Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: "No, but I served in a company of heroes."


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: "No, but I served in a company of heroes." Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: "No, but I served in a company of heroes." - 1/15/2011 8:01:40 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
Sorry, those damn Japanese were late to the Pearl Harbor game. What can I say ? FDR wanted to do it, but withiout a few bodies he would never have had the support.

Keeping at what bay ? Even FDR knew that Hitler wouldn't touch us with a ten [thousand] foot pole. Everybody knew that back then. It was not our war really.

Sorry if that offends you, I didn't mean to. But I am not backing down to be politically correct or, for that matter any reason. Really, I'm not too impressed with FDR, he knew, and he wanted to be on the side that's winning, or would be. With all of Russia's might, Germany was doing better than expected. Look at the manpower, we shouldn't even have been bothered. But FDR needed that feather in his cap or something.

But really the point of that post was to have you-know-who stewing and steaming while I laugh. You can't really get pissed at me about that now right ?

T

(in reply to RapierFugue)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: "No, but I served in a company of heroes." - 1/15/2011 8:13:33 PM   
RapierFugue


Posts: 4740
Joined: 3/16/2006
From: London, England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Sorry, those damn Japanese were late to the Pearl Harbor game. What can I say ? FDR wanted to do it, but withiout a few bodies he would never have had the support.

Keeping at what bay ? Even FDR knew that Hitler wouldn't touch us with a ten [thousand] foot pole. Everybody knew that back then. It was not our war really.

Sorry if that offends you, I didn't mean to. But I am not backing down to be politically correct or, for that matter any reason. Really, I'm not too impressed with FDR, he knew, and he wanted to be on the side that's winning, or would be. With all of Russia's might, Germany was doing better than expected. Look at the manpower, we shouldn't even have been bothered. But FDR needed that feather in his cap or something.


Your knowledge of military history is woeful. Your lack of knowledge doesn't offend me in the slightest though, so no worries. I'm used to it.

Although, being fair, as I always try to be, yours is a different sort of woeful to the woeful normally espoused by your countrymen, and a slightly more honourable one, so I suppose there's a degree of pride you should take in that. You can at least put "I'm different" on a T-Shirt.

As to the rest, a) I'm not "steamed" about anything, merely trying (as I sometimes do) to correct ignorance, although on this topic I confess I rarely bother much these days because it's like swimming upstream through treacle, so poorly is the subject taught in both US and UK schools (although even more poorly in the US) and b) I've “ignore” binned your opponent as a troll, and thus he has no further interest to me, either for or against.

Thus I'm not fussed one way or the other at your attempts to bait him, although I would point out you must surely realise that, as I've said before, and will doubtless say again, the only reaction to trolls that “works” is just to ignore them. If you feel so moved to poke them with a stick then that's your business, and I wouldn't speak against you for doing so, as I do the same myself from time to time, but you surely comprehend that it's like chucking petrol on a bonfire? I mean, you're not entirely stupid, from what I’ve seen of your posts previously. Somewhat eccentric maybe, and a little devoid of self-control, but hardly dense.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: "No, but I served in a company of heroes." - 1/16/2011 1:43:36 AM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
Well thanks RF - I think :-)

Was I irked that someone pollutes a thread that was started in the best of intentions ? Yes. Did I rant ? Yes. Am I done ? Hopefully. The poking stick can tire one out, really.

I read Band Of Brothers, and of all the things to say about it, you have to keep in mind that THIS IS NOT FICTION. Another thing I liked was the fact that it pulled no punches. They gave their opinions and observations about the people in different countries without reservation, and even the fact that they considered Sobel an asshole. Asshole or not, he earned a decent life after the war, which he was denied. They also expressed respect for the enemy.

I've also read a good part of Mein Kampf. Hitler was not as much of a nut as they made him out to be. There is one thing I refuse to believe and nobody can prove it anyway. That the Nazis would come after the US. It was of course impractical and pretty much impossible. So basically we really did not have to enter the war. I'm not spouting off about the claims that FDR knew about the Pearl Harbor attack aforehand here, but the facts are that the US was pushing Japan into a corner, on purpose. We simply did not have to do anything at the time.

There is a school of thought though that had we not entered the theater, eventually the Nazis might have the bomb. I can't say without a time machine. Simple job, change history once and see how it works out and if you don't like it just go change it back. Of course that is preposterous. And of course exploring the what-ifs is simply an exercise. If the Nazis could've taken care of Russia, and gained some territory, the people of those territories would grow loyalty in as little as thirty years perhaps. With the bomb and that manpower they could become a real threat, especially if we didn't have the bomb. Perhaps it's better that we did get involved.

However I don't buy into the published reasons. The US government can think that far ahead in this matter but not on monetary policy ? And our objectives were totally altruistic ? I got some oceanfront property in Belin, New Mexico for anyone who believes that. Everything they do they do for money or votes. The new deal ? A chicken in every pot ? That means votes.

The people I've known - some of them were on the "inside". This is up front and personal, things I was told about how things really work. I've come to some near unshakable conclusions, but I can't say for sure that I am always right. But I doubt I am always wrong. People at the top did not get there by being nice. Not a pleasant truth, but a truth nonetheless.

It's bad enough when someone smears soldiers because the war was for the wrong reasons. People are so manipulable, to the point where they gathered around the arrival points of Viet Nam vets and called them baby killers. To put it extremely bluntly, if your life is in danger because some "Gook" strapped a bomb to some kid's chest you shoot. Not only for yourself but for your comrades. These people gave a part of their phyche - or something.

I can draw an analogy. People who think guns kill people. Think of the government as the person and the soldier as the gun. Because the war was wrong the soldiers were wrong ? That's bad enough, chastising people in a bad situation for wanting to live another day. Even Easy Company, from what I read in the book, did not hate the Germans. They had a job to do and they did it.

Although that mentality is bad enough, someone comes along even worse. Soldiers are bloodthirsty, and should burn in hell. This is an order of magnitude worse than those who shouted "baby killer" as our vets disembarked the planes that brought them "home ? ".

Now to really get real, some soldiers were bloodthirsty animals, reveling in the arena of death, bragging about their kill count, things like that. Of course it's true. But to paint them all with the same brush is bigotry on a level that makes the racial inequalities in this country. past or present, look like nothing.

Tis true that I know more revisionist history than regular history. I've only begun to study it in the last decade or so. But knowing human nature, I cast a jaundiced eye on conventional history, especially when the historians try to state the reasons, the motives for what governments did. In that light, Mein Kampf could've been full of shit. Hitler purported his goals to be altruistic in nature, and I would be a fool to believe it completely, just as the supposed good hearts of our own "leaders. I have plenty of grains of salt. If I thought Hilter would build an army and send it out to conquer half of Europe for no financial gain, I should be dismissed. Or dissed, take yor pick.

And if deem me eccentric, I got news for you. That word is not strong enough. I have not found an adjective that fits as of yet.

I believe that nature intended for some to die off. Natural selection. The development of human society has largely removed that factor and due to the fact that there are too many people, the time and resources do not exist to educate and support everyone. Natural selection. War is a form of modified natural selection.

I'm OK with John Lennon's statement : "What if they gave a war and nobody came ? ". However that is not reality. To blame the soldier for the war is like blaming the car for the accident. (under normal circumstance, not an equipment failure). And as I said, one takes it even further attacking the character of the soldier. Irked ? You betcha.

T


(in reply to RapierFugue)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: "No, but I served in a company of heroes." - 1/16/2011 4:48:42 AM   
RapierFugue


Posts: 4740
Joined: 3/16/2006
From: London, England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
Well thanks RF - I think :-)


You're welcome. I certainly wasn't attacking you, old sport, merely pointing out a couple of foibles I've noticed. No harm or offence intended.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
There is a school of thought though that had we not entered the theater, eventually the Nazis might have the bomb.


It's not a school attended by more than anyone with more than 3 functioning brain cells. The Germans lacked the theoretical know-how, and were at least 4-5 years behind getting it, as they'd killed, imprisoned or let flee a load of mathematical experts, on account of them being Jewish, and a load of chemical and manufacturing experts, for the same reasons. It's somehow oddly fitting that, if Hitler hadn't been an anti-Semite, he'd have been massively more dangerous. German scientists, interrogated post war by the Allies, were massively incorrect about both the quantities of Uranium 235 necessary to make a bomb (their chief scientific advisor considered that something in excess of 1.5 metric tonnes was required, whereas the amount is nothing like that much), and the processes necessary to make it reliably. And that’s in 1945/6, remember; even if they’d started from the same point as people like Oppenheimer (which they didn't), they wouldn’t have got there as quickly because they had made a number of errors in their initial calculations, and they’d also made some hideously inaccurate errors on the rest of the process as well (in other words, they started with wrong thinking and allowed it to continue to direct their ever more incorrect efforts); they believed that Uranium was the only workable isotope, having missed Plutonium completely (one theory for this is that Heisenberg deliberately misled his own nation concerning the maths around fissile isotopes, on account of wanting to sabotage, or at least stall, Germany’s nuclear programme, but more likely is that they simply missed it, on account of the fact that not one single German nuclear theorist of the era managed to work out that plutonium was fissile under everyday conditions) but worse they weren’t yet aware that the only isotope of uranium that “works” in a bomb-making capacity is uranium 235 – the Germans thought that any of several of the uranium isotopes they were working on (at least 4-6 years behind the Allies’ understanding, remember) would suffice were they ever to make such a device. They wouldn’t have. What they would do was make a fairly effective “dirty bomb”, and there’s strong evidence Germany did manage this, but a dirty bomb is a long way away from a useful weapon of war.

Next, Germany's ability to manufacture the components of a nuclear bomb, i.e. their capacity to weaponise fissile materials, was at least 3-4 years away from where they needed to be, because they'd been directed (again, from the top, i.e. der Führer and the military seniors) to concentrate on the mechanical engineering technologies necessary to make aircraft, ships, guns, tanks, etc. This technological approach (I call it the Krups Model, after the best exponent of it) was very good at making large-scale mechanical devices, but the manufacturing skills required to weaponise fissile materials are completely different; it’s like the difference between making a skyscraper and a Swiss watch – both are difficult technical challenges, but they're completely different in terms of manufacturing focus and skill-sets required.

Thirdly, courtesy of Heisenberg again, the Germans believed they were “only” about 18-24 months off having such a weapon in late 1942 and, as they thought at that point there was virtually no chance of losing the war (note that they didn't consider America’s entry to be any blocker to victory, which is your starter for 10), they actually shelved the project as being a) unnecessary and b) easily re-started if it should be required. By the time they realised they were in trouble, war-wise, they were also too far off having the theory, practice, manufacturing and weaponising skills required and, worse (from their POV of course, not ours) they didn't even realise just how far off they were.

Next, and (oddly) most tellingly; cost and resources. The Manhattan project, and the research preceding it, was one of the most costly and resource-hungry projects ever attempted at that stage in human history. At its peak it drew in something in the region of 150,000 technical or semi-technical personnel, and cost (in today’s terms) something in the order of $75-100 Billion dollars – Germany simply didn't have either the personnel to achieve this on its own, or the money. Britain (and I mean Britain on its own, not the Allies as a whole) had matched and then surpassed Germany’s manufacturing output as early as mid 1942, and the Germans were constantly on the back foot from then on, capacity-wise. Put simply, if they had have tried it they’d have starved or been unable to make much in the way of tanks, guns, ships, aircraft, etc, while they were doing it.

Next, security of research facilities; the Germans simply didn't have anywhere they could work in peace; they had a few subterranean facilities, but these were relatively shallow, and weren’t anywhere near big enough to allow work on an atomic device to be completed without severe disruption by Allied bombing attacks. As soon as the Allies noticed the build-up of personnel and materials (which they would have, having excellent photo-reconnaissance capabilities), they would have been able to disrupt the programme.

Next, delivery methods; the Germans didn't have a suitable vehicle for deployment – they had shelved development of a long range, heavy tactical bomber as early as 1942, as they felt that it would prove unnecessary – their thinking was that, once they’d conquered Russia and sorted out their natural resource limitation issues, they could deal with Britain and the rest of Europe in short order, and America would then be a fairly easy “mop up”; Hitler’s plan, as best we understand it, was to simply offer America peace terms, albeit at the point of a gun.

Next, ... oh I could go on all day on this one, sorry, but as I noticed yesterday that at least one of the mods are having one of their "on topic" drives (something I'm not personally in favour of as I enjoy and appreciate, and am educated by a lot of “thread drift”, but of course it’s not my call), I'm not going into more details. Read a book. Read lots of books. Study for, oh I dunno ... 20 years maybe? Then come to the understanding that America’s intervention in WWII, while it certainly capped the war to a 1945 conclusion that would probably have spun out to 1947-48 without them, wasn't actually intrinsic to an Allied victory. Don't get me wrong, I'm personally glad and grateful they did (not least because it’s unlikely my grandfather would have lived had the fighting gone on much longer), but this commonly held (and, as I'm given to understand, taught as fact in many American schools?) belief is sadly erroneous. If you remove the Chinese and other forces in the Pacific theatre then the Allies lose. If you remove Russia from the European theatre then the Allies lose, but you can remove America and what happens is that the war lasts longer, and costs more lives, but still isn't lost.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

And if deem me eccentric, I got news for you. That word is not strong enough. I have not found an adjective that fits as of yet.

I can think of a couple ;)
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
Irked ? You betcha.


My point was, your degree of irked-ness is immaterial; trolls can’t be argued out of an idiotic position, because they're not about the facts, they're about the needle and the damage done, i.e. it’s the argument they want, and any response is fine by them – your reason, logic and understanding, such as it is, don't count. Until you get that you're always going to be dancing to their tune, not singing your own.

Are we learning yet?


< Message edited by RapierFugue -- 1/16/2011 5:01:25 AM >

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 84
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: "No, but I served in a company of heroes." Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.067