REMEMBRANCE SUNDAY.....

[floo]

No it wasn't. The Germans were never close to being in a position to launch a successful invasion, not with the equipment they had at the time.

Have you evidence to support that claim?

[jeremyp]

Have you evidence to support that claim?

The German invasion plan included towing barges of men and equipment across the English Channel. These were flat bottomed canal barges and they would have capsized if - say - a destroyer steamed past them at speed. Thus Germany needed to completely neutralise the Royal Navy and for that the first needed complete air superiority. They never even came close to that.

[Owlswing]

The German invasion plan included towing barges of men and equipment across the English Channel. These were flat bottomed canal barges and they would have capsized if - say - a destroyer steamed past them at speed. Thus Germany needed to completely neutralise the Royal Navy and for that the first needed complete air superiority. They never even came close to that.

Thanks to the R A F - even 'Stuffy' Dowding admnitted that the vistory in the Battle of Britain was a damned close thing.

FFS - a large chunk of the Navy was kept busy for most of the war doing nothing mnore thast waiting for ONE German ship to hit the high seas - Tirpitz!

If Tirpitz had sortied just as the barges exited the Channel ports the very existence of your high speed destroyers would be in doubt.

I set up a 'possible' scenario, had Hitler not shifted his attention and the Luftwaffe to Russia the outcome could have been as I suggested. The Army on ouir home islands would not have lasted more than a fortnight - there weren't enough of them.

Even meglomaniac Churchill admitted just how close we had come to defeat - in 1940 the Home Guard was still training with broomstcks because there were not enough rifles available to arm them.

[Walter]

Thanks to the R A F - even 'Stuffy' Dowding admnitted that the vistory in the Battle of Britain was a damned close thing.

FFS - a large chunk of the Navy was kept busy for most of the war doing nothing mnore thast waiting for ONE German ship to hit the high seas - Tirpitz!

If Tirpitz had sortied just as the barges exited the Channel ports the very existence of your high speed destroyers would be in doubt.

I set up a 'possible' scenario, had Hitler not shifted his attention and the Luftwaffe to Russia the outcome could have been as I suggested. The Army on ouir home islands would not have lasted more than a fortnight - there weren't enough of them.

Even meglomaniac Churchill admitted just how close we had come to defeat - in 1940 the Home Guard was still training with broomstcks because there were not enough rifles available to arm them.

Dear Mr Owl

Your history lesson on this subject has been invaluable , thank you .

[floo]

The German invasion plan included towing barges of men and equipment across the English Channel. These were flat bottomed canal barges and they would have capsized if - say - a destroyer steamed past them at speed. Thus Germany needed to completely neutralise the Royal Navy and for that the first needed complete air superiority. They never even came close to that.

I don't think you have any verifiable evidence for that statement.

[Robbie]

We could probably find it if we searched the internet. It's what I've always been given to understand. Still the navy was a dangerous place to be, ships regularly torpedoed & where do you go if you ship's torpedoed except into the sea and maybe drowning.

[Owlswing]

We could probably find it if we searched the internet. It's what I've always been given to understand. Still the navy was a dangerous place to be, ships regularly torpedoed & where do you go if you ship's torpedoed except into the sea and maybe drowning.

In the North Sea for most of the year it wasn't "maybe" at all! It was almost inevitable if the cold didn't get you first!

[Robbie]

Yep and in the two world wars they were conscripts, poor souls had no choice in the matter. There's something about the mere thought of conscription that terrifies me.

[Nearly Sane]

A thought occurs

What would have been the consequences of the Nazis Adlertag being successful and not cancelled? It was, by all accounts quiote a close thing.

So instead of June 1940 being the beginning of our stand alone it would be the beginning of life under the Nazis in the UK.

How many of the lefties posting on this Forum are the sons and grandsons, daughters and grandaughters of, 1940's lefties? In the above scenario there is a very good chance that those parents and grandparents would be treated exactl;y as the lefties in the Reich and the othetr Occupied Countrieds - death in a concentration camp.

There would be no Brirish Jews - dead in the Concentation Camp too.

Newspapemen and women, gays, the mentally ill, the physically deformed all murdered.

Twins sent for Dr Mengele to experiment on.

Can anyone see isolationist America of 1940 lifting a finger to help? I certainly can't; how many of their politicians, between 1939 and 1941, kept going on about "not getting dragged into another European war and having good ol' American boys killed for something that was not America's fight."

Oh they would fight in the Pacific from December 7, 1941 but what use would that be to Britain? None.

Why did this scenario not come to be? Because of all those men and women who stood up and said NOT ON MY WATCH! Men and women who fought, died, were wounded and mutilated, who endured the Blitz, who lost friends and family to defeat Hitler.

The people we remember with every poppy we buy, with every second of the two minutes silence.

Is that too much to do to thank these people whio ensured that we can have an argument over what the poppy stands for rather than being worked to death as slaves in a Nazi factory?       

I have to admit to be completely at a loss as to what you mean here by 'lefties'. There are few people on here who would argue that fighting WW2 was wrong, note as a pacifist I am one of them but then it's a bit more nuanced than your strawman about that.

Hundreds of thousands of what might be called lefties fought and died in that war. So what is the relevance of your post?

Further, as you seem to be accepting on the Should We Remember Then thread being a 'conscie' is neither a bad nor a 'leftie' thing, so again what point are you trying to make?


Finally, as the one openly pacifist (afaik) member of the forum, absolutely your challenge is a value one. But to me it's illustrated throughout history that good people fight and kill, and are killed for what I might think are badideas. The willingness to follow leaders to kill 'the others' is what contributes to the bloody slaughter of the brave, the foolish (and there is little difference between the two), the bad, the good, the ugly, the cruel, those who are terrified, and those who enjoy it (and yes, Churchill, I'm looking at you.)


Your support of the bravery and honour seems time to lead to the slaughter. My doubt and idea that murdering others just because they are run by a certain different type of idiot seems the one way to avoid that.

[jeremyp]

FFS - a large chunk of the Navy was kept busy for most of the war doing nothing mnore thast waiting for ONE German ship to hit the high seas - Tirpitz!

No it wasn't.

If Tirpitz had sortied just as the barges exited the Channel ports the very existence of your high speed destroyers would be in doubt.

It would have been engaged by the British Home Fleet (of battleships). It would not have lasted long.

I set up a 'possible' scenario, had Hitler not shifted his attention and the Luftwaffe to Russia the outcome could have been as I suggested. The Army on ouir home islands would not have lasted more than a fortnight - there weren't enough of them.

By the time Hitler shifted his attention, autumn was upon us and the weather not conducive to towing barges across the channel. The Germans ran out of time to subdue the RAF and the Royal Navy.

Even meglomaniac Churchill admitted just how close we had come to defeat - in 1940 the Home Guard was still training with broomstcks because there were not enough rifles available to arm them.

Ever heard of propaganda?

Had Germany neutralised the RAF and then the Navy so they could come across unopposed, they might have made a go of it. I rather suspect they wouldn't have got beyond the beaches though. When we did it the other way, we had huge quantities of specialist amphibious equipment to do the job and an overwhelming advantage of men and materiel and it was still a bit close.

[jeremyp]

I don't think you have any verifiable evidence for that statement.

Apart from all the history books I've read on the subject, no.

Start with Len Deighton's "Fighter".

[Owlswing]

I have to admit to be completely at a loss as to what you mean here by 'lefties'. There are few people on here who would argue that fighting WW2 was wrong, note as a pacifist I am one of them but then it's a bit more nuanced than your strawman about that.

Sorry that is not what I meant.

Anyone professing the kind of anti-tory sentiments that are frequent on here, if thgey expressed similar sentiments in a Brutain under tghe Nazis would be considered, at the very least, communist sympathisers.

[Nearly Sane]

Sorry that is not what I meant.

Anyone professing the kind of anti-tory sentiments that are frequent on here, if thgey expressed similar sentiments in a Brutain under tghe Nazis would be considered, at the very least, communist sympathisers.

Then good for them! And to be fair, Tories, despite some of their best efforts, are not Nazis.

[Owlswing]

 Then good for them! And to be fair, Tories, despite some of their best efforts, are not Nazis.

I'm not talking about today, but 1939-45 and the way the nazis saw it.

OK, the nazis were further to the right than the Tories, but at that time the analogy fits, they saw any kind of socialist (maybe this is a better word than leftie) equalled communism

[Owlswing]

Apart from all the history books I've read on the subject, no.

Start with Len Deighton's "Fighter".

#209 - and where do you think my analysis of it comes from if not books written by historians, military memoirs, etc? It certainly did not come off the back of a matchbox!

Whatever the answer it does not alter the fact that Remembrance Day should not be a religious ritual, or seen as a glorification of war (any war), a justification of organised violence (the use of troops/veterans - see Zimbabwe - Tianamin (sic) Square etc).

It should be exactly what it says on the tin - a day to remember those who died and those who wished they has died and those who , despite horrific mental and physical injuries, continue to live life and to be as close to their pre-injury selves as they can and, perhaps even more those whose injuries prevent them from living in the community that they suffered their injuries to protect.

[Nearly Sane]

I'm not talking about today, but 1939-45 and the way the nazis saw it.

OK, the nazis were further to the right than the Tories, but at that time the analogy fits, they saw any kind of socialist (maybe this is a better word than leftie) equalled communism

Then why mention 'lefties' today or what it meant then as if they weren't fighting. I don't get what you are trying to say.

[Owlswing]

Then why mention 'lefties' today or what it meant then as if they weren't fighting. I don't get what you are trying to say.

The anti-tory sentiments expressed here  if expressed after a successfull German invasion in 1940 against the Nazis would have had fatal consequences for those expressing them.

I am NOT saying that those here would suffer but those living in 1940 post a German invasion. The .list drawn up of those to be executed immediately the Germans landed in England is clear evidence of this.

Is that clear enough for you?

[Nearly Sane]

The anti-tory sentiments expressed here  if expressed after a successfull German invasion in 1940 against the Nazis would have had fatal consequences for those expressing them.

I am NOT saying that those here would suffer but those living in 1940 post a German invasion. The .list drawn up of those to be executed immediately the Germans landed in England is clear evidence of this.

Is that clear enough for you?

No, because you appear to be saying that people expressing opposition yo what Boris Johnson has just done are supporting the Nazis.

[Owlswing]

No, because you appear to be saying that people expressing opposition yo what Boris Johnson has just done are supporting the Nazis.

I've never seen you talking bollocks before but this time I think you are deliberately misreading what I am saying.

As a result I'm out of this thread; which I have no doubt was your intention.

[Nearly Sane]

I've never seen you talking bollocks before but this time I think you are deliberately misreading what I am saying.

As a result I'm out of this thread; which I have no doubt was your intention.

I have to admit I'm guessing what you mean because as pointed out, it seems so unclear. Why mention lefties then and now in such a confused way and be unwilling to explain what you mean?

[jeremyp]

#209 - and where do you think my analysis of it comes from if not books written by historians, military memoirs, etc? It certainly did not come off the back of a matchbox!

Your analysis doesn't really conflict with mine. All I'm saying is that the Germans couldn't invade Britain without first neutralising the Royal Navy. The only way they had to neutralise the Royal Navy was to gain air superiority. Even in the darkest days before they switched to bombing cities, we could have withdrawn all the aircraft to airfields out of range of their fighters. Once they switched to bombing cities, they had basically thrown in the towel with respect to invasion.

Whatever the answer it does not alter the fact that Remembrance Day should not be a religious ritual, or seen as a glorification of war (any war), a justification of organised violence (the use of troops/veterans - see Zimbabwe - Tianamin (sic) Square etc).

It should be exactly what it says on the tin - a day to remember those who died and those who wished they has died and those who , despite horrific mental and physical injuries, continue to live life and to be as close to their pre-injury selves as they can and, perhaps even more those whose injuries prevent them from living in the community that they suffered their injuries to protect.

You won't get any disagreement from me on that one.