If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
The Black Monk wrote: Instead, of course, Hitler's war was a crusade only for his grotesque and evil ideology, as bad as if not worse than the Bolshevism he fought. There is simply no comparison between the explicit genocide promulgated by the Nazi ideology and the de facto repressive implementation of "communism" in the USSR. All this talk about "famine holocausts" is nothing but revisionist and Nazi apologist drivel especially considering that it originates from areas that never suffered through any Soviet famine and which actively supported Hitler during WWII. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
"John Mullen" a écrit dans le message news: ... "Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ... (snip) The French were involved rather heavily in WW1 you'll find For sure, but not (with all respect) in the second. They were invaded, defeated, surrendered, collaborated or resisted according to taste, and then liberated themselves with the help of a third of a million US and UK troops. For most of the war, most of the time, most of them weren't involved. Figures dont't really agree, you know. France sent 8,410,000 soldiers to the front. Out of them, 1,357,800 were killed and 3,595,000 wounded. The only country that suffered higher losses in this war was Russia. Yours, Christophe |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in news:bn3guk
: "Cub Driver" wrote in message ... Well yes but the army retained the upper hand, its not as if they were doing nothing. There was this little war going on in China If you read Yamamoto's biography its clear that the navy OPPOSED war with the western powers. Where in the world did you get this information? The Japanese army longed to attack Russia. The Japanese navy longed to attack into the "southern treasure chest", incidentally liberating Asia from British, Dutch, and American imperialism. From the biography of Admiral Yamamoto which was written by Hiroyuki Agawa published by Kodansha International Right, but how do you jump from "Admiral Yamamoto opposed the war" to "The Navy opposed the war"? Admiral Yamamoto was fairly atypical among Japanese Navel offices in that he had spent a fair amount of time in the US. He therefor had a somewhat better appreciation than most in Japan of the ability of America to simply crush Japan in terms of Industrial output. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
"Christophe Chazot" wrote in message
... "John Mullen" a écrit dans le message news: ... "Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ... (snip) The French were involved rather heavily in WW1 you'll find For sure, but not (with all respect) in the second. They were invaded, defeated, surrendered, collaborated or resisted according to taste, and then liberated themselves with the help of a third of a million US and UK troops. For most of the war, most of the time, most of them weren't involved. Figures dont't really agree, you know. France sent 8,410,000 soldiers to the front. Out of them, 1,357,800 were killed and 3,595,000 wounded. The only country that suffered higher losses in this war was Russia. For WW2? Seems awfully high and the figures I have certainly don't agree. On Googling, I keep getting France military 250,000 civilian 350,000 total 600,000 which sounds more reasonable, although still obviously a lot. After summer 1940 very few French were 'at the front', although I know about the Free French movement and the heroism of the Resistance etc. France only learned from WW1 that war was to be avoided (perfectly sensible) and that a defensive strategy would deter Germany (turned out not to be true as we know). Many in Britain made the same mistakes, but you were unlucky enough to be before us in the firing line. John |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
"John Mullen" wrote in message ...
snip We did not badly to win the air and sea battles with Nazi Germany. Neither was easy and both had costs attached. Of course we couldn't have won overall without the support of the USA and the USSR, both of which in their own ways hedged their bets until the decision to enter the war was forced upon them. Not by their choice. The Soviets had alliances with Czechoslovakia and France since 1935, and offered Great Britain and France a full-up Triple Alliance with all the trimmings on 17 April 1939. Too bad Chamberlain refused to take it seriously, preferring to pursue Anglo-German agreement. Of the two, that of the USSR was IMO the less honourable. They had been excluded from the prewar European diplomacy, and their alliance offers to the Western Allies refused. Once that was clear, they looked after themselves. Nothing dishonorable about that. Stuart Wilkes |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
The book title, by the way, is Flyboys: A True Story of Courage, by James Bradley. After initially being put off by the moral equivalence (oh sure, the Japanese murdered, cooked, and ate bits of seven American fliers off Chichi Jima, but hey! Americans behaved badly at the Battle of Wounded Knee!), I've decided it's worth the read. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...f=nosim/annals all the best -- Dan Ford email: www.danford.net/letters.htm#9 see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
A limited operation does not have to be minor, it just has to have well defined limits. Shucks, by that definition, the U.S. fought World War II as a limited operation. a) defeat Germany b) defeat Japan What limits could be better defined than those? all the best -- Dan Ford email: www.danford.net/letters.htm#9 see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
The Japanese leader who took over in Oct 1941 was of course General Hideki Tojo who was a hard liner and it was under his leadership and that of the army that the decison for war was taken It was taken at the Imperial Conference in September. Everything after that was merely a decision not to turn back. all the best -- Dan Ford email: www.danford.net/letters.htm#9 see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
"Stuart Wilkes" wrote in message om... "John Mullen" wrote in message ... snip We did not badly to win the air and sea battles with Nazi Germany. Neither was easy and both had costs attached. Of course we couldn't have won overall without the support of the USA and the USSR, both of which in their own ways hedged their bets until the decision to enter the war was forced upon them. Not by their choice. The Soviets had alliances with Czechoslovakia and France since 1935, and offered Great Britain and France a full-up Triple Alliance with all the trimmings on 17 April 1939. Too bad Chamberlain refused to take it seriously, preferring to pursue Anglo-German agreement. Given that Stalin had 1) Reneged on his agreements with Czechoslovakia when that nation asked the Soviets to intervene in 1938 2) Just finished decimating the Red Army by killing three out of five Soviet marshals, fifteen out of sixteen army commanders, sixty out of 67 corps commanders, and 136 out of 199 divisional commanders and 36,761 officers. 3) Had just presided over the man made famine in the Ukraine Its scarcely suprising that Soviet promises were viewed with a degree of scepticism. Of the two, that of the USSR was IMO the less honourable. They had been excluded from the prewar European diplomacy, and their alliance offers to the Western Allies refused. Once that was clear, they looked after themselves. Nothing dishonorable about that. The secret codicils to the Soviet-German non-aggression pact were scarcely honorable , neither was the Soviet invasion of the Baltic states and Finland, unless you consider that the Finnish hordes poised to sweep across the borders of the USSR were a major threat to the Rodina. Fact is Stalin was already secretly negotiating with Germany in 1938 and thought he could cut a cosy deal with his buddy Adolf and carve up Central Europe between them. Oops Keith |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|