History Channel

Neil...

Its all perception, in any war...

If resistance fighters were on your side and "win" they are heroes. If
those same resistance fighters were on the other side they were terrorists.

If resistance fighters were on the other side and "lose" they were
terrorists. If those same resistance fighters were on your side they were
heroes/martyrs..


"Neil Hoskins" wrote in message
...

"Bobby Galvez" wrote in message
...


Neil Hoskins wrote:

The shooting down of Yamamoto's aircraft was an assassination..

Arguably. When they tried to target Sadam during the invasion of Iraq
there
was some discussion of this. It turns out that Churchill was reluctant
to
assassinate Hitler. Think about it: if it was legal for the USAF to
attempt
to take out Saddam, would it also be legal for the Iraqi insurgents to
send
a suicide bomber to London to target Blair? You have to be very careful
with the law and "OK" doesn't always equate to "legal".

The whole point to "insurgents" is that they operate against governments.
Nothing they do is "legal."

BobbyG

Oh, I see. So the French Resistance were "illegal"? The Yugoslav
partisans? What about the soldiers of the American Revolutionary War?
And, since Hamas were democratically elected, presumeably anybody who
opposes them is an illegal insurgent? I see, that's all so simple, thanks
for explaining. Presumeably you're one of Dubya's top advisors?

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
Robert Sveinson wrote:
How about the bombing of Prague when the USAAF was AIMING at
Dresden.

How about the bombing of several Swiss cities
when AIMING at targets (supposedly) in Germany?


You've confused target identification/navigation with bombing accuracy.



So any target will do, right one or wrong one, as long as it is bombed
"accurately"?

"Precision" is an integral part of the equation, in that it implies that
the bomber crews knew where they were going and, having got there, knew
what they had to do.

That is NOT the situation with the bombing of Prague, Schaffhausen,
Zurich and Basel.

--
Moving things in still pictures!

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
Robert Sveinson wrote:
RAF accuracy was as good if not better than that of
the USAAF if the target was vivible.

Did the USAAF precisely hit any target such as
the TIRPITZ, the Dortmund Ems canal,
the Saumur Tunnel, various Gestapo buildings,
the Antheor Viaduct, Amiens Prison?


Yes.


No! I have never heard of any!


That you haven't heard of any does not mean it didn't occur, it means you're
ignorant.


Why not give us a list of those targets.
--
Moving things in still pictures!

Mitchell Holman wrote:
"Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:euI%j.98$t07.25
@newsfe22.lga:

"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
...
"Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:7Gm%j.31$%g5.8
@newsfe13.lga:

"GC" wrote in message
...



My question on the B17's probably related to the fact the program
totally
ignored the Dams,the Tirpitz,etc all involving a touch of precision
Yes the so called pundits with the most resources to get A message
out to the public are the ones ignoring the facts, but it is also
the consumers of these so called facts who want their
fables fed to them by spoon rather than consulting
reputable historians who are at fault as well.

There was that fairey tale about U-571 which claimed
that the US Navy intercepted secret signals from a U-Boat,
decyphered the signals and using these spectacular results
sent a force and captured said U-Boat. A true work of fiction,
however people who saw this fairey tale asked me
in all seriousness whether I had heard about this
heroic episode of the anti submarine war.

For military movie fiction you can't "The Sound Barrier"
showing the British being the first to achieve supersonic
flight.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044446/
I am surprised that you could find that one
what with the extensive air brushing out of any
British accomplishments.
I assume that you are stating that the British
did nothing in the attempts to fly faster
than the speed of sound. No surprise there.
Air brush away!


No, just that British complaints about the inaccuracy
of "U-571" need to take into account their country's own
loose treatment of history.

And then there is British director David Leans' "Bridge
Over The River Kwai", which credited the British for an
action that in fact Americans accomplished.........


I noticed this review of U-571:

"Faithful to the conventions of the World War II genre, Mostow's
(BREAKDOWN) submarine thriller pays earnest homage to the pluck and
determination of ordinary people forced to overcome extraordinary odds.
The mostly young and inexperienced crew of the S-33 is deployed on a top
secret, high-priority mission to intercept a disabled German u-boat (the
titular U-571) and capture the ship's encryption system--the Enigma--in
order to crack the Nazi's communication codes and hasten an allied
victory in the North Atlantic. Racing against a German rescue effort,
the S-33 stages a daring raid on the U-571. But after capturing the
U-571, the Americans find themselves its prisoner as they must pilot the
leaky, disabled vessel through hostile enemy waters. McConaughey (EDTV,
DAZED AND CONFUSED) leads a strong cast (Keitel - HOLY SMOKE, Paxton - A
SIMPLE PLAN) in this fast-paced, tense, submarine adventure."

Presumably "Faithful to the conventions of the World War II genre"
relates to rebranding all WW2 coups and victories as being down to the USA?

The big US propaganda machine was even at work in WWW2, possibly
starting with "Objective, Burma", to belittle the endeavours of their
allies, or to ignore them completely.


--
Moving things in still pictures!

®i©ardo wrote in news:mGP%j.75386$zc6.60120
@newsfe29.ams2:

Mitchell Holman wrote:
"Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:euI%j.98$t07.25
@newsfe22.lga:

"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
...
"Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:7Gm%j.31$%g5.8
@newsfe13.lga:

"GC" wrote in message
...



My question on the B17's probably related to the fact the program
totally
ignored the Dams,the Tirpitz,etc all involving a touch of precision
Yes the so called pundits with the most resources to get A message
out to the public are the ones ignoring the facts, but it is also
the consumers of these so called facts who want their
fables fed to them by spoon rather than consulting
reputable historians who are at fault as well.

There was that fairey tale about U-571 which claimed
that the US Navy intercepted secret signals from a U-Boat,
decyphered the signals and using these spectacular results
sent a force and captured said U-Boat. A true work of fiction,
however people who saw this fairey tale asked me
in all seriousness whether I had heard about this
heroic episode of the anti submarine war.

For military movie fiction you can't "The Sound Barrier"
showing the British being the first to achieve supersonic
flight.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044446/
I am surprised that you could find that one
what with the extensive air brushing out of any
British accomplishments.
I assume that you are stating that the British
did nothing in the attempts to fly faster
than the speed of sound. No surprise there.
Air brush away!


No, just that British complaints about the inaccuracy
of "U-571" need to take into account their country's own
loose treatment of history.

And then there is British director David Leans' "Bridge
Over The River Kwai", which credited the British for an
action that in fact Americans accomplished.........


I noticed this review of U-571:

"Faithful to the conventions of the World War II genre, Mostow's
(BREAKDOWN) submarine thriller pays earnest homage to the pluck and
determination of ordinary people forced to overcome extraordinary odds.
The mostly young and inexperienced crew of the S-33 is deployed on a top
secret, high-priority mission to intercept a disabled German u-boat (the
titular U-571) and capture the ship's encryption system--the Enigma--in
order to crack the Nazi's communication codes and hasten an allied
victory in the North Atlantic. Racing against a German rescue effort,
the S-33 stages a daring raid on the U-571. But after capturing the
U-571, the Americans find themselves its prisoner as they must pilot the
leaky, disabled vessel through hostile enemy waters. McConaughey (EDTV,
DAZED AND CONFUSED) leads a strong cast (Keitel - HOLY SMOKE, Paxton - A
SIMPLE PLAN) in this fast-paced, tense, submarine adventure."

Presumably "Faithful to the conventions of the World War II genre"
relates to rebranding all WW2 coups and victories as being down to the
USA?

The big US propaganda machine was even at work in WWW2, possibly
starting with "Objective, Burma", to belittle the endeavours of their
allies, or to ignore them completely.



Was there a likewise "big British propoganda machine" to credit
their country with feats done by Americans, as in The Sound Barrier
and Bridge Over River Kwai?

Movies have always taking liberty with reality, and military
movies are no exception. Much ado about nothing if you ask me.

Mitchell Holman wrote:
®i©ardo wrote in news:mGP%j.75386$zc6.60120
@newsfe29.ams2:

Mitchell Holman wrote:
"Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:euI%j.98$t07.25
@newsfe22.lga:

"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
...
"Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:7Gm%j.31$%g5.8
@newsfe13.lga:

"GC" wrote in message
...



My question on the B17's probably related to the fact the program
totally
ignored the Dams,the Tirpitz,etc all involving a touch of precision
Yes the so called pundits with the most resources to get A message
out to the public are the ones ignoring the facts, but it is also
the consumers of these so called facts who want their
fables fed to them by spoon rather than consulting
reputable historians who are at fault as well.

There was that fairey tale about U-571 which claimed
that the US Navy intercepted secret signals from a U-Boat,
decyphered the signals and using these spectacular results
sent a force and captured said U-Boat. A true work of fiction,
however people who saw this fairey tale asked me
in all seriousness whether I had heard about this
heroic episode of the anti submarine war.
For military movie fiction you can't "The Sound Barrier"
showing the British being the first to achieve supersonic
flight.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044446/
I am surprised that you could find that one
what with the extensive air brushing out of any
British accomplishments.
I assume that you are stating that the British
did nothing in the attempts to fly faster
than the speed of sound. No surprise there.
Air brush away!

No, just that British complaints about the inaccuracy
of "U-571" need to take into account their country's own
loose treatment of history.

And then there is British director David Leans' "Bridge
Over The River Kwai", which credited the British for an
action that in fact Americans accomplished.........

I noticed this review of U-571:

"Faithful to the conventions of the World War II genre, Mostow's
(BREAKDOWN) submarine thriller pays earnest homage to the pluck and
determination of ordinary people forced to overcome extraordinary odds.
The mostly young and inexperienced crew of the S-33 is deployed on a top
secret, high-priority mission to intercept a disabled German u-boat (the
titular U-571) and capture the ship's encryption system--the Enigma--in
order to crack the Nazi's communication codes and hasten an allied
victory in the North Atlantic. Racing against a German rescue effort,
the S-33 stages a daring raid on the U-571. But after capturing the
U-571, the Americans find themselves its prisoner as they must pilot the
leaky, disabled vessel through hostile enemy waters. McConaughey (EDTV,
DAZED AND CONFUSED) leads a strong cast (Keitel - HOLY SMOKE, Paxton - A
SIMPLE PLAN) in this fast-paced, tense, submarine adventure."

Presumably "Faithful to the conventions of the World War II genre"
relates to rebranding all WW2 coups and victories as being down to the
USA?
The big US propaganda machine was even at work in WWW2, possibly
starting with "Objective, Burma", to belittle the endeavours of their
allies, or to ignore them completely.



Was there a likewise "big British propoganda machine" to credit
their country with feats done by Americans, as in The Sound Barrier
and Bridge Over River Kwai?

You tell me. Don't forget this thread started about the extreme bias of
The History Channel and its rewriting of history in America's favour.

Movies have always taking liberty with reality, and military
movies are no exception. Much ado about nothing if you ask me.




--
Moving things in still pictures!

"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
...
®i©ardo wrote in news:mGP%j.75386$zc6.60120
@newsfe29.ams2:
Mitchell Holman wrote:
"Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:euI%j.98$t07.25
@newsfe22.lga:
"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
...
"Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:7Gm%j.31$%g5.8
@newsfe13.lga:
"GC" wrote in message
...

small snip

For military movie fiction you can't "The Sound Barrier"
showing the British being the first to achieve supersonic
flight.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044446/
I am surprised that you could find that one
what with the extensive air brushing out of any
British accomplishments.
I assume that you are stating that the British
did nothing in the attempts to fly faster
than the speed of sound. No surprise there.
Air brush away!

No, just that British complaints about the inaccuracy
of "U-571" need to take into account their country's own
loose treatment of history.

And then there is British director David Leans' "Bridge
Over The River Kwai", which credited the British for an
action that in fact Americans accomplished.........

I noticed this review of U-571:

"Faithful to the conventions of the World War II genre, Mostow's
(BREAKDOWN) submarine thriller pays earnest homage to the pluck and
determination of ordinary people forced to overcome extraordinary odds.
The mostly young and inexperienced crew of the S-33 is deployed on a top
secret, high-priority mission to intercept a disabled German u-boat (the
titular U-571) and capture the ship's encryption system--the Enigma--in
order to crack the Nazi's communication codes and hasten an allied
victory in the North Atlantic. Racing against a German rescue effort,
the S-33 stages a daring raid on the U-571. But after capturing the
U-571, the Americans find themselves its prisoner as they must pilot the
leaky, disabled vessel through hostile enemy waters. McConaughey (EDTV,
DAZED AND CONFUSED) leads a strong cast (Keitel - HOLY SMOKE, Paxton - A
SIMPLE PLAN) in this fast-paced, tense, submarine adventure."

Presumably "Faithful to the conventions of the World War II genre"
relates to rebranding all WW2 coups and victories as being down to the
USA?

The big US propaganda machine was even at work in WWW2, possibly
starting with "Objective, Burma", to belittle the endeavours of their
allies, or to ignore them completely.

Was there a likewise "big British propoganda machine" to credit
their country with feats done by Americans, as in The Sound Barrier
and Bridge Over River Kwai?

Sir -- as a land-bound lurker whose familiarity is mostly with things army,
and as an admirer of your contributions here and elsewhere, I raise a timid
hand in polite objection.
The British propaganda machine did nothing to slight or ignore American
efforts during WW2. (It could be argued that they didn't have the resources
for that approach, even if they wanted to take it.)
Meanwhile ®i©ardo's point about "Objective Burma" has some merit -- or at
least Churchill thought so. He was infuriated that such a film should be
released in the last year of the war itself, that the hero was played by
someone who had ducked military service, and that it implied U.S. paratroops
were responsible for the sort of action Wingate's Chindits had been
generating since 1942. Objective Burma was banned in England until
1952.

I remember seeing "The Sound Barrier" in the year of its release, and my
memories of it stretch back that far. If you have access to a VHS or DVD
home version, please correct me ... but ... the film presents a disclaimer
that it is a piece of fiction, and if despite that it seems more truthful
than most works of fiction then that may be due to the skill of the
director, David Lean; it was acknowledged in the film that the sound barrier
had already been overcome by an American aviator, without, as I remember,
any mention being made that the American aircraft was not jet- but
rocket-powered; and the whole thing is really about Geoffrey de Havilland's
fatal semi-success in the DH 108 Swallow, when he tickled Mach 1 but didn't
survive.

As to "Bridge Over the River Kwai" -- also a David Lean film, as you
noted -- if there's blame to be handed out, blame Pierre Boulle for writing
the hit novel on which the film is based, and for turning several
stiff-necked and stupid French army officers he had known in Indo-China into
the one stiff-necked and stupid English officer played by Alec Guinness.
The novel (and the film) were meant to outline the torments of the POWs
building the bridge, not glorify the heroism or achievement of those
destroying it. Besides -- the film has the bridge destroyed in 1943, and in
a manner that exploits cinematic story-telling. The actual destruction of
the bridge in 1945 by the 458th Heavy Bombardment Group, U.S.A.A.F, wouldn't
have made much of a movie.

arjay wrote:
"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
...
®i©ardo wrote in news:mGP%j.75386$zc6.60120
@newsfe29.ams2:
Mitchell Holman wrote:
"Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:euI%j.98$t07.25
@newsfe22.lga:
"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
...
"Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:7Gm%j.31$%g5.8
@newsfe13.lga:
"GC" wrote in message
...

small snip

For military movie fiction you can't "The Sound Barrier"
showing the British being the first to achieve supersonic
flight.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044446/
I am surprised that you could find that one
what with the extensive air brushing out of any
British accomplishments.
I assume that you are stating that the British
did nothing in the attempts to fly faster
than the speed of sound. No surprise there.
Air brush away!
No, just that British complaints about the inaccuracy
of "U-571" need to take into account their country's own
loose treatment of history.

And then there is British director David Leans' "Bridge
Over The River Kwai", which credited the British for an
action that in fact Americans accomplished.........
I noticed this review of U-571:

"Faithful to the conventions of the World War II genre, Mostow's
(BREAKDOWN) submarine thriller pays earnest homage to the pluck and
determination of ordinary people forced to overcome extraordinary odds.
The mostly young and inexperienced crew of the S-33 is deployed on a top
secret, high-priority mission to intercept a disabled German u-boat (the
titular U-571) and capture the ship's encryption system--the Enigma--in
order to crack the Nazi's communication codes and hasten an allied
victory in the North Atlantic. Racing against a German rescue effort,
the S-33 stages a daring raid on the U-571. But after capturing the
U-571, the Americans find themselves its prisoner as they must pilot the
leaky, disabled vessel through hostile enemy waters. McConaughey (EDTV,
DAZED AND CONFUSED) leads a strong cast (Keitel - HOLY SMOKE, Paxton - A
SIMPLE PLAN) in this fast-paced, tense, submarine adventure."

Presumably "Faithful to the conventions of the World War II genre"
relates to rebranding all WW2 coups and victories as being down to the
USA?
The big US propaganda machine was even at work in WWW2, possibly
starting with "Objective, Burma", to belittle the endeavours of their
allies, or to ignore them completely.
Was there a likewise "big British propoganda machine" to credit
their country with feats done by Americans, as in The Sound Barrier
and Bridge Over River Kwai?

Sir -- as a land-bound lurker whose familiarity is mostly with things army,
and as an admirer of your contributions here and elsewhere, I raise a timid
hand in polite objection.
The British propaganda machine did nothing to slight or ignore American
efforts during WW2. (It could be argued that they didn't have the resources
for that approach, even if they wanted to take it.)
Meanwhile ®i©ardo's point about "Objective Burma" has some merit -- or at
least Churchill thought so. He was infuriated that such a film should be
released in the last year of the war itself, that the hero was played by
someone who had ducked military service, and that it implied U.S. paratroops
were responsible for the sort of action Wingate's Chindits had been
generating since 1942. Objective Burma was banned in England until
1952.

I remember seeing "The Sound Barrier" in the year of its release, and my
memories of it stretch back that far. If you have access to a VHS or DVD
home version, please correct me ... but ... the film presents a disclaimer
that it is a piece of fiction, and if despite that it seems more truthful
than most works of fiction then that may be due to the skill of the
director, David Lean; it was acknowledged in the film that the sound barrier
had already been overcome by an American aviator, without, as I remember,
any mention being made that the American aircraft was not jet- but
rocket-powered; and the whole thing is really about Geoffrey de Havilland's
fatal semi-success in the DH 108 Swallow, when he tickled Mach 1 but didn't
survive.

As to "Bridge Over the River Kwai" -- also a David Lean film, as you
noted -- if there's blame to be handed out, blame Pierre Boulle for writing
the hit novel on which the film is based, and for turning several
stiff-necked and stupid French army officers he had known in Indo-China into
the one stiff-necked and stupid English officer played by Alec Guinness.
The novel (and the film) were meant to outline the torments of the POWs
building the bridge, not glorify the heroism or achievement of those
destroying it. Besides -- the film has the bridge destroyed in 1943, and in
a manner that exploits cinematic story-telling. The actual destruction of
the bridge in 1945 by the 458th Heavy Bombardment Group, U.S.A.A.F, wouldn't
have made much of a movie.



Ah, an eloquent lurker.

Thank you for your well expressed comments.

--
Moving things in still pictures!

"Steven P. McNicoll" schreef in bericht
m...
Robert Sveinson wrote:

RAF accuracy was as good if not better than that of
the USAAF if the target was vivible.

Did the USAAF precisely hit any target such as
the TIRPITZ, the Dortmund Ems canal,
the Saumur Tunnel, various Gestapo buildings,
the Antheor Viaduct, Amiens Prison?


Yes.



No! I have never heard of any!


That you haven't heard of any does not mean it didn't occur, it means
you're ignorant.


Any examples?
Calling people ignorant is not only rude, is also says something about
yourself.

Regards,
Herman

"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
...
"Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:euI%j.98$t07.25
@newsfe22.lga:


"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
...
"Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:7Gm%j.31$%g5.8
@newsfe13.lga:


"GC" wrote in message
...



My question on the B17's probably related to the fact the program
totally
ignored the Dams,the Tirpitz,etc all involving a touch of precision

Yes the so called pundits with the most resources to get A message
out to the public are the ones ignoring the facts, but it is also
the consumers of these so called facts who want their
fables fed to them by spoon rather than consulting
reputable historians who are at fault as well.

There was that fairey tale about U-571 which claimed
that the US Navy intercepted secret signals from a U-Boat,
decyphered the signals and using these spectacular results
sent a force and captured said U-Boat. A true work of fiction,
however people who saw this fairey tale asked me
in all seriousness whether I had heard about this
heroic episode of the anti submarine war.


For military movie fiction you can't "The Sound Barrier"
showing the British being the first to achieve supersonic
flight.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044446/

I am surprised that you could find that one
what with the extensive air brushing out of any
British accomplishments.
I assume that you are stating that the British
did nothing in the attempts to fly faster
than the speed of sound. No surprise there.
Air brush away!


No, just that British complaints about the inaccuracy
of "U-571" need to take into account their country's own
loose treatment of history.

Air Brush In High Gear.

And then there is British director David Leans' "Bridge
Over The River Kwai", which credited the British for an
action that in fact Americans accomplished.........

http://www.gunplot.net/kwairailway/s...marailway.html

Look at the table showing, if your *claim* is more than a fable,
that +-700 Americans built the death railway and the bridges. They
only lost 356 to the harsh conditions.
Makes one wonder what +-30,000 British, +-18,000 Dutch,
+-13,000 Australian pows with the losses of 6,540 British,
2,830 Dutch and 2,710 were doing at the time wouldn't you
say?





http://www.kanchanaburi-info.com/en/muang.html


Historical background: 'Death Railway'

In 1943 thousands of Allied Prisoners of War (PoW) and Asian labourers
worked on the Death Railway under the imperial Japanese army in order to
construct part of the 415 km long Burma-Thailand railway. **Most of these
men were Australians, Dutch and British** and they had been working steadily
southwards from Thanbyuzayat (Burma) to link with other PoW on the Thai side
of the railway. This railway was intended to move men and supplies to the
Burmese front where the Japanese were fighting the British. Japanese army
engineers selected the route which traversed deep valleys and hills. All the
heavy work was done manually either by hand or by elephant as earth moving
equipment was not available. The railway line originally ran within 50
meters of the Three Pagodas Pass which marks nowadays the border to Burma.
However after the war the entire railway was removed and sold as it was
deemed unsafe and politically undesirable. The prisoners lived in squalor
with a near starvation diet. They were subjected to captor brutality and
thus thousands perished. The men worked from dawn until after dark and often
had to trudge many kilometres through the jungle to return to base camp
where Allied doctors tended the injured and diseased by many died. After the
war the dead were collectively reburied in the War Cemeteries and will
remain forever witness to a brutal and tragic ordeal.



Don-Rak War Cemetery

This War Cemetery is also known as the Kanchanaburi War Cemetery. It is
located opposite Kanchanaburi's Railway Station on Saengchootoe Road. It
contains the remains of **6,982 Australian, Dutch and British** war
prisoners who lost their lives during the construction of the Death Railway.