb, The facts speak for themselves.... The British ships relentlessly closed the distance from the outset until Hood's destruction. The Germans could not evade to the west due to the Greenland ice pack which was only a few miles away to their starboard.
V/Adm Holland's original plan was to "cross the T" of the Germans, but as you briefly mentioned at around midnight in the evening in 22/23rd May HMS Norfolk & Suffolk lost contact with the German ships for just under 3 hours, throwing V/Adm Holland's intercept plans into doubt. It was the uncertainty caused by these hours of lost contact that turned the tables on Holland, with instead of his ships crossing the German's "T" it was now Lütjens who had the advantage.
With regard to why Bismarck didn't pursue the withdrawing PoW other factors in addition to the one you've already given regarding Bismarck's orders NOT to seek combat with enemy warships were.....
1. Bismarck was forced to reduce speed to reduce the risk of collapse of internal bulkheads in her bows that were under severe water pressure after the damage she had sustained from PoW's hit, and to enable her damage control parties to shore up the weakened bulkheads. Due to the damage she had received during the battle and the water she had taken onboard from two of PoW's hits Bismarck had a list to port and was down by her bows, so much so that the tips of her starboard propeller were breaking the surface. This forced reduction in Bismarck's speed meant she was incapable of keeping up with withdrawing PoW whose speed had been unaffected by the hits she herself had received.
2. In addition to being surprised by the capability of the radars onboard Norfolk & Suffolk, the nastiest surprise of all for Lütjens was the COMPLETELY unexpected appearance of two of the RN Home Fleet's heavy units over the horizon on that fateful morning.
The German "B-Dienst" was the branch of the German Abwehr intelligence service whose role it was to listen to the electronic airwaves, in an effort to intercept & decode any Royal Naval transmissions, and pass such information to the German naval high command for transmission to its ships at sea (what modern armed forces call SIGINT, or "SIGnals INTelligence"), indeed each major unit of the Kriegsmarine carried its own "B-Dienst" team onboard for the same purpose.
B-dienst failed COMPLETELY during "Exercise Rhine" to provide Lütjens in Bismarck with ANY warning of the approach of Hood / PoW. Prior luftwaffe reconnaisance of the RN Home Fleet's main anchorage at Scapa Flow on 21st May had mistakenly reported that the RN capital ships were still at anchor (they weren't), and due to V/Adm Holland's adherence to strict radio & radar discipline Lütjens in Bismarck fully believed he had a clear run out into the vastness of the North Atlantic. The TOTALLY unannounced appearance of two of the RNs major units over the horizon in the dawn light on 23rd May not only highlighted to Lütjens the absolute failure of the German intelligence network, but also how well informed and prepared the RN were for his escapade. He knew that there were at least 2 other major units (Repulse and a second KGV battleship) with probably several more as well as a couple of aircraft carriers zooming in on his precise location while he in return had absolutely NO idea of their dispositions.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
After the battle of Britain, the British Air Ministry asked ACM Dowding to write an authorised history of the battle of Britain. He duly did so and provided it to the air council. Such was the internal emnity of the RAF "top brass" towards him, that his account was rejected and the Air ministry commisioned their own account, in which ACM Dowding's name was not mentioned even ONCE.
On reading the finished Document, Churchill, who was a tacit supporter of Hugh Dowding, returned it to the minister for air, Archibald Sinclair annotated with the following comment :
“The jealousies and cliquism which have led to the committing of this offence are a discredit to the Air Ministry, and I do not think any other Service Department would have been guilty of such a piece of work. What would have been said if … the Admiralty had told the tale of Trafalgar and left Lord Nelson out of it?”
But Churchill was aware of the range of powerful figures within the RAF & govt that were arrayed against ACM Dowding, and also that he was overdue for retirement, and so acquiesced to his dismissal and subsequent posting to the US.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@virginiawolf6431 What is it with clueless modern day commenters? They seem to have utterly NO idea that modern day Poland OWES its ENTIRE current existence to the British Empire ALONE.
What do they imagine would have happened to Poland if Britain and France did as the ENTIRE rest of the world did in Sept 1939 and completely IGNORED the nazi / soviet dismemberment of Poland? Or if the isolated British Isles had instead decided to seek an armistice with the nazis after the fall of France in 1940? Do you all stupidly believe that they would liberate themselves from nazi tyranny? Dream on.
Let me tell you what would have happened in reality. Today Poland would not exist. It would simply be a footnote in modern history books, a former nation that would now be divided between nazi East Prussia and the "General Government" region of the nazi Empire. The former Polish cities would now be "Germanised" and each would STILL today have swastikas flying above them, and most chillingly of all, the likes of Sobibor, Chelmno, Belzec, Treblinka, Majdanek & Auschwitz would STILL be operating and belching human ashes into formerly Polish skies.
Please give over with the almost CONSTANT insults at the UK, the nation that made a sacrifice of 460,000 of it's OWN citizen's lives, which ENTIRELY bankrupted itself, and which financed the Polish war effort in the west with UK tax payer's money, and due to those ruinous costs also lost its empire, ALL in the selfless effort to prevent a nazi domination of Europe, and saving Polish asses from extinction.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I think you'll notice that there was NO referenda for ANY country to join the EU. They were ALL of them (the UK included) railroaded into it without any input from individual national populations. Governments have for many many years been increasingly filled with corporate puppets who do their pay master's bidding and NOT their country's bidding.
It works like this. Have you heard the phrase "Money makes the world go around"? Well there has NEVER been a truer saying with regard to the world of politics. EVERY mainstream democratic political party across the wrold, whether it be UK conservatives, the Social Democratic Party of Germany, the Republicans in France & the US, Or the Movimento Democrático Brasileiro in Brasil, they ALL have an INSATIABLE hunger for MONEY. Where do they get it from? Frau Witzelberger in Hamburg, making a monthly donation of €10 to the German SDP? Mr Bill Jones of Colchester UK leaving the conservative party £10000 in his will? Maybe Carlos Menendez in Brasilia, charity mugging shoppers as they enter and leave a supermarket for a couple of Brazilian reals per month..... or do you think 95% of their party political funding comes from multinational conglomerated corporations with literally hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars burning a hole in their corporate pockets?
Another old saying is "he who pays the piper calls the tune".... So if your political party wants the corporations to show their "support" by shady "donations" of millions of dollars into your party's offshore tax haven, then first you have to run your party's policy ideas past the Corporate CEO and his team of highly trained business lawyers first... and then also let them edit your party's shortlists for political nominations, their own suggested canditates replace ones who don't "fit the company's profile"... and maybe accept a few of our "advisors" into your government to help "smooth out" any problems that may get in the way of our business intetests.
In other world raw political corruption makes ALL western political parties do what the multinational coporations want for THEIR best interests, while shitting all over the people who then vote for the edited candidates and have to live and die by the rules they then make.
What use is a democracy when all of the parties that you have the option to vote for are ALL financed by the same corrupting influence of global corporations? Your choice at the ballot box has been reduced to another old phrase... that is "Hobson's choice".... which means although you may appear to have mutliple viable options available to you, in reality you DON'T. All the options mean the same thing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Porcelanix For those who've been misled that Poland was "excluded" from the 1946 London victory parade, here is a brief timeline of what actually happened to give some context to the oft repeated nonsense that "Brits never invited the Poles" or "the Brits banned the Poles".
Since before the end of WW2 in Europe, Britain and the US had been negotiating with the Soviets over the future of eastern Europe and especially Poland in post WW2 Europe. The UK & US wanted a democratic Polish government that would by way of democracy include both the Polish communists of the existing Moscow backed "Lublin committee", and the Polish nationalists from the Polish Govt in exile that had been based in London during most of WW2. This proposed "Polish provisional government of national unity" (Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) was to be setup in Warsaw, and was agreed to by all of the "Big 3" (UK / US / USSR) at the Feb 1945 Yalta conference, but from the outset the Soviets then occupying Poland did everything they practically could to bar the inclusion of the "London Poles" within the "unity govt", and to intimidate the small number of nationalists that did eventually make it into the provisional govt.
With regard to the 1946 Victory parade when Britain sent out its invites to all of the countries that had fought on the side of the Allies during WW2, The British Labour government of Clement Attlee, quite correctly handed the Polish invitation to the newly constituted Warsaw based "Polish provisional government of national unity" which was after all now the official government of Poland, as recognised by the United Nations.
The now effectively powerless & stateless nationalist Polish government in exile in London took great offence at their sidelining in this matter, and raised a torrent of indignation within the UK Parliament that was backed by many British MPs and ordinary people. A few days before the parade was due to take place, and with no response having been forthcoming from the Warsaw government, a belated invitation was hurriedly sent both to the Polish Govt in Exile in London as well as directly to various Polish generals who had fought with the allies, ALL of whom felt so disgusted with the perceived public disrespect shown by the INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY (That is, being made to play "second fiddle" to the official Warsaw Polish government on the world stage) that they CHOSE not to attend the parade to register their fury and resentment at not being consulted first.
And the final ignominy? The Soviet backed Warsaw government neither acknowledged the British invite, or attended the parade either.
1
-
@Porcelanix Where do you get the BS that Poland as "sold"? What price did "we" get for the "sale"? Utter BS.
Since before the end of WW2 in Europe, Britain and the US had been negotiating with the Soviets over the future of eastern Europe and especially Poland in post WW2 Europe. The UK & US wanted a democratic Polish government that would by way of democracy include both the Polish communists of the existing Moscow backed "Lublin committee", and the Polish nationalists from the Polish Govt in exile that had been based in London during most of WW2. This proposed "Polish provisional government of national unity" (Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) was to be setup in Warsaw, and was agreed to by all of the "Big 3" (UK / US / USSR) at the Feb 1945 Yalta conference, but from the outset the Soviets then occupying Poland did everything they practically could to bar the inclusion of the "London Poles" within the "unity govt", and to intimidate the small number of nationalists that did eventually make it into the provisional govt.
With regard to the 1946 Victory parade when Britain sent out its invites to all of the countries that had fought on the side of the Allies during WW2, The British Labour government of Clement Attlee, quite correctly handed the Polish invitation to the newly constituted Warsaw based "Polish provisional government of national unity" which was after all now the official government of Poland, as recognised by the United Nations.
The now effectively powerless & stateless nationalist Polish government in exile in London took great offence at their sidelining in this matter, and raised a torrent of indignation within the UK Parliament that was backed by many British MPs and ordinary people. A few days before the parade was due to take place, and with no response having been forthcoming from the Warsaw government, a belated invitation was hurriedly sent both to the Polish Govt in Exile in London as well as directly to various Polish generals who had fought with the allies, ALL of whom felt so disgusted with the perceived public disrespect shown by the INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY (That is, being made to play "second fiddle" to the official Warsaw Polish government on the world stage) that they CHOSE not to attend the parade to register their fury and resentment at not being consulted first.
And the final ignominy? The Soviet backed Warsaw government neither acknowledged the British invite, or attended the parade either.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@soopypicle6314 Lets look at some survivor testimonies (people who actually witnessed the events of Bismarck's sinking first hand), and not some poorly researched, modern day revisionist nonsense written by the "hard of thinking" shall we?
From "Battleship Bismarck: A survivor's story" Written by Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's senior ranking survivor.
The following passages are with regard to Bismarck's final engagment.
Page 211 "Our list to port had increased a bit while firing was going on" followed by "Around 9:30am gas and smoke began to drift through our station" This means that prior to 9:30am Bismarck was already flooding, not something that happens to a healthy seaworthy ship, in other words she was already starting to sink.
Then from an interview conducted for the highly regarded weekly history journal "Purnell's history of the second world war" in the late 1960's with Gerhard Junack (who was Bismarck's only surviving engineering officer and the survivor who supposedly enacted the "scuttle order"). He stated that...
"Somewhere about 1015 hours, I received an order over the telephone from the Chief Engineer (Korvettenkapitän (Ing.) Walter Lehmann) to 'Prepare the ship for sinking.' That was the last order I received on the Bismarck. Soon after that, all transmission of orders collapsed."
Heading back to the account of Mullenheim-Rechberg, on Page 212 he states that (before 10:00am) "I was using all the telephone circuits and calling all over the place in an effort to find out as much as possible about the condition of the ship. I got only one answer. I reached the messenger in the damage control centre and asked "who has and where is the command of the ship? Are there new orders in effect?".... The man said he was in a great hurry. He told me that everyone had abandoned the damage control centre, adding that he was the last one in the room and had to get out... then he hung up".
This vain search for contact & information over the Bismarck's internal comms happened BEFORE 10:00am which throws some mild doubt on Junack's testimony where he says he was contacted by the chief engineer who supposedly gave him the "scuttle order" over the phone at 10:15am... Hmmmmm.
If taken at face value these survivor testimonies show that there was at least a 45 minute gap between Bismarck starting to sink and the first mention of a "scuttle order" being given. Even if Bismarck's crew had done nothing, Bismarck was going to sink, and if the beaten crew want to help the RN, then all the better... But face it, Bismarck's crew weren't going to scuttle a perfectly seaworthy ship in the middle of the storm tossed North Atlantic of their own free will, it was only for the fact that the RN had already dismantled Bismarck and initiated the sinking process. In other words in every sense the sinking of Bismarck was the result of actions dictated by the Royal Navy.
Anything else is just hurt German pride, bolstered by modern day delusional wehraboos. Germany was well known for trying to hide its national humiliations, such as when they scuttled their "grand fleet" at the end of WW1, like illogically saying "We lost.. but you didn't win", or a pathetic "You didn't beat us because we killed ourselves first" sort of idiocy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@123pik1 I was correcting your mistake of saying that Poland was fighting "FOR the allies", it WASN'T fighting "for" them, it was fighting alongside allies who were collectively fighting to topple the nazi regime that was destroying YOUR country.
Don#t be ignorant of the fact that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need", or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism from June 1940 onwards, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s.
For those Ignorant modern day Poles, on your way out, please remember to kneel at the altar dedicated to the combined 1.1 million lives sacrificed by the UK and France in order to topple the nazism that was murdering and torturing YOUR country when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
1
-
@123pik1 The French army was a clay colossus. The immense losses it suffered in WW1 followed by 20 years of deep internal political divisions meant that by 1939 inspite of its huge armies (FAR bigger than those of Britain) they were led by incompetent old men more worried about keeping their positions within their own chaotic national establishment than actually planning offensive or even effective defensive military doctrines.
Remember that by May 1940 Britain had just TEN army divisions of the BEF on the French mainland, compared to the over 150 of the French army and 108 divisions of the German Heer, I'm glad you have acknowledged that.
It appears you've not read or comprehended my post above, otherwise you'd realise your phrase "Declaration which meant nothing" is complete BS.
"Giving way for Hitler to turn on Britain" oh yes quite possibly, but as you already surely realise there was NO way that the Kriegsmarine could protect a cross channel invasion of the UK, and inspite of their efforts at strangling the UK with the U-boat offensive, the British & Canadian navies ended up sinking 85% of the German U-boat fleet.
Polish decrypters had successfully broken German 3 rotor German army and air force enigma between 1933 and Jan 1939. At that point the Germans changed their encryption procedures and brought the Polish decryption efforts to a grinding halt. At no point did the Poles break into the kriegsmarine 3 rotor cipher network. After passing on their valuable but non-working foundation efforts first to the French (who had no time to work on it) and then to the British, the British then put maximum effort into the ULTRA program, and succeeded in once more breaking into ALL 3 rotor enigma, and then German naval 4 rotor enigma before decipering German high command "Lorenz" cipher network, before finally cracking the highest level "geheimschreiber" network used by the German government. The original Polish decrypters (Jerzy Rozycki, Henryk Zygalski, and Marian Rejewski) took no further part in ULTRA after the British took over the reins.
Strange how you honour the Americans higher than the British. In case you're unaware when the nazis were busy conquering Poland, the yanks were still happy to use the Ford and General Motors companies to generate massive profits for the US whilst simultaneously providing the Wehrmacht with over 60% of its lorry requirements as well as aero engines for the luftwaffe to bomb Weilun, Warsaw, Rotterdam, London and 50 other British cities.
Remember the 6 million Poles and countrymen of the other central European countries who died during WW2 did so to liberate their OWN nations.... the 460,000 British citizens who died, did so for the sake of liberating OTHER people's nations. It seems the Polish mantra of "For our freedom and yours" applies more to the British than anyone else in Europe.
You're welcome.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@FelipeScheuermann1982 Don't be mistaken Felipe. BOTH HMS Rodney & HMS King George V were superior in both firepower AND armour to Bismarck. Also HMS Prince of Wales inspite of an inexperienced crew and problems with her main guns due to being rushed into service without a "shakedown" period, had already done enough to cause the cancellation of Rhineübung. And far from "running for home" she was again shadowing Bismarck within 25 mintues of withdrawing and after repairing her main guns engaged in a further 2 gunnery exchanges with Bismarck before having to retire to Hvalfjord for refuelling.
IF any scuttling actually took place then all that was scuttled was a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken and penetrated in several places, her command staff physically obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater, a thousand of her crew dead, and further hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All that any scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer AFTER he has been punched senseless by a more skillful & powerful opponent, and only a deluded child would say, "the victor didn't win because his opponent killed himself before he lost.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off by the victor and handed back to him on a plate.
Imagine the ignominy of being forced to commit suicide by your opponent?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It's not quite as cut and dried as that.
After the battle of Britain, the British Air Ministry asked ACM Dowding to write an authorised history of the battle of Britain. He duly did so and provided it to the air council. Such was the internal emnity of the RAF "top brass" towards him, that his account was rejected and the Air ministry commisioned their own account, in which ACM Dowding's name was not mentioned even ONCE.
On reading the finished Document, Churchill, who was actually a tacit supporter of Hugh Dowding, returned it to the minister for air, Archibald Sinclair annotated with the following comment : “The jealousies and cliquism which have led to the committing of this offence are a discredit to the Air Ministry, and I do not think any other Service Department would have been guilty of such a piece of work. What would have been said if … the Admiralty had told the tale of Trafalgar and left Lord Nelson out of it?”
But Churchill was also aware of the range of powerful figures within the RAF & govt that were arrayed against ACM Dowding, and also that he was very much overdue for retirement, and so acquiesced to his dismissal and subsequent posting to the US.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Bismarck's crew actually scuttled a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken in several places along her port side, her command staff obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater, a thousand of her crew dead, and further hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All the scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer when he has been punched senseless by a more skillful & powerful opponent, and only a deluded child would say, "the loser wasn't beaten, he gave in before he was annihilated.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off and handed back to him on a plate.
Maybe stick to Roblox... historical accuracy doesn't seem to be your strong point.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Congratulations HB for highlighting the utter ruthlessness of the political left thats NEVER shown on the MSM.... Hitler's henchmen, Nazi death camps, Hitler's elite and any other combination of words that highlights the evils of the extreme right CONSTANTLY being aired, but strangely NEVER any MSM coverage of the left's even more AWFUL crimes against humanity.
It's as if the red terror, the great purges, the collctivisation of the kulaks, the holodomor, the gulags, the "Great leap forward", the Khmer Rouge "Year Zero" killing fields never happened.
Be rightfully frightened of the evil nationalist extremists, but have no worries about the cuddly lefties, why even their ideology is "communal", like a big, warm, cuddly love fest.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Bismarck's hit on Hood is described as "lucky" because from 8½ miles away one of its shells found an small, obscure "Achilles heel" in her armour scheme, this allowed the particular shell to penetrate deeply into her hull where it would not have normally been able to reach, and set off a chain of events that quickly led to Hood's destruction.
Here is an explanation of why the shell is considered "lucky". A full salvo of main gun fire from a battleship is analogous to a scatter of lead shot from a shotgun, but obviously on a much larger scale. During the battle of Denmark Strait, the Bismarck aimed at Hood from 8-9 nautical miles (Approx 17-18,000 yards) away. The German's own naval gunnery data tables from their AVKS (or "Artillerie Versuchs Kommando für Schiff" or Naval artillery testing department) show that at that range the 38 cm SK C/34 (Bismarck's main armament) had a CEP (circular error probability - effectively the radius of a circle within which 50% of its shots would fall) of 100 meters. That means that if 8 of Bismarck's 15in guns fired at a single point 8-9 nm away, 4 of her shells would be expected to land (with completely random distribution) within an ellipse (think of the 100m radius circle as being stretched along one axis, due to the angle of fall of the shells) measuring approximately 200m (660ft) wide, (or to put it another way 76% of HMS Hood's 860ft length), by more than 1500 meters long long. The other 4 shots would be expected to land even FURTHER away from the aiming point, and outside of the ellipse.
That being the case, how can an individual shell be specifically aimed from 8-9 miles away at a tiny part of HMS Hood's structure, namely the 4in HA magazine, that its believed triggered off her destruction?
I'll give you a hint, there's a little clue in my paragraph above....where it says "completely random distribution".
A simplified analogy is that if you prop a dartboard up 50 yards away and can consistently knock it over with a shotgun at that range then that is pretty good shooting, just as Bismarck / PE achieved during the Denmark Strait encounter.
Now you can "knock the dartboard over" all day long and STILL NOT hit the dartboard's bullseye (magazine) with an individual pellet from the shotgun. As opposed to being a skillful shot by knocking over the dartboard, whether you hit the bullseye with an individual pellet is complete luck.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
With regard to the OPs contention that they were "all posh kids from the wealthy families", while the "poshies" were over-represented without a doubt in the form of RAF "career" pilots heavily bolstered by the RAF equivalent of the Army's "territorials" these "auxiliary squadrons" were made up of, by definition, rich, civilian aviation enthusiasts who trained part time pre-war.
BUT there was the 3rd way of becoming an RAF pilot. The "RAF volunteer reserve" was a widespread UK Government program introduced in 1936 that as its name suggests was open to volunteers, usually from RAF "other ranks" but also civilians who showed the necessary aptitude for flight training and were trained at UK government expense. Through this program, PLENTY of "ordinary blokes" such as Ray Holmes, Charlton Haw and Maurice Leng, all took part in the battle, usually as "NCO pilots", the vast majority of RAFVR came from "ordinary" backgrounds.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Also read about the fate of the RN destroyer HMS Glowworm, that alone, and on its way to a rendezvous with other RN ships singlehandedly charged after German destroyers it had spotted in the Norwegian sea in April 1940. They turned tail and lured Glowworm in poor visibility towards an unseen German heavy cruiser, the "Admiral Hipper".
When the situation became apparent to Glowworm's captain, Lt Commander Gerard Roope, he immediately zig zagged with all guns blazing towards the larger ship, loosed off his torpedoes, then the crew quickly reloaded and fired a second torpedo salvo, which the German captain skillfully "combed". Lt Commander Roope then without a second's hesitation and inspite of the overwhelming fire of the German cruiser and 2 destroyers at close range as well as his own heavily damaged ship went full steam ahead and managed to ram Admiral Hipper before Glowworm finally succumbed to the German's devastating fire.
After his ship had slid beneath the waves, Lt Comm Roope was then witnessed assisting other members of his drowning crew onto bowlines thrown down from the decks of Admiral Hipper, before he himself drowned.
The German commander Kapitan z See Helmuth Heye was so deeply impressed by Roope's coolness under fire & selfless actions that he privately contacted the international red cross after returning to Germany, and asked them to relay a message to the British admiralty that Lt Commander Roope should be recommended for Britain's highest award for valour, the Victoria Cross, which he duly received posthumously in 1945.
1
-
Since 1932 the Polish codebreakers Marian Rejewski, Henryk Zygalski & Jerzy Różycki worked within BS4 (the Polish general staff cipher Bureau focussed on German decryption & intelligence), and together with VITAL assistance given by the French intelligence officer Gustave Bertrand (who had cultivated a German informant codenamed "Asché" who had provided French Intelligence with tons of vital data including a full nazi procedural manual for use of the enigma encryption device), had by the purchase of a commercial version of the early enigma device and LOTS of analysis eventually broken into German army and navy 3 rotor encryption networks, this was a fantastic achievement, but it is true to say that they at no time did they crack German Kriegsmarine encryption due to the additional layers of security employed by the German navy.
In December 1938 the nazis introduced a further 2 interchangeable encryption rotors to the enigma system, which immediately brought the vast majority of Polish decryption efforts to a grinding halt, which is where it remained up until the outbreak of WW2. In the weeks prior to the outbreak of WW2 the Polish research work was passed to the French, who in the six months they had it in their possession added little to the accumulated knowledge, and to the UK where the British government seized it with both hands, and made its study top priority. So was instigated the British "ULTRA" project.
Jerzy Różycki elected to stay behind and work in Vichy France where, unknown to the Germans he worked on an a seperate secret encryption system, which bore no tangible fruit before his death in 1942.
Marian Rejewski & Henryk Zygalski were, for security reasons, not included in the UK "ULTRA" project, and so took no further part in British decryption efforts.
The British "ULTRA" project took the non working foundation research of the Polish decrypters and from there massively expanded that research to once again break into nazi 3 rotor enigma, this was followed in 1942 by the cracking of the improved kriegsmarine 4 rotor enigma network (SHARK), as well as simultaneously breaking into the FAR more complex "lorenz" cipher device used by the German army & navy high commands (TUNNY), before finally cracking the "Geheimschreiber" encryption device used by both the Luftwaffe high command as well as the top level of the nazi government (STURGEON), on top of these British achievements another product of the ULTRA program was the building of the world's first programmable electronic computer (COLOSSUS) to speed up the breaking of German codes. This was designed by a British telephone engineer (Tommy Flowers), which transformed British decryption from a process which often only gave results weeks after the message was eavesdropped on by the British, to a state of affairs where the British were reading top level communications at the same time as the intended German recipient.
The early Polish codebreakers did indeed provide the "acorn" from which the British cultivated the "mighty oak" of ULTRA.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@GermanShepherd1983 Please understand that Britain in 1940 saved HERSELF, INSPITE of the US as much as she did BECAUSE of the US.
The US happily used her neutrality status to continue trade with BOTH sides of the European war, and was happily dealing with the nazis at the time of the battle of Britain, here's just a few of the big US names who were "balls deep" in business with the nazis upto 1941 and even beyond.... Ford... General Motors.... Standard Oil.... IBM.... Kodak... Chase Bank... to name but a few. ALCOA (The ALuminium COrporation of America) then the world's LARGEST producer of aluminium was supplying so much aircraft grade aluminium to the nazis throughout 1939/41 that it stifled early 1940s US aircraft production and in June 1941 prompted Harold Ickes, the US Secretary of the Interior, to go on record as saying “If America loses this coming war, it can thank the Aluminum Corporation of America”.
Prewar, the US Govt had allowed "The Standard Oil of Jersey City" company to sell a production licence for tetra ethyl lead (the anti-knock compound necessary for hi-octane fuels) to the nazis, but then withheld the same licence from the British, Hmmm Nazi sympathies in the Standard Oil boardroom? Or US Govt geopolitics aiming to bleed the British Empire dry?
Ford's auto production facility in Cologne and General Motor's Opel subsiduary plant in Berlin were both busy working 24/7 THROUGHOUT WW2 furnishing the nazis with approximately 60% of the Wehrmacht's military transportation needs, as well as a sizeable chunk of the Luftwaffe's aero engine requirements... all the better for attacking Britain with eh, and all the while providing US companies with BILLIONS of dollars in profit, and the US govt with millions of dollars of tax revenue
America saved itself, NOT Britain. We saved OURSELVES which included BUYING supplies from the US and overpaying for EVERYTHING we obtained.
That's not to say that we don't still love the ordinary US citizen, of course we do, but go easy on the "Yanks did everything" BS.... it sticks in the throats of all the other nations who had fought military tyranny before the US was dragged into WW2 against its will by the nazi's ONLY legal declaration of war during WW2 on 11th Dec 1941.
1
-
1
-
The US "had Britain's back" did it? You do realise that the US business community was greedily making vast profits from BOTH sides of the European war until Germany declared war on you?
The US "business community" engaged in VERY profitable business dealings with BOTH sides throughout WW2. US corporations such as Ford, General Motors, US Standard Oil, IBM, Kodak, Chase Bank (to name but a few) carried on "business as usual" with nazi Germany THROUGHOUT WW2.
Ford's auto production facility in Cologne and General Motor's Opel subsiduary plant in Berlin were both busy working 24/7 THROUGHOUT WW2 furnishing the nazis with approximately 60% of the Wehrmacht's military transportation needs, as well as a sizeable chunk of the Luftwaffe's aero engine requirements... all the better for attacking Britain with eh?
The "ALuminum COrporation of America" (ALCOA) for instance supplied SO much aircraft grade aluminium to nazi Germany in the late 1930s and into the early 1940s that it actually caused shortfalls within the US government's own military aircraft production schedules, so much so that in June 1941 the situation prompted Harold Ickes, US Secretary of the Interior, to go on record as saying “If America loses this coming war, it can thank the Aluminum Corporation of America”.
With "friends" like the US "business community" "watching your back" who needs enemies?
1
-
"Norman & Saxon"
By Rudyard Kipling.
"My son," said the Norman Baron, "I am dying, and you will be heir
To all the broad acres in England that William gave me for my share
When he conquered the Saxon at Hastings, and a nice little handful it is.
But before you go over to rule it I want you to understand this:–
"The Saxon is not like us Normans. His manners are not so polite.
But he never means anything serious till he talks about justice and right.
When he stands like an ox in the furrow – with his sullen set eyes on your own,
And grumbles, 'This isn't fair dealing,' my son, leave the Saxon alone.
"You can horsewhip your Gascony archers, or torture your Picardy spears;
But don't try that game on the Saxon; you'll have the whole brood round your ears.
From the richest old Thane in the county to the poorest chained serf in the field,
They'll be at you and on you like hornets, and, if you are wise, you will yield.
"But first you must master their language, their dialect, proverbs and songs.
Don't trust any clerk to interpret when they come with the tale of their wrongs.
Let them know that you know what they're saying; let them feel that you know what to say.
Yes, even when you want to go hunting, hear 'em out if it takes you all day.
"They'll drink every hour of the daylight and poach every hour of the dark.
It's the sport not the rabbits they're after (we've plenty of game in the park).
Don't hang them or cut off their fingers. That's wasteful as well as unkind,
For a hard-bitten, South-country poacher makes the best man-at-arms you can find.
"Appear with your wife and the children at their weddings and funerals and feasts.
Be polite but not friendly to Bishops; be good to all poor parish priests.
Say 'we,' 'us' and 'ours' when you're talking, instead of 'you fellows' and 'I.'
Don't ride over seeds; keep your temper; and never you tell 'em a lie!"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@adam_zs8292 Certainly their lives never turned out as they expected, lives rarely do especially in wartime, but using the "glass half full / half empty" principle, they ended up living in a free country serving pints in a Edinburgh pub and not face down dead in a ditch in Byelorussia with thousands of their fellow countrymen as happened to the Polish general staff at Katyn in 1940, and that was prevented from happening by Britain giving the western Poles a new national home with full citizenship and residency rights here in the UK. We were in fact the first nation post WW2 to pass such a law in 1947 (the "UK Polish Resettlement Act", which is still available to view on the UK govt legislation website), followed by France in 1948, both before the US who, as usual, came into the act late, passing their own equivalent laws in 1949.
I've got absolutely NOTHING but respect for the Polish war veterans, but Mark's portrayal of them as somehow deserving better treatment than hundreds of thousands of returning British troops, returning to a country that was a broken husk of its former self post WW2 is deeply unbalanced & highly selective in the viewpoint it produces.
Thank you for your politeness, as such discussions easily fall into "internet flaming" by uninformed commenters who've had their BS questioned (although I'm sincerely NOT including yourself amongst their number), All the best.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The simple fact is that the world at the end of WW2 was a complete & impossibly complex mess. NO-ONE (apart from the USSR & moreso the US) was a winner. The UK also had to "take it up the ass" just as Poland and eastern Europe did, having completely bankrupted itself in the service of opposing German domination of Europe. We can argue all day about the injustices and problems of each and every nation.
The facts are that Britain, who went to war to stop German domination of Europe, by 1942 was broken, and had became the "third wheel" in international matters. Eastern Europe's fate was secretly decided between Stalin and Roosevelt/Truman.
Churchill had already by Spring 1945 directed the British Imperial General staff to draw up plans to push back the soviet steamroller back to its pre-1939 borders, plans named as "Operation unthinkable". When completed they were presented to the senior allied western partner the US govt, who immediately sidelined them.
Unbeknown to Churchill and the British at that time, Roosevelt and then Truman had already carried out secret negotiations with Stalin and the soviets to which the British had not been party.
These negotiations were basically that the US & USSR (now the two world "superpowers") would form their own "spheres of influence" in Europe, and the US agreed to allow the USSR to control eastern and central Europe on TWO conditions.
1. The USSR would Immediately declare war on Japan. This was of the UTMOST importance to the US govt, as the uncertain "Manhattan project" had not yet come to fruition at that point, and the US govt was TERRIFIED that it may have had to carry out "Operation Downfall", that is the US invasion of the Japanese home islands, with resultant hugely unpopular terrible losses to US troops in the run up to a postwar US election.
2. The USSR would agree to sign up to the then embryonic "United Nations".
Both of which happened.
When British intelligence informed the Churchill govt that these negotiations had taken place, Churchill was horrified, but realised Britain's hopeless position, and so sought to salvage what he could from the fait accompli of the US/USSR betrayal by then negotiating with Stalin to keep the Soviets out of Greece (thereby containing communist access to the Mediterranean) by way of Churchill's "dirty secret" known as the "percentages document".
No-one argues that Eastern Europe did well out of WW2.... but they WERE saved from 1000 years of nazi tyranny, only to then suffer a much lesser communist one. The British for their part lost the human history's largest empire due to the ruinous costs of saving Europe from the "1000 year third Reich".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
When devious nazi fanboi idiots and other assorted uninformed loons such as yourself say "Hitler never wanted war with Britain and France" they ALWAYS miss off the part that says "until he was ready for it on his OWN terms".
Because of course Hitler laid all his hopes on being left to expand the nazi empire EASTWARDS in peace, assimilate his new found conquests with their collective economies and resources, further build up his military power and only THEN conquer France as they had already attempted such a feat TWICE BEFORE in the previous 70 years, once in 1870 and again in 1914, followed by Britain (or at the VERY least imposing a crushing "pax Germanica" on the UK as they did with Vichy France), the Germans THIRD attempt to conquer Europe in 1940 was precipitated by the British and French not sitting and waiting for it to happen on Hitler's terms. If we had've waited the outcome would have been much MUCH different from the destruction of nazism in 1945.
Not confronting Hitler in 1939 would have resulted with Britain by the late 1940s onwards having:
A puppet nazi government, a nazi supporting King Edward VIII restored to the throne, and the UK as a nazi satellite state.
Extermination camps in the Cotswolds, Pennines & Scottish Highlands.
SS Einsatzgruppen stalking the shires looking to find "undesirables" to summarily execute.
All UK males of working age being deported to the reich to be slaved to death in nazi armaments factories or infrastructure projects.
And now, slimy nazi fanbois and other devious loons want the uninformed to think that letting Hitler conduct his plans undisturbed would mean that we would have a Britain today filled with Rose cottages, warm beer, bar skittles, Morris dancers & village cricket.
How utterly devious those people are, people with greater awareness of the situation don't fall for their nazi apologist nonsense.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Simon, for such a wise and perceptive ol' fox, you appear to be COMPLETELY ignorant of the fact that ALL of the mainstream political establishment of the UK (and also most of western Europe) is HOPELESSLY enmeshed into the very fabric of the WEF corporate globalists, with ALL of the formerly "independent" political parties (as well as individual party "luminaries") now HEAVILY dependent on corporate financing of their party (as well as personal) coffers after a colossal collapse in grass root party membership over the last 60 years.
Of course being a wise ol' fox you'll also know the old saying "He who pays the piper calls the tune", in this case meaning that ALL political parties now have to pass their candidate shortlists for all elections past the eyes of the globalists who now control them.... if the candidate's CV doesn't pass muster with the WEF top table, then the party concerned is quietly told by their WEF benefactors to "furnish another, more suitable, candidate".
Surely you realise Simon that when your ballot paper gives you the choice of :
Corporate globalism dressed up as "conservative"
Corporate globalism dressed up as "Labour"
Corporate globalism dressed up as "Social democrat"
Then you're already living in a corporate globalist dictatorship, and the former "cut and thrust" of Westminster is now a shallow "political theatre" with a cast of third and fourth rate actors simply maintained to keep the unenlightened hoi polloi believing that they're still living within a "democracy".
Suggesting that a change of leadership of ANY of the UK's WEF "front" parties would make ANY difference to the current political landscape is, to use yet ANOTHER "oldism", simply rearranging the deckchairs on the deck of the Titanic.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ralphbernhard1757 At least we're in agreement about something Ralph. ALL empires go down the drain eventually, its why those of us who understand human nature and possess a solid outline of history are at ease with the decline of the British empire and are able to move on... there's nothing else you can do. Do you think ANY human construct now in place today will still be in existence in say the next 500-600 years, even the current "globalism" now being enforced on the world, will eventually break up and factionalise with time, there's NO human power in the world that can stop it?
As for your "divide and rule" nonsense, where did Britain "rule" within Europe exactly? Apart that is from its home islands, and the likes of Gibraltar, Malta? Any example of British "rule" in Poland, Spain, Germany France you could give us? We couldn't even enforce the payment of reparations from the european central powers after WW1, THATS how much "rule" we exercised within Europe. As for the "Divide" part, that was an eminently wise and sensible strategy, as in no one country having an hegemony over the others, which is exactly what Germany was attempting to achieve by force of arms. Or would you enjoy that kind of "togetherness"?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The ignorance of SOME modern day Poles (and lefty agitators) as witnessed in so many of the comments in this thread is quite shameless. Their ignorance of the fact that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need", or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism from June 1940 onwards, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s.
For those Ignorant modern day Poles, on your way out, please remember to kneel at the altar dedicated to the combined 1.1 million lives sacrificed by the UK and France in order to topple the nazism that was murdering and torturing YOUR country when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
And for all current honourable, and deeper thinking Poles, please accept our best wishes from the UK.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DylanWOWilliams Why does the US have to provide anything? You're labouring under the illusion that the US charitably gives aid to other nations for the benefit of the recipient nation, while having utterly no idea of the concept of geopolitics. The US exerts, as the old communists of the USSR also used to, a "sphere of influence" to protect themselves and promote their business interests and regimes across the regions of the world. The maintainence and spreading of the US "sphere of influence" is usually done with "soft power". The type of power exercised by the corrupting nature of US corporate & govt influence within a potential client nation's state. The type of "soft power" that has seen the NATO front line spread 1000 miles EASTWARDS since 1990, and US corporate friendly politicians financed into power. When US soft power doesn't work, then their military hard power is used, as in Vietnam, Nicaragua, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and now potentially against Russia itself.
I'd guarantee you're completely unaware that during WW2 that US business community carried out extremely profitable business with the nazis THROUGHOUT the whole of the war, providing billions in profits to US businesses and millions in tax revenue to the US Govt, but mainly before the nazi declaration of war on them. It was only when it looked as if Britain might sue for peace with the nazis in 1940 that the US realised that if we did then their misguided "isolationism" would result in the US being isolated between a nazi dominated Europe and a Japanese dominated Asia.
It's the same reason that the US Govt and CIA have since WW2 been highly active in regime change across the world while following the ideals of their "Monroe doctrine", To expand US corporate hegemony across the globe.
It's a "win win" situation for them. they get the benefit of spreading US militarism across the world and other nations pay the price in blood.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@pawelmod3292 Not a single source just the product of widely based accumulated reading over my 60 years, though the UK national archives is a valuable source of information... VERY dry and boring but if you spend the time to study their archives MUCH of the details of the history can be gleaned from it. Some information is also to be found in "Hansard" (that is the name of the official records of parliamentary debates in Britain and many of her Commonwealth countries).
With regard to the non-appearance of Polish forces during the "1946 Victory parade" the problem lay SQUARELY with POLAND. The first invites sent out by the UK Labour Govt of Clement Attlee to ALL the nations who had fought for the Allied cause during WW2 (INCLUDING Poland, USSR & Yugoslavia) were sent out weeks in advance of the parade. The Polish invite in particular was quite understandably delivered to the Polish "Provisional Government of National Unity" ( the "TRJN" or Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) based in Warsaw, which was the OFFICIAL Polish govt as recognised by the international community in the form of the "United Nations", and NOT just by Britain alone, the TRJN was the same govt that it was intended the London based Polish nationalist Govt in exile would become an intrinsic part of, as agreed to by ALL sides at the Yalta conference in Feb 1945.... (although the soviets subsequently saw to it that this never actually happened).
This invite sent to Warsaw immediately raised a storm of protest from the Polish nationalist govt in exile based in London who, with some justification, felt they had been sidelined in this matter, their anger was supported by many British MPs and members of the British public.
With only days left before the parade was due to take place, and with no reply or even acknowledgement of the British invite from the OFFICIAL Polish TRJN govt in Warsaw, the British govt then belatedly sent out a SECOND INVITE to the Polish Govt in Exile in London, (as well as directly to individual senior Polish service personnel), but as one united group they CHOSE to shun the invites to register their anger and disgust at being treated as "second fiddle" to the Warsaw govt.
And the final Ignominy? The Warsaw TRJN govt as well as not acknowledging the UK invite also never attended the parade either (as neither did the USSR or Yugoslavia) .
As you can see the Polish "non appearance" was solely down to a poisonous bitter mix of political hatred (from Warsaw communists) and hubris (from the London nationalist Poles), and NOTHING to do with the insidious left wing agitprop "Poles weren't invited" or "Poles were banned" nonsense.
As neither the USSR or Yugoslavia had exiled governments based in the UK, Poland was the ONLY nation to actually receive TWO invites to the parade.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What a perfect script.
Just watch as the corporate globalists who have insinuated themselves across the globe & control world politics, now debase and demean the formerly highly respected offices of prime ministers and presidents across the world by their financial control over mainstream political parties and their "prefered shortlists" for candidates to the major offices of state.
Put in place utter fucking puppet clowns, such as Truss, Biden, Trudeau, Macron, Ardern et al, then stand back and watch as they follow their paymasters orders to mismanage and destabilise their respective economies, as a precursor to the slow but steady establishment of globalist institutions that will eventually comprise the future "one world government" that will "be needed" to restabilise economic control and firmly place the world under globalist dictatorship.
The British people voted to fuck off the globalist regional controllers (the EUSSR) but the filth of globalism has already poisoned and infected the whole of the UK establishment, and now they use their puppets in Westminster, ably assisted by their control of the MSM to destabilise and tear down the UK. Cunts.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Project_Prescott I apologise for my late reply. I did reply earlier to your message above but YT LOVES randomly deleting my posts. My now deleted message said...
I don't know if you're aware that the HMS Hood association website has a memorial page for EVERY known member of the ship's crew. A lot of these memorial pages contain photographs and history of the individual concerned, and they are a means to keep alive their memory for the future. There currently exists a page for Ordinary Seaman Leonard Moyal Peckham, Service Number: P/JX 158236, born on 04 December 1922 at Fratton, Portsmouth, Hampshire, but unfortunately there is no photograph and no further information. If you have a confirmed family photograph of Leonard the association would be delighted to receive a copy (and any other related information) which they will be only too glad to place on Leonard's page.
There is currently NO corresponding page for James William, but if you have his details (service number / dates of service aboard Hood etc) they will create a new page especially for him.
I would post a link to Leonard's page, but if I do so Youtube "kindly" delete the message, if you put leonard's name in google, his page at the website will be the first result that will show up. I hope this is of some use to your family. All the best, Project Prescott.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"he never really tried or wanted to actually do it"..... I suppose the Germans gathering and converting 200 transport ships & 2000 canal barges into makeshift assault landing vessels, then smashing their air force against Britain's defences, and lossing nearly 2000 aircraft in the process was all done "for a laugh".
If you're still in any doubt, then below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler's "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the "Felsennest" (Hitler's forward command HQ in Western Germany) on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW).
The directive was transmitted over secure landlines encrypted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to initmidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan fell to ruin. The operation had been smashed in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Lets look at some survivor testimonies (people who actually witnessed the events of Bismarck's sinking first hand), and not your modern day revisionist nonsense made for the "hard of thinking" shall we?
From "Battleship Bismarck: A survivor's story" Written by Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's senior ranking survivor.
Page 211 "Our list to port had increased a bit while firing was going on" followed a couple of paragraphs later by "Around 9:30am gas and smoke began to drift through our station" This means that prior to 9:30am Bismarck was already flooding, not something that happens to a healthy seaworthy ship, in other words she was already starting to sink.
Then from an interview conducted for the highly regarded weekly history journal "Purnell's history of the second world war" in the late 1960's with Gerhard Junack (who was Bismarck's only surviving engineering officer and the survivor who supposedly enacted the "scuttle order"). He stated that...
"Somewhere about 1015 hours, I received an order over the telephone from the Chief Engineer (Korvettenkapitän (Ing.) Walter Lehmann) to 'Prepare the ship for sinking.' That was the last order I received on the Bismarck. Soon after that, all transmission of orders collapsed."
Heading back to the account of Mullenheim-Rechberg, on Page 212 he states that (before 10:00am) "I was using all the telephone circuits and calling all over the place in an effort to find out as much as possible about the condition of the ship. I got only one answer. I reached the messenger in the damage control centre and asked "who has and where is the command of the ship? Are there new orders in effect?".... The man said he was in a great hurry. He told me that everyone had abandoned the damage control centre, adding that he was the last one in the room and had to get out... then he hung up".
This vain search for contact & information over the Bismarck's internal comms happened BEFORE 10:00am which throws some mild doubt on Junack's testimony where he says he was contacted by the chief engineer who supposedly gave him the "scuttle order" over the phone at 10:15am... Hmmmmm.
If taken at face value these survivor testimonies show that there was at least a 45 minute gap between Bismarck starting to sink and the first mention of a "scuttle order" being given. Even if Bismarck's crew had done nothing, Bismarck was going to sink, and if the beaten crew want to help the RN, then all the better... But face it, Bismarck's crew weren't going to scuttle a perfectly seaworthy ship in the middle of the storm tossed North Atlantic of their own free will, it was only for the fact that the RN had already dismantled Bismarck and initiated the sinking process. In other words in every sense the sinking of Bismarck was the result of actions dictated by the Royal Navy.
Anything else is just hurt German pride, bolstered by modern day delusional wehraboos. Germany was well known for trying to hide its national humiliations, such as when they scuttled their "grand fleet" at the end of WW1, like illogically saying "We lost.. but you didn't win", or a pathetic "You didn't beat us because we killed ourselves first" sort of idiocy.
1
-
Mark... still peddling your complete nonsense?
First German bombs dropped on the British mainland?
16th October 1939 saw the very first bombs dropped on Britain when the Germans launched scattered air attacks over port and industrial facilities around the Scottish city of Edinburgh.
First bombs dropped by the RAF on German soil?
19th March 1940... When on 13th November 1939 the luftwaffe bombed RAF Sullom Voe a seaplane base with port facilities in the Shetland Isles (with the resultant death of a rabbit, and no hits on the 9 seaplanes or 2 RN vessels stationed there), the RAF retaliated by hitting the nazi seaplane base at Hörnum on the island of Sylt in the North Sea. These were THE VERY FIRST RAF bombs to land on German soil....5 months AFTER the first German bombs had landed on British soil.
The first British or German civilian casualty caused by the bombing of the opposing side during WW2?
16th March 1940 when German bombs hit the village of Waithe on Orkney during an attack on the Home Fleet anchorage at Scapa Flow, which killed a 27 year-old County Council employee, James Isbister (luckily, his wife, baby son, and the neighbour James was endeavouring to rescue from her bombed cottage all survived).
First British bombs to drop on the actual German mainland?
11th May 1940, when the British air ministry for the first time allowed the bombing of railway yards, communication centres and bridges west of the Rhine River as interdiction of German supply lines for the German assault into the NEUTRAL Low countries and France on 10th May 1940. Previous to this date the British air ministry in an effort to stop the spreading of the conflict had refused to allow the RAF to drop ANY bombs on the German mainland, instead the RAF supplied the German demand for toilet paper by dropping propaganda leaflets on German cities. This attack on 11th May 1940 had also come after REPEATED attacks against RN installations on the British mainland, most notably at Rosyth near Edinburgh, and the Cromarty Firth, both in Scotland throughout the winter of 1939/40.
First British bombs dropped EAST of the Rhine River?
23/24th August 1940. This attack ostensibly directed at the Klingenberg Power Station in Eastern Berlin & Templehof airport was in RETALIATION for REPEATED luftwaffe raids on RAF stations within the suburbs of Greater London throughout July and August 1940 that had already caused HUNDREDS of innocent British civilian deaths & casualties (euphemistically known nowadays as "collateral damage") this was inspite of Hitler's previous decrees that no bombs should be dropped within the boundaries of Greater London. Obviously that decree had never reached the ears of Herman Goering.
German retaliation for the one night of bombing of Berlin on 23/24th August 1940? The launching of the all out assault against British cities from 7th sept 1940 onwards, culminating in the world's first attempt to create a firestorm during operation "moonlight sonata" on the British city of Coventry on the night of 14/15th Nov 1940, where the luftwaffe sent 575 bombers using their world beating "X-gerat" bombing system (in the Germans own words capable of placing "target indicator" flares with an accuracy of 50 meters at 200 miles range) over the civilian city centre of Coventry dropping 550 tons of high explosive (including hundreds of "flammen" (oil) bombs) followed by over 30,000 incendiary bombs. The final death toll of that single raid? A previously unheard of 568 innocent civilians, this was in addition to the thousands of other British civilians already killed in other cities across Britain over the previous 2 months.
The first British bombing raid directly targetted at German civilians? "Operation Abigail" on the night of 16/17th December 1940, (3 months AFTER the opening of the nazi "blitz" on British cities) the Dec 16th attack by the RAF was launched against the German city of Mannheim where 100 RAF bombers dropped 100 tons of HE and 14,000 incendiaries inflicting a death toll on the German population of 34 dead and 81 injured.
Not to worry though , the RAF eventually "upped its game" and showed the Germans how to do it properly a year or two later.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
If you completely conquer the ruling country of an empire and replace its government and head of state, then its colonies no longer have a sovereign connection to that country and effectively become "free agents", effectively independent, and able to exercise self-determination and ally with whom they please. If France was anything to go by, then the Nazis would have left a part of Great Britain unoccupied by nazi forces, and nominally governed by a puppet British "rump" government (possibly led by Oswald Mosley, the leader of the outlawed prewar "British Union of Fascists", who knows?), this would be in order to retain a semblance of British sovereignty with which to exert power over the rest of the British commonwealth. Just as the Germans did with Vichy France which was primarily allowed to remain under a nominally French government, which was then used to administer and control French colonies in SE Asia, the middle east and north west Africa. For example this setup allowed the Germans to quietly direct the Vichy puppet government to allow the Japanese to land military forces unopposed in French Indo China prior to the Japanese entry into WW2.
For its part Britain had plans in place for the UK government to evacuate to Canada in the event of a German invasion of Britain (British gold reserves from the "Bank of England" had already been sent to Canada in 1940), and to attempt to continue opposition to the fascists from there. That raises the question, which British government would the British colonies take their orders from? The Puppet British govt based in the nazi dominated United Kingdom? Or the British govt-in-exile based in Canada?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The UK continues to honour the Poles who served in the west during WW2 to this day at each and every Remembrance day parade across the UK.... BUT the ignorance of SOME modern day Poles (and lefty agitators) as witnessed in so many of the comments in this thread is quite shameless. Their ignorance of the fact that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need", or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism from June 1940 onwards, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s.
For those Ignorant modern day Poles, on your way out, please remember to kneel at the altar dedicated to the combined 1.1 million lives sacrificed by the UK and France in order to topple the nazism that was murdering and torturing YOUR country when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
And for all current honourable, and deeper thinking Poles, please accept our best wishes from the UK.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@oculusangelicus8978 The weren't "aiming to hit below the waterline". in WW2 long range naval gunnery you are aiming to hit the ship. Simple as that.
A full salvo of main gun fire from a battleship is analogous to a scatter of lead shot from a shotgun. During the battle of Denmark Strait, the Bismarck aimed at Hood from 8-9 nautical miles away. At that range the 38 cm SK C/34 (Bismarck's main armament) had a CEP (circular error probability - effectively the radius of a circle within which 50% of its shots would fall) of 100m. That means that if 8 of Bismarck's 15in guns fired at a single point 8-9 nm away, 4 of her shells would be expected to land (with completely random distribution) within an ellipse (think of it as a stretched circle, due to the angle of fall of the shells) measuring approximately 200m (660ft) wide, (or to put it another way 76% of HMS Hood's 860ft length), by around three thousand feet long. The other 4 shots would land even FURTHER away from the aiming point. That being the case, how can an individual shell be aimed specifically at a tiny part of HMS Hood's structure, namely the 4in HA magazine, that its believed triggered off Hood's detonation? I'll give you a hint, there's a little clue in my paragraph above....where it says "completely random distribution".
A simplified analogy is that if you prop a dartboard up 50 yards away and can consistently knock it over with a shotgun at that range then that is pretty good shooting, just as Bismarck / PE achieved during the Denmark Strait encounter.
Now you can "knock the dartboard over" all day long with the shotgun and STILL NOT hit the bullseye (magazine) with an individual pellet. As opposed to being a skillful shot by knocking over the dartboard, whether you hit the bullseye with an individual pellet is complete luck.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TWX1138 "Why would an international superstate so vast that the sun never sets on it have to rely on another country to supply it with the materiel needed to keep it from utter defeat at the hands of a nation with somewhere between 68 and 80 million"?
That would be because +90% of the British Empire was non-industrial, resource rich colonies... We had NO shortage of raw materials, its just that they were widely spread across the world on multiple continents (hence why the "sun never set" on it, and it was all on external lines of communication and supply, but with a relatively small industrial base with which to process those resources (mostly in the UK and Canada). Its the reason why the British Empire, via "reverse lend-lease" (look it up), supplied the US with a full 30% of the value in raw resources that the US supplied to Britain during WW2. "Reverse lend-lease" is something almost completely unknown to the general public, ESPECIALLY clueless, loudmouthed Yanks who ignorantly talk about "saving Britain", which is another aspect I could give you some commonly overlooked information on.
Germany on the other hand had a greater industrial capacity than the UK, and had just conquered a slew of some of the most industrialised nations on the planet, whilst also having a potentially endless supply of raw materials on INTENRAL lines of supply from within Europe as well as a MASSIVE supply from its non-aggression partner, the USSR, who provided Germany with MILLIONS of tons of food, fuel and raw materials up until 22nd June 1941.
Glad to have been of help in filling in some of the bits of history you appear to know nothing about.
1
-
@TWX1138 "Why would an international superstate so vast that the sun never sets on it have to rely on another country to supply it with the materiel needed to keep it from utter defeat at the hands of a nation with somewhere between 68 and 80 million"?
Here, let me explain. That would be because +90% of the British Empire was non-industrial, resource rich colonies... We had NO shortage of raw materials, its just that they were widely spread across the world on multiple continents (hence why the "sun never set" on it, and it was all on external lines of communication and supply, but with a relatively small industrial base with which to process those resources (mostly in the UK and Canada). Its the reason why the British Empire, via "reverse lend-lease" (look it up), supplied the US with a full 30% of the value in raw resources that the US supplied to Britain during WW2. "Reverse lend-lease" is something almost completely unknown to the general public, ESPECIALLY clueless, loudmouthed Yanks who ignorantly talk about "saving Britain", which is another aspect I could give you some commonly overlooked information on.... And there was you thinking the US was self sufficient !!! How silly of you.
Germany on the other hand had a greater industrial capacity than the UK, and had just conquered a slew of some of the most industrialised nations on the planet, whilst having a potentially endless supply of raw materials from within Europe as well as further MASSIVE supply from its non-aggression partner, the USSR, who, up until 22nd June 1941, provided Germany with MILLIONS of tons of food, fuel and raw materials, and it was almost all completely on INTERNAL lines of supply.
Glad to have been of help in explaining some of the aspects of WW2 that appear to have passed you by.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
For all Mark's knowledge and historical research he seems to be a bit short in the "how things really are" dept. It's not just the royal family (who have always suffered the peasants as much as they can bear in order to be showered with the hosepipe of public cash known as the "civil list") but the entire "establishment" that is at war with the British public.
I suggest if Mark would like some better treatment he should climb off an inflatable dinghy at Dover, possess no assets or documentation, and profess to not speak English, this will guarantee him preferential treatment in many walks of British life nowadays, while those who have worked and contributed their whole lives to the society we had created are, as Mark found out here, treated like pariahs in our own country.
P.S I wouldn't advise a trip to Osborne House on the Isle of Wight either. A similar sort of set up, orchestrated to lever the maximum amount of cash from the maximum crush people who paid for the place, for the least amount of courtesy or value in return.
In the post war period it was the communist left that had haughtily ensconced themselves in the "redbricks" that had inculcated the loathing of the general public into the "establishment", today that has been cosmetically transformed into the corporate globalist financed form of snobbery that now runs our country and education system. Growing like the fungus it emulates in its "slime though the institutions".
The upper classes are notorious for their hatred of the "Oiks", sorry to tell you Mark, but that's exactly what you, I and the rest of us are to these cnuts.
It's not the buildings that are a disappointment, far from it, but the disgusting treatment by management and their largely mouthbreathing staff that can barely hide their disdain for the "punters".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@peteenglish8773 Please feel free to provide us with just a handful of the apparently "regular" massacres you believe were carried out by RN subs in the Med.
Yes it is bollocks. Trying to portray TWO isolated instances by the same RN officer as "regularly".
HMSub Torbay (Lt Comm Anthony Miers) 4th July 1941 , unnamed Cretan schooner (~50 tons) 36'01N,23'06E
HMSub Torbay (Lt Comm Anthony Miers) 4th July 1941 , unnamed Cretan schooner (~50 tons) 35.43N,23.12E
His actions on the 4th & 9th July 1941 at resulted in Torbay's commander (Lt Com Anthony Miers) being severely reprimanded and ordered to cease such actions by Adm Max Horton.
The are a larger (but still a relatively small number) of incidents of German U-boats gunning survivors,
U-37 (KL Victor Oehrn) 23 August 1940, British ship "Severn Leigh" (5242grt) 54'31'N,25'41W
U-552 (KL Erich Topp) 3 March 1942, US ship "David H. Atwater"(2428grt) 37'57N, 75'10W
U-126 (KL Ernst Bauer) 8 March 1942 Panamanian Tanker "Esso Bolivar" (10389grt) 19'38N,74'38W
U-172 (KL Carl Emmermann) 24 June 1942 Colombian Sailing Vessel "Resolute"(35grt)13'15N,80'30W
U-754(KL Johanns Oestermann) 28 July 1942 US Fishing Vessel "Ebb"(259grt) 43'18N,63'50W
U-852(KL Heinz-Wilhelm Eck) 13 March 1944 Hellenic Steamship "Peleus"(4695grt) 02'00S,10'00W
U-532(FK Ottoheinrich Junker) 27 March 1944 British Ship "Tulagi"(228grt) 11'00S,78'40E
the most egregious of which (known as the "Peleus incident" and committed by the U-852 (KptLt Eck) resulted in the post war execution of Eck and two of his crew members for the massacre of 33 survivors.
The war in the pacific was FAR harsher on survivors of sinkings with both US & Japanese captains far more likely to kill defenceless survivors.
1
-
@peteenglish8773 Please feel free to provide us with just a handful of the apparently "regular" massacres you believe were carried out by RN subs in the Med.
Yes it is bollocks. Trying to portray TWO isolated instances by the same RN officer as "regularly".
HMSub Torbay (Lt Comm Anthony Miers) 4th July 1941 , unnamed Cretan schooner (~50 tons) 36'01N,23'06E
HMSub Torbay (Lt Comm Anthony Miers) 4th July 1941 , unnamed Cretan schooner (~50 tons) 35.43N,23.12E
His actions on the 4th & 9th July 1941 at resulted in Torbay's commander (Lt Com Anthony Miers) being severely reprimanded and ordered to cease such actions by Adm Max Horton.
The are a larger (but still a relatively small number) of incidents of German U-boats gunning survivors,
U-37 (KL Victor Oehrn) 23 August 1940, British ship "Severn Leigh" (5242grt) 54'31'N,25'41W
U-552 (KL Erich Topp) 3 March 1942, US ship "David H. Atwater"(2428grt) 37'57N, 75'10W
U-126 (KL Ernst Bauer) 8 March 1942 Panamanian Tanker "Esso Bolivar" (10389grt) 19'38N,74'38W
U-172 (KL Carl Emmermann) 24 June 1942 Colombian Sailing Vessel "Resolute"(35grt)13'15N,80'30W
U-754(KL Johanns Oestermann) 28 July 1942 US Fishing Vessel "Ebb"(259grt) 43'18N,63'50W
U-852(KL Heinz-Wilhelm Eck) 13 March 1944 Hellenic Steamship "Peleus"(4695grt) 02'00S,10'00W
U-532(FK Ottoheinrich Junker) 27 March 1944 British Ship "Tulagi"(228grt) 11'00S,78'40E
the most egregious of which (known as the "Peleus incident" and committed by the U-852 (KptLt Eck) resulted in the post war execution of Eck and two of his crew members for the massacre of 33 survivors.
The war in the pacific was FAR harsher on survivors of sinkings with both US & Japanese captains far more likely to kill defenceless survivors.
1
-
1
-
@peteenglish8773 Please feel free to provide us with just a handful of the apparently "regular" massacres you believe were carried out by RN subs in the Med.
Yes it is bollocks. Trying to portray TWO isolated instances by the same RN officer as "regularly".
HMSub Torbay (Lt Comm Anthony Miers) 4th July 1941 , unnamed Cretan schooner (~50 tons) 36'01N,23'06E
HMSub Torbay (Lt Comm Anthony Miers) 4th July 1941 , unnamed Cretan schooner (~50 tons) 35.43N,23.12E
His actions on the 4th & 9th July 1941 at resulted in Torbay's commander (Lt Com Anthony Miers) being severely reprimanded and ordered to cease such actions by Adm Max Horton. The are a larger (but still a relatively small number) of incidents of German U-boats gunning survivors,
U-37 (KL Victor Oehrn) 23 August 1940, British ship "Severn Leigh" (5242grt) 54'31'N,25'41W
U-552 (KL Erich Topp) 3 March 1942, US ship "David H. Atwater"(2428grt) 37'57N, 75'10W
U-126 (KL Ernst Bauer) 8 March 1942 Panamanian Tanker "Esso Bolivar" (10389grt) 19'38N,74'38W
U-172 (KL Carl Emmermann) 24 June 1942 Colombian Sailing Vessel "Resolute"(35grt)13'15N,80'30W
U-754(KL Johanns Oestermann) 28 July 1942 US Fishing Vessel "Ebb"(259grt) 43'18N,63'50W
U-852(KL Heinz-Wilhelm Eck) 13 March 1944 Hellenic Steamship "Peleus"(4695grt) 02'00S,10'00W
U-532(FK Ottoheinrich Junker) 27 March 1944 British Ship "Tulagi"(228grt) 11'00S,78'40E
the most egregious of which (known as the "Peleus incident" and committed by the U-852 (KptLt Eck) resulted in the post war execution of Eck and two of his crew members for the massacre of 33 survivors.
The war in the pacific was FAR harsher on survivors of sinkings with both US & Japanese captains far more likely to kill defenceless survivors.
1
-
@peteenglish8773 Please feel free to provide us with just a handful of the apparently "regular" events you believe were carried out by RN subs in the Med.
Yes it is bollocks. Trying to portray TWO isolated instances by the same RN officer as "regularly".
HMSub Torbay (Lt Comm Anthony Miers) 4th July 1941 , unnamed Cretan schooner (~50 tons) 36'01N,23'06E
HMSub Torbay (Lt Comm Anthony Miers) 4th July 1941 , unnamed Cretan schooner (~50 tons) 35.43N,23.12E
His actions on the 4th & 9th July 1941 resulted in Torbay's commander (Lt Com Anthony Miers) being severely reprimanded and ordered to cease such actions by Adm Max Horton.
The are a larger (but still a relatively small number) of incidents of German U-boats gunning survivors,
U-37 (KL Victor Oehrn) 23 August 1940, British ship "Severn Leigh" (5242grt) 54'31'N,25'41W
U-552 (KL Erich Topp) 3 March 1942, US ship "David H. Atwater"(2428grt) 37'57N, 75'10W
U-126 (KL Ernst Bauer) 8 March 1942 Panamanian Tanker "Esso Bolivar" (10389grt) 19'38N,74'38W
U-172 (KL Carl Emmermann) 24 June 1942 Colombian Sailing Vessel "Resolute"(35grt)13'15N,80'30W
U-754(KL Johanns Oestermann) 28 July 1942 US Fishing Vessel "Ebb"(259grt) 43'18N,63'50W
U-852(KL Heinz-Wilhelm Eck) 13 March 1944 Hellenic Steamship "Peleus"(4695grt) 02'00S,10'00W
U-532(FK Ottoheinrich Junker) 27 March 1944 British Ship "Tulagi"(228grt) 11'00S,78'40E
the most egregious of which (known as the "Peleus incident" and committed by the U-852 (KptLt Eck) resulted in the post war execution of Eck and two of his crew members for the murder of 33 survivors.
The war in the pacific was FAR harsher on survivors of sinkings with both US & Japanese captains far more likely to kill defenceless survivors.
1
-
@peteenglish8773 Please feel free to provide us with any of the details of the apparently "regular" events you believe were carried out by RN subs in the Med.
Yes it is bollocks. Trying to portray TWO isolated instances by the same RN officer as "regularly".
HMSub Torbay (Lt Comm Anthony Miers) 4th July 1941 , unnamed Cretan schooner (~50 tons) 36'01N,23'06E
HMSub Torbay (Lt Comm Anthony Miers) 9th July 1941 , unnamed Cretan schooner (~50 tons) 35.43N,23.12E
His actions on the 4th & 9th July 1941 resulted in Torbay's commander (Lt Com Anthony Miers) being severely reprimanded and ordered to cease such criminal actions by Adm Max Horton. There are no further accounts of such actions taking place.
There are a larger (but still a relatively small number) of incidents of German U-boats gunning survivors,
U-37 (KL Victor Oehrn) 23 August 1940, British ship "Severn Leigh" (5242grt) 54'31'N,25'41W
U-552 (KL Erich Topp) 3 March 1942, US ship "David H. Atwater"(2428grt) 37'57N, 75'10W
U-126 (KL Ernst Bauer) 8 March 1942 Panamanian Tanker "Esso Bolivar" (10389grt) 19'38N,74'38W
U-172 (KL Carl Emmermann) 24 June 1942 Colombian Sailing Vessel "Resolute"(35grt)13'15N,80'30W
U-754(KL Johanns Oestermann) 28 July 1942 US Fishing Vessel "Ebb"(259grt) 43'18N,63'50W
U-852(KL Heinz-Wilhelm Eck) 13 March 1944 Hellenic Steamship "Peleus"(4695grt) 02'00S,10'00W
U-532(FK Ottoheinrich Junker) 27 March 1944 British Ship "Tulagi"(228grt) 11'00S,78'40E
The most egregious of which (known as the "Peleus incident" and committed by the U-852 commanded by Kpt Lt Eck) resulted in the post war execution of Eck and two of his officers for the murder of 33 survivors.
The war in the pacific was FAR harsher on survivors of sinkings with both US & Japanese captains far more likely to kill those taking to boats or in the water.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The ignorance of some modern day Poles as witnessed in so many of the comments in this thread is quite incredible. Their ignorance of the fact that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need" or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries
NO Royal Navy interdiction of nazi German sea trade
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s. For those Ignorant modern day Poles, please feel free to thank the UK (and France) for that commitment and resolve when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
And also remember to kneel and pay your respects at the altar to the 1.1 million British and French Lives that were sacrificed to remove nazi tyranny from YOUR nation's soil.
And for all current honourable, deeper thinking Poles, please accept our best wishes from the UK.
1
-
"scuttled" my arse. IF any "scuttling" actually took place then all that was scuttled was a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken and penetrated in several places, her command staff physically obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater, a thousand of her crew dead, and further hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All that any scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer AFTER he has been punched senseless by a more skillful & powerful opponent, and only a deluded child would say, "the victor didn't win because his opponent killed himself before he lost.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off by the victor and handed back to him on a plate.
Imagine the ignominy of being forced to commit suicide by your opponent?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It's unusual to hear confirmation of how US corporations profitted from BOTH sides throughout the WHOLE of the European war.
Your mentioning of how the Ford corporation (ably assisted by General Motors) provided the nazi German regime with over 60% of its military trasportation during WW2, gives some context to the usual one sided "selected highlights" of how the US "saved Britain".
Your next video should detail more of how US corporations (and subsequently the US Govt though its corporate tax take) made BILLIONS of dollars in profits from the nazi regime during WW2, with corporations such as Standard Oil, Ford, General Motors, Coke Cola, IBM, ITT, Chase Bank and many many others being topics you could highlight.
NONE of which is a slight against the ordinary US citizen who answered their country's call to EVENTUALLY come and oppose the evils of world authoritarian militarism, but it would show to those with little understanding of "how the world works" how corporate entities inherently have NO national loyalites but instead are a law only unto themselves, willing to provide their services to their parent nation's enemies as long as the profits make it worthwhile.... moreso today than ever before !!!!
1
-
1
-
@thespartan8476 Save all your "US saved Britain" BS for the uninformed. Britain saved ITSELF, INSPITE of the US as much as it did BECAUSE of the US.
If the US had REALLY wanted to "help Britain" in its "hour of need", then instead of bleeding the British empire dry and causing its collapse, they could have for example sold a production license for Tetra Ethyl Lead (or TEL - The compound required for the production of hi-octane fuels) to Britain when we applied to purchase one from the "Standard Oil of Jersey City Company" prewar.... Instead they & the US Govt refused to sell one to "their British cousins"... So much for the nonsense idea of a "special relationship" between the UK & US.
Standard Oil and the US Govt had NO qualms though about providing the exact same licence to the nazis when they applied to purchase one prewar. But when it came to Britain the US preferred to strip the British of ALL their gold, cutting edge technology and military bases around the world during the British "hour of need" in return for a supply of amongst other things, US produced hi-octane fuel.
Where there nazi sympathies in the Standard Oil boardroom and in some parts of the US Govt? The truth is so unsavoury were the business practices of the US "Standard Oil" company (such as seeking furtive routes and brokering shady deals to supply nazi Germany with fuel and oil via neutral nations during the war) that it's activities were investigated and closely monitored by the US Govt... but only AFTER the they had been DRAGGED into WW2 in Dec 1941 by the German declaration of war on the US!!!
The US "business community" engaged in VERY profitable business dealings with BOTH sides throughout WW2. US corporations such as Ford, General Motors, US Standard Oil, IBM, ITT, Kodak, Chase Bank, Coke-Cola (to name but a few) carried on "business as usual" with nazi Germany THROUGHOUT WW2.
Ford's auto production facility in Cologne and General Motor's Opel subsiduary plant in Berlin were both busy working 24/7 THROUGHOUT WW2 furnishing the nazis with approximately 60% of the Wehrmacht's military transportation needs, as well as a sizeable chunk of the Luftwaffe's aero engine requirements... as a small example the "Seibel ferries" that the Germans developed to assist in their planned invasion of the UK in 1940 were all powered by US Ford V8 engines, all the better for attacking Britain with eh, and all the while providing US companies with BILLIONS of dollars in profit, and the US govt with millions of dollars of tax revenue
The "ALuminum COrporation of America" (ALCOA) for instance supplied SO much aircraft grade aluminium to nazi Germany in the late 1930s and into the early 1940s that it actually caused shortfalls within the US government's own military aircraft production schedules during the same period, so much so that in June 1941 the situation prompted Harold Ickes, US Secretary of the Interior, to go on record as saying “If America loses this coming war, it can thank the Aluminum Corporation of America”.
With "friends" like the US corporations and to a lesser degree the US govt, who needs enemies?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@notsureyou I have to agree that the book, while being well researched, does seem to lack slightly in the "narrative cohesion" dept. In my mind there are two obvious sources for this, one of which would have been avoidable. It's a problem that appears often throughout the book.
The same facts are repeated, but told differently, it appears that each of the authors has made their contributions to the book, and no-one had been assigned to assimilate the joint research & construct a smooth cohesive overarching narrative from it, but such a task would require the wisdom of Solomon and the judgement of a diplomat to keep the authors contented that their research had been well represented.
Also the original source material is by its very nature is from many disparate sources. The example of HMS Rodney & Norfolk for instance highlights the principle well. Rodney from her viewpoint sees no hits, but Norfolk from a completely different angle does, and thats from two ships on the same side!!! The accounts from enemy ships as well as confirming many points also totally contradicts others and above all of this is the fact that the individual ship's chronometers were set at different time zones, and none were exactly synchronised as there was no "atomic clock" which all would have been set by, something which is taken for granted now in our internet age, meaning that attempting to build a reliable chronology of closely related events becomes incredible difficult to achieve.
So trying to judge relative performances by time alone is fraught with inaccuracies, what is left is individual events and the aftermath.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dmbeaster The Fairey Swordfish were designed & built in Britain from 1935 onwards, originally for the Greek navy, But when trialled prior to delivery they were seen to be so capable that the Royal Navy bought them instead.
They were biplanes for a very good reason. At the time they were designed existing aircraft engines were of relatively low power (especially for the British fleet air arm which was ALWAYS low down on the engine & aircraft "priority list") so to enable a carrier aircraft to carry aloft heavy loads needed a large wing area. Their biplane wing area was SO great that they could take off fully loaded WITHOUT the use of a carrier's catapult. This meant that in the stormy North Atlantic where the Royal Navy mainly intended to operate them, instead of being forced to take off at the carrier's bows where the catapults are and which is the part of a ship that is the most affected by rolling and pitching as well as waves breaking across the bows in heavy seas, the Swordfish could take of from the middle of the carrier's decks close to the bridge where the pitching and rolling was the least, and was not subjected to bow waves breaking over the flight deck.
It was for this reason in May 1941 that they were able to take off from HMS Ark Royal to attack Bismarck when the Ark Royal was struggling through an Atlantic gale in MOUNTAINOUS seas, with her bows rising and falling by 60ft !!! Try to imagine how terrifying it must have been for the brave young crews flying them in those conditions. Those weather conditions would have prevented ALL other US carrier aircraft of the era from flying and instead seen them safely lashed down inside the hangar deck.
They were also incredibly adaptable and throughout WW2 they were adapted to carry, bombs, depth charges, torpedoes, extra fuel tanks and even eight anti ship rockets as well as the world's very first naval airborne radars. They are widely regarded to have ended the war as the aircraft with the GREATEST amount of enemy shipping tonnage sunk, and were HUGELY loved by their crews.
They WERE to have been replaced mid war by a succesor, the Fairey Albacore, but the "stringbag" (as the Swordfish were affectionately known) were so ubiquitous that they outlasted the Albacore in service.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
When devious nazi fanbois & other idiots say "Hitler never wanted war with Britain and France" they ALWAYS miss off the part that says "until he was ready for it on his OWN terms".
Because of course he was putting all his hopes on being left to expand the nazi empire EASTWARDS in peace, assimilate his new found conquests with their collective economies and resources, further build up his military power and THEN conquer Britain & France. Luckily for us all today the British and French were not prepared to allow Hitler to get his way.
Not confronting Hitler in 1939 would have resulted with Britain by the mid 1940s onwards having:
A puppet nazi government, with a nazi supporting King Edward VIII restored to the throne.
Extermination camps in the Cotswolds, Pennines & Scottish Highlands.
SS Einsatzgruppen stalking the shires looking to find "undesirables" to summarily execute.
All UK males of working age being deported to the reich to be slaved to death in nazi armaments factories or infrastructure projects.
And now, slimy nazi fanbois want the uninformed to think that letting Hitler conduct his plans undisturbed would mean that we would have a Britain today filled with Rose cottages, warm beer, bar skittles & village cricket.
As it is, for all its faults today, YOU live in a country where you are free to express your opinions, no matter how uninformed they are and NOT have to worry about being executed for it.
How utterly devious those people are, people with greater awareness of the situation don't fall for their nazi apologist nonsense.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Sam-z5r5r Hi Sam, Yes there obviously was a LOT of brainpower used on problem solving after the torpedo strike, the most well known part being the idea of blowing off the rudders with explosives, but as well as being considered suicidal for anyone who "went over the side" to try to place explosives on the rudder stocks, Bismarck's engineering teams had inspected her stern and reported that it was in a VERY precarious state. This was because Bismarck structurally had a "transom" stern, that is her final internal transverse frame was just astern of her rudder motor rooms, about 30 ft forward of her stern jackstaff, the final 30ft of her stern was a relatively lightweight hollow section that was welded and bolted onto that final transverse frame. The same design was used in the "Hipper" class heavy cruisers and the "Deutschland" class armoured cruisers, and ships of all 3 of those classes suffered "stern collapses" due to battle damage during the war. In Bismarck's case Adm Lütjens after listening to the crew's damage reports feared that any attempt to blow off the rudders would cause the entire stern section to detach and irreparably damage her propellers.
As for the idea of of creating drag, according to some of the suvivor's accounts it was suggested that one of the hangar doors be craned (with the aircraft crane) and welded into a position on the starboard side of the hull to counteract the rudders jammed to port as they were, but it was viewed as an impossible "pipe dream" in the stormy conditions that prevailed at the time.
Another factor that is usually only mentioned in passing was the weather, there was a stormy south easternly wind which when Bismarck was moving at low speed was turning her northwards.
I guess that her boats and launches onboard were not considered to be powerful or massive enough to affect her steering in any way, and all of the other methods you suggest were things that while they could have been built into her at the design stage, were not available to be "jury rigged" at sea in a force 10 gale.
As for the "luck factor" in the FAA torpedo strike on Bismarck, torpedo bomber pilots knew that the stern of a capital ship was the most vulnerable part of her hull. The amidships were as often as not heavily clad in armour and featured "torpedo defence systems", a ship's propellers and rudders were almost completely unprotected, and so were the ideal part of a ship to be aimed for. The Fleet Air Arm had done the exact same thing to the Italian battleship "Vittorio Veneto" at the Battle of Cape Matapan 3 months earlier, and the Japanese, whose torpedo bomber pilots had been taught interwar by the Royal Navy also managed the same hit on HMS Prince of Wales which caused her sinking in Dec 1941.
As the world champion golfer Gary Player used to say "The more I practice the 'luckier' I get".
All the best Sam.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cisco9t5-y9e Take no notice of those ignorant commenters who say "it wuz uselezz"
The Fairey Swordfish were designed & built in Britain from 1935 onwards, originally for the Greek navy, But when trialled prior to delivery they were so capable that the Royal Navy bought them instead. They were biplanes for a very good reason. At the time they were designed existing aircraft engines were of relatively low power (especially for the British fleet air arm which was low down on the engine "priority list" at the time) so to enable a carrier aircraft to carry aloft heavy loads needed a large wing area. Their biplane wing area was SO great that they could take off fully loaded WITHOUT the use of a carrier's catapult. This meant that in the stormy North Atlantic where the Royal Navy mainly intended to operate them, instead of being forced to take off at the carrier's bows (where the catapults are) and which is the part of a ship that rises and falls by the greatest amount in heavy seas, the Swordfish could take of from the middle of the carrier's decks close to the bridge where the pitching and rolling was the least.
It was for this reason in May 1941 that they were able to take off from HMS Ark Royal to attack Bismarck when Ark Royal was struggling through an Atlantic gale in MOUNTAINOUS seas, with her bows rising and falling by nearly 60ft !!! Try to imagine how terrifying it must have been for the brave young crews flying them in those conditions. Those weather conditions would have prevented all other allied carrier aircraft of the era from flying and instead seen them safely lashed down inside the hangar deck.
They were also incredibly adaptable and throughout WW2 they were adapted to carry, bombs, depth charges, torpedoes, extra fuel tanks and even eight anti ship rockets as well as the world's very first naval airborne radars that we're talking about. They are widely regarded to have ended the war as the aircraft with the GREATEST amount of enemy shipping tonnage sunk, and were HUGELY loved by their crews.
They WERE to have been replaced mid war by a succesor, the Fairey Albacore, but the "stringbag" (as the Swordfish were affectionately known) were so ubiquitous that they outlasted the Albacore in service.
All the best.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ronaldschultenover8137 What the hell has Clive Cussler got to say on the matter? He's been no nearer to the wreck of the Bismarck than I have.
Ignore his shit and have some reality instead.
IF any scuttling actually took place then all that was scuttled was a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her main armour belt broken and penetrated in several places, her command staff physically obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater, a thousand of her crew dead, and further hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All that any scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
In the world of boxing the crew's scuttling efforts are what is known as "throwing in the towel", submission of a boxer AFTER he has been punched senseless by a more skillful & powerful opponent, and only a deluded child would say, "the victor didn't win because his opponent killed himself before he lost.", when the truth is the loser had his arse ripped off by the victor and handed back to him on a plate. Bismarck was tag-teamed and spit roasted to death by two superior British battleships.
Imagine the ignominy of being forced to commit suicide by your opponent?
1
-
1
-
1
-
If some mad brute passing by you in the street, without warning, punches you in the face then rapes you, do you then get angry and abusive towards the ONLY "good samaritan" who rushed from across the street to your aid, but never made it in time to stop the initial assault?
Britain and France assured Poland that if the Wehrmacht crossed the Polish frontier, that they would declare war on nazi Germany, which as good as their word, they did.
Instead the UK and France could have done what the ENTIRE rest of the world did and just "walked on by", simply ignoring the nazi / communist dismemberment of Poland in Sept 1939.
What do you imagine would have happened to Poland then? Would she somehow rise up on her own and miraculously overthrow her nazi & soviet conquerors alone? Who knows what would happen in 300 years time, but rest assured in OUR lifetimes Poland would STILL to this day have a swastika flying over Warsaw, and the chimneys of nazi death camps would STILL to this day be belching out human ashes into Polish skies.
Adolf Hitler explicitly wanted more than anything else for the UK to join his "crusade", and support his "vision" for a nazi dominated Europe while we controlled the world's seas and kept our Empire.... what an unbeatable alliance that would have been !!!
But Instead of looking out for our own selfish interests, the largely unprepared UK and France declared war on Hitler's Germany for Poland & Europe's sake, NOT OUR OWN, What benefit did the UK receive from declaring war on Germany? That selfless act alone set in train the events that eventually led to the fall of nazism 5½ years later.... only then for the communists and Americans to betray Poland and NOT allow democracy to flourish there postwar (but keep in mind that Poland had NOT been a democracy before WW2 anyway).
After the fall of France in June 1940 the UK, against the expectations of the ENTIRE world, then fought on ALONE in Europe from June 1940 to June 1941 & continued the opposition to nazism when absolutely NO-ONE else in the world was interested.
Who ELSE do you imagine was going to save Poland?
The USSR? They'd eagerly joined the nazis in raping Poland, and then happily executed 22,000 of their countrymen in one fell swoop, followed by countless others.
The USA? Their chosen neutrality meant they were NEVER going to get drawn into a European war (it was only nazi Germany's declaration of war on the US in Dec 1941 that dragged their backsliding arses into the conflict), in fact US businesses were only TOO happy to do business with BOTH sides, and happily supplied Britain AND Germany with raw materials, fuel and war equipment while the nazis raped Poland and THROUGHOUT the rest of WW2.
Poland's eastern European neighbours? They all pretended not to notice Poland being raped and murdered in front of their very eyes and instead all of them quickly signed up with the nazis.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire ALONE to nazism from June 1940 onwards, opposition which bankrupted the UK and cost her 460,000 of her citizen's lives, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps would STILL be operating on Polish soil today.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I remember back in the late 1990s going on a full guided tour of U-534 (pre-vandalisation) when it was still in one piece next to the "Spillers" flour mills. The whole trip was a fascinating experience (Not many people can say nowadays that they have stood on the bridge of a type IX U-boat... well "health and safety" hadn't yet reached the ridiculous lengths it has nowadays) and I still drink out of the U-534 mug that I bought from the gift "portacabin".
One thing that sticks in my mind in particular was that when we inside the boat making our way through each of the internal compartments, was that although the vast majority of the internals of the sub were either rusted or rust stained, in each compartment there was a clearly defined area near the compartment roof above which the original paint finish could be clearly seen, I realised it was where trapped air had prevented the seawater from corroding the paint & steel. The sudden realisation of its significance was chilling as I thought of the hundreds of thousands of men who had been trapped onboard sinking vessels during the war, who must have fought for their last, dying breaths with their faces pressed into such air pockets, before they finally succumbed to hypothermia, or more likely asphyxia.... such was the grim reality of war away from the recruiting posters and blaring fanfares.
But on a more pleasant note, its absolutely fantastic to hear that there are still people who care enough to preserve what remains of her for future generations, I remember signing a local petition to stop U-534 being cut up, but as you can see it had the effect that most petitions have, I.E none. I'm just sorry I no longer live in Liverpool as I would be offering my services in whatever capacity was needed to take part in such a worthy undertaking. I sincerely wish them all the best.
P.S For anyone watching the video, the torpedo shown at 25:11 is extremely rare, being one of possibly only three remaining original G7es T11 "Zaunkonig II" acoustic homing torpedoes left in the world.... and wouldn't you know it Wirral borough council are clueless enough to leave it rusting away outdoors, the cretins.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
But it's true that the Polish army WERE completely overwhelmed by the nazi and then Soviet forces... there's NO misrepresentation in that fact. No need to feel any national embarassment about it though... No nation in Europe could have withstood such an assault.
I've NEVER in over 50 years heard ANYONE say that Poland as a naiton collaborated with the nazis during WW2.... Before WW2 maybe to some small extent, but not during it.
Don't repeat the lefty commie nonsense about "Poles being banned from the 1946 victory parade" that is nothing but communist "gaslighting", trying to set Poland againt the UK, the UK being the SOLE reason why Poland still doesn't have a nazi flag flying over Warsaw.
The cause of the non-appearance of Polish forces during the "1946 Victory parade" lay SQUARELY with POLAND. The first invites sent out by the UK Labour Govt of Clement Attlee to ALL the nations who had fought for the Allied cause during WW2 (INCLUDING Poland, USSR & Yugoslavia) were sent out weeks in advance of the parade. The Polish invite in particular was quite understandably delivered to the Polish "Provisional Government of National Unity" ( the "TRJN" or Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) based in Warsaw, which was the OFFICIAL Polish govt as recognised by the international community in the form of the "United Nations", and NOT just by Britain alone, the TRJN was the same govt that it was intended the London based Polish nationalist Govt in exile would become an intrinsic part of, as agreed to by ALL sides at the Yalta conference in Feb 1945.... (although the soviets subsequently saw to it that this never actually happened).
This invite sent to Warsaw immediately raised a storm of protest with the Polish nationalist govt in exile based in London who, with some justification, felt they had been sidelined in this matter, their anger was supported by many British MPs and members of the British public.
With only days left before the parade was due to take place, and with no reply or even acknowledgement of the British invite from the OFFICIAL Polish TRJN govt in Warsaw, the British govt then belatedly sent out a SECOND INVITE to the Polish Govt in Exile in London, (as well as directly to individual senior Polish service personnel), but as one united group they CHOSE to shun the invites to register their anger and disgust at being treated as "second fiddle" to the Warsaw govt.
And the final Ignominy? The Warsaw TRJN govt never answered or even acknowledged the original invite from the UK (as neither did the USSR or Yugoslavia) and never attended the parade either.
As you can see the Polish "non appearance" was solely down to a poisonous bitter mix of political hatred (from Warsaw) and hubris (from the London Poles), and NOTHING to do with this imaginary "Poles weren't invited to the parade" BS. As I've described above the Polish nation was actually the ONLY allied nation to receive TWO invites to the parade.
1
-
@readmylisp With regard to the non-appearance of Polish forces during the "1946 Victory parade" the problem lay SQUARELY with POLAND. The first invites sent out by the UK Labour Govt of Clement Attlee to ALL the nations who had fought for the Allied cause during WW2 (INCLUDING Poland, USSR & Yugoslavia) were sent out weeks in advance of the parade. The Polish invite in particular was quite understandably delivered to the Polish "Provisional Government of National Unity" ( the "TRJN" or Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) based in Warsaw, which was the OFFICIAL Polish govt as recognised by the international community in the form of the "United Nations", and NOT just by Britain alone, the TRJN was the same govt that it was intended the London based Polish nationalist Govt in exile would become an intrinsic part of, as agreed to by ALL sides at the Yalta conference in Feb 1945.... (although the soviets subsequently saw to it that this never actually happened).
This invite sent to Warsaw immediately raised a storm of protest with the Polish nationalist govt in exile based in London who, with some justification, felt they had been sidelined in this matter, their anger was supported by many British MPs and members of the British public.
With only days left before the parade was due to take place, and with no reply or even acknowledgement of the British invite from the OFFICIAL Polish TRJN govt in Warsaw, the British govt then belatedly sent out a SECOND INVITE to the Polish Govt in Exile in London, (as well as directly to individual senior Polish service personnel), but as one united group they CHOSE to shun the invites to register their anger and disgust at being treated as "second fiddle" to the Warsaw govt.
And the final Ignominy? The Warsaw TRJN govt never answered or even acknowledged the original invite from the UK (as neither did the USSR or Yugoslavia) and never attended the parade either.
As you can see the Polish "non appearance" was solely down to a poisonous bitter mix of political hatred (from Warsaw) and hubris (from the London Poles), and NOTHING to do with this imaginary "Poles weren't invited to the parade" BS. As I've described above the Polish nation was actually the ONLY allied nation to receive TWO invites to the parade.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Its NEVER been a "misunderstanding".
Below is the vebatim British ultimatum delivered to Adm Bruno-Marcel Gentoul at Mers-El-Kebir on the 3rd July 1940
"It is impossible for us, your comrades up to now, to allow your fine ships to fall into the power of the German or Italian enemy. We are determined to fight on until the end, and if we win, as we think we shall, we shall never forget that France was our Ally, that our interests are the same as hers, and that our common enemy is Germany. Should we conquer, we solemnly declare that we shall restore the greatness and territory of France. For this purpose, we must make sure that the best ships of the French Navy are not used against us by the common foe. In these circumstances, His Majesty’s Government have instructed me to demand that the French Fleet now at Mers-el-Kébir and Oran shall act in accordance with one of the following alternatives:
(a) Sail with us and continue the fight until victory against the Germans and Italians.
(b) Sail with reduced crews under our control to a British port. The reduced crews would be repatriated at the earliest moment. If either of these courses is adopted by you, we will restore your ships to France at the conclusion of the war or pay full compensation, if they are damaged meanwhile.
(c) Alternatively, if you feel bound to stipulate that your ships should not be used against the Germans or Italians unless these break the Armistice, then sail them with us with reduced crews, to some French port in the West Indies—Martinique for instance—where they can be demilitarised to our satisfaction, or perhaps be entrusted to the United States and remain safe until the end of the war, the crews being repatriated.
If you refuse these fair offers, I must, with profound regret, require you to sink your ships within 6 hours.
Finally, failing the above I have orders of His Majesty's Government to use whatever force may be necessary to prevent your ships from falling into German or Italian hands."
It may be TL:DR for you, but a senior officer of the French Navy had a greater intellect and thought he would be a "smart arse".... to use a current phrase he "fucked about & found out".
1
-
@pauldh62 Who left who in the lurch at Dunkirk?
The numbers evacuated from the Dunkirk pocket were.
205,000 British troops,
110,000 French troops
23,000 Belgian troops.
The BEF suffered 66,426 casualties, comprising of 11,014 killed or died of wounds, 14,074 wounded and 41,338 men missing or taken prisoner
The BEF lost one seventh of its ENTIRE strength killed and captured, because the TEN BEF divisions on the Belgian border were left isolated by the unannounced withdrawal of the French first army on their right flank, and collapse of the Belgian forces on their left.
The Perimeter of the Dunkirk pocket was manned by British, French and Belgian troops, which fought to allow British French and Belgian troops be evacuated MOSTLY by the RN and British "little ships".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@maciejpieczula631 A lot of people in the UK are getting TIRED of the CONSTANT current day bitching and clueless insults from uninformed Poles and devious lefties directed at Britain for perceived historical "betrayal" as was taught to the Polish people for 45 years after WW2 by the communist authorities.
They seem to have utterly NO idea that they OWE their ENTIRE current existence to the British Empire ALONE.
What do they imagine would have happened to Poland if Britain and France did as the ENTIRE rest of the world did in 1939 and completely IGNORED the nazi / soviet dismemberment of Poland in 1939? Or if the isolated British Isles had instead decided to seek an armistice with the nazis after the fall of France in 1940?
Let me tell you what would have happened. Today Poland would not exist. It would simply be a footnote in modern history books, a former nation that would now be divided between nazi Prussia and the "General Government" region of the nazi Empire. The former Polish cities would now be "Germanised" and each would STILL today have swastikas flying above them, and most chillingly of all, the likes of Sobibor, Chelmno, Belzec, Treblinka, Majdanek & Auschwitz would STILL be operating and belching human ashes into formerly Polish skies.
Please give over with the almost CONSTANT insults at the UK, the nation that made a sacrifice of 460,000 of it's citizen's lives, which ENTIRELY bankrupted itself and lost its empire ALL in the selfless effort to prevent a nazi domination of Europe, and saved your asses from extinction.
Best wishes to all intelligent, decent Poles from the UK. To all the idiot Polish commenters please leave your messages of thanks & gratitude to your saviours below.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tom80 No, any plan where one of the key players doesn't act as he has been ordered, is simply cast into the lap of the gods. Imagine if in 1940, that if instead of following the "Manstein plan" and striking for the channel coast as he had been ordered, Guderian had, without informing his superiors, instead followed the Schlieffen plan and instead struck towards Paris. The course of 20th century European history would have taken a most different turn.
P.S As for "Yanks saving Britain" save your BS for people who don't know the history. The US, being neutral, did absolutely FUCK ALL to save Great Britain. Britain simply bought supplies from the US who happily stripped Britain of its remaining wealth, territories and cutting edge scientific research.
For example, If it wasn't for the British "tube alloys" nuclear research project (the world's FIRST nuclear weapons research program), then the US "Manhattan project" would have taken a further 10 years to complete and many many hundreds of thousands of rednecks would have died on the beaches of Japan if operation"downfall" had had to be put into effect.
If the US had REALLY wanted to "help Britain", then instead of bleeding the British empire dry and causing its collapse, they could have for example sold a production license for Tetra Ethyl Lead (The compound required for the production of hi-octane fuels) to Britain when we applied to purchase one prewar. ... instead they refused to sell one to "their British cousins"... A "special relationship" indeed. Where there nazi sympathies in the Standard Oil boardroom? The truth is so unsavoury were the business practices of the US "Standard Oil" company (such as seeking furtive routes and brokering shady deals to supply nazi Germany with fuel and oil via neutral nations during the war) that it's activities were investigated and closely monitored by the US Govt... but only AFTER the they had been DRAGGED into WW2 in Dec 1941 by the German delcaration of war on the US!!!
The "Standard Oil of Jersey City" company had NO qualms though about providing the exact same licence to the nazis prewar. But when it came to Britain the US preferred to strip the British of ALL their gold, cutting edge technology and military bases around the world during the British "hour of need" in return for a supply of amongst other things, US produced hi-octane fuel.
The US "business community" engaged in VERY profitable business dealings with BOTH sides throughout WW2. US corporations such as Ford, General Motors, US Standard Oil, IBM, Kodak, Chase Bank (to name but a few) carried on "business as usual" with nazi Germany THROUGHOUT WW2.
Ford's auto production facility in Cologne and General Motor's Opel subsiduary plant in Berlin were both busy working 24/7 THROUGHOUT WW2 furnishing the nazis with approximately 60% of the Wehrmacht's military transportation needs, as well as a sizeable chunk of the Luftwaffe's aero engine requirements... all the better for attacking Britain with eh?
The "ALuminum COrporation of America" (ALCOA) for instance supplied SO much aircraft grade aluminium to nazi Germany in the late 1930s and into the early 1940s that it actually caused shortfalls within the US government's own military aircraft production schedules, so much so that in June 1941 the situation prompted Harold Ickes, US Secretary of the Interior, to go on record as saying “If America loses this coming war, it can thank the Aluminum Corporation of America”.
With "friends" like the US "business community" who needs enemies?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@stevecam724 Lets look at some survivor testimonies (people who actually witnessed the events of Bismarck's sinking first hand), and not some poorly researched, modern day revisionist TV nonsense made for the "hard of thinking" shall we?
From "Battleship Bismarck: A survivor's story" Written by Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's senior ranking survivor.
Page 211 "Our list to port had increased a bit while firing was going on" followed by "Around 9:30am gas and smoke began to drift through our station" This means that prior to 9:30am Bismarck was already flooding, not something that happens to a healthy seaworthy ship, in other words she was already starting to sink.
Then from an interview conducted for the highly regarded weekly history journal "Purnell's history of the second world war" in the late 1960's with Gerhard Junack (who was Bismarck's only surviving engineering officer and the survivor who supposedly enacted the "scuttle order"). He stated that...
"Somewhere about 1015 hours, I received an order over the telephone from the Chief Engineer (Korvettenkapitän (Ing.) Walter Lehmann) to 'Prepare the ship for sinking.' That was the last order I received on the Bismarck. Soon after that, all transmission of orders collapsed."
Heading back to the account of Mullenheim-Rechberg, on Page 212 he states that (before 10:00am) "I was using all the telephone circuits and calling all over the place in an effort to find out as much as possible about the condition of the ship. I got only one answer. I reached the messenger in the damage control centre and asked "who has and where is the command of the ship? Are there new orders in effect?".... The man said he was in a great hurry. He told me that everyone had abandoned the damage control centre, adding that he was the last one in the room and had to get out... then he hung up".
This vain search for contact & information over the Bismarck's internal comms happened BEFORE 10:00am which throws some mild doubt on Junack's testimony where he says he was contacted by the chief engineer who supposedly gave him the "scuttle order" over the phone at 10:15am... Hmmmmm.
If taken at face value these survivor testimonies show that there was at least a 45 minute gap between Bismarck starting to sink and the first mention of a "scuttle order" being given. Even if Bismarck's crew had done nothing, Bismarck was going to sink, and if the beaten crew want to help the RN, then all the better... But face it, Bismarck's crew weren't going to scuttle a perfectly seaworthy ship in the middle of the storm tossed North Atlantic of their own free will, it was only for the fact that the RN had already dismantled Bismarck and initiated the sinking process. In other words in every sense the sinking of Bismarck was the result of actions dictated by the Royal Navy.
Anything else is just hurt German pride, bolstered by modern day delusional wehraboos. Germany was well known for trying to hide its national humiliations, such as when they scuttled their "grand fleet" at the end of WW1, like illogically saying "We lost.. but you didn't win", or a pathetic "You didn't beat us because we killed ourselves first" sort of idiocy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@pflubber With regard to the non-appearance of Polish forces during the London "1946 Victory parade" the problem lay SQUARELY with POLAND. The first invites sent out by the UK Labour Govt of Clement Attlee to ALL the nations who had fought for the Allied cause during WW2 (INCLUDING Poland, USSR & Yugoslavia) were sent out weeks in advance of the parade. The Polish invite in particular was quite understandably delivered by the British ambassador to Poland (Victor Cavendish-Bentinck) to the Polish "Provisional Government of National Unity" ( the "TRJN" or Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) based in Warsaw, which was the OFFICIAL Polish govt as recognised by the international community in the form of the "United Nations", and NOT just by Britain alone. The TRJN was the same govt that it was intended the London based Polish nationalist Govt in exile would become an intrinsic part of, as agreed to by ALL sides at the Yalta conference in Feb 1945.... (although the soviets subsequently saw to it that this never actually happened).
This invite sent directly to Warsaw immediately raised a storm of protest from the Polish nationalist govt in exile based in London who, with some justification, felt they had been sidelined in the matter, their anger was supported by many British MPs, senior ranks within the UK armed forces & members of the British public.
With only days left before the parade was due to take place, and with no reply or even acknowledgement of the British invite from the OFFICIAL Polish TRJN govt in Warsaw, the British govt then hurriedly & belatedly sent out a SECOND INVITE to the Polish Govt in Exile in London, (as well as directly to many individual Polish service personnel), but as one united group they CHOSE to ignore the British invite to register their anger and disgust at being treated as "second fiddle" to the Warsaw govt.
And the final Ignominy? The Warsaw TRJN govt never did answer or even acknowledge the original invite from the UK (as neither did the USSR or Yugoslavia) and never attended the parade either.
As you can see the Polish "non appearance" was solely down to a poisonous bitter mix of POLISH political hatred (from Warsaw) and hubris (from the London Poles), and NOTHING to do with this imaginary "Poles weren't invited to the parade" nonsense. As I've described above the Polish nation was actually the ONLY allied nation to receive TWO invites to the parade.
I'm just someone who knows more about the subject being irritated by yet another clueless lefty bot who knows f*ck all about the history talking complete b0llocks, and then pompously thinking their comments are well informed.
Now go live in the socilaist paradise of North Korea and stop boring us with your lefty propaganda.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Also read about the fate of the RN destroyer HMS Glowworm, that alone, and on its way to a rendezvous with other RN ships singlehandedly charged after German destroyers it had spotted in the Norwegian sea in April 1940. They turned tail and lured Glowworm in poor visibility towards an unseen German heavy cruiser, the "Admiral Hipper".
When the situation became apparent to Glowworm's captain, Lt Commander Gerard Roope, he immediately zig zagged with all guns blazing towards the larger ship, loosed off his torpedoes, then the crew quickly reloaded and fired a second torpedo salvo, which the German captain skillfully "combed". Lt Commander Roope then without a second's hesitation and inspite of the overwhelming fire of the German cruiser and 2 destroyers at close range as well as his own heavily damaged ship went full steam ahead and managed to ram Admiral Hipper before Glowworm finally succumbed to the German's devastating fire.
After his ship had slid beneath the waves, Lt Comm Roope was then witnessed assisting other members of his drowning crew onto bowlines thrown down from the decks of Admiral Hipper, before he himself drowned.
The German commander Kapitan z See Helmuth Heye was so deeply impressed by Roope's coolness under fire & selfless actions that he privately contacted the international red cross after returning to Germany, and asked them to relay a message to the British admiralty that Lt Commander Roope should be recommended for Britain's highest award for valour, the Victoria Cross, which he duly received posthumously in 1945.
Do such people still exist today? whether they do or they don't, I offer my sincerest respects to the service, sacrifice & memory of the crews we've mentioned.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Be careful Gerardo!!! Your complete ignorance of the matter is showing.
With regard to the non-appearance of Polish forces during the London "1946 Victory parade" the problem lay SQUARELY with POLAND. The first invites sent out by the UK Labour Govt of Clement Attlee to ALL the nations who had fought for the Allied cause during WW2 (INCLUDING Poland, USSR & Yugoslavia) were sent out weeks in advance of the parade. The Polish invite in particular was quite understandably delivered to the Polish "Provisional Government of National Unity" ( the "TRJN" or Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) based in Warsaw, which was the OFFICIAL Polish govt as recognised by the international community in the form of the "United Nations", and NOT just by Britain alone. The TRJN was the same govt that it was intended the London based Polish nationalist Govt in exile would become an intrinsic part of, as agreed to by ALL sides at the Yalta conference in Feb 1945.... (although the soviets subsequently saw to it that this never actually happened).
This invite sent directly to Warsaw immediately raised a storm of protest from the Polish nationalist govt in exile based in London who, with some justification, felt they had been sidelined in the matter, their anger was supported by many British MPs, senior ranks within the UK armed forces & members of the British public.
With only days left before the parade was due to take place, and with no reply or even acknowledgement of the British invite from the OFFICIAL Polish TRJN govt in Warsaw, the British govt then hurriedly & belatedly sent out a SECOND INVITE to the Polish Govt in Exile in London, (as well as directly to many individual Polish service personnel), but as one united group they CHOSE to shun the invites to register their anger and disgust at being treated as "second fiddle" to the Warsaw govt.
And the final Ignominy? The Warsaw TRJN govt never answered or even acknowledged the original invite from the UK (as neither did the USSR or Yugoslavia) and never attended the parade either.
As you can see the Polish "non appearance" was solely down to a poisonous bitter mix of political hatred (from Warsaw) and hubris (from the London Poles), and NOTHING to do with this imaginary "Poles weren't invited to the parade" nonsense. As I've described above the Polish nation was actually the ONLY allied nation to receive TWO invites to the parade.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@glowiak3430 Your ignorqance (and ingratitude) are ASTOUNDING.
Just remember that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need", or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism from June 1940 onwards, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s.
For those Ignorant modern day Poles, on your way out, please remember to kneel at the altar dedicated to the combined 1.1 million lives sacrificed by the UK and France in order to topple the nazism that was murdering and torturing YOUR country when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
Hearing the likes of you in these comments makes some of us here in the UK wonder if we'd have been better off to leave the nazis to murder some more of you, as there was NO way on earth you were EVER going to liberate yourselves. Think of all those British and French lives we could have saved, as well as not bankrupting OUR countries on YOUR behalf.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The other mystery being why you bothered to make such a silly post.
If you'd like an individual example of the esteem with which HMS Hood was held by other nations, look no further than the account of Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, the senior ranking survivor of Bismarck, and her 4th gunnery officer, here's an excerpt of his account of the start of the battle of Denmark Strait.
"The British ships were turning slightly to port, the lead ship showing an extremely long forecastle and two heavy twin turrets. On the telephone I heard Albrecht (Bismarck's chief gunnery officer) shout, "The HOOD...... it's the HOOD!" (his capitalisation), It was an unforgettable moment. There she was, the famous warship, once the largest in the world, that had been the "terror" of so many of our war games."
Later he made these remarks following Hood's demise....
"At first the Hood was nowhere to be seen: in her place was a colossal pillar of black smoke reaching into the sky. Gradually at the foot of the pillar, I made out the bow of the battle cruiser projecting upwards at an angle, a sure sign that she had broken in two. Then I saw something I could hardly believe: A flash of orange coming from her forward guns! Although her fighting days had ended, the Hood was firing a last salvo. I felt a great respect for those men over there"
Sounds as if the Kriegsmarine and her gunnery experts were more impressed by HMS Hood than you appear to be.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Thehiddentruths-rj4fn Oh, here we go again....
The numbers evacuated from the Dunkirk pocket alone were.
203,000 British troops,
112,000 French troops
23,000 Belgian troops.
The BEF suffered 66,426 casualties, that was 11,014 killed or died of wounds, 14,074 wounded and 41,338 men missing or taken prisoner
The BEF lost one seventh of its personnel killed and captured, because the TEN BEF divisions on the Belgian border were left isolated by the unannounced withdrawal of the French first army on their right flank, and collapse of the Belgian forces on their left. Fortunately for the whole of Europe the retreating BEF launched the ONLY serious counter attack of the French campaign at Arras on 21st May, which knocked the overstretched German thrust off balance and helped precipitate the "halt order" 3 days later that allowed the majority of the encircled allied forces to escape.
The Perimeter of the Dunkirk pocket was manned by British, French and Belgian troops, which fought to allow British French and Belgian troops be evacuated MOSTLY by the RN and British "little ships".
Don't try to blame the DREADFUL performance of the >140 divisions of the French home army on the 13 BEF divisions. The BEF was seconded to the PISS POOR French high Command, and it was THEY who lost the battle.
Luckily We Brits fought on and saved your cheese eating, surrendering asses from the 1000 year nazi reich, while the majority of the French population quietly acquiesced and collaborated with nazi rule.
Re-Read my correct details and drop your pathetic French cheese eating surrender monkey nonsense.
1
-
1
-
@supremeownage8995 A simpler way of explaining it would be that the electrical fuse circuit for detonating the bomb would often have more than one switch in series within it. For the bomb to detonate would need all switches within the fuse to be activated. One switch is simply controlled by a delay mechanism, either electrical or mechanical, and the second switch is either a motion activated "trembler" switch , or some other type of switch which could be operated by magnetism, sound or even in a small number of cases a light sensitive switch.
The initial timer device stops the second switch from operating until after the bomb or mine has landed.
Various mechanisms can quite easily achieve the "delay" part of the activation. A simple clockwork mechanism activated as the bomb leaves the aircraft that switches on the 2nd switch only after the bomb has landed is one method, another similar method is to have an electrical circuit that is turned on within the fuse as the bomb leaves the aircraft that trickle charges the fuse so that it only holds sufficient charge to detonate the device after it has landed, and then a secondary switch such as a small sensitive spring loaded "trembler" in the fuse is the trigger waiting to detonate the bomb.
And finally there were in addition to the fuse what are called "anti handling devices" such as the German "ZUS-40" which was a secondary trigger hidden underneath the primary fuse that meant even after the fuse had been deactivated, when it was removed from the bomb casing, the "anti handling device" would then operate and detonate the bomb.
Of course there were incidents when the bomb impacted awkwardly and actually broke apart, that could lead to the fuse being damaged and made inoperable, but it could also simply break the bomb casing and cause the explosive filler to spill from the bomb, but the fuse itself may still have been fully functional, in which case the BD operative would still have to defuse the empty casing because the fuse itself had an integral small explosive device that is used to trigger the bomb, that even without the explosive filling surrounding it was still capable of killing people within a few yards.
And of course there were a very small number of fuses that were simply faulty... but of course all fuses would be considered and treated as fully functional until proven otherwise.
Naval mines, instead of having an initial timed delay switch had what is called a "hydrostatic valve" which was a switch which only operated when the mine was below a certain depth of water and it was then switched on by the water pressure... when the mine was dropped in water deep enough the hydrostatic valve then activated a secondary magnetic or acoustic switch waiting for a ship to pass by near enough to activate the second switch.
In case the mine drifted onto dry land or was exposed at low tide, there was also a normal trembler switch which detonated if anyone tried to move or interfere with the mine. In fact the first German magnetic mine that was defused by the British in 1940 was in part due to the German armourer who forgot to remove a safety pin from the trembler fuse installed into the device as it was loaded into the Luftwaffe bomber.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mixit2413 All UK fire brigades (including the one I served in) have fitted domestic smoke alarms (battery powered obviously) across the whole of Britain for at least the last 20 years, and I have personally fitted more than a couple of thousand over that time.
The safest placement of detectors within a single dwelling is to cover the "means of escape" I.E in a standard domestic property that means the hallway, stairs and landings, with the additional strong advice that room doorways are to be closed last thing at night. The problem with placing a detector in individual rooms is that when a detector activates during the night, the natural reaction of a roused occupant is to open the door to the room where the sound is coming from, with potentially fatal consequences from the release of overpressured heat and smoke from the room overcoming the person, or potentially even a "backdraught".
There is NO "optimum height" down a wall. The optimum height is ceiling level, anything "down a wall" is "sub optimal" to use the content creator's choice of phrase. What I have said in my earlier reply regarding the heat/smoke barrier at ceiling height gradually descending as the fire develops is absolutely correct, to argue that it is acceptable to place detectors on walls in tall rooms to make it easier to test and service them is VERY bad advice, and may lead people to make potentially disastrous choices when they fit a smoke detector. When they are fitted on ceilings in tall rooms it is recommended that they be tested with the use of a broom handle, most detectors nowadays even have large, dished test buttons specifically for that purpose.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
As well as the cost of caring for the aged population, older people are often wiser, and due to their experience can see through the rehashed political BS served up for the consumption of the younger, more credulous generations.
It's been one of the pillars of the transformation of society.... cleaving a chasm between the old and the young, so the experience of the "oldies" is not passed on to the "youngies". What better way to cause division and resentment than to tell the youngies that the oldies "had it easy", "easy" as in 17% interest rates, "national service", mass unemployment, power cuts, even the dead remaining unburied, and of course world war two.
To facilitate the generational war then hang easy to remember generalisations onto each group.... such as "affluent Boomers" & "snowflake millenials".
I wonder what the putrid Gwynne creature's mother and father think about his remarks? They must be ever so proud of the sociopath that they appear to have reared.... I bet they don't let the insufferable lefty turd prepare any of their own food & drinks.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Disgraceful. Just as bad as your previous video regarding the misuse of the British army by George VI in saving his private family belongings at the end of WW2 (I await the nonsense spoken by idiotic royal flunkies).
My own father being a "HO" (hostilities Only) conscript into the Royal Navy for 6 years from the start to the end of WW2, witnessed the sinking of Bismarck, narrowly survived the sinking of his own ship HMS Dorsetshire in the Indian ocean in April 1942, was then miraculously rescued after having clung to wreckage for 36 hours hundreds of miles from land, before finally having his hearing permanently damaged by the "Fritz X" strike on HMS Warspite at Salerno in Sept 1943, (and even then he wasn't "invalided out" but served a further two years largely aboard a submarine tender HMS Adamant in fremantle Western Australia), received the 1939-45 star, Atlantic Star, Italy star, Burma star, War medal and defence medal, as well as a pittance of an enhancement to his state pension for a "war injury" but only after he had paid his national insurance every month for 40 years.
Politicians, they jingoistically cling to the military for their own purposes, then shit all over the survivors who saved their political skins, they ALWAYS have done, and ALWAYS will do.... (though surprisingly after the Dardanelles in WW1 Churchill did honourably serve pennance for his involvement in that fiasco).
I'd rather eat dog excrement that have to shake hands with most politicians, and ESPECIALLY the corporate globalist puppets that have now taken over the Houses of Parliament.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The ship was USCG Modoc, she was a part of the US Neutrality Patrol, and she wasn't "nearly attacked" as the vid suggests. The Swordfish from HMS Victorious, which were carrying the world's first naval air to surface radar, were flying in cloud, the squadron leader's telegraphist alerted him to a contact, and the leader, Eugene Esmond dropped below cloud base to ID the contact. He immediately recognised it as a neutral, but as he "eyeballed" the Modoc, his aircraft was spotted by lookouts on the Bismarck which was a number of miles away, and so lost the element of surprise in the Swordfish's attack on Bismarck.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Many MANY mistakes and misinformation in your post.
Since 1932 the Polish codebreakers Marian Rejewski, Henryk Zygalski & Jerzy Różycki worked within BS4 (the Polish general staff cipher Bureau focussed on German decryption & intelligence), and together with VITAL assistance given by the French intelligence officer Gustave Bertrand (who had cultivated a German informant codenamed "Asché" who had provided French Intelligence with tons of vital data including a full nazi procedural manual for use of the enigma encryption device), had by the purchase of a commercial version of the early enigma device and LOTS of analysis eventually broken into German army and navy 3 rotor encryption networks, this was a fantastic achievement, but it is true to say that they at no time did they crack German Kriegsmarine encryption due to the additional layers of security employed by the German navy.
In December 1938 the nazis introduced a further 2 interchangeable encryption rotors to the enigma system, which immediately brought the vast majority of Polish decryption efforts to a grinding halt, which is where it remained up until the outbreak of WW2. In the weeks prior to the outbreak of WW2 the Polish research work was passed to the French, who in the six months they had it in their possession added little to the accumulated knowledge, and to the UK where the British government seized it with both hands, and made its study top priority. So was instigated the British "ULTRA" project.
Jerzy Różycki elected to stay behind and work in Vichy France where, unknown to the Germans he worked on an a seperate secret encryption system, which bore no tangible fruit before his death in 1942.
Marian Rejewski & Henryk Zygalski were, for security reasons, not included in the UK "ULTRA" project, and so took no further part in British decryption efforts.
The British "ULTRA" project took the non working foundation research of the Polish decrypters and from there massively expanded that research to once again break into nazi 3 rotor enigma, this was followed in 1942 by the cracking of the improved kriegsmarine 4 rotor enigma network (SHARK), as well as simultaneously breaking into the FAR more complex "lorenz" cipher device used by the German army & navy high commands (TUNNY), before finally cracking the "Geheimschreiber" encryption device used by both the Luftwaffe high command as well as the top level of the nazi government (STURGEON), on top of these British achievements another product of the ULTRA program was the building of the world's first programmable electronic computer (COLOSSUS) to speed up the breaking of German codes. This was designed by a British telephone engineer (Tommy Flowers), which transformed British decryption from a process which often only gave results weeks after the message was eavesdropped on by the British, to a state of affairs where the British were reading top level communications at the same time as the intended German recipient.
The early Polish codebreakers did indeed provide the "acorn" from which the British cultivated the "mighty oak" of ULTRA.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@richardodonoghue I too have spent over 60 years not just reading eyewitness accounts, but also discussing firsthand with eye witnesses such as my late father and his shipmates and friends, who, as former crew members onboard various RN ships that took part in the Bismarck chase, were invited on multiple occasions to attend joint RN/Bismarck crew reunions in the 1960's and 70's held outside Hamburg, close to the Friedrichsruh family estate of Otto von Bismarck.
Indeed, up until he donated it to the "Merseyside Maritime Museum" in the UK in 1993, my father had in his possession an "Erkennungsmarke" (or dogtag) from one of the Bismarck survivors he pulled aboard HMS Dorsetshire on the morning of 27th May 1941.
But all of that aside, my assumption of your ignorance is based on your statement that "a shell penetrated the wooden decking", which belies the illustrious citations you provide, and let's be frank about this, instead displays SCHOOLBOY level ignorance.
"Sonny"? Are you SURE you're old enough to use that, lad?
1
-
I too have spent over 60 years not just reading eyewitness accounts, but also discussing firsthand with eye witnesses such as my late father and his shipmates and friends, who, as former crew members onboard various RN ships that took part in the Bismarck chase, were invited on multiple occasions to attend joint RN/Bismarck crew reunions in the 1960's and 70's held outside Hamburg, close to the Friedrichsruh family estate of Otto von Bismarck.
Indeed, up until he donated it to the "Merseyside Maritime Museum" in the UK in 1993, my father had in his possession an "Erkennungsmarke" (or dogtag) from one of the Bismarck survivors he pulled aboard HMS Dorsetshire on the morning of 27th May 1941.
But all of that aside, my assumption of your ignorance is based on your statement that "a shell penetrated the wooden decking", which belies the illustrious citations you provide, and let's be frank about this, instead displays SCHOOLBOY level ignorance.
"Sonny"? Are you SURE you're old enough to use that, lad?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Its what happens when you start attacking your neighbours without warning. If you don't want Dresden to happen to you, don't go around doing it to others first of all.
Guernica, Weilun, Warsaw, Rotterdam, London, Coventry, Liverpool, Plymouth, Southampton, Hull, Glasgow, Swansea, Leningrad, Stalingrad, Moscow..... ALL were plastered with nazi bombs BEFORE any serious bombing of Germany took place.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Gravitatis "(T)echnically speaking the displacement of water only directly signifies the volume of an object and not its weight"..... Oh dear.... It DOESN'T "signify the volume of an object" at ALL, but only that PART of the object that is physically immersed in the fluid.
Following on from Archimedes principle of fluid mechanics, The MASS of the volume of water displaced by a ship floating in it is IDENTICAL to the actual mass of the ship. If it weighed less, then the ship would sink further into the water (magically enough until the increased mass of the water it was now diplacing EQUALLED it's own mass), If it weighted more the ship would ride higher and higher out of the water for the same reason, it's known simply as "bouyancy". That's why the density of the water is also important to know, density being a function of mass and volume. It's why plimsoll lines are painted on ships, these indicate a safe loading level in various areas of the planet due to differences in salinity and hence density of the water.
"but we can(')t expect you (E)nglishmen to be as intelligent"... but we're likely more intelligent than yourself, who while attempting to pedant someone else then displays a fundamental omission in your OWN understanding of the matter, in addition to which you also display poor use of English grammar.
The phrase you're looking for is "hoist on your own petard".
P.S I forgot to mention that I'm from Lancashire in England.... which part of the world do you hail from, which has an "ejukayshun sistim" that doesn't instill a full understanding of basic physical laws in it's students?
1
-
1
-
@CB-fz3li I typed this out a while ago but keep a lot of info ready to "copy and paste" for the LEGIONS of those who choose to believe that "the Brits banned the Poles".
For those who believe Poland was "excluded" from the 1946 London victory parade, here is a brief timeline of what actually happened to give some context to the oft repeated nonsense that "Brits never invited the Poles" or "the Brits banned the Poles".
Since before the end of WW2 in Europe, Britain and the US had been negotiating with the Soviets over the future of eastern Europe and especially Poland in post WW2 Europe. The UK & US wanted a democratic Polish government that would by way of democracy include both the Polish communists of the existing Moscow backed "Lublin committee", and the Polish nationalists from the Polish Govt in exile that had been based in London during most of WW2. This proposed "Polish provisional government of national unity" (Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) was to be setup in Warsaw, and was finally agreed to by all of the "Big 3" (UK / US / USSR) at the Feb 1945 Yalta conference, but from the outset the Soviets then occupying Poland did everything they practically could to bar the inclusion of the "London Poles" within the "unity govt", and to intimidate & marginalise the small number of nationalists that did eventually make it into the provisional govt.
With regard to the 1946 Victory parade when Britain sent out its invites to all of the countries that had fought alongside the Allies during WW2, The British Labour government of Clement Attlee, quite correctly handed the Polish invitation to the newly constituted Warsaw based "Polish provisional government of national unity" which was after all now the official government of Poland, as recognised by the United Nations.
The now effectively powerless & stateless nationalist Polish government in exile in London took great offence at their sidelining in this matter, and raised a torrent of indignation within the UK Parliament that was backed by many British MPs and had widespread support amongst ordinary people. A few days before the parade was due to take place, and with no response having been forthcoming from the Warsaw government, a belated invitation was hurriedly sent both to the Polish Govt in Exile in London as well as directly to various Polish generals who had fought with the allies, ALL of whom felt so disgusted with the perceived public disrespect shown by the INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY (That is, being made to play "second fiddle" to the official Warsaw Polish government on the world stage) that they CHOSE not to attend the parade to register their fury and resentment at not being consulted first.
And the final ignominy? The Soviet backed Warsaw government neither acknowledged the British invite, or attended the parade either.
But of course for the "hard of thinking" its much easier to say "The Brits banned the Poles".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
More complete & utter bollocks about "not allowed in the victory parade", at least you mentioned a PART of the correct story.
The non-appearance of Polish forces during the "1946 Victory parade" was a result of POLISH political hatred and hubris. Please read on.
There is an ongoing belief that Britain somehow "cared what Stalin thought", That is complete nonsense. The first invites sent out by the UK Labour Govt of Clement Attlee to ALL the nations who had fought for the Allied cause during WW2 (including POLAND, Yugoslavia AND the USSR) were sent out weeks in advance of the parade. The Polish invite in particular was quite understandably delivered to the Polish "Provisional Government of National Unity" ( the "TRJN" or Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) based in Warsaw, which was the OFFICIAL Polish govt as recognised by the international community in the form of the "United Nations", and NOT just by Britain alone, the TRJN was the same govt that it was intended the London based Polish nationalist Govt in exile would become an intrinsic part of, as agreed to by ALL sides at the Yalta conference in Feb 1945.... (although the soviets subsequently saw to it that this never actually happened).
This invite sent to Warsaw immediately raised a storm of protest with the Polish nationalist govt in exile based in London who, with some justification, felt they had been sidelined in this matter, their anger was supported by many British MPs and members of the British public.
With only days left before the parade was due to take place, and with no reply or even acknowledgement of the British invite from the OFFICIAL Polish TRJN govt in Warsaw, the British govt then belatedly sent out a SECOND INVITE to the Polish Govt in Exile in London, (as well as directly to individual senior Polish service personnel), but as one united group they CHOSE to shun the invites to register their anger and disgust at being treated as "second fiddle" to the Warsaw govt.
And the final Ignominy? The Warsaw TRJN govt never answered or even acknowledged the original invite from the UK (as neither did the USSR or Yugoslavia) and never attended the parade either.
As you can see the Polish "non appearance" was solely down to a poisonous bitter mix of political hatred (from Warsaw) and hubris (from the London Poles), and NOTHING to do with this imaginary "Poles weren't invited to the parade" BS. As I've described above the Polish nation was actually the ONLY allied nation to receive TWO invites to the parade.
1
-
1
-
My father was a stoker onboard HMS Dorsetshire during this period. On Sunday 5th April 1942, he was off-watch from his normal station in the boiler rooms and called to his "action station" at about 12pm, at this time he was a leader of a damage control party up near the Dorsetshire's bows adjacent to the ships "paint locker". The ship's company were aware that a Japanese reconaissance aircraft (from the Japanese heavy cruiser "Tone") had passed astern of them earlier in the morning and had disappeared in the hazy sky. They hoped that it had not spotted them as they made their way SSW to rendezvous with the rest of the British Eastern Fleet. At around 12:30pm the approaching Japanese aircraft were spotted. Very shortly after the commencement of the Japanese air attack, all comms in the ship were lost, though it was all too apparent that Dorsetshire was receiving a heavy pounding, with the ship heeling over and quaking from the impact of the Japanese bombs.
During the chaos and din in the compartment where dad and his damage control team were stationed, one concussion dislodged a length of heavy suction hose, known as an "elephant's foot", which hit dad on the head, knocking him senseless for several seconds. On regaining his wits in the now blacked out darkness of the compartment, he sensed that the ship was starting to list heavily, and ordered the party to get on the upper deck via a ladder leading to the "bosun's hatch" in the compartment roof. The first man up the ladder shouted that he couldn't unlatch the hatch "dogs". Dad climbed up and used a crowbar to release the latches and the party crawled out into the burning sunlight on the rapidly inclining foredeck. One of the damage control party members, a South African named David van Zyl, confided to dad that he couldn't swim and despite desperate pleas from dad for him to jump overboard, he tragically went down with the ship, the rest of the party all survived.
After swimming away from the sinking ship, dad together with nearly 1000 other men from the two ships (which had both been sink within 10 minutes of the start of the attack) found themselves floating in the ocean, hundreds of miles from the nearest land. A few of the Japanese aircraft machine gunned the survivors in the water before departing, and dad said he never forgot the face of one of the Japanese pilots with a large black moustache as he swept overhead before he flew off. Only one boat from the two ships had survived the attack, and it was used to keep the most severely injured sailors safe out of the water. The survivors floated right through the cold of the first night, and then through the burning heat of the second day, most of them were suffering badly from sunburn and being encrusted with salt from the sea water, though to lessen the effects many of them smothered themselves in oil that had started to float up from the 2 sunken ships, which gave some respite.
As night approached on the second day, dad said that the general feeling was that they were all going to die from thirst and exposure, but incredibly the men in the one boat had an oar with a biscuit tin lid tied to the top of it and had taken it in turns to keep the upright oar revolving in the boat, and shortly before sunset a swordfish aircraft from Ceylon spotted a reflection of the sun's rays from the biscuit tin lid, and radioed a report of the survivors back to land. Admiral Somerville, the commander of "Force A" had already sent ships to search for the survivors and these ships (HMS Enterprise, Paladin & Panther) which were about to give up the search were instructed by radio to the location and the 1000 survivors were saved.
He always said that if the Japanese had been able to shadow the Cornwall and Dorsetshire for another couple of hours, they would have wiped out a large part of the RN Eastern fleet as they rendezvoused with his two ships.
After being landed in Durban in East Africa dad went on to serve on the battleships HMS Warspite & Valiant (During the Salerno landings) and also HMS Malaya, and ended the war in Perth (Fremantle), Australia onboard the submarine tender, HMS Adamant.
After his return from Australia to the UK onboard the ship "S.S Maidstone Castle" and his subsequent demobilisation in 1946, dad was a tram then a bus driver in Liverpool until his retirement in 1984, and he passed away in 2013, aged 93.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
First German bombs dropped on the British mainland?
16th October 1939 saw the very first bombs dropped on Britain when the Germans launched scattered air attacks over port and industrial facilities around the Scottish city of Edinburgh.
First bombs dropped by the RAF on German soil?
19th March 1940... When on 13th November 1939 the luftwaffe bombed RAF Sullom Voe a seaplane base with port facilities in the Shetland Isles (with the resultant death of a rabbit, and no hits on the 9 seaplanes or 2 RN vessels stationed there), the RAF retaliated by hitting the nazi seaplane base at Hörnum on the island of Sylt in the North Sea. These were THE VERY FIRST RAF bombs to land on German soil....5 months AFTER the first German bombs had landed on British soil.
The first British or German civilian casualty caused by the bombing of the opposing side during WW2?
16th March 1940 when German bombs hit the village of Waithe on Orkney during an attack on the Home Fleet anchorage at Scapa Flow, which killed a 27 year-old County Council employee, James Isbister (luckily, his wife, baby son, and the neighbour James was endeavouring to rescue from her bombed cottage all survived).
First British bombs to drop on the actual German mainland?
11th May 1940, when the British air ministry for the first time allowed the bombing of railway yards, communication centres and bridges west of the Rhine River as interdiction of German supply lines for the German assault into the NEUTRAL Low countries and France on 10th May 1940. Previous to this date the British air ministry in an effort to stop the spreading of the conflict had refused to allow the RAF to drop ANY bombs on the German mainland, instead the RAF supplied the German demand for toilet paper by dropping propaganda leaflets on German cities. This attack on 11th May 1940 had also come after REPEATED attacks against RN installations on the British mainland, most notably at Rosyth near Edinburgh, and the Cromarty Firth, both in Scotland throughout the winter of 1939/40.
First British bombs dropped EAST of the Rhine River?
23/24th August 1940. This attack ostensibly directed at the Klingenberg Power Station in Eastern Berlin & Templehof airport was in RETALIATION for REPEATED luftwaffe raids on RAF stations within the suburbs of Greater London throughout July and August 1940 that had already caused HUNDREDS of innocent British civilian deaths & casualties (euphemistically known nowadays as "collateral damage") this was inspite of Hitler's previous decrees that no bombs should be dropped within the boundaries of Greater London. Obviously that decree had never reached the ears of Herman Goering.
German retaliation for the one night of bombing of Berlin on 23/24th August 1940? The launching of the all out assault against British cities from 7th sept 1940 onwards, culminating in the world's first attempt to create a firestorm during operation "moonlight sonata" on the British city of Coventry on the night of 14/15th Nov 1940, where the luftwaffe sent 575 bombers using their world beating "X-gerat" bombing system (in the Germans own words capable of placing "target indicator" flares with an accuracy of 50 meters at 200 miles range) over the civilian city centre of Coventry dropping 550 tons of high explosive (including hundreds of "flammen" (oil) bombs) followed by over 30,000 incendiary bombs. The final death toll of that single raid? A previously unheard of 568 innocent civilians, this was in addition to the thousands of other British civilians already killed in other cities across Britain over the previous 2 months.
The first British bombing raid directly targetted at German civilians? "Operation Abigail" on the night of 16/17th December 1940, (3 months AFTER the opening of the nazi "blitz" on British cities) the Dec 16th attack by the RAF was launched against the German city of Mannheim where 100 RAF bombers dropped 100 tons of HE and 14,000 incendiaries inflicting a death toll on the German population of 34 dead and 81 injured.
Not to worry though , the RAF eventually "upped its game" and showed the Germans how to do it properly a year or two later.
Don't try to hide the fact that the Germans enjoyed dropping HE on the cities of its neighbours from the earliest days of flight. The first aerial bombs dropped in history were from a zeppelin raid on Bruges in Belgium in August 1914... just 11 years after the invention of powered flight. Since WW2, they've learned the lesson NOT to do it again.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
While Chester Nimitz did advise allied prosecutors that the USN did often resort to harsh measures in the Pacific, but only after multiple incidents of Japanese sailors being rescued and then detonating grenades onboard US subs, or attempting to kill US sub crew.
Here are the only two documented instances of the SAME British RN sub commander being reprimanded for killing sinking survivors
HMSub Torbay (Lt Comm Anthony Miers) 4th July 1941 , unnamed Cretan schooner (~50 tons) 36'01N,23'06E
HMSub Torbay (Lt Comm Anthony Miers) 4th July 1941 , unnamed Cretan schooner (~50 tons) 35.43N,23.12E
His actions on the 4th & 9th July 1941 at resulted in Torbay's commander (Lt Com Anthony Miers) being severely reprimanded and ordered to cease such actions by Adm Max Horton.
The are a larger (but still a relatively small number) of incidents of German U-boats gunning survivors,
U-37 (KL Victor Oehrn) 23 August 1940, British ship "Severn Leigh" (5242grt) 54'31'N,25'41W
U-552 (KL Erich Topp) 3 March 1942, US ship "David H. Atwater"(2428grt) 37'57N, 75'10W
U-126 (KL Ernst Bauer) 8 March 1942 Panamanian Tanker "Esso Bolivar" (10389grt) 19'38N,74'38W
U-172 (KL Carl Emmermann) 24 June 1942 Colombian Sailing Vessel "Resolute"(35grt)13'15N,80'30W
U-754(KL Johanns Oestermann) 28 July 1942 US Fishing Vessel "Ebb"(259grt) 43'18N,63'50W
U-852(KL Heinz-Wilhelm Eck) 13 March 1944 Hellenic Steamship "Peleus"(4695grt) 02'00S,10'00W
U-532(FK Ottoheinrich Junker) 27 March 1944 British Ship "Tulagi"(228grt) 11'00S,78'40E
the most egregious of which (known as the "Peleus incident" and committed by the U-852 (KptLt Eck) resulted in the post war execution of Eck and two of his crew members for the massacre of 33 survivors.
The war in the pacific was FAR harsher on survivors of sinkings with both US & Japanese captains far more likely to kill defenceless survivors.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@joewoodchuck3824 If the mine had been dropped in open countryside (jettisoned by a damaged aircraft etc) then yes it could be safely detonated leaving a large crater that would either later become a nice "duck pond", or filled in if it was on productive farmland.
Bombs were disarmed by the British Army's Royal Engineers, but mines were the responsibility of the Royal Navy to disarm. The RN had a department called RMS... "Rendering Mines Safe". In the early days the unfortunate naval officer would be "making it up as he went along", the first task faced was to determine what sort of activation device was fitted to the bomb / mine.
Movement? (Don't attempt to move the bomb..... some later "trembler" switches were so sensitive that even the slightest bump of the bomb would set it off)
Clockwork? (Better work fast or stop the clock from working. The clocks in clockwork fuses could be set to run anywhere from a few minutes upto 3 days!!!)
Magnetic? (Keep all steel or nickel items well away from the device)
Acoustic? (Keep noise to a minimum)
Some mines even had photosensitive fuses that would be set off by bright light.
As they studied the device they would be logging any markings on the various fuses (very often two, three or even four different activation devices would be fitted to the same mine or bomb) for future reference, and so by a process of "trial and error" and the deaths of many brave young men, eventually more and more knowledge of the internal workings of each fuse type was discovered by govt scientists from the initially small number of successfully disarmed fuses. The scientists then very quickly developed devices and techniques that could be used in future to aid the disposal experts.
The naval mines had a device that armed a fuse when water pressure (from being dropped in the sea) activated a switch.... this switch connected the mine's battery to the detonator, the only thing that now stopped the mine from detonating was a sensitive magnetic switch which would be operated by the influence of any iron or nickel that moved near it. If that happened the circuit was completed by this magnet influence switch and the mine was detonated.
A completely seperate second fuse was fitted that only worked out of water. If the mine was accidentally dropped on land and liable to be tampered with by the British then this second fuse would be set off by the slightest movement. Unfortunately for the Germans one of their mines was spotted at low tide off the coast at Shoeburyness in Essex, and two VERY brave sailors were tasked to go and disarm it. They managed to successfully do this only because the second fuse that was meant to stop the mine being moved had not been switched on by the German armourer who had earlier installed it in the bomber. This single mistake by the German armourer allowed the British to discover all the secrets of this deadly mine. If he had remembered to switch that fuse on before the aircraft took off, then further hundreds of thousands of tons of British shipping and thousands of further lives would have been lost.
After the British discovered the workings of the magnetic mine they quickly developed equipment and techniques to counteract them, saving THOUSANDS of lives.
The see saw of the technological battles between the fuse designers and the scientists of the side having to deal with the fuses is fascinating. Early German fuses could be "short circuited" to drain the internal batteries that sparked the detonation. The German scientists then discovered that the British were short circuiting the batteries and so rewired future fuses so that attempting to short circuit the batteries also detonated the device. This resulted in more Bomb disposal officers being killed so the British then discovered a way of drilling a small hole into the new type of fuse and injecting a special fluid that safely killed the fuse battery.
Clockwork fuses were stopped by placing very large electromagnets onto them to stop the clockwork mechanism from functioning, which then allowed the fuses to be safely removed..... until the Germans started fitting a second device UNDERNEATH the clockwork fuses that when the clockwork fuse was "pulled out" the second device set off the bomb, this was called the "ZUS-40 anti handling device" which again killed a large number of bomb disposal personnel. The British were then confronted with the problem of how do you stop a bomb exploding when you can't remove the fuse? Hmmm.... How about we drill through the steel of the side of the bomb, pump in steam to melt the main explosive contents and then remove the resultant goo out of the bomb casing? Which is what they did. The device was called a "Steam Steriliser" and was used on large bombs where there was enough space inside the bomb to have a ZUS-40 fitted beneath the main fuse.
The Germans also utilised another anti handling fuse type that was so sensitive that the merest tap could set it off. How could you disarm THAT fuse? The British quickly worked out that by using liquified gas at below -200°c to freeze the bomb fuse caused the internal batteries to lose their charge and therefore disable the fuse.
I think I've probably typed more than I should already... Hope its of some interest to you. If you're interested then seek out an old UK TV series called "Danger UXB"... it's WELL worth a watch.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MrPaulBellingham I certainly did take an "oath of allegiance" to the then "Queen, her heirs and successors". But that in NO way allows the monarch to bypass the UK parliament and issue orders to the armed forces... OR his/her government. Those powers which existed centuries ago have through struggle (English civil wars) and by mutual "horse trading" & agreement been whittled down to a small number of remaining powers (known as "Royal Prerogative") NONE of which entitle the monarch to issue edicts or commands that override the rule of government.
I am a realist who knows that royal wishes are always "heard", but that does NOT make it "right".
Look at the story this conversation relates to. One of Britain's then richest men uses the British army which is paid for by you, me and every other hard pressed tax payer in the UK going back to Saxon times to help out his GERMAN relatives in a PRIVATE matter that in NO WAY benefitted the UK taxpayer. (The Royal Family itself has never paid ANY taxes prior to 1992, and have since then been allowed to chose what taxes they will and will not pay... they CHOOSE NOT to pay most taxes that they would otherwise incur, that change was done in the hope of keeping the masses from asking any further questions about their finances).
The King, understandably wanted to help his German cousins (whose nation had for the previous 6 years had been trying to kill as many UK taxpayers as they could, and those German cousins had been only too happy to be a part of their national regime that wanted to destroy the UK).
Why did he keep this act so secret if he wasn't ashamed of it?
Why did he not pay the "Inland revenue" a million pounds to thank the taxpayers of Britain who had saved his relative's private foreign wealth?
The whole story STINKS and the principle that it betrays, that is the accountability of the royals and the powerful to the government of the land, together with the acquiescence of the disinterested public will in the long run lead our future descendents back to feudal subsistance farming.
Don't be so forgiving of the richest in society taking you & I for fools... rest assured they wouldn't give you the steam off their sh!t, even if you and your entire family's life depended on it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Crusader1815
Your evidence that there was no periscope? To set against the sighting by the lookout on Dorsetshire?
I refer you to the account of Baron Burkhard von Müllenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's senior ranking survivor who in his book "Battleship Bismarck - a survivor's story" wrote this passage about an discussion he held with Capt Martin of the Dorsetshire after being rescued.
"Why," I burst out, "did you suddenly break off the rescue and leave hundreds of our men to drown?"
Martin replied that a U-boat had been sighted, or at least reported, and he obviously could not endanger his ship by staying stopped any longer.
The Bismarck's experiences on the night of 26 May and the morning of the 27th, I told him, indicated that there were no U-boats in the vicinity.
Farther away, perhaps, but certainly not within firing range of the Dorsetshire. I added that in war one often sees what one expects to see.
We argued the point back and forth until Martin said abruptly: "Just leave that to me. I'm older than you are and have been at sea longer. I'm a better judge."
What more could I say? He was the captain and was responsible for his ship.
"Apparently some floating object had been mistaken for a periscope or a strip of foam on the water for the wake of a torpedo.
No matter what it was, I AM NOW CONVINCED THAT, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, CAPT MARTIN HAD TO ACT AS HE DID". (My caps)
What is known with certainty is that Bismarck had for the previous 24 hours been transmitting beacon signals on known u-boat radio wavelengths and the scene of the final action was 350 miles (a relative naval stone's throw) away from the Kriegsmarine's Atlantic u-boat bases on the French coast.
Was Captain BCS Martin of Dorsetshire expected to gamble the lives of his 750 man crew that it was indeed a dolphin's fin or a broaching whale? Or that if it WAS a u-boat the sub's capt would hold fire while he carried out the rescues?
As an RN naval captain he would have been SORELY aware of the actions of Otto Weddigen during WW1 during his attack on the British Cruisers Aboukir, Cressy & Hogue. I suggest you look up the details of that incident.
Also google about U-74 (KptLt Eitel-friedrich Kentrat) and U-556 (KptLt Herbert Wohlfarth) who WERE in the vicinity of the sinkings, having spotted various British warships and heard the final battle. Indeed although U-556 had to depart for France due to lack of fuel and battle damage, U-74 surfaced after the departure of the RN rescue ships and searched for survivors himself eventually rescuing a further 3 sailors.
The RN was so filled with hatred that the day following the sinking, one of the survivors who had been picked up, a badly injured German sailor named Gerhard Lüttich, died on the operating table in Dorsetshire's sick bay. His body was then "committed to the deep" with full military honours provided by both his German comrades AND sailors from HMS Dorsetshire. The remaining crew were treated EXCELLENTLY by the crews of HMS Dorsetshire & HMS Maori, being given the same bunking arrangements as the crew (under guard of course), and provided with 3 hot meals a day for the 4 days they were on board. They were also given Grog (rum and water) which was usually issued normally to the RN sailors, the survivors were also provided with sweets, chocolate and cigarettes by the RN crews, and this was just 3 days after the sinking of HMS Hood... so much for any imagined "deep hatred" by the RN.
How do I know this? because my father was a crewman onboard Dorsetshire at the time. He later survived Dorsetshire's own sinking and along with the rest of the "HMS Dorsetshire association" members post war, was invited to various reunions with the Bismarck survivors through the 1960s and 70s. THAT was the level of respect and comradeship that was experienced between the crews of both sides... far removed from your own seemingly devious nonsense.
For some further reading material on the matter, google "nineteenkeys dorsetshire" and look for a blog, written by a German researcher between 2008 until about 2012. If you read the entire blog, you will see that he starts with a viewpoint that concurs with your own, and then through further research and discussions with Capt Benjamin Martin's family members, that he changes his opinion 100% and indeed ends up paying respects to Capt Martin.
If you're so heartbroken about the abandonment of sailors to their fate by the enemy, then I'll warn you NOT to read about the actions of Adm Wilhelm Marschall who on the afternoon of 8th June 1940, after his ships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau had sunk the British aircraft carrier HMS Glorious and her two gallant escorts HMS Acasta & Ardent then made not even the most rudimentary effort to provide humanitarian assistance, and instead sailed away leaving over 1500 RN sailors to die in the North sea, inspite of their being NO other vessels in the vicinity. Or is it only German sailors abandoned by the RN who you get "teared up" about?
One day you'll grow up, little one, and be embarrassed that you were ever enthralled by the lure of nazism.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The ignorance of SOME modern day Poles (and lefty agitators) as witnessed in so many of the comments in this thread is quite shameless. Their ignorance of the fact that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need", or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism from June 1940 onwards, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s.
For those Ignorant modern day Poles, on your way out, please remember to kneel at the altar dedicated to the combined 1.1 million lives sacrificed by the UK and France in order to topple the nazism that was murdering and torturing YOUR country when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@patriciabrenner9216 Or Liverpool, Plymouth, Hull, Glasgow, Bristol, Southampton, Sunderland, Newcastle, Swansea, Leningrad, Stalingrad, Moscow.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@yingyang1008 P.S at the time that the nazis were incinerating British civilians in 1940, the USSR was happily supplying the nazis with millions of tons of oil, raw materials, and foodstuffs to enable them to conquer continantal Europe, hoping to keep the nazis occupied devastating western Europe while the commies built theselves up for the struggle that everyone knew was inevitable. We only allied with the communists to destroy the more clear and present danger to Europe (nazism), and then when that was done the cold war started.
Save your lefty whinging about the British empire while completely ignoring the failed world empires of almost ALL European nations..... the French, German, Dutch, Italian, Belgian, Spanish, Portuguese all had exploitative and ruthless imperial pretentions, not forgetting the many many empires that have spread their conquerors "cultures" far and wide since the beginning of mankind, and each and EVERY one of them was run as ruthlessly as the British, so don't expect any regrets its the way of the world to this day, only now it is stateless international corporate globalists doing the empire building.
Yes if the German population HAD risen to complain about the murders of others then of course it would have changed the course of events.... only died in teh wool programmed Brit haters as yourself would believe otherwise.
1
-
1
-
@yingyang1008 You're wrong. Even by weaselly reducing the discussion to purely the British and Germans the first to "bomb another city" was the Germans in EVERY sense.
The first bombs to fall on the land of EITHER country? The Luftwaffe attack on RAF Sullom Voe in the Shetland Islands on 13th November 1939. The RAF RESPONDED by dropping THEIR first bombs on German soil by attacking the German seaplane base on the island of Sylt on 19th March 1940, FOUR MONTHS after the first of repeated German air attacks on RAF and Royal Navy bases on the British mainland. Prior to the RAF's attack on Sylt in March 1940, they had been prohibited by the British government from dropping ANY bombs on German soil whatsoever, instead preferring to avoid civilian casualties by supplying the German demand for toilet paper by dropping propaganda leaflets over German cities.
The first civilian bombing casualty of either of the two countries was a Mr James Isbister who on 16th March 1940 was killed in the village of Brig o' Waithe in the Orkney islands during a luftwaffe attack on Scapa Flow. The first RAF bombs to land on the German mainland fell on May 11th 1940, and were likewise ostensibly directed at military targets such as Bridges and railyards west of the river Rhine to disrupt the supply of the German armies then attacking France and the Low countries. Both sides in striking designated non civilian targets regularly caused what is quaintly known as "collateral civilian casualties" (Remember while we're discussing this we're ignoring the direct aerial assaults of the nazis on Polish towns and cities in the east and the bombing of Rotterdam and the aerial attacks executed against the roads of France clogged with hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing from the invading German armies in the west).
The attack on Berlin on the night of 23/24th August 1940 that you attempt to portray as the "first civilian bombing", was also targetted at valid non civilian targets, those being the Klingenburg power station in eastern Berlin and Templehof airport. That attack was a DIRECT RESPONSE to what the suburbs of London had been exposed to for the PREVIOUS MONTH during luftwaffe attacks on the RAF fighter airfields of Hornchurch, Biggin Hill, Kenley & Croydon ALL of which were situated in suburban areas of Greater London, and which had resulted in HUNDREDS of innocent British civilian deaths. The German response to the attack on Berlin took place from 7th September 1940 onwards with widespread attacks on London and 50 other British towns and cities, culminating in operation "Moonlight sonata" the then LARGEST firebombing attack on a city to that date, the target being Coventry on the night of 13th Nov 1940.
In RESPONSE to that unmittigated assault on innocent civilians the RAF planned and launched its FIRST purposely civilian targetted bombing raid of the war, that being "Operation Abigail" on the night of 16th December 1940 against the German city of Mannheim.
Don't try to hide the fact that the Germans enjoyed dropping HE on the cities of its neighbours from the earliest days of flight. The first aerial bombs dropped in history were from a zeppelin raid on Bruges in Belgium in August 1914... just 11 years after the invention of powered flight. Since WW2, they've learned the lesson NOT to do it again.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler's "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the Reichchancellery on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW).
The directive was transmitted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to initmidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan was academic. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
1
-
1
-
Since 1932 the Polish codebreakers Marian Rejewski, Henryk Zygalski & Jerzy Różycki worked within BS4 (the Polish general staff cipher Bureau focussed on German decryption & intelligence), and together with VITAL assistance given by the French intelligence officer Gustave Bertrand (who had cultivated a German informant codenamed "Asché" who had provided French Intelligence with tons of vital data including a full nazi procedural manual for use of the enigma encryption device), had by the purchase of a commercial version of the early enigma device and LOTS of analysis eventually broken into German army and navy 3 rotor encryption networks, this was a fantastic achievement, but it is true to say that they at no time did they crack German Kriegsmarine encryption due to the additional layers of security employed by the German navy.
In December 1938 the nazis introduced a further 2 interchangeable encryption rotors to the enigma system, which immediately brought the vast majority of Polish decryption efforts to a grinding halt, which is where it remained up until the outbreak of WW2. In the weeks prior to the outbreak of WW2 the now almost completely non-functional Polish research work was passed to the French, who in the six months they had it in their possession added little to the accumulated knowledge, and also to the UK where the British government seized it with both hands, and made its study top priority. So was instigated the BRITISH "ULTRA" project.
Jerzy Różycki elected to stay behind and work in Vichy France where, unknown to the Germans he worked on an a seperate secret encryption system, which bore no tangible fruit before his death in 1942.
Marian Rejewski & Henryk Zygalski were, for security reasons, not included in the UK "ULTRA" project, and so took no further part in British decryption efforts.
The British "ULTRA" project took the non working foundation research of the Polish decrypters and from there massively expanded that research to once again break into nazi 3 rotor enigma, this was followed in 1942 by the cracking of the improved kriegsmarine 4 rotor enigma network (SHARK), as well as simultaneously breaking into the FAR more complex "lorenz" cipher device used by the German army & navy high commands (TUNNY), before finally cracking the "Geheimschreiber" encryption device used by both the Luftwaffe high command as well as the top level of the nazi government (STURGEON), on top of these British achievements another product of the ULTRA program was the building of the world's first programmable electronic computer (COLOSSUS) to speed up the breaking of German codes. This was designed by a British telephone engineer (Tommy Flowers), which transformed British decryption from a process which often only gave results weeks after the message was eavesdropped on by the British, to a state of affairs where the British were reading top level communications at the same time as the intended German recipient.
The early Polish codebreakers did indeed provide the "acorn" from which the British cultivated the "mighty oak" of ULTRA.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
With regard to the non-appearance of Polish forces during the "1946 Victory parade" the problem lay SQUARELY with POLAND. The first invites sent out by the UK Labour Govt of Clement Attlee to ALL the nations who had fought for the Allied cause during WW2 (INCLUDING Poland, USSR & Yugoslavia) were sent out weeks in advance of the parade. The Polish invite in particular was quite understandably delivered to the Polish "Provisional Government of National Unity" ( the "TRJN" or Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) based in Warsaw, which was the OFFICIAL Polish govt as recognised by the international community in the form of the "United Nations", and NOT just by Britain alone, the TRJN was the same govt that it was intended the London based Polish nationalist Govt in exile would become an intrinsic part of, as agreed to by ALL sides at the Yalta conference in Feb 1945.... (although the soviets subsequently saw to it that this never actually happened).
This invite sent to Warsaw immediately raised a storm of protest with the Polish nationalist govt in exile based in London who, with some justification, felt they had been sidelined in this matter, their anger was supported by many British MPs and members of the British public.
With only days left before the parade was due to take place, and with no reply or even acknowledgement of the British invite from the OFFICIAL Polish TRJN govt in Warsaw, the British govt then belatedly sent out a SECOND INVITE to the Polish Govt in Exile in London, (as well as directly to individual senior Polish service personnel), but as one united group they CHOSE to shun the invites to register their anger and disgust at being treated as "second fiddle" to the Warsaw govt.
And the final Ignominy? The Warsaw TRJN govt never answered or even acknowledged the original invite from the UK (as neither did the USSR or Yugoslavia) and never attended the parade either.
As you can see the Polish "non appearance" was solely down to a poisonous bitter mix of political hatred (from the communist Warsaw Poles) and hubris (from the nationalist London Poles), and NOTHING to do with this imaginary "Poles weren't invited to the parade" BS. As I've described above the Polish nation was actually the ONLY allied nation to receive TWO invites to the parade.
What would have been even sadder than working as a bar tender in Edinburgh would have been getting shot in the back of the head by the NKVD and dumped in a shallow grave in a remote Polish forest, which is what would have happened to General Maczek had he NOT been granted UK citizenship after WW2.
He was so unhappy with his postwar existence, that he freely elected to remain in the UK till his death.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@heartsofiron4ever Who says the bombing of industry was "largely ineffective"?
Albert Speer (who knew more about the situation than contemporary lefty commentators) told Hitler after "Operation Millenium" (the bombing of Cologne in May 1942) that If the allies were able to launch 6 more raids of that scale in quick succession then the Germans would be forced out of the war. "Ineffective" eh?
What allied bombing accomplished was substantial in contributing to Germany’s defeat. The Anglo-American bombing offensive brought the war to the German people long before their armies were forced back onto German soil. In a war in which the effort of civilian workers on the production lines was as essential to victory as the fighting of the soldiers on the front lines, the very existence of the strategic bombing offensive encouraged US and British civilians and inflicted pain and suffering on the enemy. The British may have devoted 40 to 50 percent of their total war production to the air forces; the United States expended up to 35 percent; and the Germans up to 40 percent. German war production increased throughout the war, reaching its peak in the third quarter of 1944. Strategic air bombardment beyond ANY doubt kept that production increase from reaching stratospheric levels.
It forced the dispersion of factories and the building of underground facilities, made German production more vulnerable to transportation disruption, lowered production by forcing on German industry smaller, more labor-intensive, production facilities that denied the Germans the manufacturing economies of scale available to the allies, it disorganized workers’ lives, and lowered their productivity. In ways great and small and utterly incalculable strategic bombing made German war production less efficient and effective than it would have been if the bombers had not flown night after night and day after day.
Strategic bombing also forced the Germans into an enormous defense and reconstruction effort, diverting German aircraft manufacture almost exclusively into fighter and interceptor production. The bombing of oil not only limited mobility, but as a side effect greatly reduced nitrogen production, hampering the manufacture of explosives and fertilizers. By 1944, Germany had two million soldiers, civilians, and prisoners of war engaged in Reich antiaircraft defense, more than the total number of workers in its aircraft industry. And on any given day or night, most of this huge force, spread across the length & breadth of Germany to defend all targets, stood idle, while the Allied bombers struck only a relatively few areas.
An additional million workers were engaged in repair and rebuilding; the maintenance of the nazi oil industry alone (used for the rebuilding of oil production facilities NOT the actual oil production effort itself) absorbed 250,000 workers. Albert Speer estimated that 30 percent of total gun output and 20 percent of heavy ammunition output was directed towards air defense, a significant loss to the front line ground forces of high velocity weapons suitable for antitank defense. It took an average of 16,000 88 mm flak shells to bring down a single Allied heavy bomber. Speer further estimated that 50 percent of electro-technical production and one-third of the optical industry was devoted to radar and signals equipment for the antiaircraft effort, further starving the front lines of essential communications equipment.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MarkHarrison733 No it didn't Mark, as you know full well, RAF Blenheims and Wellingtons attacked German naval units in the estuary of the river Weser, the Jade Bight and the Schillig roads off the north coast of Germany, as they were even forbidden from attacking German naval units while they were berthed in port in case of hitting innocent Germans, and the RAF bombers also did it in broad daylight so as to avoid the chance of hitting neutral shipping in the area. NO civilians were killed or injured in these attacks.
Unlike when the Germans bombed Scapa Flow on 16th March 1940 and murdered the FIRST innocent civilian, either British OR German, who was a Mr James Isbister, killed by luftwaffe bombs meant for the RN anchorage at Scapa Flow. Mr Isbister was a council road mender whose cottage at Bridge of Waithe near Stenness was hit by German bombs.
But aside from the British the Germans had uttely NO worries about murdering innocent Polish, Norwegian, Dutch, Belgian or French civilians prior to their all out assault on British cities in Sept 1940.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@alienspace1 There's utterly NO doubting the cost and sacrifice to the USSR during WW2, BUT Without the continued opposition of the British empire and later western allies to nazism from June 1940 onwards, opposition which bankrupted the UK and cost her 460,000 of her citizen's lives, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program to the soviets.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination & concentration camps still operating on European soil into the 1950s, 60s, 70s or even beyond, and Stalin & his high command sitting in a cave in Mongolia eating their beetroot soup with a shared wooden spoon.
To dismiss the western war effort is to deny the influence it had on the eastern front, and without that influence the world would be a VERY much different (and even DARKER) place than it is today.
1
-
You're not entirely right there. Prewar RAF "Auxiliary" squadrons (the RAuxAF, mainly the 600 numbered fighter squadrons) were the preserve of the monied "upper crust", who viewed themselves as "gentleman's clubs", they were (and still are) portrayed as the quintisential RAF fighter pilots both prewar and during early WW2, but even prewar the RAF had recognised that there were simply not enough "rich people" prepared to pay for their own flight training (which is what a majority of the "auxiliary" pilots had done), and so created the RAF volunteer reserve (RAFVR), which took no account of social standing but was based on, as you say, aptitude alone, there were many working/middle class men who came through the VR system of pilot training as it was paid for by the RAF and not the individual, and the ranks of the "silk scarf brigade" were very quickly diluted by the new breed of VR pilots as the attrition rate during the early war years saw the number of those "elitist" pilots quickly whittled down. Pilot numbers were further boosted by the "British Empire/Commonwealth air training plan" which came online at the start of WW2 and which saw entrants from across the British empire being trained for all fields of piloting within the RAF, and rest assured the majority of those pilots were from anything but "well to do" backgrounds.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rinkashikachi "Elaborate"? Why would I need to elaborate to such a poorly informed non "argument" from yourself? I responded with the intellect that was required to rebuff your groundless assertion. You're clearly unaware of the yawning chasm between German propaganda claims about the Type XXI (and Type XXIII) "electro boats" and the reality of what happened during the nazis failed "electro boat" production project.
If you'd like some "elaboration" I can happily provide you with some.
The Type XXIs, on paper were to have sported many pioneering systems that were intended to revolutionise the German's failed u-boat offensive. They were designed for a distributed production method to avoid the bombed and wrecked German shipyards which had slowed u-boat production to a crawl in 1944-45. The type XXI was to be assembled from 9 major sections constructed by 32 different sub contractors, The sections were then individually transported by barge to an assembly facility on the river Weser known as the "Valentin" bunker, there, under a 15-23ft thick reinforced concrete roof (build by slave labourers) the 9 sections were meant to be bolted together, tested and then the completed type XXI sailed out of the bunker to their operational bases.
Such was the inexperience in marine engineering of the sub contractor's engineers that when the sections first arrived at the "Valentin" bunker very few of the subsections actually fitted together. and those that did had hull seals and piping that were so poorly aligned that they were unable to reach ANYWHERE near their intended test diving depths, with the result that after assembly the "brand new" subs required further months of re-engineering to actually make them sea worthy.
The poor engineering of their new 6 cylinder supercharged diesel engines meant that the superchargers were literally unusable and so the XXI's had to operate with non-supercharged diesel engines that reduced their power output from a projected 2000 horsepower each down to 1200 horsepower, with the result that on the surface the type XXIs were the SLOWEST u-boats the Germany produced, and while they were faster underwater than their predecesors the lower power of the diesel engines meant a full recharge of the massive battery capacity was prohibitively long and required nearly two full days of charging for a full charge, this charging by the diesel engines could NOT be done on the surface due to allied air superiority and so had to be accomplished by running underwater using the poorly designed and fitted schnorkels that leaked and dunked in the north Atlantic's rough seas, taking a dreadful toll on the health of the poor young u boat men that were forced to man them.
The "groundbreaking" hydraulic system that controlled the type XXI's rudders and planes, torpedo tube doors, anti aircraft turrets as well as the "uber" torpedo reloading system was ALL situated outside of the sub's pressure hull where it's complex systems were subject to saltwater corrosion and damage from wave and enemy action, and could not be repaired from within the hull.
The supposed superior "habitability" of the type XXI when viewed by the postwar USN failed to meet the basic standards of even the earlier US submarines (Which the US navy themselves referred to as "pig boats" due to the stink that emanated from them on return from a long patrol).
Of the initially projected 118 type XXI electro boats to have been built, due to the catastrophically bad quality control of their assembly just FOUR of them passed muster to be commisioned into the Kriegsmarine and only ONE undertook a patrol which saw it achieve NO successes before the war ended.
It's one thing promising and designing a superlative weapon, but when the finished product is a lemon that's not fit for purpose, its not going to achieve anything.
Is that enough "elaboration" for you?
P.S And just to rub salt into the German's wounds, the RAF allowed the German's to sink millions of reichmarks and two years of effort into the contruction of their "secret" bombproof "Valentin" type XXI assembly bunker, and then a month before it was due to start operation, the RAF destroyed it by hitting it with 10 ton "Grand Slam" bombs.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The Fairey Swordfish were designed & built in Britain from 1935 onwards, originally for the Greek navy, But when trialled prior to delivery they were seen to be so capable that the Royal Navy bought them instead.
They were biplanes for a very good reason. At the time they were designed existing aircraft engines were of relatively low power (especially for the British fleet air arm which was ALWAYS low down on the engine & aircraft "priority list") so to enable a carrier aircraft to carry aloft heavy loads needed a large wing area. Their biplane wing area was SO great that they could take off fully loaded WITHOUT the use of a carrier's catapult. This meant that in the stormy North Atlantic where the Royal Navy mainly intended to operate them, instead of being forced to take off at the carrier's bows (where the catapults are) and which is the part of a ship that rises and falls by the greatest amount in heavy seas, the Swordfish could take of from the middle of the carrier's decks close to the bridge where the pitching and rolling was the least.
It was for this reason in May 1941 that they were able to take off from HMS Ark Royal to attack Bismarck when the Ark Royal was struggling through an Atlantic gale in MOUNTAINOUS seas, with her bows rising and falling by nearly 60ft !!! Try to imagine how terrifying it must have been for the brave young crews flying them in those conditions. Those weather conditions would have prevented all other allied carrier aircraft of the era from flying and instead seen them safely lashed down inside the hangar deck.
They were also incredibly adaptable and throughout WW2 they were modifed to carry, bombs, depth charges, torpedoes, extra fuel tanks and even eight anti ship rockets as well as the world's very first naval airborne radars (that's the reason why they were nicknamed "stringbags" it was said they could carry ANYTHING). They are widely regarded to have ended the war as the aircraft with the GREATEST amount of enemy shipping tonnage sunk, and were HUGELY loved by their crews.
They WERE to have been replaced mid war by a succesor, the Fairey Albacore, but the "stringbags" were so ubiquitous that they outlasted the Albacore in service.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Lets look at some survivor testimonies (people who actually witnessed the events of Bismarck's sinking first hand), and not some poorly researched, modern day revisionist claptrap, shall we?
From "Battleship Bismarck: A survivor's story" Written by Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's 4th gunnery officer & senior ranking survivor.
Here are excerpts from his account of the final battle.
Page 211 "Our list to port had increased a bit while firing was going on"..... followed two paragraphs later by........ "Around 9.30am gas and smoke began to drift through our station" This means that prior to 9.30am Bismarck was already flooding, not something that happens to a healthy seaworthy ship, in other words she was already starting to sink.
Then from an interview conducted for the highly regarded late 1960s weekly history journal "Purnell's history of the second world war" with Korvettenkapitan Gerhard Junack (who was Bismarck's only surviving engineering officer and the survivor who supposedly enacted the "scuttle order"). He stated that...
"Somewhere about 10.15 hours, I received an order over the telephone from the Chief Engineer (Korvettenkapitän (Ing.) Walter Lehmann) to 'Prepare the ship for sinking.' That was the last order I received on the Bismarck. Soon after that, all transmission of orders collapsed."
Heading back to the account of Mullenheim-Rechberg, on Page 212 he states that (before 10:00am) "I was using all the telephone circuits and calling all over the place in an effort to find out as much as possible about the condition of the ship. I got only one answer. I reached the messenger in the damage control centre and asked "who has and where is the command of the ship? Are there new orders in effect?".... The man said he was in a great hurry. He told me that everyone had abandoned the damage control centre, adding that he was the last one in the room and had to get out... then he hung up".
This vain seach for contact & information over the Bismarck's internal comms happened BEFORE 10:00am which throws some mild doubt on Junack's testimony where he says he was contacted by the chief engineer who supposedly gave him the "scuttle order" over the phone at 10:15am... Hmmmmm.
If taken at face value these survivor testimonies show that there was at least a 45 minute gap between Bismarck starting to sink and the first mention of a "scuttle order" being given. Even if Bismarck's crew had done nothing, Bismarck was going to sink, and if the beaten crew want to help the RN, then all the better... But face it, Bismarck's crew weren't going to scuttle a perfectly seaworthy ship in the middle of the storm tossed North Atlantic of their own free will, it was only for the fact that the RN had already dismantled Bismarck and initiated the sinking process. In other words in every sense the sinking of Bismarck was the result of actions dictated by the Royal Navy.
Anything else is just hurt German pride, bolstered by modern day delusional wehraboos. Germany was well known for trying to hide its national humiliations, such as when they scuttled their "grand fleet" at the end of WW1, like illogically saying "We lost.. but you didn't win", or a pathetic "You didn't beat us because we killed ourselves before you killed us" sort of idiocy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Oh look ANOTHER clueless youngster who has NO idea of what he's talking about.
Your evidence that there was no periscope? To set against the sighting by the lookout on Dorsetshire?
I refer you to the account of Baron Burkhard von Müllenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's senior ranking survivor who in his book "Battleship Bismarck - a survivor's story" wrote this passage about an discussion he held with Capt Martin of the Dorsetshire after being rescued.
"Why," I burst out, "did you suddenly break off the rescue and leave hundreds of our men to drown?"
Martin replied that a U-boat had been sighted, or at least reported, and he obviously could not endanger his ship by staying stopped any longer.
The Bismarck's experiences on the night of 26 May and the morning of the 27th, I told him, indicated that there were no U-boats in the vicinity.
Farther away, perhaps, but certainly not within firing range of the Dorsetshire. I added that in war one often sees what one expects to see.
We argued the point back and forth until Martin said abruptly: "Just leave that to me. I'm older than you are and have been at sea longer. I'm a better judge."
What more could I say? He was the captain and was responsible for his ship.
"Apparently some floating object had been mistaken for a periscope or a strip of foam on the water for the wake of a torpedo.
No matter what it was, I AM NOW CONVINCED THAT, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, CAPT MARTIN HAD TO ACT AS HE DID". (My caps)
What is known with certainty is that Bismarck had for the previous 24 hours been transmitting beacon signals on known u-boat radio wavelengths and the scene of the final action was 350 miles (a relative naval stone's throw) away from the Kriegsmarine's Atlantic u-boat bases on the French coast.
Was Captain BCS Martin of Dorsetshire expected to gamble the lives of his 750 man crew that it was indeed a dolphin's fin or a broaching whale? Or that if it WAS a u-boat the sub's capt would hold fire while he carried out the rescues?
As an RN naval captain he would have been SORELY aware of the actions of Otto Weddigen during WW1 during his attack on the British Cruisers Aboukir, Cressy & Hogue. I suggest you look up the details of that incident.
As for a "non-existent U-boat" google about U-74 (Kpt Lt Eitel-friedrich Kentrat) and U-556 (Kpt Lt Herbert Wohlfarth) who WERE in the vicinity of the sinkings, having spotted various British warships and heard the final battle. Indeed although U-556 had to depart for France due to lack of fuel and battle damage, U-74 surfaced after the departure of the RN rescue ships and searched for survivors eventually rescuing a further 3 sailors after the sinking.
The RN was so filled with hatred that the day following the sinking, one of the survivors who had been picked up, a badly injured German sailor named Gerhard Lüttich, died on the operating table in Dorsetshire's sick bay. His body was then "committed to the deep" with full military honours provided by both his German comrades AND sailors from HMS Dorsetshire together with a Royal Marine bugler. The remaining crew were treated EXCELLENTLY by the crews of HMS Dorsetshire & HMS Maori, being given the same bunking arrangements as the crew (under guard of course), and provided with 3 hot meals a day for the 4 days they were on board. They were also given Grog (rum and water) which was usually issued normally to the RN sailors, the survivors were also provided with sweets, chocolate and cigarettes by the RN crews, and this was just 3 days after the sinking of HMS Hood... so much for any imagined "deep hatred" by the RN.
Here is what Mullenheim-Rechberg wrote of British treatment of the Bismarck survivors.
""The fight that the Bismarck put up to the bitter end earned the admiration of British seamen, which probably accounts for the good accommodations we were given and the way we were treated onboard ship. The fact that Captain Martin was well treated as a prisoner of war in Germany in World War One may also have had something to do with this. When he made his rounds among our men he always told them, "As long as you are here with me, you'll have it just as good." And the attitude of his crew was the same. The British seamen were always pleasant and helpful. "You today, us tomorrow," they said.""
How do I know this? because my father was a crewman onboard Dorsetshire at the time. He later survived Dorsetshire's own sinking and along with the rest of the "HMS Dorsetshire association" members post war, was invited to various reunions with the Bismarck survivors through the 1960s and 70s. THAT was the level of respect and comradeship that was experienced between the crews of both sides... far removed from your own seemingly devious nonsense.
For some further reading material on the matter, google "nineteenkeys dorsetshire" and look for a blog, written by a German researcher between 2008 until about 2012. If you read the entire blog, you will see that he starts with a viewpoint that concurs with your own, and then through further research and discussions with Capt Benjamin Martin's family members, that he changes his opinion 100% and indeed ends up paying respects to Capt Martin.
If you're so heartbroken about the abandonment of sailors to their fate by the enemy, then I'll warn you NOT to read about the actions of Adm Wilhelm Marschall who on the afternoon of 8th June 1940, after his ships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau had sunk the British aircraft carrier HMS Glorious and her two gallant escorts HMS Acasta & Ardent then made not even the most rudimentary effort to provide humanitarian assistance, and instead sailed away leaving over 1500 RN sailors to die in the North sea, inspite of their being NO other vessels in the vicinity. Or is it only German sailors abandoned by the RN who you get "teared up" about?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Since 1932 the Polish codebreakers Marian Rejewski, Henryk Zygalski & Jerzy Różycki worked within BS4 ("Biuro Szyfrów 4" the Polish general staff cipher Bureau focussed on German decryption & intelligence), and together with VITAL assistance given by the French intelligence officer Gustave Bertrand (who had cultivated a German informant codenamed "Asché" who had provided French Intelligence with tons of vital data including a full nazi "Enigma" procedural manual & a list of full daily key settings for use of the enigma encryption device), had by the purchase of a commercial version of the early enigma device and LOTS of analysis eventually broken into German army and air force 3 rotor encryption networks, this was a fantastic achievement, but it is true to say that they at no time did they crack German Kriegsmarine encryption due to the additional layers of security employed by the German navy.
In December 1938 the nazis introduced a further 2 interchangeable encryption rotors to the enigma system, which immediately brought the vast majority of Polish decryption efforts to a grinding halt, which is where it remained up until the outbreak of WW2. In the weeks prior to the outbreak of WW2 the Polish research work was passed to the French, who in the six months they had it in their possession added little to the accumulated knowledge, and to the UK where the British government seized it with both hands, and made its study top priority. So was instigated the British "ULTRA" project.
Jerzy Różycki elected to stay behind and work in Vichy France where, unknown to the Germans he worked on a seperate secret encryption system, which bore no tangible fruit before his death in 1942.
Marian Rejewski & Henryk Zygalski were, for security reasons, not included in the UK "ULTRA" project, and so took no further part in British decryption efforts.
The British "ULTRA" project took the non working foundation research of the Polish decrypters and from there MASSIVELY expanded that research to once again break into nazi 3 rotor enigma, this was followed in 1942 by the cracking of the improved kriegsmarine M4 enigma (the 4 rotor enigma device, codenamed "SHARK"), as well as simultaneously breaking into the FAR more complex "lorenz" cipher device used by the German army & navy high commands (TUNNY), before finally cracking the "Geheimschreiber" encryption device used by both the Luftwaffe high command as well as the top level of the nazi government (STURGEON), on top of these British achievements another product of the ULTRA program was the building of the world's first programmable electronic computer (COLOSSUS) to speed up the breaking of German codes. This was designed and built by a British team led by Alan Turing and the telephone engineer Tommy Flowers, which transformed British decryption from a process which often only gave results days or even weeks after the message was eavesdropped on by the British, to a state of affairs towards the end of WW2 where the British were reading a LOT of top level communications at the same time as the intended German recipient.
The early Polish codebreakers did indeed provide the "acorn" from which the British cultivated the "mighty oak" of ULTRA.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ejmproductions8198 You're very impetuous. Please read my earlier responses CAREFULLY. I like alternate view points, but ALWAYS prefer ones that are well reasoned and have a good degree of factual merit.
1. I did not say my comment about US supplies was your opinion, I said "You appear to be the same sort of biased, uninformed commenter who would" give that opinion... if that is not the case then all is well and good, and I apologise for the inference.
2. "Also you failed to mention the Role South-Africa, NZ and Australia played in North-Africa", You obviously didn't read my comment "meanwhile Britain & its Commonwealth had its forces defending a world wide empire"
2. "The pub landlord" A.K.A Mr Al Murray, is a "comedic caricature" invented by the said Mr Murray. You do understand what that means don't you? "The pub landlord" is a portrayal of the perception of a UK nationalist intentionally inflated and malformed & created for comic effect. If you actually watch the videos you describe you will see they're light hearted, and eagerly contested discussions regarding British history that as often as not air less than flattering facts about Britain and its erstwhile empire.
I'm stunned by your apparent TOTAL unawareness of the the elevated self-regard that ALL countries display, and have to laugh at the idea that Britain is any worse that the rest of the world community. Please tell me that you're not from the United States, as they are the MAJOR LEAGUE WORLD CHAMPIONS of self-aggrandisement compared to Britain's middle of the junior league level of self elevation. Or maybe you should read the title and lyrics of the German national anthem "Deutschland über alles".
A major difference I feel between us is that I consider points in shades and nuances, while you talk in absolutes, and see the world as simplistic black and white.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ShakespearHD Here, let me rectify that situation.
If you'd like a brief(ish) outline of the run up to the 1946 victory parade then read on, It's something I've written previously that I have saved ready to "copy and paste" in response to the oft repeated nonsense within YT regarding a supposed British "ban" on Poles at the victory parade.
For those who believe Poland was "excluded" from the 1946 London victory parade, here is a brief timeline of what actually happened to give some context to the oft repeated nonsense that "Brits never invited the Poles" or "the Brits banned the Poles".
Since before the end of WW2 in Europe, Britain and the US had been negotiating with the Soviets over the future of eastern Europe and especially Poland in post WW2 Europe. The UK & US wanted a democratic Polish government that would by way of democracy include both the Polish communists of the existing Moscow backed "Lublin committee", and the Polish nationalists from the Polish Govt in exile that had been based in London during most of WW2. This proposed "Polish provisional government of national unity" (Tymczasowy Rząd Jedności Narodowej) was to be setup in Warsaw, and was agreed to by all of the "Big 3" (UK / US / USSR) at the Feb 1945 Yalta conference, but from the outset the Soviets then occupying Poland did everything they practically could to bar the inclusion of the "London Poles" within the "unity govt", and to intimidate & marginalise the small number of nationalists that did eventually make it into the provisional govt.
With regard to the 1946 Victory parade when Britain sent out its invites to all of the countries that had fought on the side of the Allies during WW2, The British Labour government of Clement Attlee, quite correctly handed the Polish invitation to the newly constituted Warsaw based "Polish provisional government of national unity" which was after all now the OFFICIAL government of Poland, as recognised by the United Nations.
The now effectively powerless & stateless nationalist Polish government in exile in London took great offence at their sidelining in this matter, and raised a torrent of indignation within the UK Parliament that was backed by many British MPs and ordinary people. A few days before the parade was due to take place, and with no response having been forthcoming from the Warsaw government, a belated invitation was hurriedly sent both to the Polish Govt in Exile in London as well as directly to various Polish generals who had fought with the allies, ALL of whom felt so disgusted with the perceived public disrespect shown by the INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY (That is, being made to play "second fiddle" to the official Warsaw Polish government on the world stage) that they CHOSE not to attend the parade to register their fury and resentment at not being consulted first.
And the final ignominy? The Soviet backed Warsaw government neither acknowledged the British invite, or attended the parade either.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@johnweerasinghe4139 I can type long replies as well, Y'know?
You may consider my points above as "old arguments" but nevertheless they are totally relevent. Of course it was stupid of Germany to attack the very nation that supplied a large proportion of their requisite resources. Your own argument that "If Hitler had succeeded Germany would have become more powerful than the US" itself highlights that the western allied effort to shore up the crumbling soviets in 1941-43 cost Germany the war.
1. "The Germans knew the war would bring a blockade". Of course they did, but their knowledge of that fact did not neutralise the immense problems it caused them throughout WW2. Even though they had prepared for it by sourcing their requirements from within their European conquests and prewar stockpiling of raw materials to attempt to render the blockade ineffective. And yet they still had to continually try to feed their never ending requirements for strategic materials such as rubber, copper, tungsten and other lower volume but critical commodities that they couldn't obtain elsewhere by use of blockade runners. Once their tightly organised plan for a short sharp war was derailed first by the British victory in the battle of Britain, then the western support of their soviet enemy, those stockpiles quickly began to dwindle. So as well as quickly becoming critically short of tungsten for anti tank shells, they also suffered the calamitous knock on effect of having to use their ever dwindling supply of oil & coal to make synthetic rubber.
2."landing at France in 1944 was a little late to help the Soviets" How stupid of you!!! You appear to believe that the German preparations for D-Day started in june 1944, when in fact it had diverted increasing numbers of troops and equipment to man the "atlantic wall" YEARS before D-day. Even through the "quiet period" in western Europe in 1941-43 the Germans had between 27 & 56 divisions stationed in France on the Channel, Atlantic and Mediterranean coasts. In May 1943 for example, in the run up to "Operation Zitadelle" the Germans last big offensive in the east, When the Germans needed EVERY man they could to execute that planned attack, as well as fielding 185 divisions on the Eastern Front, they were simultaneously COMPELLED to station 56 divisions in France and the Low Countries, 9 in Norway (though admittedly 4 were facing the Russians), 9 in North Africa and 2 in Italy and a further 11 in the Balkans awaiting expected allied landings there.... in total 83 divisions that were NOT availble for service against the soviets on the eastern front.
Your argument that the German drubbing during "bagration" saved D-day is disingenuous to say the least. D-Day took place 2 weeks BEFORE Bagration!!! You portray it solely as the Soviets enabling the western allies to invade when it is just as mcu if not MORE the case that "bagration" was SO successful BECAUSE of D-day and the absence of 66 German divisions (including 10 Panzer and 8 motorised) stationed in France, with a further 29 fighting the allies in Italy. Not forgetting the 350,000 troops previously removed from the axis OOB as a result of the western allies crushing the axis in North Africa.
The axis collapse in North Africa in May 1943 did have one positive outcome for the nazis though, it meant they didn't have to continue sacrificing hundreds of transport aircraft and ships each month to keep the African army supplied at a time when they were DESPERATELY needed in Russia.... yet ANOTHER factor that helped save the Soviets.... And all of that is BEFORE we've even touched on the CRUCIAL flow of top level intelligence from the British detailing the German OOB, dispositions, supply levels & intentions within the USSR. Without the information provided to the USSR by Britain in the run up to the attack on the Kursk salient, the German pincers would have met and nipped off countless soviet divisions and done a "reverse Stalingrad" on the soviets.
3 & 4. Contrary to your own specially chosen selection of assorted hearsay regarding how the soviets fought "with their own weapons during 1941", Western supplies via Murmansk & the Persian corridor (both from August 1941 onwards) and direct from the US via Vladivostok CRUCIALLY plugged the gaps caused in the Soviet war economy during the great movement of the soviet factories from the European USSR into the Russian hinterlands during 1941-42, during the same period that the Soviet land and air forces had been utterly shredded losing countless thousands of its outdated tanks and aircraft (and a fair number of their latest models) to the initial German onslaught, for instance less than a THIRD of their armoured forces comprised of the T34s and KV1's that you mention (with the majority of their tanks during the 1941 period being of the T26 & 28 / BT7 / T60s types) the remnants of those soviet forces were well supplemented by both several thousand British valentine & churchill tanks (and later by many thousands of Shermans), as well as 3,500 hurricane fighters together with a further 3100 aircraft PAID FOR BY THE BRITISH & sent directly from the US, on top of the 6000 supplied & paid for by the US themselves, together with thousands of British trucks (as well as further tens of thousands of US trucks which were supplied direct from the USA via Vladivostok, and again after having been PAID FOR BY THE UK). In fact eventually over 22,000 of the soviet "Katyushas" that you mention were mounted on British Leyland and US Studebaker trucks. The total amount of both raw and finished war materiel supplied to the USSR led Georgi Zhukov to declare in the 1960s that the USSR would not have been able to survive without it.
1
-
@johnweerasinghe4139 5 & 6. (I had originally typed this for another discussion, but it will suffice here for you as well)
Albert Speer (who knew a fair bit about Germany's industrial situation) told Hitler after "Operation Millenium" (the RAF bombing of Cologne in May 1942) that If the allies were able to launch 6 more raids of that scale in quick succession then the Germans would be forced out of the war. He also commented after the war that "The allied bombing of Germany and the required defence of the German Reich REDUCED THE GERMAN ARMY'S ANTI-TANK CAPABILITY BY 60%, and forced us to withhold more than one million men from the front line units. The effect of the allies strategic bombing has always been underestimated. It was in fact the biggest lost battle of the whole war for Germany, greater than the losses from all our retreats in Russia and the surrender of the German army at Stalingrad".... "Ineffective" eh?
What allied bombing accomplished was substantial in contributing to Germany’s defeat. The Anglo-American bombing offensive brought the war to the German people long before their armies were forced back onto German soil by the soviets & western allies. The British directed ~45% of their total war production to their air forces; the United States expended up to 35 percent; and the Germans up to 40 percent. While German war production certainly did increase throughout the war, reaching its peak in the third quarter of 1944 allied strategic air bombardment beyond ANY doubt kept that production increase from reaching stratospheric levels.
It forced the dispersion of factories, the building of underground facilities, made German production more vulnerable to transportation disruption, lowered production by forcing on German industry smaller, more labor-intensive, production facilities that denied the Germans the manufacturing economies of scale available to the allies, it disorganized workers’ lives, and lowered their productivity. In ways great and small and utterly incalculable strategic bombing made German war production less efficient and effective than it would have been if the bombers had not flown night after night and day after day.
Strategic bombing also forced the Germans into an enormous defense and reconstruction effort, diverting German aircraft manufacture almost exclusively into fighter and interceptor production. The bombing of Germany's oil industry not only critically limited their mobility, but as a side effect greatly reduced their nitrogen production, hampering the manufacture of explosives and fertilizers.
By 1944, Germany had two million soldiers, civilians, and prisoners of war engaged in Reich anti aircraft defence, more than the total number of workers in its aircraft industry. And on any given day or night, most of this huge force, spread across the length & breadth of the Reich to defend all targets, stood idle, while the Allied bombers struck only a relatively few areas at any one time.
An additional million workers were engaged in repair and rebuilding of their shattered facilites. The maintenance of the nazi oil industry alone (used for the rebuilding of oil production facilities NOT the actual oil production effort itself) for example absorbed 250,000 workers. Albert Speer estimated that 30 percent of total gun output and 20 percent of heavy ammunition output was directed towards air defense, a significant loss to the front line ground forces of high velocity weapons suitable for antitank defense. It took an average of 16,000 88 mm flak shells to bring down a single Allied heavy bomber. Speer further estimated that 50 percent of electro-technical production and one-third of the optical industry was devoted to radar and signals equipment for the antiaircraft effort, further starving the front lines of essential communications equipment.
7. It was precisely because of Stalin's mistrust of the western allies that led to the USSR's shocking lack of preparedness for Barbarossa. As for other countries "pulling British spuds out of the fire", it was the British alone who were responsible for the course that the war took, when in 1940 they bested the lufwaffe and faced down the kriegsmarine while BOTH the US and USSR were only too happy to support the nazis.
You likewise appear to be utterly oblivious to the many communinst sympathisers within western governments, the sort of people who oversaw the sale of British jet engines and American uranium to the USSR after WW2. As for your nonsense about Britian urging the US to nuke the USSR after WW2, I assume you're ignorantly misrepresenting the non-nuclear British "Operation unthinkable" the outline plan to push the USSR back to its pre 1939 borders that was disregarded by the US.
1
-
1
-
Any peace signed by Britain with the nazis in 1940 would have been a "Pax Germanica" that is a peace based on nazi German terms. A puppet nazi UK govt, possibly with a nazi sympathetic King Edward VIII restored to the throne, and with a likely future imposition of nazi concentration camps in the Cotswolds/Pennines/Scottish Highlands & potentially British SS einsatzgruppen stalking the "shires", and if the rest of Germany's European conquests were anything to go by, the forced deportation and enslavement of all males of working age to nazi armaments factories and infrastructure projects.
The loss to the "free world" of the UK as an "unsinkable aircraft carrier" would also have HUGELY strengthened the nazi's military position from 1940 onwards.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire ALONE to nazism from June 1940 onwards, opposition which bankrupted the UK and cost her 460,000 of her citizen's lives, there would have been:
NO D-Day and ongoing war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west via the UK to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before anyone says it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would likely have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps would STILL be operating on European soil today. The USA would have been isolated between a nazi dominated Europe and a Japanese dominated Asia and Stalin would have been left eating his borscht out of a wooden bowl, sat in a cave in Mongolia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@martinschnelle3077 There is no such thing as "regular armour". Every nation had its own "recipes" for the alloy compositions and manufacturing processes of the various armours it employed, with a large degree of commonality in the various compositions, but also many variations. "Regular" naval armour does NOT exist. The oversimplification of your comment "Bismarck's armor was a little bit different from regular armor" highlights your misplaced simplistic belief that somehow "German armour is special". When it was not.
Also you appear to believe that the same armour is used all over a ship, which is NOT the case. Different armours had different performance characteristics which were suited to different applications. For example Bismarck's AA directors were protected by "Wotan Starrheit" composition armour, her decks were composed of "Wotan Weich" and her main belt of a different composition called "Krupp Cemented Neuer Art (New Type)" (or KC n/a) to name just a few examples.
When you say that "it withstood a direct torpedo hit", I assume you mean the hit amidships on the 25th May 1941 during the airstrike from HMS Victorious. While the lighter warhead of the aerial torpedo hit did not directly penetrate Bismarck's main belt armour, it DID buckle it and allow a degree of flooding amidships.
According to the metallurgical engineer Nathan Okun, a world renowned authority on naval armour metallurgy, the armour that was used for Bismarck's main belt (Krupp Cemented Neuer Art (New Type) (KC n/A)) was no better or worse than the equivalent British cemented armour, the Italian AOD (Acciaio Omogenee Duttile - homogenous ductile steel) armour, or the US STS Class "B" armour, though they were ALL slightly better performing than the Japanese VC (Vickers Cemented) armour, but even that information is HIGHLY simplified as the entire subject of armour metallurgy & performance is EXTREMELY complex. Here, have a read of a SMALL proportion of the late Mr Okun's work for yourself.
http://www.navweaps.com/index_nathan/index_nathan.php
But suffice to say Bismarck's armour was NOT a peculiar form of "super armour" as can be testified to by the fact that the THICKEST armour on Bismarck, that being the 360mm face plates of her main turrets (which was 40mm THICKER than her 320mm main armoured belt) and which was also built from the same KC n/a armour as her main belt, was such "super armour" that one of HMS Rodney's 16" shells went STRAIGHT through the face plate of Turret Bruno, continued on through the gunhouse that the 360mm plate was supposed to be protecting, then impacted on the INSIDE face of the 320mm thick REAR armour plate of the turret with sufficient force to simply knock the rear plate right off the turret and into the sea beyond (as turret Bruno was trained to port at the time this occured).
1
-
@martinschnelle3077 Once again your post is full of misrepresentations and nonsense.
1. The ONLY reason why Tovey stayed as long as he did inspite of being on "bingo" fuel was to ENSURE the Bismarck was sunk. Which it did.... as a result of British gunfire and torpedoes.
2. Do you actually READ my posts? As I CLEARLY said above, the torpedo that crippled HMS PoW did NOT impact on her armoured belt. It hit the unarmoured support stanchion of her outer port propeller shaft and destroyed it, (The stanchion position was 10-15 meters aft of the aft edge of PoW's small lower belt extension). The destruction of that support stanchion meant that the now unsupported propeller shaft turning at maximum revs then precessed & snaked out of control along its full length and in doing so destroyed ALL the seals and stuffing boxes along its length through to the port engine room, which resulted in nearly a third of the ship flooding because its watertight integrity had been so greivously comprimised in a way that could never have been accounted for. Also the extensive flooding put most of PoW's electrical generation plant offline which meant the floodwater could not be pumped outboard, and counterflooding procedures could not be carried out. As I said above, such a hit would have sunk ANY ship that it happened to.
3.The 15" shell that was found in PoW's double bottom was ONLY there precisely because the shell fuse was faulty. IF the fuse had operated as was intended it would have been triggered as the shell impacted the water OUTSIDE of PoW's hull and would not have penetrated her hull.
4. My mistake. KGV's 28 knots was surpassed by Bismarck's 30 knots. My bad. I'll amend my assesment of the comparison to say. The ONLY aspect of Bismarck that surpassed the KGVs was her "running away power". When she lost that advantage she was decisively defeated in short order. Also when quoting the propulsion plant output remember to qualify it with the respective power to weight ratios of the two classes.
Bismarck = 2.944 hp/ton
KGV = 2.962 hp/ton
5. "Much faster fire rate". A May 1941 report by the German Artillerieversuchskommando - AVSK (Artillery Testing Command for Ships) stated that the turret ammunition hoists on Bismarck were capable of delivering between 23 and 25 rounds per minute (for all four turrets), the equivalent of 3 rounds per minute per gun. However, this same report stated that design faults in the hoists led to two significant breakdowns during the evaluation, both of which caused long interruptions in the ammunition supply. Finally, it should be noted that Bismarck fired a total of 93 rounds during her thirteen minutes of firing at the Denmark Strait battle, which is actually less than one round per gun per minute.
6. "superior range-finders" debatable. The Stereoscopic rangefinders had already been trialled by the Royal Navy years earlier, who found that while they were capable of more quickly establishing the correct range, they were less able to maintain a consistent firing solution due to operator eye fatigue, hence why they retained their conincidence rangefinders which displayed the opposite characteristics, slower to range but once established provided a more consistent ranging solution. Bismarck's stereoscoping range finders don't seem to have been working very well on the morning of 27th May when she failed to land a single hit on ANY of the 4 RN ships opposing her.
7. While Hood was still sporting her WW1 vintage Mk 5 Dreyer Table FC computer, The Mk IX AFCT (Admiralty Fire Control Table) onboard the KGVs was no slouch as it demonstated when PoW landed the first hit of the Denmark Strait engagement, KGV put shell after shell into Bismarck during her final engagement, as well as DoY doing likewise to Scharnhorst 2½ years later. I'm not sure where you got your "superior electronic-mechanic computing" from but judging by the nonsense you spoke about Bismarck's armour I won't put too much creedence by it.
But again ALL of this has NOTHING to do with your original assertion, which was completely groundless "wehraboo" nonsense.
1
-
1
-
@martinschnelle3077 My better judgement tells me to leave you in your own little fabricated, fact free, world construct. But I feel a duty to challenge your misinformation in a public forum. (Plus I've just reread the thread, and once again it appears YT has been choosing to miss out some of your posts, which have now appeared).
Long experience has shown that people who haughtily announce themselves as "scientists" / "doctors" / "scholars" / <place your own nonsense here> to be amongst the most fact free posters of all on YT, hoping instead to intimidate their co-respondent with some fake air of "expertise" on a chosen subject in lieu of actual knowledge and understanding. That well worn tactic fazes me not ONE little bit. I'm MUCH more impressed by well written, researched and most importantly factually correct discussion, which your posts upto now have been slightly lacking in.
1. Glad you've confirmed that Tovey's frustration has absolutely no bearing on the matter of Bismarck's armour. (BTW "British performance" that morning saw 51,000 tons of flaming German wreckage sink beneath the Atlantic.)
2. I contrast your vague uninformed "smoke and mirrors" (i.e "a hit in the same area") with my own more accurate and verifiable facts. Resorting to "muddying the waters" to try to win a point is not something an analytical "scientist" would do, "mate". As an example, hit someone on the shoulder with a golf club, then hit them across the throat with the same club, and see which "hit in the same area" has the most damaging effect. (But again, what does your point here have to do with the fact that you weakly tried to pass off nonsense in your first post, were politely called out on it, and have since flailed around wildly trying in vain to score an irrelevant point in return?)
3. At least we can agree on PoW's lack of combat readiness. But regardless of her unpreparedness, the fact remains that an untested and malfunctioning ship crewed by inexperienced men STILL single handedly put the WHOLE of SKL's planning to naught. A wonderful example of good ol' British pluck & improvisation, though once again none of your flailing around on this point has ANYTHING to do with the nonsense of your first post.
4. Dear oh dear oh dear.... I've given you a trial speed of 30.12 knots that I took from the highly regarded "Battleship Bismarck - a Design and Operational History" (ISBN 9781526759757) (pages 35 AND 47), whereas you appear to be citing the trial speed of 30.81 knots attained by Tirpitz. Then again if you quickly refer to wikipedia there they state Bismarck's top speed as 30.01 knots and "Jane's fighting ships" gives the rated speed of the Bismarck class as 29 knots. I give an unbiased top end estimate of Bismarck's maximum speed and once again you then further try to inflate her abilities by citing incorrect info from a different ship as your own "evidence". You're not REALLY a "scientist" are you, "mate"?... and once again what is the relevance of this point to your original assertion?
5. "The ship had nearly one and a half the power and had better hydrodynamics because it was made for speed." I'll admit you're closer to being a "scientist" than you are to being a writer. (plus its just more unsubstantiated nonsense, and not very analytical at ALL. I thought a "scientist" like yourself would be burrowing down into specifics, and FACTS and figures, rather than ungrammatical & meaningless phrases?). Relevance to your original point?
Please point me to your "stream of arguments" on how Bismarck was superior to the KGVs? I freely accepted my error (from memory) with regards to the speed issue (which you then desperately attempt to profit from by then spouting incorrect nonsense), but beyond that you STILL haven't described how Bismarck outstripped the KGV's or even the 13 year older Nelsons (again apart from Bismarck's "running away power"). I can fire facts and figures back and forth regarding the ships with you all day, but as in the battle of Denmark Strait a fair percentage of the shots fired by you upto now have been "duds". Both the KGV AND the much older Nelsons were equally well gunned and better armoured than Bismarck inspite of being 25-30% lighter. It's called "design efficiency" and in the case of the British was necessitated by keeping within internationally agreed naval limits, something that never hindered German naval designers.
What "Lies" have I told about Bismarck? I've given you facts, along with widely regarded sources with which to verify them. Bismarck PLAINLY had many inefficient and outdated design choices, such as incremental armour that saw her quickly shredded as the multiple thinner layers of secondary armour activated the fuses of British shells that would otherwise have passed through non essential portions of the ship, and compare it to the performance of PoW's armour scheme at Denmark Strait when the fusillade of hits on PoW did virtually nothing of any real importance with most of the shots passing harmlessly through the largely unarmoured superstructure of her "all or nothing" armour scheme. Or Bismarck's needlessly duplicated secondary armaments and 4 double gunned turrets that added THOUSANDS of tons of unnecessary weight for no appreciable gain, as opposed to the dual purpose secondaries and triple and quad gunned main turret designs that were then being used by the more modern naval designs. Not to mention her triple screw design that IMMEDIATELY saw a full 33% of her engine power consigned to the dustbin when it came to steering with her engines alone. At least the damage caused by the hit on PoW's outboard propeller support could be viewed as an unforeseeable or unlikely eventuality, Bismarck's primary design discounting the facility of steering with her engines alone seems ludicrous in comparison.
Your problem is not people trying to demean Bismarck, but well informed people debunking the utter fact free nonsense gushed by enthralled nazi fanbois or "wehraboos" as they've become known in YT threads.
P.S The general air of your posts leads me to (possibly incorrectly) treat your "friend of Baron Mullenhiem-Rechberg" as just so much more far fetched guff, in comparison my father who WAS a crewmember aboard HMS Dorsetshire at the time of the Bismarck episode, and was subesquently invited to and attended multiple joint reunions with the Bismarck survivors in Hamburg during the 1960s and 70s, DID meet and have the honour to include the Baron and many of the other Bismarck survivors as friends and aquaintances.
1
-
@martinschnelle3077 My better judgement tells me to leave you in your own little fabricated, fact free, world construct. But I feel a duty to challenge your misinformation in a public forum. (Plus I've just reread the thread, and once again it appears YT has been choosing to miss out some of your posts, which have now appeared).
Long experience has shown that people who haughtily announce themselves as "scientists" / "doctors" / "scholars" / <place your own nonsense here> to be amongst the most fact free posters of all on YT, hoping instead to intimidate their co-respondent with some fake air of "expertise" on a chosen subject in lieu of actual knowledge and understanding. That well worn tactic fazes me not ONE little bit. I am MUCH more impressed by well written, well researched posts that contain a high degree of correct facutal information in them. Your comments are currently somewhat lacking in that department.
1. Glad you've confirmed that Tovey's frustration has absolutely no bearing on the matter of Bismarck's armour. (BTW the "British performance" saw 51,000 tons of flaming German wreckage sink beneath the Atlantic that morning.)
2. I contrast your vague uninformed guff ("a hit in the same area") with my detailed and verifiable facts. Resorting to "muddying the waters" to try to win a point is not something an analytical "scientist" would do, "mate". As an example, hit someone on the shoulder with a golf club, then hit them across the throat with the same club, and see which "hit in the same area" has the most damaging effect. (But again, what does your point here have to do with the fact that you weakly tried to pass off complete BS in your first post, were called out on it, and have since flailed around wildly trying vainly to score an irrelevant point in return?)
3. At least we can agree on PoW's lack of combat readiness. But regardless of her unpreparedness, the fact remains that an untested and malfunctioning ship crewed by inexperienced men STILL single handedly put the WHOLE of SKL's planning to naught. A wonderful example of good ol' British pluck & improvisation, though once again none of your flailing around on this point has ANYTHING to do with the nonsense of your first post.
4. Dear oh dear oh dear.... I've given you a trial speed of 30.12 knots that I took from the highly regarded "Battleship Bismarck - a Design and Operational History" (ISBN 9781526759757) (pages 35 AND 47), whereas you appear to be citing the trial speed of 30.81 knots attained by Tirpitz. Then again if you were to quickly to refer to wikipedia there they give 30.01 knots and "Jane's fighting ships" gives the rated speed of the Bismarck class as 29 knots. I give an unbiased top end estimate of Bismarck's maximum speed and once again you then further try to inflate her abilities by citing incorrect info, in this case a completely different ship as your own "evidence". You're not REALLY a "scientist" are you, "mate"?
5. "The ship had nearly one and a half the power and had better hydrodynamics because it was made for speed." I'll admit you're closer to being a "scientist" than you are to being a writer. (plus its just more unsubstantiated nonsense, and not very analytical at ALL. I thought a "scientist" like yourself would be burrowing down into specifics, and FACTS and figures, rather than meaningless phrases?).
Please point me to your "stream of arguments" on how Bismarck was superior to the KGVs? I freely accepted my error (from memory) with regards to the speed issue (which you then desperately attempt to profit from by then spouting incorrect nonsense), but beyond that you STILL haven't described how Bismarck outstripped the KGV's or even the 13 year older Nelsons (again apart from Bismarck's "running away power"). I can fire facts and figures back and forth regarding the two ships with you all day, but as in the battle of Denmark Strait a fair percentage of the shots fired by you upto now have been duds.
What "Lies" have I told about Bismarck? She had many inefficient design choices, with outdated incremental armour that saw her quickly shredded as opposed to the fusillade of hits on PoW that did virtually nothing of any real importance with most of the shots passing harmlessly through the largely unarmoured superstructure of her "all or nothing" armour scheme. Or her needlessly duplicated secondary armaments and 4 double gunned turrets that added THOUSANDS of tons of unnecessary weight for no appreciable gain, as opposed to the dual purpose secondaries and triple and quad gunned main turret designs that were then being used by the more modern naval designs. Not to mention her triple screw design that IMMEDIATELY saw a full 33% of her engine power consigned to the dustbin when it came to steering with the engines alone. At least the damage to PoW's outboard propeller support could be seen as an unlikely though unfortunate eventuality, Bismarck's primary design ignoring the facility of steering by her engines alone seems ludicrous in comparison.
Both the KGV AND the much older Nelsons were equally well gunned and better armoured inspite of being 25-30% lighter. It's called "design efficiency" and in the case of the British was necessitated by keeping within international naval limits, something that never hindered the nazis.
Your problem is not people trying to demean Bismarck, but people with more knowledge not buying a lot of the utter fact free nonsense spoken by gushing enthralled nazi fanbois or "wehraboos" as they've become known as that is posted in YT threads.
P.S As opposed to your equally far fetched guff about carousing with Baron Mullenhiem-Rechberg, my father who was a crewmember aboard HMS Dorsetshire at the time of the Bismarck episode, attended multiple joint reunions with the Bismarck survivors in Hamburg during the 1960s and 70s, and he DID meet and have the honour to include the Baron and many other of the Bismarck survivors as friends and aquaintances.
1
-
@martinschnelle3077 My better judgement tells me to leave you in your own little fabricated, fact free, world construct. But I feel a duty to challenge your misinformation in a public forum. (Plus I've just reread the thread, and once again it appears YT has been choosing to miss out some of your posts, which have now appeared).
Long experience has shown that people who haughtily announce themselves as "scientists" / "doctors" / "scholars" / <place your own nonsense here> to be amongst the most fact free posters of all on YT, hoping instead to intimidate their co-respondent with some fake air of "expertise" on a chosen subject in lieu of actual knowledge and understanding. That well worn tactic fazes me not ONE little bit. I'm MUCH more impressed with well written, well researched comments which contain a high degree of correct factual information. Your posts to date are somewhat lacking in those regards.
1. Glad you've confirmed that Tovey's frustration has absolutely no bearing on the matter of Bismarck's armour. (BTW the "British performance" that morning saw 51,000 tons of flaming German wreckage sink beneath the Atlantic.)
2. I contrast your vague "smoke & mirrors" (I.E "a hit in the same area") with my own more accurate and verifiable facts. Resorting to "muddying the waters" to try to win a point is not something an analytical "scientist" would do, "mate". As an example, hit someone on the shoulder with a golf club, then hit them across the throat with the same club, and see which "hit in the same area" has the most damaging effect. (But again, what does your point here have to do with the fact that you weakly tried to pass off nonsense as "fact" in your first post, were politely called out on it, and have since then flailed around wildly trying vainly to score an irrelevant point in return?)
3. At least we can agree on PoW's lack of combat readiness. But regardless of her unpreparedness, the fact remains that an untested and malfunctioning ship crewed by inexperienced men STILL single handedly put the WHOLE of SKL's planning to naught. A wonderful example of good ol' British pluck & improvisation, though once again none of your flailing around on this point has ANYTHING to do with the nonsense of your first post (as do ANY of your further "points").
4. Dear oh dear oh dear.... After my earlier faux pas I've given you a trial speed of 30.12 knots that I took from the highly regarded "Battleship Bismarck - a Design and Operational History" (ISBN 9781526759757) (pages 35 AND 47), whereas you appear to be citing the trial speed of 30.81 knots attained by Tirpitz. If you refer to wikipedia there they give 30.01 knots as Bismarck's maximum speed and "Jane's fighting ships" gives the rated speed of the Bismarck class as 29 knots. I give an unbiased top end estimate of Bismarck's maximum speed and you STILL then try to further inflate her abilities by citing incorrect info, in this case from a completely different ship, as your own "evidence". It's just another example, if any were needed, of your own bias and agenda. You're not REALLY a "scientist" are you, "mate"?
5. "The ship had nearly one and a half the power and had better hydrodynamics because it was made for speed." I'll admit you're closer to being a "scientist" than you are to being a writer. (though that's not glowing praise as it's just more of your unsubstantiated nonsense, and not very analytical at ALL. I thought a "scientist" like yourself would be burrowing down into specifics, and FACTS and figures, or citing reputable research to back up your claim, rather than ungrammatical meaningless phrases?).
Please point me to your "stream of arguments" on how Bismarck was superior to the KGVs? I freely accepted my error (from memory) with regards to the speed issue (which you then desperately attempt to profit from by then spouting incorrect nonsense), but beyond that you STILL haven't described how Bismarck outstripped the KGV's or even the 13 year older Nelsons (again apart from Bismarck's "running away power"). Both the KGV AND the much older Nelsons were equally well gunned and better armoured inspite of being 25-30% lighter. It's called "design efficiency" and in the case of the British was necessitated by keeping within internationally agreed naval limits, something that never hindered the German naval designers. I can fire facts and figures back and forth regarding the ships with you all day, but as in the battle of Denmark Strait a fair percentage of the shots fired by you upto now have been "duds".
What "Lies" have I told about Bismarck? I've provided you with FACTS and even nighly regarded sources for you to check them against. She had many plainly inefficient design choices, such as outdated incremental armour that saw her quickly shredded as the thinner layers of secondary armour initiated the fuses of incoming British shells causing FAR greater damage than if they had passed through unhindered. As opposed to the fusillade of hits on PoW that did virtually nothing of any real importance with most of the shots passing harmlessly through the largely unarmoured superstructure of her more up to date "all or nothing" armour scheme. Or Bismarck's needlessly duplicated secondary armaments and 4 double gunned turrets that added THOUSANDS of tons of unnecessary weight for no appreciable gain, as opposed to the dual purpose secondaries and triple and quad gunned main turret designs that were then being used by more modern naval designers. Not to mention her triple screw design that IMMEDIATELY saw a full 33% of her engine power consigned to the dustbin when it came to steering with the engines alone. At least the damage to PoW's outboard propeller support could be considered as an unforeseeable though unfortunate eventuality, Bismarck's primary design ignoring the facility her steering by her engines alone seems ludicrous in comparison.
Your problem is not people trying to demean Bismarck, but people with well informed people not buying the utter fact free nonsense spoken by gushing enthralled nazi fanbois or "wehraboos" as they've become known in YT threads.
P.S With the standard of your posts so far, I'm dubious about you claim of chatting with Baron Mullenhiem-Rechberg (who knows? Maybe you're NOT giving false information for once?), though my own father who was a crewmember aboard HMS Dorsetshire at the time of the Bismarck episode, and as a member of the HMS Dorsetshire association WAS invited to and attended multiple joint reunions with the Bismarck survivors in Hamburg during the 1960s and 70s, and he DID meet and have the honour to include the Baron and many other of the Bismarck survivors amongst his friends and aquaintances.
1
-
@martinschnelle3077 My better judgement tells me to leave you in your own little fabricated, fact free, world construct. But I feel a duty to challenge your misinformation in a public forum. (Plus I've just reread the thread, and once again it appears YT has been choosing to miss out some of your posts, which have now appeared).
Long experience has shown that people who haughtily announce themselves as "scientists" / "doctors" / "scholars" / <place your own nonsense here> to be amongst the most fact free posters of all on YT, hoping instead to intimidate their co-respondent with some fake air of "expertise" on a chosen subject in lieu of actual knowledge and understanding. That well worn tactic fazes me not ONE little bit. I'm MUCH more impressed with well written, well researched comments which contain a high degree of correct factual information. Your posts to date are somewhat lacking in those regards.
1. Glad you've confirmed that Tovey's frustration has absolutely no bearing on the matter of Bismarck's armour. (BTW the "British performance" that morning saw 51,000 tons of flaming German wreckage sink beneath the Atlantic.)
2. I contrast your vague "smoke & mirrors" (I.E "a hit in the same area") with my own more accurate and verifiable facts. Resorting to "muddying the waters" to try to win a point is not something an analytical "scientist" would do, "mate". As an example, hit someone on the shoulder with a golf club, then hit them across the throat with the same club, and see which "hit in the same area" has the most damaging effect. (But again, what does your point here have to do with the fact that you weakly tried to pass off nonsense as "fact" in your first post, were politely called out on it, and have since then flailed around wildly trying vainly to score an irrelevant point in return?)
3. At least we can agree on PoW's lack of combat readiness. But regardless of her unpreparedness, the fact remains that an untested and malfunctioning ship crewed by inexperienced men STILL single handedly put the WHOLE of SKL's planning to naught. A wonderful example of good ol' British pluck & improvisation, though once again none of your flailing around on this point has ANYTHING to do with the nonsense of your first post (as do ANY of your further "points").
4. Dear oh dear oh dear.... After my earlier faux pas I've given you a trial speed of 30.12 knots that I took from the highly regarded "Battleship Bismarck - a Design and Operational History" (ISBN 9781526759757) (pages 35 AND 47), whereas you appear to be citing the trial speed of 30.81 knots attained by Tirpitz. If you refer to wikipedia there they give 30.01 knots as Bismarck's maximum speed and "Jane's fighting ships" gives the rated speed of the Bismarck class as 29 knots. I give an unbiased top end estimate of Bismarck's maximum speed and you STILL then try to further inflate her abilities by citing incorrect info, in this case from a completely different ship, as your own "evidence". It's just another example, if any were needed, of your own bias and agenda. You're not REALLY a "scientist" are you, "mate"?
5. "The ship had nearly one and a half the power and had better hydrodynamics because it was made for speed." I'll admit you're closer to being a "scientist" than you are to being a writer. (though that's not glowing praise as it's just more of your unsubstantiated nonsense, and not very analytical at ALL. I thought a "scientist" like yourself would be burrowing down into specifics, and FACTS and figures, or citing reputable research to back up your claim, rather than ungrammatical meaningless phrases?).
Please point me to your "stream of arguments" on how Bismarck was superior to the KGVs? I freely accepted my error (from memory) with regards to the speed issue (which you then desperately attempt to profit from by then spouting incorrect nonsense), but beyond that you STILL haven't described how Bismarck outstripped the KGV's or even the 13 year older Nelsons (again apart from Bismarck's "running away power"). Both the KGV AND the much older Nelsons were equally well gunned and better armoured inspite of being 25-30% lighter. It's called "design efficiency" and in the case of the British was necessitated by keeping within internationally agreed naval limits, something that never hindered the German naval designers. I can fire facts and figures back and forth regarding the ships with you all day, but as in the battle of Denmark Strait a fair percentage of the shots fired by you upto now have been "duds".
What "Lies" have I told about Bismarck? I've provided you with FACTS and even nighly regarded sources for you to check them against. She had many plainly inefficient design choices, such as outdated incremental armour that saw her quickly shredded as the thinner layers of secondary armour initiated the fuses of incoming British shells causing FAR greater damage than if they had passed through unhindered. As opposed to the fusillade of hits on PoW that did virtually nothing of any real importance with most of the shots passing harmlessly through the largely unarmoured superstructure of her more up to date "all or nothing" armour scheme. Or Bismarck's needlessly duplicated secondary armaments and 4 double gunned turrets that added THOUSANDS of tons of unnecessary weight for no appreciable gain, as opposed to the dual purpose secondaries and triple and quad gunned main turret designs that were then being used by more modern naval designers. Not to mention her triple screw design that IMMEDIATELY saw a full 33% of her engine power consigned to the dustbin when it came to steering with the engines alone. At least the damage to PoW's outboard propeller support could be considered as an unforeseeable though unfortunate eventuality, Bismarck's primary design ignoring the facility her steering by her engines alone seems ludicrous in comparison.
Your problem is not people trying to demean Bismarck, but people with well informed people not buying the utter fact free nonsense spoken by gushing enthralled nazi fanbois or "wehraboos" as they've become known in YT threads.
P.S With the standard of your posts so far, I'm dubious about you claim of chatting with Baron Mullenhiem-Rechberg (who knows? Maybe you're NOT giving false information for once?), though my own father who was a crewmember aboard HMS Dorsetshire at the time of the Bismarck episode, and as a member of the HMS Dorsetshire association WAS invited to and attended multiple joint reunions with the Bismarck survivors in Hamburg during the 1960s and 70s, and he DID meet and have the honour to include the Baron and many other of the Bismarck survivors amongst his friends and aquaintances.
1
-
@martinschnelle3077 My better judgement tells me to leave you in your own little fabricated, fact free, world construct. But I feel a duty to challenge your misinformation in a public forum. (Plus I've just reread the thread, and once again it appears YT has been choosing to miss out some of your posts, which have now appeared).
Long experience has shown that people who haughtily announce themselves as "scientists" / "doctors" / "scholars" / <place your own nonsense here> to be amongst the most fact free posters of all on YT, hoping instead to intimidate their co-respondent with some fake air of "expertise" on a chosen subject in lieu of actual knowledge and understanding. That well worn tactic fazes me not ONE little bit. I'm MUCH more impressed with well written, well researched comments which contain a high degree of correct factual information. Your posts to date are somewhat lacking in those regards.
1. Glad you've confirmed that Tovey's frustration has absolutely no bearing on the matter of Bismarck's armour. (BTW the "British performance" that morning saw 51,000 tons of flaming German wreckage sink beneath the Atlantic.)
2. I contrast your vague "smoke & mirrors" (I.E "a hit in the same area") with my own more accurate and verifiable facts. Resorting to "muddying the waters" to try to win a point is not something an analytical "scientist" would do, "mate". As an example, hit someone on the shoulder with a golf club, then hit them across the throat with the same club, and see which "hit in the same area" has the most damaging effect. (But again, what does your point here have to do with the fact that you weakly tried to pass off nonsense as "fact" in your first post, were politely called out on it, and have since then flailed around wildly trying vainly to score an irrelevant point in return?)
3. At least we can agree on PoW's lack of combat readiness. But regardless of her unpreparedness, the fact remains that an untested and malfunctioning ship crewed by inexperienced men STILL single handedly put the WHOLE of SKL's planning to naught. A wonderful example of good ol' British pluck & improvisation, though once again none of your flailing around on this point has ANYTHING to do with the nonsense of your first post (as do ANY of your further "points").
4. Dear oh dear oh dear.... After my earlier faux pas I've given you a trial speed of 30.12 knots that I took from the highly regarded "Battleship Bismarck - a Design and Operational History" (ISBN 9781526759757) (pages 35 AND 47), whereas you appear to be citing the trial speed of 30.81 knots attained by Tirpitz. If you refer to wikipedia there they give 30.01 knots as Bismarck's maximum speed and "Jane's fighting ships" gives the rated speed of the Bismarck class as 29 knots. I give an unbiased top end estimate of Bismarck's maximum speed and you STILL then try to further inflate her abilities by citing incorrect info, in this case from a completely different ship, as your own "evidence". It's just another example, if any were needed, of your own bias and agenda. You're not REALLY a "scientist" are you, "mate"?
5. "The ship had nearly one and a half the power and had better hydrodynamics because it was made for speed." I'll admit you're closer to being a "scientist" than you are to being a writer. (though that's not glowing praise as it's just more of your unsubstantiated nonsense, and not very analytical at ALL. I thought a "scientist" like yourself would be burrowing down into specifics, and FACTS and figures, or citing reputable research to back up your claim, rather than ungrammatical meaningless phrases?).
Please point me to your "stream of arguments" on how Bismarck was superior to the KGVs? I freely accepted my error (from memory) with regards to the speed issue (which you then desperately attempt to profit from by then spouting incorrect nonsense), but beyond that you STILL haven't described how Bismarck outstripped the KGV's or even the 13 year older Nelsons (again apart from Bismarck's "running away power"). Both the KGV AND the much older Nelsons were equally well gunned and better armoured inspite of being 25-30% lighter. It's called "design efficiency" and in the case of the British was necessitated by keeping within internationally agreed naval limits, something that never hindered the German naval designers. I can fire facts and figures back and forth regarding the ships with you all day, but as in the battle of Denmark Strait a fair percentage of the shots fired by you upto now have been "duds".
What "Lies" have I told about Bismarck? I've provided you with FACTS and even nighly regarded sources for you to check them against. She had many plainly inefficient design choices, such as outdated incremental armour that saw her quickly shredded as the thinner layers of secondary armour initiated the fuses of incoming British shells causing FAR greater damage than if they had passed through unhindered. As opposed to the fusillade of hits on PoW that did virtually nothing of any real importance with most of the shots passing harmlessly through the largely unarmoured superstructure of her more up to date "all or nothing" armour scheme. Or Bismarck's needlessly duplicated secondary armaments and 4 double gunned turrets that added THOUSANDS of tons of unnecessary weight for no appreciable gain, as opposed to the dual purpose secondaries and triple and quad gunned main turret designs that were then being used by more modern naval designers. Not to mention her triple screw design that IMMEDIATELY saw a full 33% of her engine power consigned to the dustbin when it came to steering with the engines alone. At least the damage to PoW's outboard propeller support could be considered as an unforeseeable though unfortunate eventuality, Bismarck's primary design ignoring the facility her steering by her engines alone seems ludicrous in comparison.
Your problem is not people trying to demean Bismarck, but people with well informed people not buying the utter fact free nonsense spoken by gushing enthralled nazi fanbois or "wehraboos" as they've become known in YT threads.
P.S With the standard of your posts so far, I'm dubious about you claim of chatting with Baron Mullenhiem-Rechberg (who knows? Maybe you're NOT giving false information for once?), though my own father who was a crewmember aboard HMS Dorsetshire at the time of the Bismarck episode, and as a member of the HMS Dorsetshire association WAS invited to and attended multiple joint reunions with the Bismarck survivors in Hamburg during the 1960s and 70s, and he DID meet and have the honour to include the Baron and many other of the Bismarck survivors amongst his friends and aquaintances.
1
-
@martinschnelle3077 My better judgement tells me to leave you in your own little fabricated, fact free, world construct. But I feel a duty to challenge your misinformation in a public forum. (Plus I've just reread the thread, and once again it appears YT has been choosing to miss out some of your posts, which have now appeared).
Long experience has shown that people who haughtily announce themselves as "scientists" / "doctors" / "scholars" / <place your own nonsense here> to be amongst the most fact free posters of all on YT, hoping instead to intimidate their co-respondent with some fake air of "expertise" on a chosen subject in lieu of actual knowledge and understanding. That well worn tactic fazes me not ONE little bit. I'm MUCH more impressed with well written, well researched comments which contain a high degree of correct factual information. Your posts to date are somewhat lacking in those regards.
1. Glad you've confirmed that Tovey's frustration has absolutely no bearing on the matter of Bismarck's armour. (BTW the "British performance" that morning saw 51,000 tons of flaming German wreckage sink beneath the Atlantic.)
2. I contrast your vague "smoke & mirrors" (I.E "a hit in the same area") with my own more accurate and verifiable facts. Resorting to "muddying the waters" to try to win a point is not something an analytical "scientist" would do, "mate". As an example, hit someone on the shoulder with a golf club, then hit them across the throat with the same club, and see which "hit in the same area" has the most damaging effect. (But again, what does your point here have to do with the fact that you weakly tried to pass off nonsense as "fact" in your first post, were politely called out on it, and have since then flailed around wildly trying vainly to score an irrelevant point in return?)
3. At least we can agree on PoW's lack of combat readiness. But regardless of her unpreparedness, the fact remains that an untested and malfunctioning ship crewed by inexperienced men STILL single handedly put the WHOLE of SKL's planning to naught. A wonderful example of good ol' British pluck & improvisation, though once again none of your flailing around on this point has ANYTHING to do with the nonsense of your first post (as do ANY of your further "points").
4. Dear oh dear oh dear.... After my earlier faux pas I've given you a trial speed of 30.12 knots that I took from the highly regarded "Battleship Bismarck - a Design and Operational History" (ISBN 9781526759757) (pages 35 AND 47), whereas you appear to be citing the trial speed of 30.81 knots attained by Tirpitz. If you refer to wikipedia there they give 30.01 knots as Bismarck's maximum speed and "Jane's fighting ships" gives the rated speed of the Bismarck class as 29 knots. I give an unbiased top end estimate of Bismarck's maximum speed and you STILL then try to further inflate her abilities by citing incorrect info, in this case from a completely different ship, as your own "evidence". It's just another example, if any were needed, of your own bias and agenda. You're not REALLY a "scientist" are you, "mate"?
5. "The ship had nearly one and a half the power and had better hydrodynamics because it was made for speed." I'll admit you're closer to being a "scientist" than you are to being a writer. (though that's not glowing praise as it's just more of your unsubstantiated nonsense, and not very analytical at ALL. I thought a "scientist" like yourself would be burrowing down into specifics, and FACTS and figures, or citing reputable research to back up your claim, rather than ungrammatical meaningless phrases?).
Please point me to your "stream of arguments" on how Bismarck was superior to the KGVs? I freely accepted my error (from memory) with regards to the speed issue (which you then desperately attempt to profit from by then spouting incorrect nonsense), but beyond that you STILL haven't described how Bismarck outstripped the KGV's or even the 13 year older Nelsons (again apart from Bismarck's "running away power"). Both the KGV AND the much older Nelsons were equally well gunned and better armoured inspite of being 25-30% lighter. It's called "design efficiency" and in the case of the British was necessitated by keeping within internationally agreed naval limits, something that never hindered the German naval designers. I can fire facts and figures back and forth regarding the ships with you all day, but as in the battle of Denmark Strait a fair percentage of the shots fired by you upto now have been "duds".
What "Lies" have I told about Bismarck? I've provided you with FACTS and even nighly regarded sources for you to check them against. She had many plainly inefficient design choices, such as outdated incremental armour that saw her quickly shredded as the thinner layers of secondary armour initiated the fuses of incoming British shells causing FAR greater damage than if they had passed through unhindered. As opposed to the fusillade of hits on PoW that did virtually nothing of any real importance with most of the shots passing harmlessly through the largely unarmoured superstructure of her more up to date "all or nothing" armour scheme. Or Bismarck's needlessly duplicated secondary armaments and 4 double gunned turrets that added THOUSANDS of tons of unnecessary weight for no appreciable gain, as opposed to the dual purpose secondaries and triple and quad gunned main turret designs that were then being used by more modern naval designers. Not to mention her triple screw design that IMMEDIATELY saw a full 33% of her engine power consigned to the dustbin when it came to steering with the engines alone. At least the damage to PoW's outboard propeller support could be considered as an unforeseeable though unfortunate eventuality, Bismarck's primary design ignoring the facility her steering by her engines alone seems ludicrous in comparison.
Your problem is not people trying to demean Bismarck, but people with well informed people not buying the utter fact free nonsense spoken by gushing enthralled nazi fanbois or "wehraboos" as they've become known in YT threads.
P.S With the standard of your posts so far, I'm dubious about you claim of chatting with Baron Mullenhiem-Rechberg (who knows? Maybe you're NOT giving false information for once?), though my own father who was a crewmember aboard HMS Dorsetshire at the time of the Bismarck episode, and as a member of the HMS Dorsetshire association WAS invited to and attended multiple joint reunions with the Bismarck survivors in Hamburg during the 1960s and 70s, and he DID meet and have the honour to include the Baron and many other of the Bismarck survivors amongst his friends and aquaintances.
1
-
@martinschnelle3077 My better judgement tells me to leave you in your own little fabricated, fact free, world construct. But I feel a duty to challenge your misinformation in a public forum. (Plus I've just reread the thread, and once again it appears YT has been choosing to miss out some of your posts, which have now appeared).
Long experience has shown that people who haughtily announce themselves as "scientists" / "doctors" / "scholars" / <place your own complete BS here> to be amongst the most fact free posters of all on YT, hoping instead to intimidate their co-respondent with some fake air of "expertise" on a chosen subject in lieu of actual knowledge and understanding. That well worn tactic fazes me not ONE little bit. I'm MUCH more impressed with well written, well researched comments which contain a high degree of correct factual information. Your posts to date are somewhat lacking in those regards. (And whats this nonsense about "crappy performance"? The RN finds and tracks a fast ship that never stopped running to avoid contact in the 44,000,000 square mile North Atlantic in the era before satellites, GPS, over the horizon radars or even comprehensive air coverage, and after finding the needle in the haystick, stopped it running away and then dismantled it with 2 superior battleships who tag teamed it and raped it?") Suck it up lad, suck it up !!!!
1. Glad you've confirmed that Tovey's frustration has absolutely no bearing on the matter of Bismarck's armour. (BTW the "British performance" that morning saw 51,000 tons of flaming German wreckage sink beneath the Atlantic.)
2. I contrast your vague "smoke & mirrors" (I.E "a hit in the same area") with my own more accurate and verifiable facts. Resorting to "muddying the waters" to try to win a point is not something an analytical "scientist" would do, is it "mate"? As an example, hit someone on the shoulder with a golf club, then hit them across the throat with the same club, and see which "hit in the same area" has the most damaging effect. (But again, what does your point here have to do with the fact that you weakly tried to pass off nonsense as "fact" in your first post, were politely called out on it, and have since then flailed around wildly trying vainly to score an irrelevant point in return?)
3. At least we can agree on PoW's lack of combat readiness. But regardless of her unpreparedness, the fact remains that an untested and malfunctioning ship crewed by inexperienced men STILL single handedly put the WHOLE of SKL's planning to naught. A wonderful example of good ol' British pluck & improvisation, though once again none of your flailing around on this point has ANYTHING to do with the nonsense of your first post (as do ANY of your further "points").
4. Dear oh dear oh dear.... After my earlier faux pas I've given you a trial speed of 30.12 knots that I took from the highly regarded "Battleship Bismarck - a Design and Operational History" (ISBN 9781526759757) (pages 35 AND 47), whereas you are citing the trial speed of 30.81 knots attained by TIRPITZ. If you refer to wikipedia there they give 30.01 knots as Bismarck's maximum speed and "Jane's fighting ships" gives the rated speed of the Bismarck class as 29 knots. I give an unbiased top end estimate of Bismarck's maximum speed and you STILL then try to further inflate her abilities by citing incorrect info, in this case from a completely different ship, as your own "evidence". It's just another example, if any were needed, of your own bias and agenda. You're not REALLY a "scientist" are you, "mate"?
1
-
@martinschnelle3077 5. "The ship had nearly one and a half the power and had better hydrodynamics because it was made for speed." I'll admit you're closer to being a "scientist" than you are to being a writer. (though that's not glowing praise as it's just more of your unsubstantiated nonsense, and not very analytical at ALL. I thought a "scientist" like yourself would be burrowing down into specifics, and FACTS and figures, or citing reputable research to back up your claim, rather than ungrammatical meaningless phrases?).
Please point me to your "stream of arguments" on how Bismarck was superior to the KGVs? I freely accepted my error (from memory) with regards to the speed issue (which you then desperately attempt to profit from by then spouting incorrect nonsense), but beyond that you STILL haven't described how Bismarck outstripped the KGV's or even the 13 year older Nelsons (again apart from Bismarck's "running away power"). Both the KGV AND the much older Nelsons were equally well gunned and better armoured inspite of being 25-30% lighter. It's called "design efficiency" and in the case of the British was necessitated by keeping within internationally agreed naval limits, something that never hindered the German naval designers. I can fire facts and figures back and forth regarding the ships with you all day, but as in the battle of Denmark Strait a fair percentage of the shots fired by you upto now have been "duds".
What "Lies" have I told about Bismarck? I've provided you with FACTS and even highly regarded sources for you to check them against. She had many plainly inefficient design choices, such as outdated incremental armour that saw her quickly shredded as the thinner layers of secondary armour initiated the fuses of incoming British shells causing FAR greater damage than if they had passed through unhindered. As opposed to the fusillade of hits on PoW that did virtually nothing of any real importance with most of the shots passing harmlessly through the largely unarmoured superstructure of her more up to date "all or nothing" armour scheme. Or Bismarck's needlessly duplicated secondary armaments and 4 double gunned turrets that added THOUSANDS of tons of unnecessary weight for no appreciable gain, as opposed to the dual purpose secondaries and triple and quad gunned main turret designs that were then being used by more modern naval designers. Not to mention her triple screw design that IMMEDIATELY saw a full 33% of her engine power consigned to the dustbin when it came to steering with the engines alone. At least the damage to PoW's outboard propeller support could be considered as an unforeseeable though unfortunate eventuality, Bismarck's primary design ignoring the facility her steering by her engines alone seems ludicrous in comparison.
Your problem is not people trying to demean Bismarck, but well informed people not buying into the utter fact free nonsense spoken by gushing enthralled nazi fanbois (or "wehraboos" as they've become known in YT threads), as well as the occasional pretend "scientist".
P.S With the standard of your posts so far, I'm dubious about you claim of chatting with Baron Mullenhiem-Rechberg (who knows? Maybe you're NOT giving false information for once?), though my own father who was a crewmember aboard HMS Dorsetshire at the time of the Bismarck episode, and as a member of the HMS Dorsetshire association WAS invited to and attended multiple joint reunions with the Bismarck survivors in Hamburg during the 1960s and 70s, and he DID meet and have the honour to include the Baron and many other of the Bismarck survivors amongst his friends and aquaintances.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davidarchibald50 Your evidence that there was no periscope? To set against the sighting by the lookout on Dorsetshire?
What was known with certainty by the Royal Navy was that Bismarck had for the previous 24 hours been transmitting beacon signals on known u-boat radio wavelengths and the scene of the final action was 350 miles (a relative Atlantic stone's throw) away from the Kriegsmarine's Atlantic u-boat bases on the French coast.
Was Captain BCS Martin of Dorsetshire expected to gamble the lives of his 750 man crew that it was indeed a dolphin's fin or a broaching whale? Or that if it WAS a u-boat the sub's capt would hold fire while he carried out the rescues?
As an RN naval captain he would have been SORELY aware of the actions of Otto Weddigen during WW1 during his attack on the British Cruisers Aboukir, Cressy & Hogue.
Also google about U-74 (KptLt Eitel-friedrich Kentrat) and U-556 (KptLt Herbert Wohlfarth) who WERE in the vicinity of Bismarck's sinking, having spotted various British warships and heard the final battle. Indeed although U-556 had to depart for France due to shortage of fuel and battle damage, U-74 surfaced after the battle & departure of the RN rescue ships to search for survivors, eventually rescuing a further 3 sailors.
You can also refer to the account of Baron Burkhard von Müllenheim-Rechberg, Bismarck's senior ranking survivor who in his book "Battleship Bismarck - a survivor's story" wrote this passage about a discussion he held with Capt Martin of the Dorsetshire after being rescued.
"Why," I burst out, "did you suddenly break off the rescue and leave hundreds of our men to drown?"
Martin replied that a U-boat had been sighted, or at least reported, and he obviously could not endanger his ship by staying stopped any longer.
The Bismarck's experiences on the night of 26 May and the morning of the 27th, I told him, indicated that there were no U-boats in the vicinity.
Farther away, perhaps, but certainly not within firing range of the Dorsetshire. I added that in war one often sees what one expects to see.
We argued the point back and forth until Martin said abruptly: "Just leave that to me. I'm older than you are and have been at sea longer. I'm a better judge."
What more could I say? He was the captain and was responsible for his ship.
Apparently some floating object had been mistaken for a periscope or a strip of foam on the water for the wake of a torpedo. No matter what it was.... I AM NOW CONVINCED THAT, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, CAPT MARTIN HAD TO ACT AS HE DID." (My caps).
They are the words of a Bismarck survivor.
If you're so heartbroken about the abandonment of sailors to their fate by the enemy, then I'll warn you NOT to read about the actions of Adm Wilhelm Marschall who on the afternoon of 8th June 1940, after his ships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau had sunk the British aircraft carrier HMS Glorious and her two gallant escorts HMS Acasta & Ardent then failed to make even the most rudimentary effort to provide humanitarian assistance, and instead sailed away leaving over 1500 RN sailors to die in the North sea, inspite of their being NO other vessels in the vicinity. Or is it only German sailors abandoned by the RN who you get all "teared up" about?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rogueriderhood1862 You say "Britain needed a victory", which it did, and a victory is what it won. Let's look at the evidence.
I've only got to provide one piece of CORRECT and verifiable information. Hitler's direct order to his armed forces high command. Issued from the German Reich Chancellery.
Being transmitted in what the German's fully believed was unbreakable code it was NOT meant as mere intimidation for the British to digest but was a signal of Hitler's true intentions to his armed forces. Here is the preamble to his "Fuhrer Directive no.16" issued on 16th July 1940.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
It does go on at length, but that's enough to be getting along with for now.
Now tell me how did the German effort to defeat Britain turn out? Did they achieve their objective of "eliminat(ing) the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely"?
We both know that they completely failed, which would be termed in common parlance as "A British victory".
Don't fell sour about that fact. We changed the course of world history by our achievement.
1
-
@rogueriderhood1862 The battle of Britain was simply the opening phase of the German move on Britain. You do realise that? If they had vanquished the RAF north of the Thames with greivous losses, then they would have obviously have made further approaches to the British govt to surrender.... if as we all know those approaches were also rejected they had placed 13 fully prepared wehrmacht divisions (that was the limit of what the Kriegsmarine thought it could transport and protect) in the Pas de Calais and assembled 2500 towed canal barges in the channel ports.
I only need to provide a SINGLE piece of verifiable information to prove my point. What better than the order issued by none other the Adolf Hitler himself? Below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the Reichchancellery on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW).
The directive was transmitted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to initmidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan was academic. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
1
-
@rogueriderhood1862 The battle of Britain was simply the opening phase of the German move on Britain. You do realise that? If they had vanquished the RAF north of the Thames with greivous losses, then they would have obviously have made further approaches to the British govt to surrender.... if as we all know those approaches were also rejected they had placed 13 fully prepared wehrmacht divisions (that was the limit of what the Kriegsmarine thought it could transport and protect) in the Pas de Calais and assembled 2500 towed canal barges in the channel ports.
I only need to provide a SINGLE piece of verifiable information to prove my point. What better than the order issued by none other the Adolf Hitler himself? Below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the Reichchancellery on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW).
The directive was transmitted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to initmidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan was academic. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
A backdraught is when a closed fire compartment (such as a room with a closed fire resisting door) traps the fire, heat and smoke within... the oxygen in the room is then consumed by the fire and the flames die down as no new oxygen is available due to the closed door/windows, but the room remains VERY hot and full of thick smoke together with a high concentration of partially combusted gases from the room's smouldering contents (fuel)... now only the oxygen is missing from the "triangle of combustion".... a door opens / window fails / or floor or ceiling burns through and fresh oxygen is now drawn into the room as the room's internal overpressure pushes out some of the previously trapped smoke/gases. The incoming oxygen mixes with the concentrated flammable gases accumulated within the room and brings the atmosphere into the "explosive range" not too lean and not too rich, and then all it needs is a smouldering ember to set of the explosive ignition. A tell tale sign of potential backdraught for firefighters attending an incident, is blackened windows with yellowish grey smoke pulsating from any gaps or cracks, also lots of heat and smoke, but little flame within a building is also a VERY dangerous situation.
A flashover is when the heat trapped at the top of a burning compartment eventually reaches such a high temperature that its radiance downwards is sufficient for every exposed combustible surface in the compartment to spontaneously combust within a second or two, turning a growing but defined fire source into a general firestorm in seconds, and it will even char nomex fire kit, and blister and crack the surface of a fire helmet. The way to remove this risk is to PULSE water spray into the searing hot upper area of the room to absorp and reduce the heat in the upper area, as a continous spray of water will completely fill the room with superheated steam in seconds, with resultant heavily "poached" & scalded firefighters.
A lesser known phenomena is known as a fire gas or smoke explosion, and is where the heat from a well developed fire in one room is transferred through the structure of a building usually into a room above the fire, this heat causes the floor covering to smoulder and thermally decompose though not necessarily in flames, filling the room again with heat and gases of thermal decomposition (pyrolysis) then if an ignition source is introduced (spark from an electrical fitting or a smouldering ember is exposed) and again an explosive conflagration can occur in a room that was not itself directly on fire. Such an incident killed two Welsh firefighters in a house fire in Blaina Gwent UK in 1996.
These are all reasons why properly managed & controlled ventilation of fire situations is now used far more often than in the past.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Early Mk I Hurricanes (and very early Spitfires) were fitted prewar with a "Watts" wooden 2 bladed fixed pitch propeller (Simply a laminated, carved solid wooden propeller). These were replaced squadron by squadron from May 1939 by the De Havilland variable pitch three blade propeller with cast metal blades, these variable pitch propellers had only two settings "fine" and "coarse" which was set manually by the pilot and improved performance during take off and at high altitude, but if the wrong pitch was selected by the pilot at the wrong time then poor performance, and most probably engine damage was the result). These were quickly superceded from Dec 1939 onwards by the "Rotol" Constant Speed propellers where the propeller blades (made of a composite wood/metal constuction trademarked as "Jablo") were infinitely variable and controlled automatically.
The 3 types of propellers above can be thought of in a similar way to gears. The 2 bladed wooden fixed pitch was rather like an old bike with only one gear.... a single inflexible gear set to give the "worst of both worlds" for both indifferent top speed and sluggish acceleration. The 2 pitch De Havilland was like a car with 2 manual gears, low and high. The Rotol constant speed propeller was like a fully automatic gearbox.
The "Rotol" constant speed propeller reduced the pilot's workload during combat and provided a VAST improvement to the overall performance of the aircraft they were fitted to.
Eric "Winkle" Brown's book "Duels in the sky" states that in his opinion the joint overall best fighter aircraft in WW2 were the Spitfire & Fw190. The Me-109 doesn't even make the top 6.
1. Supermarine Spitfire / FW-190.
2. Grumman Hellcat.
3. North American Mustang IV.
4. Mitsubishi Zeke.
5. Hawker Tempest V.
6. Kawanishi N1K2 Shinden-Kai.
(P.S Eric Brown is STILL the world's most experienced & respected test pilot, with more aircraft types flown than ANY other pilot in history, and consequently his opinion is one which is undeniably worth taking into consideration.)
As for the varied merits of both aircraft, another unmentioned aspect is the matter of relative firepower. The Me109E had....
2x 7.92mm MG17s above the engine each with 1000 rounds of ammo. The MG17 had a rate of fire of 1200rpm which gave 50 seconds of fire.
2x 20mm MG FF cannon in the wings with just 60 rounds of ammo each. The MG FF even with its relatively low rate of fire of 540rpm gave just over SIX SECONDS of potent but low density fire.
So after those 6 seconds of fire the 109E had 44 seconds of fire left from just TWO 7.92mm MG , effectively making the average Me 109E a one (or sometimes two) punch wonder.
The RAF fighter's 16 seconds of EIGHT .303 Brownings firing at 1150rpm looks a LOT less anaemic when viewed like that.
With regards to dogfighting the nazi's MG FF itself was far from an ideal weapon. As well as its low rate of fire, it's low muzzle velocity meant that when used in a "turning battle" or at high angles of deflection it was an incredibly difficult weapon to achieve hits with. It was best employed in "Boom and Zoom" tactics, where a diving 109 would fall on an unsuspecting British fighter and shred it before it had time to react.... Experienced 109 pilots were loath to get into a "turning fight" with a Spitfire or Hurricane.
In defence of the 8 x .303s of the British fighters and their lack of outright destructive power, one RAF pilot (either Al Deere or Adolph Malan, I can't remember) voiced the opinion of many RAF pilots when they were recorded as saying they preferred to send a German bomber back to France, riddled with bullet holes, both engines smoking with its aircrew dead and dying rather than shooting it down outright.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The ignorance and ingratitude of SOME modern day Poles (and lefty agitators) as witnessed in so many of the comments in this thread is quite shameless. Their ignorance of the fact that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need", or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism from June 1940 onwards, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s.
For those Ignorant modern day Poles, on your way out, please remember to kneel at the altar dedicated to the combined 1.1 million lives sacrificed by the UK and France in order to topple the nazism that was murdering and torturing YOUR country when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
And for all current honourable, and deeper thinking Poles, please accept our best wishes from the UK.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The ignorance of SOME modern day Poles (and lefty agitators) as witnessed in so many of the comments in this thread is quite shameless. Their ignorance of the fact that if it hadn't been for the British & French declaration of war in 1939, regardless of their inability to give meaningful support to Poland in its "hour of need" or if the UK had surrendered in june 1940 after the collapse of France (as the ENTIRE world expected us to) then Poland would have remained under nazi domination for DECADES. Remember that apart from Britain and France (who between them collectively squandered 1.1 million of their own citizen's lives, as well as both bankrupting themselves as nations) absolutely NO ONE in the so called "international community" raised a finger or cared whether Poland existed or not in 1939.
Without the continued opposition of the British empire to nazism from June 1940 onwards, there would have been:
NO D-Day and war in the Meditteranean to draw sizeable wehrmacht resources from the war on the Eastern Front.
NO strategic bombing of German cities and war industries.
NO interdiction of German global sea trade by the Royal Navy.
NO massive supply of weapons and war materiel from the west to the USSR, once their former allies nazi Germany had turned on them.
NO utterly crucial strategic intelligence courtesy of Britain's (not Poland's before you say it) "ULTRA" program.
With the result that the USSR would have collapsed somewhere in 1942/43, leaving the nazis in control of the whole of Europe, and their extermination camps still operating on Polish soil into the 1950s, 60s, or even 70s.
For those Ignorant modern day Poles, on your way out, please remember to kneel at the altar dedicated to the combined 1.1 million lives sacrificed by the UK and France in order to topple the nazism that was murdering and torturing YOUR country when NOBODY else cared whether you lived or died.
Seeing comments as disgusting as yours would make some people regret not leaving Poland under nazi rule, as without the UK there was never ANY hope of you escaping from it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sthgamer_ If you know your history, you'll know that it was France that had the closest ties to Poland, diplomatically, economically, culturally and militarily... Britain didn't even have a Polish embassy until 1929 and only agreed to guarantee Poland's borders in March 1939!!!
You seem to believe that massive armies just materialise fully equipped at the flick of a switch !!! Britain has never had large land armies, being primarily a naval power. The small number of full time regular troops of the BEF immediately started crossing the English Channel on 4th September 1939 followed over the next few months by the resrve divisions who had to be recalled from civilian life and equipped and transported over the follwoing few months. By the time that Poland had collapsed on 6th October, just 3 of the eventual 13 divisions of the BEF had assembled in north eastern France.
Peacetime armies do not just instantly massively swell into "combat mode"... its not a computer game. Hundreds of thousands (millions in France's case) of reservists and conscripts have to be processed, transported to their training, equipped, trained, allocated and transported to their unit, then their unit needs transporting to their operational posting.
My own father was 20 years old in Sept 1939, PERFECT age for IMMEDIATE conscription you might think... he received his "call up" papers on 2nd Sept 1939, had his RN medical on 3rd December 1939 and was instructed to arrive for his Royal Navy Basic training on 27th February 1940!!! Simply the bureaucratic process to get him and half a million other reservists and conscripts to training by itself took 5 months, by which time Poland had been conquered.
It's ridiculous that so many other people imagine that it was the sole responsibility of the UK to act as the "policeman of Europe" Why didn't the countries of central Europe not spend more of their OWN on their OWN armed forces during the interwar years to defend themselves or settle their own stupid petty differences and strike up a joint coalition to collectively defend themselves? Instead of expecting the UK taxpayer to sort out the rest of Europe's problems?
Face reality, if it wasn't for the British and French declaration of war in 1939 Poland and the Polish would STILL to this day be under the control of nazi Germany, seeing as NO-ONE else in the world cared if they were dying under nazi tyranny or not.... the USSR was only too happy to assist nazi Germany in its sacking of Europe at that point, and the US was greedily making such VAST profits off BOTH sides of the conflict that it had NO intention of taking up arms against its two highest paying "international customers".
It was ONLY the British and the French declaration of war in 1939 that triggered off the opposition to nazism and then after the French surrender in 1940 the British Empire ALONE maintained the opposition that eventually resulted in the toppling of the nazi regime.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The Fairey Swordfish were designed & built in Britain from 1935 onwards, originally for the Greek navy, But when trialled prior to delivery they were seen to be so capable that the Royal Navy bought them instead.
They were biplanes for a very good reason. At the time they were designed existing aircraft engines were of relatively low power (especially for the British fleet air arm which was ALWAYS low down on the engine & aircraft "priority list") so to enable a carrier aircraft to carry aloft heavy loads needed a large wing area. Their biplane wing area was SO great that they could take off fully loaded WITHOUT the use of a carrier's catapult. This meant that in the stormy North Atlantic where the Royal Navy mainly intended to operate them, instead of being forced to take off at the carrier's bows (where the catapults are) and which is the part of a ship that rises and falls by the greatest amount in heavy seas, the Swordfish could take of from the middle of the carrier's decks close to the bridge where the pitching and rolling was the least.
It was for this reason in May 1941 that they were able to take off from HMS Ark Royal to attack Bismarck when the Ark Royal was struggling through an Atlantic gale in MOUNTAINOUS seas, with her bows rising and falling by nearly 60ft !!! Try to imagine how terrifying it must have been for the brave young crews flying them in those conditions. Those weather conditions would have prevented all other allied carrier aircraft of the era from flying and instead seen them safely lashed down inside the hangar deck.
They were also incredibly adaptable and throughout WW2 they were modifed to carry, bombs, depth charges, torpedoes, extra fuel tanks and even eight anti ship rockets as well as the world's very first naval airborne radars (that's the reason why they were nicknamed "stringbags" it was said they could carry ANYTHING). They are widely regarded to have ended the war as the aircraft with the GREATEST amount of enemy shipping tonnage sunk, and were HUGELY loved by their crews.
They WERE to have been replaced mid war by a succesor, the Fairey Albacore, but the "stringbags" were so ubiquitous that they outlasted the Albacore in service.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TakenWithout The truth is that the 145 Polish Pilots who made it to the British Isles were the most skillful and resourceful remains of the former "Polish Air Force" who, to put it bluntly, had previously their arses kicked in both Poland and France (in the case of France, they had it kicked along with the French Airforce and the small poorly supported RAF contingent that took part in that campaign) they then arrived at the shores of Britain through late 1939 and into 1940, desperate for refuge from that nazism that had conquered their country and chased many of them for over 1000 miles.
The vast majority of them spoke absolutely no English and had previously been flying the airborne equivalent of a moped.
They had arrived at a country with the world's FIRST real time, radar based, air defence, command and control system that depended on radio direction of its aircraft via English speaking ground controllers, and which was fielding the airborne equivalent of 1000cc superbikes.
Imagine young lads who'd only ever riden mopeds around their local town centre being let loose in the middle of London on 1000cc superbikes?
The Poles were first taught (literally on bicycles) the discipline and formations that Britain's air defence system required to operate, because "freelancing" pilots & standing patrols, such as the Polish & French air forces had previously employed had TWICE proved completely incapable of providing an effective air defence against the Luftwaffe, once in Poland and again in France.
While they were learning that discipline, they also learned rudimentary English to be able to follow the orders of the British ground controllers, they simultaneously had to complete "operational conversion" training to learn how to pilot the far more powerful and complex Hurricanes that they were to pilot in the battle ahead.
Quite understandably their English language skills were by September 1940 still insufficient for them to accurately follow ground controller's orders over the radio, and so English speaking officers were originally appointed to the squadron until their English language was of a standard to be able to accurately communicate with the RAF's controllers, where upon Polish officers, who had been "shadowing" their British counterparts, were then placed in command of the squadron.
Once they'd completed that they provided a small but valuable part of the defence of the refuge they'd been given.
Polish "Kościuszko" 303 Sqd total kill tally - 45 confirmed kills
Squadron commander, Sqd Ldr Ronald Gustave Kellett (British) - 5 confirmed kills
"A" Flight commander, Fl Lt John Alexander Kent (Canadian) - 5 confirmed kills
"B" Flight commander, Fl Lt Athol Stanhope Forbes (British) - 8 confirmed kills.
Sgt pilot Josef František (Czechoslovakian) - 17 confirmed Kills.
All the best.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@wesleyjarboe9571 Yes, admittedly my comparison of Hood to Arizona is somewhat comparing "apples with oranges", considering the 5 inches of thick faced MNC armour that Arizona had over her magazines... which proved incapable of preventing the penetration of that single Japanese bomb. Also USS Arizona sounded "General Quarters" at least FIVE minutes before the commencement of the air attacks, AMPLE time for her crew to "batten down the hatches".
What, in your expert capacity as one who has received US Navy damage control training, do you suggest sank USS Arizona? Distributed systems damage, localised fires and possibly some minor flooding? or the catastrophic detonation of possibly as much as 100 tons of SPCG flashless propellant in Arizona's turret II magazine https://youtu.be/ujquq7IU0uY, caused by a single 16in Japanese naval shell converted into an airborne bomb? I know what MY money is on.
You speculation as to the structural integrity of Arizona's forward deck armour just prior to her detonation is just that, speculation, and not of the particularly well informed variety either, as is your appraisal of Hood's value as a warship. The point remains.... Was USS Arizona a worthless laughing stock due to the relatively easy nature of her destruction?
P.S I'm probably older than you are, and the last time I played a naval game was with paper and pencil. Save your condescension for the video game generation, lad.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I suppose the Germans gathering and converting 200 transport ships & 2000 canal barges into makeshift assault landing vessels, then smashing their air force against Britain's defences, and losing nearly 2000 aircraft with most of their highly trained aircrews in the process was all done "for a laugh".
If you're still in any doubt, then below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler's "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the "Felsennest" (Hitler's forward command HQ in Western Germany) on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW).
The directive was transmitted over secure landlines encrypted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to initmidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan fell to ruin. The operation had been smashed in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@robertheywood2553 I understand the geo political situation in Europe at the end of WW2. But why is there such COMPLETE current day ignorance of the other side of the coin which you voiced in your original post? Why do so many people imagine that Poland does not owe a FAR larger "debt of honour" to the UK? The same UK that had sacrificed 460,000 of its own citizens lives, which had COMPLETELY bankrupted itself with the consequent loss of its global empire, all in the effort to conquer the murderous German tyranny that had crushed it.
The Poles who made new lives in the UK after WW2 certainly recognised it.
No one is denying that Poland, unfortunately caught between two powerful warring neighbours, valiantly fought on throughout the liberation of Europe from nazism, and indeed played a small but hugely valued part in the defence of the refuge they had been given by the British.
But WHY is there the need to portray the idea that the UK is inextricably in debt to Poland while COMPLETELY ignoring the fact that if it wasn't for the UK ALONE then Poland today would only exist as a small footnote in modern history books, and the chimneys of nazi death camps would STILL be spewing out human ashes into formerly Polish skies?
The UK could NEVER have saved Poland from the post WW2 predations of the communism that had for 20 years been on its very doorstep (even though it dearly wanted to, as in 1944 Churchill even instructed the Imperial General Staff to draw up a plan to push the communist "steamroller" back to it's pre 1939 borders, a plan named "Operation Unthinkable" only to then be undermined by the US who instead co-operated with the USSR after the dust had settled.) but the UK was FUNDAMENTAL in the saving of Poland from a FAR worse 1000 year German tyranny,
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Jeremarkyjames. Hitler says you're talking bullsh!t.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan fell into ruin. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@David_Lloyd-Jones More clueless yanks crowing how "they" won the war. The common assessment of the allies victory was one won by "US industrial might, British brains and soviet blood".
If the US had REALLY wanted to "help Britain" in its "hour of need", then instead of bleeding the British empire dry and causing its collapse, they could have for example sold a production license for Tetra Ethyl Lead (or TEL - The compound required for the production of hi-octane fuels) to Britain when we applied to purchase one from the "Standard Oil of Jersey City Company" prewar.... Instead they & the US Govt refused to sell one to "their British cousins"... So much for the nonsense idea of a "special relationship" between the UK & US.
Standard Oil and the US Govt had NO qualms though about providing the exact same licence to the nazis when they applied to purchase one prewar. But when it came to Britain the US preferred to strip the British of ALL their gold, cutting edge technology and military bases around the world during the British "hour of need" in return for a supply of amongst other things, US produced hi-octane fuel.
Where there nazi sympathies in the Standard Oil boardroom and in some parts of the US Govt? The truth is so unsavoury were the business practices of the US "Standard Oil" company (such as seeking furtive routes and brokering shady deals to supply nazi Germany with fuel and oil via neutral nations during the war) that it's activities were investigated and closely monitored by the US Govt... but only AFTER the they had been DRAGGED into WW2 in Dec 1941 by the German declaration of war on the US!!!
The US "business community" engaged in VERY profitable business dealings with BOTH sides throughout WW2. US corporations such as Ford, General Motors, US Standard Oil, IBM, Kodak, Chase Bank (to name but a few) carried on "business as usual" with nazi Germany THROUGHOUT WW2.
Ford's auto production facility in Cologne and General Motor's Opel subsiduary plant in Berlin were both busy working 24/7 THROUGHOUT WW2 furnishing the nazis with approximately 60% of the Wehrmacht's military transportation needs, as well as a sizeable chunk of the Luftwaffe's aero engine requirements... all the better for attacking Britain with eh, and all the while providing US companies with BILLIONS of dollars in profit, and the US govt with millions of dollars of tax revenue
The "ALuminum COrporation of America" (ALCOA) for instance supplied SO much aircraft grade aluminium to nazi Germany in the late 1930s and into the early 1940s that it actually caused shortfalls within the US government's own military aircraft production schedules during the same period, so much so that in June 1941 the situation prompted Harold Ickes, US Secretary of the Interior, to go on record as saying “If America loses this coming war, it can thank the Aluminum Corporation of America”.
With "friends" like the US who needs enemies?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Hooibeest2D Let's dissect your nonsense point by point shall we?
1. Why do you stupidly believe "the Germans knew they weren't going to invade"? Your hero, Hitler, ABSOLUTELY intended to invade, as is shown in his "Fuhrer Directive No.16" Issued to OKW (Nazi's armed forces high command) on 16th July 1940. Here's the preamble below.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
2. "Over a 1000 pilots came from other countries, That's not even including America or Canada"
Below is an accurate graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940.
Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the actual number of pilots from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%)
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%)
🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%)
🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%)
🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%)
🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%)
That is 2342 BRITISH pilots, along with 595 NON-British pilots (and that IS including 112 Canadian and just 9 US pilots). You were only 50% wrong.
3. Yes the German's had radar (technically better sets than the British too) BUT radar in air warfare then was completely a DEFENSIVE asset, and so utterly no use to the Germans during the battle of Britain. Also the Germans had NOTHING to compare with the Chain Home command and control system that Air Chief Marshall Dowding had conceived in the run up to WW2, and it was THAT system that was a MAJOR factor in the British victory.
4. The RAF lost 1024 aircraft during the battle of Britain, compared to the Luftwaffe who lost approx 1700 aircraft.
Cut the BS and just accept... the "Mighty luftwaffe" thought it was going to piss all over Britain in 1940... and instead ended up getting it's arse kicked & PERMANENTLY losing the very CREME of its prewar air crew cadre for virtually NO gain.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
ALL mainstream western political parties (not just in the UK) are now bankrolled and controlled by corporate globalism (Want to impose corporate taxes on us? We'll move our operations elsewhere if you do). National governments and establishments have over the last 30 years been subverted from within, with political appointments of previously unheard of figures to do as their corporate paymasters tell them (Whatever happened to Danny Alexander, just where did Leo Varadkhar "pop up" from? & why is the UK Archbishop of Canterbury a former city corporate banker? Etc Etc), while still giving out the appearance of being democratically elected parliaments & public serving bodies. They have effectively become a globalist puppet theatre to keep the masses hoodwinked that its all just "business as usual" in the world of politics while the reality is that political control has been usurped from publicly elected servants by publically elected servants from a globalist sponsored and financed shortlist.
We've had years of "centrism", that reasonable, hard to argue against, political mis-selling that comprimise, and adherence to the "centre ground" is the best policy. What is growingly apparent is that in practice it means that when all political parties are singing from the same "hymn sheet", you've inevitably turned your society into a "brook no dissent", "alternative ideas not welcome" dictatorship.
Its why governments across the western world have been able to crush civil liberties and destroy western democracy with such ease, wholly supported by the same globalist MSM to keep the populace frightened by "plandemics", "climate crises" and other contrived rubbish, without ANY organised opposition to challenge and question the ongoing narrative.
Now the full might of their geo politics is turned against Russia. A Russia ruled by an unarguably dangerous & wily political operator, who will not bend to their oversight. In 1989 the forces of NATO (the NORTH ATLANTIC treaty organisation) patrolled the borders of the Warsaw Pact (Soviet backed forces), through Germany and down to eastern Italy. Its ships patrolled the eastern Med, and the Norwegian Sea. Fast forward 30 years, and we have NATO tanks carrying out exercises along the Russian border in the Baltic states and Ukraine, and Globalist controlled NATO naval forces now operate in the Black sea and on the threshold of the Kara sea, all enabled because now most eastern European countries are governed by the same globalist financed political parties that have conquered the west. That means that "NORTH ATLANTIC treaty organisation" forces are now operating a further 1000 miles eastwards away from the North Atlantic that they have EVER been. And yet we're supposed to believe that its Russia that is getting territorially avaricious?
The whole of what as happened over the last 30 years is of such Orwellian evil, its hard not to believe that globalism intends to shackle us into a 1984-esque future..... and the mouthbreathing "hoi-polloi" are too busy worrying about "winter sniffles" and "wind and rain".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tristanjager4112 First German bombs dropped on the British mainland?
16th October 1939 saw the very first bombs dropped on Britain when the Germans launched scattered air attacks on the port facilities of Rosyth and industrial facilities around the Scottish city of Edinburgh.
First bombs dropped by the RAF on German soil?
19th March 1940... When on 13th November 1939 the luftwaffe bombed RAF Sullom Voe a seaplane base with port facilities in the Shetland Isles (with the resultant death of a rabbit, and no hits on the 9 seaplanes or 2 RN vessels stationed there), the RAF retaliated by hitting the nazi seaplane base at Hörnum on the island of Sylt in the North Sea. These were THE VERY FIRST RAF bombs to land on German soil....5 months AFTER the first German bombs had landed on British soil.
The first British or German civilian casualty caused by the bombing of the opposing side during WW2?
16th March 1940 when German bombs hit the village of Waithe on Orkney during an attack on the Home Fleet anchorage at Scapa Flow, which killed a 27 year-old County Council employee, James Isbister (luckily, his wife, baby son, and the neighbour James was endeavouring to rescue from her bombed cottage all survived).
First British bombs to drop on the actual German mainland?
11th May 1940, when the British air ministry for the first time allowed the bombing of railway yards, communication centres and bridges west of the Rhine River as interdiction of German supply lines for the German assault into the NEUTRAL Low countries and France on 10th May 1940. Previous to this date the British air ministry in an effort to stop the spreading of the conflict had refused to allow the RAF to drop ANY bombs on the German mainland, instead the RAF supplied the German demand for toilet paper by dropping propaganda leaflets on German cities. This attack on 11th May 1940 had also come after REPEATED attacks against RN installations on the British mainland, most notably at Rosyth near Edinburgh, and the Cromarty Firth, both in Scotland throughout the winter of 1939/40.
First British bombs dropped EAST of the Rhine River?
23/24th August 1940. This attack ostensibly directed at the Klingenberg Power Station in Eastern Berlin & Templehof airport was in RETALIATION for REPEATED luftwaffe raids on RAF stations within the suburbs of Greater London throughout July and August 1940 that had already caused HUNDREDS of innocent British civilian deaths & casualties (euphemistically known nowadays as "collateral damage") this was inspite of Hitler's previous decrees that no bombs should be dropped within the boundaries of Greater London. Obviously that decree had never reached the ears of Herman Goering.
German retaliation for the one night of bombing of Berlin on 23/24th August 1940? The launching of the all out assault against British cities from 7th sept 1940 onwards, culminating in the world's first attempt to create a firestorm during operation "moonlight sonata" on the British city of Coventry on the night of 14/15th Nov 1940, where the luftwaffe sent 575 bombers using their world beating "X-gerat" bombing system (in the Germans own words capable of placing "target indicator" flares with an accuracy of 50 meters at 200 miles range) over the civilian city centre of Coventry dropping 550 tons of high explosive (including hundreds of "flammen" (oil) bombs) followed by over 30,000 incendiary bombs. The final death toll of that single raid? A previously unheard of 568 innocent civilians, this was in addition to the thousands of other British civilians already killed in other cities across Britain over the previous 2 months.
The first British bombing raid directly targetted at German civilians? "Operation Abigail" on the night of 16/17th December 1940, (3 months AFTER the opening of the nazi "blitz" on British cities) the Dec 16th attack by the RAF was launched against the German city of Mannheim where 100 RAF bombers dropped 100 tons of HE and 14,000 incendiaries inflicting a death toll on the German population of 34 dead and 81 injured.
Not to worry though , the RAF eventually "upped its game" and showed the Germans how to do it properly a year or two later. Don't try to hide the fact that the Germans enjoyed dropping HE on the cities of its neighbours from the earliest days of flight. Germany's first aerial bombs were dropped from a zeppelin raid on Liege in Belgium on 6th August 1914... just 11 years after the invention of powered flight. Since WW2, they've learned the lesson NOT to do it again.
Notice all the way through the above timeline the repeated pattern of initial unprovoked German attacks on Britain FOLLOWED by a British response.
As Arthur Harris alluded.... "As ye sow, so shall ye reap".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
How long is this BS gonna be TOLERATED !!!!
I stumbled on a poem the other day. Written by Rudyard Kipling in the Early 20th century, it is a warning to wrong headed rulers such as the globalist puppet turds now in our once great parliament. It should be placed on a 200ft high poster facing outside of the Houses of Parliament to let the sputum therein know that they are being WARNED, and it should be taught to all proper Englishmen and women.
Here it is.
"My son," said the Norman Baron, "I am dying, and you will be heir
To all the broad acres in England that William gave me for my share
When he conquered the Saxon at Hastings, and a nice little handful it is.
But before you go over to rule it I want you to understand this:–
"The Saxon is not like us Normans. His manners are not so polite.
But he never means anything serious till he talks about justice and right.
When he stands like an ox in the furrow – with his sullen set eyes on your own,
And grumbles, 'This isn't fair dealing,' my son, leave the Saxon alone.
"You can horsewhip your Gascony archers, or torture your Picardy spears;
But don't try that game on the Saxon; you'll have the whole brood round your ears.
From the richest old Thane in the county to the poorest chained serf in the field,
They'll be at you and on you like hornets, and, if you are wise, you will yield.
"But first you must master their language, their dialect, proverbs and songs.
Don't trust any clerk to interpret when they come with the tale of their wrongs.
Let them know that you know what they're saying; let them feel that you know what to say.
Yes, even when you want to go hunting, hear 'em out if it takes you all day.
"They'll drink every hour of the daylight and poach every hour of the dark.
It's the sport not the rabbits they're after (we've plenty of game in the park).
Don't hang them or cut off their fingers. That's wasteful as well as unkind,
For a hard-bitten, South-country poacher makes the best man-at-arms you can find.
"Appear with your wife and the children at their weddings and funerals and feasts.
Be polite but not friendly to Bishops; be good to all poor parish priests.
Say 'we,' 'us' and 'ours' when you're talking, instead of 'you fellows' and 'I.'
Don't ride over seeds; keep your temper; and never you tell 'em a lie!"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@theplayerofus319 Save all your "US saved Britain" BS for the uninformed. Britain saved ITSELF, INSPITE of the US as much as it did BECAUSE of the US.
If the US had REALLY wanted to "help Britain" in its "hour of need", then instead of bleeding the British empire dry and causing its collapse, they could have for example sold a production license for Tetra Ethyl Lead (or TEL - The compound required for the production of hi-octane fuels) to Britain when we applied to purchase one from the "Standard Oil of Jersey City Company" prewar.... Instead they & the US Govt refused to sell one to "their British cousins"... So much for the nonsense idea of a "special relationship" between the UK & US.
Standard Oil and the US Govt had NO qualms though about providing the exact same licence to the nazis when they applied to purchase one prewar. But when it came to Britain the US preferred to strip the British of ALL their gold, cutting edge technology and military bases around the world during the British "hour of need" in return for a supply of amongst other things, US produced hi-octane fuel.
Where there nazi sympathies in the Standard Oil boardroom and in some parts of the US Govt? The truth is so unsavoury were the business practices of the US "Standard Oil" company (such as seeking furtive routes and brokering shady deals to supply nazi Germany with fuel and oil via neutral nations during the war) that it's activities were investigated and closely monitored by the US Govt... but only AFTER the they had been DRAGGED into WW2 in Dec 1941 by the German declaration of war on the US!!!
The US "business community" engaged in VERY profitable business dealings with BOTH sides throughout WW2. US corporations such as Ford, General Motors, US Standard Oil, IBM, Kodak, Chase Bank (to name but a few) carried on "business as usual" with nazi Germany THROUGHOUT WW2.
Ford's auto production facility in Cologne and General Motor's Opel subsiduary plant in Berlin were both busy working 24/7 THROUGHOUT WW2 furnishing the nazis with approximately 60% of the Wehrmacht's military transportation needs, as well as a sizeable chunk of the Luftwaffe's aero engine requirements... all the better for attacking Britain with eh, and all the while providing US companies with BILLIONS of dollars in profit, and the US govt with millions of dollars of tax revenue
The "ALuminum COrporation of America" (ALCOA) for instance supplied SO much aircraft grade aluminium to nazi Germany in the late 1930s and into the early 1940s that it actually caused shortfalls within the US government's own military aircraft production schedules during the same period, so much so that in June 1941 the situation prompted Harold Ickes, US Secretary of the Interior, to go on record as saying “If America loses this coming war, it can thank the Aluminum Corporation of America”.
With "friends" like the US who needs enemies?
Britain saved ITSELF INSPITE of the US as much as BECAUSE of the US !!!
1
-
@theplayerofus319 Save all your "US saved Britain" nonsense for the uninformed. Britain saved ITSELF, INSPITE of the US as much as it did BECAUSE of the US.
If the US had REALLY wanted to "help Britain" in its "hour of need", then instead of bleeding the British empire dry and causing its collapse, they could have for example sold a production license for Tetra Ethyl Lead (or TEL - The compound required for the production of hi-octane fuels) to Britain when we applied to purchase one from the "Standard Oil of Jersey City Company" prewar.... Instead they & the US Govt refused to sell one to "their British cousins"... So much for the nonsense idea of a "special relationship" between the UK & US.
Standard Oil and the US Govt had NO qualms though about providing the exact same licence to the nazis when they applied to purchase one prewar. But when it came to Britain the US preferred to strip the British of ALL their gold, cutting edge technology and military bases around the world during the British "hour of need" in return for a supply of amongst other things, US produced hi-octane fuel.
Where there nazi sympathies in the Standard Oil boardroom and in some parts of the US Govt? The truth is so unsavoury were the business practices of the US "Standard Oil" company (such as seeking furtive routes and brokering shady deals to supply nazi Germany with fuel and oil via neutral nations during the war) that it's activities were investigated and closely monitored by the US Govt... but only AFTER the they had been DRAGGED into WW2 in Dec 1941 by the German declaration of war on the US!!!
The US "business community" engaged in VERY profitable business dealings with BOTH sides throughout WW2. US corporations such as Ford, General Motors, US Standard Oil, IBM, Kodak, Chase Bank (to name but a few) carried on "business as usual" with nazi Germany THROUGHOUT WW2.
Ford's auto production facility in Cologne and General Motor's Opel subsiduary plant in Berlin were both busy working 24/7 THROUGHOUT WW2 furnishing the nazis with approximately 60% of the Wehrmacht's military transportation needs, as well as a sizeable chunk of the Luftwaffe's aero engine requirements... all the better for attacking Britain with eh, and all the while providing US companies with BILLIONS of dollars in profit, and the US govt with millions of dollars of tax revenue
The "ALuminum COrporation of America" (ALCOA) for instance supplied SO much aircraft grade aluminium to nazi Germany in the late 1930s and into the early 1940s that it actually caused shortfalls within the US government's own military aircraft production schedules during the same period, so much so that in June 1941 the situation prompted Harold Ickes, US Secretary of the Interior, to go on record as saying “If America loses this coming war, it can thank the Aluminum Corporation of America”.
With "friends" like the US who needs enemies?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tyesalhus5604 As well as being the largest ship in the world for nearly 20 years, when HMS Hood was completed, she fielded battleship firepower protected by battleship armour and could manage 32 knots when the rest of the world's battleships struggled to make 23 knots.
If you'd like an individual example of the esteem with which HMS Hood was held by other nations, look no further than the account of Baron Burkhard von Mullenheim-Rechberg, the senior ranking survivor of Bismarck, and her 4th gunnery officer, here's an excerpt of his account of the start of the battle of Denmark Strait.
"The British ships were turning slightly to port, the lead ship showing an extremely long forecastle and two heavy twin turrets. On the telephone I heard Albrecht (Bismarck's chief gunnery officer) shout, "The HOOD...... it's the HOOD!" (his capitalisation), It was an unforgettable moment. There she was, the famous warship, once the largest in the world, that had been the "terror" of so many of our war games."
Later he made these remarks following Hood's demise....
"At first the Hood was nowhere to be seen: in her place was a colossal pillar of black smoke reaching into the sky. Gradually at the foot of the pillar, I made out the bow of the battle cruiser projecting upwards at an angle, a sure sign that she had broken in two. Then I saw something I could hardly believe: A flash of orange coming from her forward guns! Although her fighting days had ended, the Hood was firing a last salvo. I felt a great respect for those men over there"
Sounds as if the Kriegsmarine and her gunnery experts were more impressed by HMS Hood than you appear to be.
1
-
1
-
@tyesalhus5604 Where do you get the idea that "any" ship's shell would do the same thing? And what part of Hood being the world's largest and fastest capital ship for nearly 20 years do you not understand? If you're aware of what blew up Hood, why assert she was "blown up by a single shell"? She wasn't, she was blown up by 100 tons of cordite. If you want to examine how ships can be destroyed by fluke events, you could also examine how USS Arizona was "torn apart by a single Japanese SAP bomb".
The RN never officially referred to HMS Hood as "The mighty Hood", because as with many major warships it was a nickname thought up by national newspapers, and was created at a time when the British empire was tottering after WW1, so it could be seen as an attempt by the British press to shore up British morale & self esteem, and it worked big time as the name and image was seized upon by the general public not just in Britain, but across the British empire and beyond as the German testimony I gave above demonstrates, you have only to look at the viewing figures and the "pull factor" of HMS Hood when she undertook her "Empire cruise" during the 1920s, which in itself shored up the image of the British Empire throughout the interbellum. Her catastrophic destruction was totally unexpected hence the national shock and horror it caused. I think you seem to not understand the relevance of your own adjective "unforeseen".
I'll stick with the verdict of 20 years of world opinion rather than some whiny YT commenter who has no real point to make.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@brianmoore1164 Brian, lad. Drop the lefty BS and wake up.
What do you all imagine would have happened to Poland if Britain and France did as the ENTIRE rest of the world did in Sept 1939 and completely IGNORED its nazi / soviet dismemberment in Sept/Oct 1939? Or if the isolated British Isles had instead decided to seek an armistice with the nazis after the fall of France in June 1940? Do you all stupidly believe that Poland would liberate herself from 1000 years of nazi tyranny? Dream on.
Let me tell you what would have happened in reality.
Today Poland would not exist. It would simply be a footnote in modern history books, a former nation that would now be divided between nazi East Prussia and the "General Government" region of the nazi Empire. The former Polish cities would now be "Germanised" and each would STILL today have swastikas flying above them, and most chillingly of all, the likes of Sobibor, Chelmno, Belzec, Treblinka, Majdanek & Auschwitz would STILL be operating and belching human ashes into formerly Polish skies.
And thats before we even mention the sum of over £140 MILLION (at 1946 prices - Just under £4.8 BILLION adjusted for 2024) of Polish national debt to the UK that the British govt wrote off at the end of WW2.
Please give over with the almost CONSTANT insults at the UK, the nation that made a sacrifice of 460,000 of it's OWN citizen's lives, which ENTIRELY bankrupted itself, and which financed the Polish war effort in the west with UK tax payer's money, and due to those ruinous costs also lost its empire, ALL in the selfless effort to prevent a nazi domination of Europe, and saving Polish asses from extinction.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
While I understand your sentiment, I think the UK & US would be sunk financially if they had to deal with the millions of tons of dangerous military detritus that their empires have left scattered across the globe. Western Europe, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Aghanistan, Kuwait, Iraq, North Africa & the middle east, various military excusrsions into central America, Malaya, Aden, Suez, as well as the leftovers of the BILLIONS of dollars worth of weapons sold to their proxies in Africa and South & central America and the middle east, as well as various sunken naval assets that are still to this day both chemically and radioactively contaminating the world's seas. The US is currently adding Ukraine to their long LONG list of foreign countries they've fouled up with their supplying of cluster bombs to their current favourite Eastern European proxy.
Thats not to say we're the only countries who are guilty, but if the "clear up the mess you're responsible for" idea came to fruition, believe me the US & UK would be MASSIVE "net losers" of such a scheme.
I think it'd be better if we left that particularly unpleasant can of worms unopened.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JamesRichards-mj9kw The VERY first bombs to fall on the land of EITHER country during WW2? The Luftwaffe attack on RAF Sullom Voe in the Shetland Islands on 13th November 1939. The RAF RESPONDED by dropping their VERY FIRST bombs on German soil by attacking the German seaplane base on the island of Sylt in the North sea on 19th March 1940, FOUR MONTHS after the first of repeated German air attacks on RAF and Royal Navy bases on the British mainland. Prior to the RAF's attack on Sylt in March 1940, they had been prohibited by the British government from dropping ANY bombs on German soil whatsoever, instead preferring to avoid civilian casualties by supplying the German demand for toilet paper and dropping propaganda leaflets over German cities instead.
The first civilian casualty of either of the two countries was a Mr James Isbister who on 16th March 1940 was killed in the village of Brig o' Waithe in the Orkney islands during a luftwaffe attack on Scapa Flow. The first RAF bombs to land on the German mainland fell on May 11th 1940, and were likewise ostensibly directed at military targets such as Bridges and railyards west of the river Rhine to disrupt the supply of the German armies then attacking France and the Low countries. Both sides in striking designated non civilian targets regularly caused what is quaintly known as "collateral civilian casualties" (Remember while we're discussing this we're ignoring the direct aerial assaults of the nazis on Polish towns and cities in the east and the bombing of Rotterdam and the aerial attacks executed against the roads of France clogged with hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing from the invading German armies in the west).
The first large scale infliction of civilian casualties between Germans and the British? (once again we're disregarding the bombing by Germany of other nation's civilians, and concentrating on their attacks solely against Britain) During the second phase of the "battle of Britain" the Luftwaffe attacked multiple RAF fighter stations within the boundary of Greater London such as RAF Biggin Hill, Hornchurch, Kenley & Northolt through the first 2 weeks of August 1940. During these attacks HUNDREDS of "collateral" civilian deaths were inflicted on the British populace.
On the night of 23/24th August 1940 the RAF once again RESPONDED to these German air attacks by launching their FIRST bombing of targets within a city, by attacking Templehof airport and Klingenberg Power Station in the suburbs of Berlin.
This precipitated the first widespread air attacks on civilian targets when the German launched their "blitz" against London and 50 other British towns and cities, culminating in the first attempt by humanity to create an "aerial firestorm", that being the Luftwaffe bombing of Coventry on the night of 14/15th November 1940.
Once again the British RESPONDED by launching their VERY FIRST aerial attack directed specifically at German civilians, that being "Operation Abigail" the RAF attack on the German city of Mannheim on the night of 16/17th Dec 1940. (For comparisons sake the Luftwaffe murdered 568 innocent British cvilians during their attack on Coventry, the British for their part murdered 34 innocent German civilians during their bombing of Mannheim).
Do you see the pattern that has formed? Initial (and repeated) luftwaffe aerial attacks on Britain that caused a British response.
1
-
@JamesRichards-mj9kw Wrong from start to finish. The first civilian aerial bombing in human history was carried out by? Surprise surprise the Germans when they bombed Liege in Belgium by zeppelin on August 4th 1914.
The VERY first bombs to fall on the land of EITHER country during WW2? The Luftwaffe attack on RAF Sullom Voe in the Shetland Islands on 13th November 1939. The RAF RESPONDED by dropping their VERY FIRST bombs on German soil by attacking the German seaplane base on the island of Sylt in the North sea on 19th March 1940, FOUR MONTHS after the first of repeated German air attacks on RAF and Royal Navy bases on the British mainland. Prior to the RAF's attack on Sylt in March 1940, they had been prohibited by the British government from dropping ANY bombs on German soil whatsoever, instead preferring to avoid civilian casualties by supplying the German demand for toilet paper and dropping propaganda leaflets over German cities instead.
The first civilian casualty of either of the two countries was a Mr James Isbister who on 16th March 1940 was killed in the village of Brig o' Waithe in the Orkney islands during a luftwaffe attack on Scapa Flow. The first RAF bombs to land on the German mainland fell on May 11th 1940, and were likewise ostensibly directed at military targets such as Bridges and railyards west of the river Rhine to disrupt the supply of the German armies then attacking France and the Low countries. Both sides in striking designated non civilian targets regularly caused what is quaintly known as "collateral civilian casualties" (Remember while we're discussing this we're ignoring the direct aerial assaults of the nazis on Polish towns and cities in the east and the bombing of Rotterdam and the aerial attacks executed against the roads of France clogged with hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing from the invading German armies in the west).
The first large scale infliction of civilian casualties between Germans and the British? (once again we're disregarding the bombing by Germany of other nation's civilians, and concentrating on their attacks solely against Britain) During the second phase of the "battle of Britain" the Luftwaffe attacked multiple RAF fighter stations within the boundary of Greater London such as RAF Biggin Hill, Hornchurch, Kenley & Northolt through the first 2 weeks of August 1940. During these attacks HUNDREDS of "collateral" civilian deaths were inflicted on the British populace.
On the night of 23/24th August 1940 the RAF once again RESPONDED to these German air attacks by launching their FIRST bombing of targets within a city, by attacking Templehof airport and Klingenberg Power Station in the suburbs of Berlin.
This precipitated the first widespread air attacks on civilian targets when the German launched their "blitz" against London and 50 other British towns and cities, culminating in the first attempt by humanity to create an "aerial firestorm", that being the Luftwaffe bombing of Coventry on the night of 14/15th November 1940.
Once again the British RESPONDED by launching their VERY FIRST aerial attack directed specifically at German civilians, that being "Operation Abigail" the RAF attack on the German city of Mannheim on the night of 16/17th Dec 1940. (For comparisons sake the Luftwaffe murdered 568 innocent British cvilians during their attack on Coventry, the British for their part murdered 34 innocent German civilians during their bombing of Mannheim).
Do you see the pattern that has formed? Initial (and repeated) luftwaffe aerial attacks on Britain that caused a British response.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thegreatmr.a3846 Like Sweden the USA up until the German declaration of war upon her on 11th Dec 1941, was neutral, and was "morally" (as if that had ANYTHING to do with matters) entitled to sell to EITHER side of the European war, which is why the precursor to "Lend-Lease" that is the US policy of "Cash and Carry" was passed by US congress in Sept 1939.
The prior US Neutrality Acts of 1935/36/37/early 39 had all completely prohibited the sales of military goods to foreign combattants, as it was publicly felt across the world after WW1 that the fledgling "Military industrial complex" had it's dirty hands in upto the elbows in the continuation of WW1 to "line its own pockets". (How anyone could believe such slander against peace loving arms companies is beyond me).
But under pressure from the ever powerful US "business community" and individual US corporations with their associated "political funding" (a.k.a corruption) the US govt was tacitly forced to acknowledge that US businesses (and consequently the US Govt) was missing out on a BUMPER payday with the outbreak of war in Europe in Sept 1939, and with that in mind the above mentioned "Cash & Carry" policy was passed which for the first time since WWI allowed US companies to sell their wares to foreign combattants, and make HUGE profits in the process.
It was ostensibly a neutral policy whereby ANYONE could conduct legal military business with US companies, as long as they paid up front and made their own arrangements for transportation of the goods purchased, but in practice it was skewed towards the British as it was obvious that the nazi regime would be highly unlikely to be able to transport purchased goods across the Atlantic, but generally the principle of aiding two of your largest competitors to knock seven kinds of shit out of one another while you reap the profits made and still makes good business sense..... even if one of those customers was then beginning their murderous policies against their own and neighbouring populations... who cares, profits are profits !!!!
But, If the US had REALLY wanted to purely "help Britain" in its "hour of need", then instead of bleeding the British empire dry and causing its collapse, they could have, as one example, sold a production license for Tetra Ethyl Lead (or TEL - The compound required for the production of hi-octane fuels) to Britain when we applied to purchase one from the "Standard Oil of Jersey City Company" in 1938.... Instead "Standard Oil" & the US Govt refused to sell one to "their British cousins".
But simultaneously they both had NO qualms though about providing the exact same licence to the nazis when they applied to purchase one prewar. But when it came to Britain the US preferred to strip the British of ALL their gold, cutting edge technology and military bases around the world during the British "hour of need" in return for a supply of amongst other things, US produced hi-octane fuel.
Where there nazi sympathies in the Standard Oil boardroom and in some parts of the US Govt? The truth is so unsavoury were the business practices of the US "Standard Oil" company (such as seeking furtive routes and brokering shady deals to supply nazi Germany with fuel and oil via neutral nations during the war) that it's activities were investigated and closely monitored by the US Govt... but only AFTER the they had been DRAGGED into WW2 in Dec 1941 by the German declaration of war on the US!!!
The reason Britain was refused a TEL license was geopolitical, in that the British empire had a PLENTIFUL supply of oil from its colonies in British Guyana and Persia, whereas Germany did not. Why would the US sell a geopolitical advantage to one of their largest competitors to produce their own Hi-Octane fuel when they could instead milk the British Empire out of all its wealth?
The US "business community" engaged in VERY profitable business dealings with BOTH sides throughout WW2. US corporations such as Ford, General Motors, US Standard Oil, IBM, Kodak, Chase Bank, Coke-Cola (to name but a few) carried on "business as usual" with nazi Germany THROUGHOUT WW2.
Ford's auto production facility in Cologne and General Motor's Opel subsiduary plant in Berlin were both busy working 24/7 THROUGHOUT WW2 furnishing the nazis with approximately 60% of the Wehrmacht's military transportation needs, as well as a sizeable chunk of the Luftwaffe's aero engine requirements... all the better for attacking Britain with eh, and all the while providing US companies with BILLIONS of dollars in profit, and the US govt with millions of dollars of tax revenue
The "ALuminum COrporation of America" (ALCOA) for instance supplied SO much aircraft grade aluminium to nazi Germany in the late 1930s and into the early 1940s that it actually caused shortfalls within the US government's own military aircraft production schedules during the same period, so much so that in June 1941 the situation prompted Harold Ickes, US Secretary of the Interior, to go on record as saying “If America loses this coming war, it can thank the Aluminum Corporation of America”.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Complete bollocks from start to finish.
Hitler had been bombing RAF sector airfields such as Hornchurch, Northolt, Biggin Hill & Kenley which were ALL within the suburbs of London for WEEKS with resultant hundreds of innocent deaths and injuries due to what is now known as "collateral damage".
Just to counter the rest of your complete bollocks here's a timeline of bombing "milestones" between the Germans and British (Remember that aside from Britain the Germans had been killing innocent civilains with HE bombs since the deaths of over 300 Spanish civilians at Guernica in April 1937, and countless hundreds in Warsaw in 1939, and Rotterdam in 1940).
First German bombs dropped on the British mainland?
16th October 1939 saw the very first bombs dropped on Britain when the Germans launched scattered air attacks over port and industrial facilities around the Scottish city of Edinburgh, and the RN naval base at Rosyth.
First bombs dropped by the RAF on German soil?
Although the RAF had launched bomber attacks on Kriegsmarine naval units in the North sea from Sept 3rd 1939 onwards, it was actually the 19th March 1940 that the FIRST RAF bombs landed on German soil... When on 13th November 1939 the luftwaffe bombed RAF Sullom Voe a seaplane base with port facilities in the Shetland Isles (with the resultant death of a rabbit, and no hits on the 9 seaplanes or 2 RN vessels stationed there), the RAF retaliated by hitting the nazi seaplane base at Hörnum on the island of Sylt in the North Sea. These were THE VERY FIRST RAF bombs to land on German soil....5 months AFTER the first German bombs had landed on British soil.
The first British or German civilian casualty caused by the bombing of the opposing side during WW2?
16th March 1940 when German bombs hit the village of "Bridge of Waithe" near Stenness on the Orkney Islands during an attack on the Home Fleet anchorage at Scapa Flow, which killed a 27 year-old County Council employee, James Isbister (luckily, his wife, baby son, and the neighbour James was endeavouring to rescue from her bombed cottage all survived).
First British bombs to drop on the actual German mainland?
11th May 1940, when the British air ministry for the first time allowed the bombing of railway yards, communication centres and bridges west of the Rhine River to interrupt German supply lines supporting their undeclared assault into the NEUTRAL Low countries and France on 10th May 1940. Previous to this date the British air ministry in an effort to stop the inflaming of the conflict had refused to allow the RAF to drop ANY bombs on the German mainland, instead the RAF supplied the German demand for toilet paper by dropping propaganda leaflets on German cities. The RAF attacks on 11th May 1940 had also come after REPEATED attacks against RN installations on the British mainland, most notably at Rosyth near Edinburgh, Cromarty Firth & Scapa Flow all in Scotland throughout the winter of 1939/40.
First British bombs dropped EAST of the Rhine River?
On the night of 23/24th August 1940 the RAF launched an attack on Berlin. This attack directed at the Klingenberg Power Station in Eastern Berlin & Templehof airport was in RETALIATION for REPEATED luftwaffe raids on RAF Fighter Command Sector Airfields within the suburbs of Greater London throughout July and August 1940 that had already caused HUNDREDS of innocent British civilian deaths & casualties (euphemistically known nowadays as "collateral damage") this was inspite of Hitler's previous decrees that no bombs should be dropped within the boundary of Greater London. Obviously that decree had never reached the ears of Herman Goering.
German retaliation for the one night of bombing of Berlin on 23/24th August 1940? The launching of the all out assault against British cities from 7th Sept 1940 onwards, culminating in the world's first attempt to create a "firestorm" during operation "moonlight sonata" on the British city of Coventry on the night of 14/15th Nov 1940, where the luftwaffe sent 575 bombers using their world beating "X-gerat" bombing system (in the Germans own words capable of placing "target indicator" flares with an accuracy of 50 meters at 200 miles range) over the civilian city centre of Coventry dropping 550 tons of high explosive (including hundreds of "flammen" (oil) bombs) followed by over 30,000 incendiary bombs. The final death toll of that single raid? A previously unheard of 568 innocent civilians, this was in addition to the thousands of other British civilians already killed & injured in other cities across Britain over the previous 2 months.
The first British bombing raid directly targetted at German civilians?
"Operation Abigail" on the night of 16/17th December 1940, (3 months AFTER the opening of the nazi "blitz" on British cities) the Dec 16th attack by the RAF was launched against the German city of Mannheim where 100 RAF bombers dropped 100 tons of HE and 14,000 incendiaries inflicting a death toll on the German population of 34 dead and 81 injured.
Not to worry though , the RAF eventually "upped its game" and showed the Germans how to do it properly a year or two later.
Don't try to hide the fact that the Germans enjoyed dropping HE on the cities of its neighbours from the earliest days of flight. The first aerial bombs dropped in history were from a zeppelin raid on Liege in Belgium on 4th August 1914... just 11 years after the invention of powered flight. Since WW2, they've learned the lesson NOT to do it again.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Below is the vebatim British ultimatum delivered to Adm Bruno-Marcel Gentoul at Mers-El-Kebir on the 3rd July 1940
"It is impossible for us, your comrades up to now, to allow your fine ships to fall into the power of the German or Italian enemy. We are determined to fight on until the end, and if we win, as we think we shall, we shall never forget that France was our Ally, that our interests are the same as hers, and that our common enemy is Germany. Should we conquer, we solemnly declare that we shall restore the greatness and territory of France. For this purpose, we must make sure that the best ships of the French Navy are not used against us by the common foe. In these circumstances, His Majesty’s Government have instructed me to demand that the French Fleet now at Mers-el-Kébir and Oran shall act in accordance with one of the following alternatives:
(a) Sail with us and continue the fight until victory against the Germans and Italians.
(b) Sail with reduced crews under our control to a British port. The reduced crews would be repatriated at the earliest moment. If either of these courses is adopted by you, we will restore your ships to France at the conclusion of the war or pay full compensation, if they are damaged meanwhile.
(c) Alternatively, if you feel bound to stipulate that your ships should not be used against the Germans or Italians unless these break the Armistice, then sail them with us with reduced crews, to some French port in the West Indies—Martinique for instance—where they can be demilitarised to our satisfaction, or perhaps be entrusted to the United States and remain safe until the end of the war, the crews being repatriated.
If you refuse these fair offers, I must, with profound regret, require you to sink your ships within 6 hours.
Finally, failing the above I have orders of His Majesty's Government to use whatever force may be necessary to prevent your ships us from falling into German or Italian hands."
Jumped up tosser of an inadequate French matelot (Gensoul) thought he would piss about at a time of CRUCIAL importance in European history.
To use a modern turn of phrase the French idiot "Fucked about & found out" causing the deaths of 1300 French sailors.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
So for a SECOND time in 5 months the tiny membership of the Conservative party is provided with a nomination shortlist provided by who exactly? The tory central office? No matter, because ALL major political parties are now FULLY in the filthy, corrupting pay of CORPORATE GLOBALISM, and we all know the old truism "He who pays the piper calls the tune". So private, stateless corporations are selecting who is to be the premier of our and all other western countries, and what is the choice to be forced onto all of us? A furtive slimy grifter, or a blubbering, incapable, entitled clown (who also does an excellent grifting sideline), BOTH of whom are merely puppets of the multinational corporations that pay into their party coffers, and WE THE PEOPLE have NO SAY in which one runs our country. The ******s are STITCHING us ALL up, because we told their EUSSR puppets to "feck off" 6 years ago. As Jonathon Swift said over 200 years ago... “For in reason, all government without the consent of the governed is the very definition of slavery.”
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
2,500 foreign pilots? Complete nonsense.
I thought I'd create a simple "visual aid" in order to assist people learning about the history of the battle of Britain. There is much ongoing debate about the nationalities and proportions of RAF fighter pilots who took part in the battle, with a furtive aspect which attempts to portray the battle as a victory of "mostly Foreign pilots". Below is an accurate graphical representation of the proportion of pilot nationalities serving within RAF Fighter Command during the summer of 1940.
Each flag is roughly equivalent to 30 pilots, The numbers after each nation are the actual number of pilots from that country, and the approximate percentage of RAF Fighter Command's establishment in the summer of 1940 that they represented.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 UK (2342) (80%)
🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱🇵🇱 Poland (145) (5%)
🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿 New Zealand (127) (4%)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦 Canada (112) (4%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇨🇿🇨🇿🇨🇿 Czechoslovakia (88) (3%)
🇦🇺 Australia (32) (1%)
🇧🇪 Belgium (28) (1%)
🇿🇦 S. Africa (25) (1%) (1940 flag emoji not available)
🇺🇳 Other nations (France (13), R o Ireland (10), USA (9), Rhodesia (3), Newfoundland (1), Jamaica (1), Barbados (1)) (1%)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@marcelgroen6256 You don't understand the concept of the Defiant (or the Roc for that matter). NOT all fighters are designed as "air superiority" fighters (those with high maneouvrability for combatting enemy fighters).
In the mid 1930s, the British air ministry set out a specification for a "bomber destroyer" (A fighter for destroying enemy bombers, and NOT for dogfighting enemy fighters) as it was believed at that time, and with good reason, that any air attacks by Germany would be launched from the German mainland and across the North Sea, as NOBODY foresaw that France would be knocked out of a coming war (and the idea of it happening in just 6 weeks was completely unimaginable). The nearest point of mainland Germany is nearly 200 miles away from the UK, WAY beyond the range of any escorting German fighters. With Germany in the mid 1930s developing its "Schnellbomber" concept of unescorted high speed bombers (such as the Do17 and the Ju88), it was reasoned that unescorted bombing attacks would be the method of attack employed by the luftwaffe against the British mainland.
With this in mind It was recognised that fighter attacks against the rear of bomber formations carried the highest risk to the fighter from return defensive fire, head on attacks were very risky and prone to quickly turn into "ramming attacks", and so the concept of the turreted "bomber destroyer" was conceived. the idea being that since defensive fire from the sides and underneath of a bomber formation was the weakest that turretted fighters would simple fly alongside (or underneath) bomber formations and "hose the nazis out of the sky". The concept had been tried and tested during the 30s and the British bomber crews agreed that it was a difficult tactic to defend against. THAT was the design concept of the Defiant and a sound concept it was too. The nazis later developed their own successful version of the tactic with their "Schräge Musik" cannon armed night fighters.
Fast forward a few years to summer 1940. France and the Low Countries have been conquered and Luftwaffe fighters were now positioned just 20 miles across the English Channel (and not the 200 miles that prewar planning had anticipated). EASILY close enough to launch ESCORTED bombing raids against the south of England. The WHOLE problem with the Defiant was in those much different circumstances the British air ministry in its desperation for fighters to counter the luftwaffe attacks during the battle of Britain ordered the Defiant into combat in conditions that it was NEVER designed for. The original premise had been sound, the aircraft was well capable of operating as it was intended, but the situation was completely different from those that had been expected in the 1930s, and poor command decisions in summer 1940 sealed its fate.
The Luftwaffe had EXACTLY the same problem when it too tried to employ its Bf-110s (You know the "Zestorer" or "destroyer" fighter) in the role of "air superiority" for which it was eminently unsuitable.
The Defiant was a dependable and well liked aircraft by its crews, and saw some success as a night fighter but by the time that working airborne interception radar had been developed faster aircraft had taken the Defiant's place (primarily the excellent Bristol Beaufighter).
Even then the Defiant was used as a pioneering "electronic warfare" aircraft carrying RAF "Moonshine" and "Mandrel" radar jamming equipment, and then ended its days as a target tug for training air gunners.
No way it deserves to be on this list... it just shows a lack of understanding.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MarkHarrison733 You know that even your hero Hitler thinks you're talking ABSOLUTE bollocks Mark !!!
I only need to provide a SINGLE piece of verifiable information to prove my point. What better than the order issued by none other the Adolf Hitler himself? Below I've "copy and pasted" the preamble to Hitler's "Fuhrerbefehl No. 16" (Fuhrer Directive 16) issued from the "Berghof" (Hitler's "holiday home" in Bavaria) on 16th July 1940 to the German armed forces high command (OKW).
The directive was transmitted over secure landlines encrypted in what the Germans believed was an unbreakable code, showing that it was NOT for the digest of the British and simply designed to initmidate them into coming to the surrender table, but was a true indication of Hitler's intent.
"The Fuhrer And Supreme Commander Of The Armed Forces.
The Fuhrer's Headquarters. 16th July, 1940. 7 copies
Directive No. 16 -- On Preparations For A Landing Operation Against England
Since England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, shows no signs of being ready to come to an understanding, I have decided to prepare a landing operation against England, and, if necessary, to carry it out.
The aim of this operation will be to eliminate the English homeland as a base for the prosecution of the war against Germany and, if necessary, to occupy it completely."
But as we both know the first phase of the operation, that being the battle of Britain, was smashed, meaning the rest of the plan was academic. The operation had been stopped in its first phase. What would be described in common parlance as "A resounding British victory".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
When devious nazi fanboi idiots and other assorted uninformed loons such as yourself say "Hitler never wanted war with Britain and France" they ALWAYS miss off the part that says "until he was ready for it on his OWN terms".
Because of course Hitler laid all his hopes on being left to expand the nazi empire EASTWARDS in peace, assimilate his new found conquests with their collective economies and resources, further build up his military power and only THEN conquer France followed by Britain (or possibly impose a crushing "pax Germanica" on the UK as they did with Vichy France), they had already attempted such a feat TWICE BEFORE in the previous 70 years, once in 1870 and again in 1914, the THIRD attempt in 1940 was precipitated by the British and French not sitting and waiting for it to happen on Hitler's terms, (have you never wondered why nazi Germany was known as the THIRD reich?). If we had've waited the outcome would have been much MUCH different from the destruction of nazism in 1945.
Not confronting Hitler in 1939 would have resulted with Britain by the late 1940s onwards having:
A puppet nazi government, a nazi supporting King Edward VIII restored to the throne, and the UK as a nazi satellite state.
Extermination camps in the Cotswolds, Pennines & Scottish Highlands.
SS Einsatzgruppen stalking the shires looking to find "undesirables" to summarily execute.
All UK males of working age being deported to the reich to be slaved to death in nazi armaments factories or infrastructure projects.
And now, slimy nazi fanbois and other devious loons want the uninformed to think that letting Hitler conduct his plans undisturbed would mean that we would have a Britain today filled with Rose cottages, warm beer, bar skittles, Morris dancers & village cricket.
Don't be a clueless dupe and fall for nonsense such as that produced by this nazi simp.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The process of evolution and dereliction of the ego of the individual "drivers" of progress has always accompanied mankind, while often the handiwork of the lowly architect or builder is the last remaining physical vestige of their former empires.
I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed:
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
No thing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rosemarycharles7164 Yes the globalist reshaping of the world has been in the pipeline for a long time, BUT My SINCERE advice to you Mary is :
STOP watching the news
STOP reading the newspapers
Be VERY selective on what you watch on youtube.
And if you can, try to encourage your family to wean themselves of the "idiot box in the living room", and it will be all for the better.
If you can live your life by filling it with ALL the things that make you happy and positive, family, nature, hobbies, dog walking, maybe some local charitable work or whatever else gives you pleasure and simultaneously remove as much of this spirit crushing nonsense that is now being foisted on us, it will ALL be to your advantage, as it will make NO DIFFERENCE if you pay attention to all this current chaos or not. Live your life in the "here and now" of your own "happy bubble" (and hopefully get your family to do the same).
Remember that most people in this once wonderful country of ours are STILL kind natured and beautiful.
And like Nick Ross used to say at the end of crimewatch, "sleep well & don't have nightmares".
God Bless Rosemary.
1
-
@rosemarycharles7164 Yes the globalist reshaping of the world has been in the pipeline for a long time, BUT My SINCERE advice to you Mary is :
STOP watching the news
STOP reading the newspapers
Be VERY selective on what you watch on youtube.
And if you can, try to encourage your family to wean themselves of the "idiot box in the living room", and it will be all for the better.
If you can live your life by filling it with ALL the things that make you happy and positive, family, nature, hobbies, dog walking, maybe some local charitable work or whatever else gives you pleasure and simultaneously remove as much of this spirit crushing nonsense that is now being foisted on us, it will ALL be to your advantage, as it will make NO DIFFERENCE if you pay attention to all this current chaos or not. Live your live in the "here and now" of your own "happy bubble" (and hopefully get your family to do the same).
Remember that most people in this once wonderful country of ours are STILL kind natured and beautiful.
And like Nick Ross used to say at the end of crimewatch, "sleep well & don't have nightmares".
God Bless Rosemary.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1