I was out doing some errands and listening to FNC through Sirious XM this morning. They played a snip of Obama speaking at Normandy. Quite frankly it made me sick. With the disdain he has for our country and military my thoughts were he is nowhere worthy to even speak of those heroes who charged that beach on June 6, 1944.
I salute all that stormed the beach, all that parachuted into the black skies, all that served in WW2.
World War Two as you have never seen it: extremely rare colour footage of D-Day invasion released
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-two/10861960/World-War-Two-as-you-have-never-seen-it-extremely-rare-colour-footage-of-D-Day-invasion-released.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-two/10861960/World-War-Two-as-you-have-never-seen-it-extremely-rare-colour-footage-of-D-Day-invasion-released.html)
Showing his disrespectful, contemptuous self.
http://www.dailydot.com/politics/obama-chewing-gum-d-day-ceremony/ (http://www.dailydot.com/politics/obama-chewing-gum-d-day-ceremony/)
Obama can kiss my ass. D-Day is about those Warriors that served in that brutal war.
Here's one 89 yr old vet that was not going to take no or an answer.
89-Year-Old D-Day Vet Told by Nursing Home He Couldn't Join His Comrades in Normandy. He Soon Went Missing. Take One Guess Where They Found Him.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/06/89-year-old-d-day-vet-told-by-nursing-home-he-couldnt-join-his-comrades-in-normandy-he-soon-went-missing-take-one-guess-where-they-found-him/ (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/06/89-year-old-d-day-vet-told-by-nursing-home-he-couldnt-join-his-comrades-in-normandy-he-soon-went-missing-take-one-guess-where-they-found-him/)
Watch a 93-Year-Old WWII Vet Recreate the D-Day Jump He Made 70 Years Ago
When asked how the jump he made Thursday compared to the one he made as a private first class with the elite 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 101st Airborne Division, Martin told CNN, "it didn't."
"Because there wasn't anybody shooting at me today," he said.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/06/watch-a-93-year-old-wwii-vet-recreate-the-d-day-jump-he-made-70-years-ago/ (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/06/watch-a-93-year-old-wwii-vet-recreate-the-d-day-jump-he-made-70-years-ago/)
Listen...I mean REALLY LISTEN to what FDR said in an address to the nation on D-day, and then think about what would happen if any POTUS said the same thing today. My how far we have slipped from the greatness we once were :(
FDR D-Day Speech June 6, 1944 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-weBUzQleo#)
Obama's there for the political photo ops, and alternately to mock the heroes however he can do so.
That's how traitors with political and media cover, roll.
Quote from: AndyJackson on June 07, 2014, 01:36:01 AM
Obama's there for the political photo ops, and alternately to mock the heroes however he can do so.
That's how traitors with political and media cover, roll.
BHO told vets and current military people exactly what he thought of them: he released 5 extremely dangerous foes whose capture likely cost lives; in trade for a deserter and possible traitor, searches for whom cost several lives (for a
deserter!); then went photo-op-ing to a commemoration he had skipped for several years running.
In your face, vets and service personnel! Suck it up and salute!
Quote from: SVPete on June 07, 2014, 05:59:20 AM
BHO told vets and current military people exactly what he thought of them: he released 5 extremely dangerous foes whose capture likely cost lives; in trade for a deserter and possible traitor, searches for whom cost several lives (for a deserter!); then went photo-op-ing to a commemoration he had skipped for several years running.
In your face, vets and service personnel! Suck it up and salute!
And then this anti-American POS stood there chewing gum.
Quote from: quiller on June 07, 2014, 07:24:30 AM
And then this anti-American POS stood there chewing gum.
Just a little breath-freshening spearmint. He was hoping to see that blonde, Danish prime minister again.
"Hey! Where the white women at?!"
Obamao looked and sounded like a fool set agianst the backdrop of the heroism of Real Men.
I was especially glad Fox played a Clip of Pres Reagan's address on the 40th anniversary of D Day.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/06/06/washingtons-iron-curtain-in-ukraine/ (http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/06/06/washingtons-iron-curtain-in-ukraine/)
"...This idealized image of the past is implicitly projected on the future. In seventy years, the Cold War, a dominant propaganda narrative and above all Hollywood have convinced the French, and most of the West, that D-Day was the turning point that won World War II and saved Europe from Nazi Germany.
Vladimir Putin came to the celebration, and has been elaborately shunned by Obama, self-appointed arbiter of Virtue. The Russians are paying tribute to the D-Day operation which liberated France from Nazi occupation, but they – and historians – know what most of the West has forgotten: that the Wehrmacht was decisively defeated not by the Normandy landing, but by the Red Army. If the vast bulk of German forces had not been pinned down fighting a losing war on the Eastern front, nobody would celebrate D-Day as it is being celebrated today..."
Quote from: kalash on June 09, 2014, 08:35:41 AM
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/06/06/washingtons-iron-curtain-in-ukraine/ (http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/06/06/washingtons-iron-curtain-in-ukraine/)
"...This idealized image of the past is implicitly projected on the future. In seventy years, the Cold War, a dominant propaganda narrative and above all Hollywood have convinced the French, and most of the West, that D-Day was the turning point that won World War II and saved Europe from Nazi Germany.
Vladimir Putin came to the celebration, and has been elaborately shunned by Obama, self-appointed arbiter of Virtue. The Russians are paying tribute to the D-Day operation which liberated France from Nazi occupation, but they – and historians – know what most of the West has forgotten: that the Wehrmacht was decisively defeated not by the Normandy landing, but by the Red Army. If the vast bulk of German forces had not been pinned down fighting a losing war on the Eastern front, nobody would celebrate D-Day as it is being celebrated today..."
It's not either-or, it's both-and. The Germans were forced to keep a lot of forces in North Africa, Italy, and France. The Russians benefited. The Russians tied down numerous German forces, which benefited the recapture of NA, Italy and France.
And I would add that this American has long been far from unaware of the Eastern Front of WW2. Including having read Marshall Zhukov's memoirs.
Quote from: kalash on June 09, 2014, 08:35:41 AM
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/06/06/washingtons-iron-curtain-in-ukraine/ (http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/06/06/washingtons-iron-curtain-in-ukraine/)
"...This idealized image of the past is implicitly projected on the future. In seventy years, the Cold War, a dominant propaganda narrative and above all Hollywood have convinced the French, and most of the West, that D-Day was the turning point that won World War II and saved Europe from Nazi Germany.
Vladimir Putin came to the celebration, and has been elaborately shunned by Obama, self-appointed arbiter of Virtue. The Russians are paying tribute to the D-Day operation which liberated France from Nazi occupation, but they – and historians – know what most of the West has forgotten: that the Wehrmacht was decisively defeated not by the Normandy landing, but by the Red Army. If the vast bulk of German forces had not been pinned down fighting a losing war on the Eastern front, nobody would celebrate D-Day as it is being celebrated today..."
Coupla points...
The Soviets had NO ONE storming the beaches that day. Even the defeated and disgraced French and Poles had some boots on the ground, but not the Russians, not there.
The whole thrust of this argument -- that D-Day would have been a different story, perhaps one of failure, if not for the Red Army -- is just bullshit. The situation was what it was. The decision to hit the beaches was made with knowledge of the obvious fact that Hitler was heavily committed in the East -- by his own choice, not ours and certainly not Stalin's. It's not as if Stalin's forces did something different on June 6 that allowed for the invasion's success.
It should also be noted that the Soviets did what they did largely while firing American ammunition from American guns and flying more than 13,000 American planes burning American gasoline and driving American vehicles -- including 77,972 jeeps, 151,053 1-1/2-ton trucks, and 200,622 2-1/2-ton trucks -- and eating American food and chasing the Germans with more than 4,000 American Sherman tanks.
D-Day was very much the opening act of the big "second front" that Stalin so dearly wanted, to help take pressure off the Red Army. But even before that, they were hardly whipping the Wehrmacht alone.
Quote from: TboneAgain on June 09, 2014, 12:58:47 PM
It should also be noted that the Soviets did what they did largely while firing American ammunition from American guns and flying more than 13,000 American planes burning American gasoline and driving American vehicles -- including 77,972 jeeps, 151,053 1-1/2-ton trucks, and 200,622 2-1/2-ton trucks -- and eating American food and chasing the Germans with more than 4,000 American Sherman tanks.
D-Day was very much the opening act of the big "second front" that Stalin so dearly wanted, to help take pressure off the Red Army. But even before that, they were hardly whipping the Wehrmacht alone.
Coupla points.
About Lend-Lease.
When in 1941 the U.S. ambassador to the USSR Harriman returned from Moscow, Roosevelt looked at list of what Stalin sought from Lend-Lease. After reading i was relieved: "Thank God! This man is most certainly will win the battle! Anyone else in his place would requested guns, ammunition, tanks and aircraft. And this stuff we ourselves don't have much. Stalin requires molybdenum for aircraft, locomotives and cars, armor and barbed wire! He will do for his army the right weapon. Great man! " And the Soviet people did everything necessary for the front.
From May 1942 to May 1945 labor productivity in Soviet industry as a whole grew by 43%, and in the defense industry - 121%. In 1944, the cost of all kinds of military products was on average 2 times lower than in 1940. Economic effect of decline of the cost for 1941 - 1944 years amounted to almost half of all expenditures of the state budget of the USSR to the military in 1942. And this was great achievement, especially of Soviet scientists and engineers that continuously improve the production technology and introducing mechanization and automation in production processes.
Per thousand tons of steel produced at defense plants produced 5 times more tanks and artillery pieces, and on one thousand machine tools - 8 times more aircraft than in the German industry. Incidentally, never more economy of the Soviet Union, especially in the post-Stalin period, so effectively worked.
In comparison with the volume of production of the Soviet Union, Lend-Lease shipments amounted to: canons - 1.4%, Aviation - 9.8% in tanks and self-propelled guns - 6.2%. Even more striking comparison looks on Small Arms and ammunition. In comparison to that Soviet industry produced, Lend-Lease amounted to: sub machine guns - 1.7% on handguns - 0.8%, in shells - 0.6%, Mines - 0.1%. That is all the necessary means of warfare, the Red Army has been achieved through the heroic labor of the workers of the Soviet rear and exceptional efficiency of the Soviet economy.
The share of supply of industrial products allies during World War II was - 4% of domestic production, and imports of grain, flour and cereals in grain - 2.8% of average annual harvesting grain in the USSR. On the basis of these data, it is evident that supply by allies certainly helped, but represented a small portion of production in the Soviet Union due to its insignificance could not affect the outcome of the war.
During the war the U.S. supplied to the USSR goods by 9.8 billion dollars. According to the pre-war rate of the ruble - is 21.6 billion rubles. By the end of the war 92% of this amount was paid. Who paid? Soviet people, who during the war have subscribed to war loans in the amount of 76 billion rubles, plus donations to the Defense Fund 17.8 billion rubles. So that the Lend-Lease was actually commercial supplies and paying for it is not by "good old uncle Sam" from the U.S. government, but Soviet people.
Remained unpaid supplies worth 722 million dollars. However, back in 1947-1948 and 1951-1952 years., still under Stalin, between the Soviet Union and the United States were negotiated settlement of the Lend-Lease. USSR returned part of the property acquired and offered to pay the remainder. However, the parties were unable to agree on the value of the payment, as the U.S. is significantly overstated it.
In addition, the problem boils down to and disagreement about what, exactly, to pay. The reason was that Stalin wanted to use as payment royal gold, which was secretly shipped to the United States both before 1917 and in the course of foreign intervention, during the Civil War. And it must be said, a huge amount of gold. U.S. arrogated to themselves this gold and agreed to consider it only as a possible contribution of the USSR to the International Monetary Fund. And it did not suit the USSR. And in the end pay 722 million dollars hung until the late 80-ies of the last century. These are the principal contribution to the clarification of the allied victory over fascism.
And then who could defeat fascism, the best Winston Churchill said at the height of the Battle of Stalingrad: "... I get up in the morning and pray that Stalin was alive and well. Stalin alone can save the world. "
Quote from: kalash on June 09, 2014, 02:54:15 PM
Coupla points.
About Lend-Lease.
When in 1941 the U.S. ambassador to the USSR Harriman returned from Moscow, Roosevelt looked at list of what Stalin sought from Lend-Lease. After reading i was relieved: "Thank God! This man is most certainly will win the battle! Anyone else in his place would requested guns, ammunition, tanks and aircraft. And this stuff we ourselves don't have much. Stalin requires molybdenum for aircraft, locomotives and cars, armor and barbed wire! He will do for his army the right weapon. Great man! " And the Soviet people did everything necessary for the front.
From May 1942 to May 1945 labor productivity in Soviet industry as a whole grew by 43%, and in the defense industry - 121%. In 1944, the cost of all kinds of military products was on average 2 times lower than in 1940. Economic effect of decline of the cost for 1941 - 1944 years amounted to almost half of all expenditures of the state budget of the USSR to the military in 1942. And this was great achievement, especially of Soviet scientists and engineers that continuously improve the production technology and introducing mechanization and automation in production processes.
Per thousand tons of steel produced at defense plants produced 5 times more tanks and artillery pieces, and on one thousand machine tools - 8 times more aircraft than in the German industry. Incidentally, never more economy of the Soviet Union, especially in the post-Stalin period, so effectively worked.
In comparison with the volume of production of the Soviet Union, Lend-Lease shipments amounted to: canons - 1.4%, Aviation - 9.8% in tanks and self-propelled guns - 6.2%. Even more striking comparison looks on Small Arms and ammunition. In comparison to that Soviet industry produced, Lend-Lease amounted to: sub machine guns - 1.7% on handguns - 0.8%, in shells - 0.6%, Mines - 0.1%. That is all the necessary means of warfare, the Red Army has been achieved through the heroic labor of the workers of the Soviet rear and exceptional efficiency of the Soviet economy.
The share of supply of industrial products allies during World War II was - 4% of domestic production, and imports of grain, flour and cereals in grain - 2.8% of average annual harvesting grain in the USSR. On the basis of these data, it is evident that supply by allies certainly helped, but represented a small portion of production in the Soviet Union due to its insignificance could not affect the outcome of the war.
During the war the U.S. supplied to the USSR goods by 9.8 billion dollars. According to the pre-war rate of the ruble - is 21.6 billion rubles. By the end of the war 92% of this amount was paid. Who paid? Soviet people, who during the war have subscribed to war loans in the amount of 76 billion rubles, plus donations to the Defense Fund 17.8 billion rubles. So that the Lend-Lease was actually commercial supplies and paying for it is not by "good old uncle Sam" from the U.S. government, but Soviet people.
Remained unpaid supplies worth 722 million dollars. However, back in 1947-1948 and 1951-1952 years., still under Stalin, between the Soviet Union and the United States were negotiated settlement of the Lend-Lease. USSR returned part of the property acquired and offered to pay the remainder. However, the parties were unable to agree on the value of the payment, as the U.S. is significantly overstated it.
In addition, the problem boils down to and disagreement about what, exactly, to pay. The reason was that Stalin wanted to use as payment royal gold, which was secretly shipped to the United States both before 1917 and in the course of foreign intervention, during the Civil War. And it must be said, a huge amount of gold. U.S. arrogated to themselves this gold and agreed to consider it only as a possible contribution of the USSR to the International Monetary Fund. And it did not suit the USSR. And in the end pay 722 million dollars hung until the late 80-ies of the last century. These are the principal contribution to the clarification of the allied victory over fascism.
And then who could defeat fascism, the best Winston Churchill said at the height of the Battle of Stalingrad: "... I get up in the morning and pray that Stalin was alive and well. Stalin alone can save the world. "
We have a true Soviet man on board.
Quote from: TboneAgain on June 09, 2014, 05:28:02 PM
We have a true Soviet man on board.
To tell facts, that you don't like, means to be soviet? Well, at least not nazi...Thanks for that!
Quote from: kalash on June 09, 2014, 06:20:22 PM
To tell facts, that you don't like, means to be soviet? Well, at least not nazi...Thanks for that!
Take away more than 4,000 Sherman tanks. (Yeah, they weren't much, but neither were the T-34.) Take away the 13,000 aircraft. Take away the gasoline and the food. Take away the 400,000-plus wheeled and tracked vehicles delivered to the Soviet Union from 1942-1944. Take away all the rifles and machine guns and the millions and millions of bullets.
Now tell me how things turn out.
Speaking things I don't like doesn't make you a "true Soviet man." Lying does.
Quote from: TboneAgain on June 09, 2014, 05:28:02 PM
We have a true Soviet man on board.
Did you doubt it for a moment?
Quote from: TboneAgain on June 09, 2014, 06:30:15 PM
Take away more than 4,000 Sherman tanks. (Yeah, they weren't much, but neither were the T-34.)
O.K. Let's see about them tanks. This is soviet production of the tank T-34 (by the way the best tank of WWII, and this is not just my opinion)
1941 г. - 2996
1942 г. - 12527
1943 г. - 15821
1944 г. - 14648
1945 г. - 12551
Total comes to 58553. And this is ONLY T-34. There was heavy tank KV, heavy tanks IS-1 and IS-2 and selfpropelled guns.... Тotal number comes to 90000.
Lend Lease of course, was a help. But in the worst years of war, 1941 and 1942 supply was limited. In quantities it start arriving in 1943, when tide of the war was already turned. Battle of Moscow, Stalingrad, Battle of Kursk, that's where destiny of WWII was decided.
P.S. During the war USSR produced about 120 000 air plains.
Quote from: kalash on June 09, 2014, 02:54:15 PM
And then who could defeat fascism, the best Winston Churchill said at the height of the Battle of Stalingrad: "... I get up in the morning and pray that Stalin was alive and well. Stalin alone can save the world. "
I've heard this a couple of times, yet no one has ever produced proof he said it, but I bet you can. :wink:
Quote from: Solar on June 10, 2014, 05:29:25 AM
I've heard this a couple of times, yet no one has ever produced proof he said it, but I bet you can. :wink:
I've got an Obama buck that says he can't.
Quote from: Harry on June 10, 2014, 05:50:16 AM
I've got an Obama buck that says he can't.
I suppose his idea of proof will have an .RU suffix on the link......
Quote from: Harry on June 10, 2014, 05:50:16 AM
I've got an Obama buck that says he can't.
:biggrin:
Just like his proof that the USSR invented the telephone and a myriad of other inventions exclusive to our evil Capitalist Nation.
Quote from: quiller on June 10, 2014, 09:39:24 AM
I suppose his idea of proof will have an .RU suffix on the link......
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Quote from: quiller on June 10, 2014, 09:39:24 AM
I suppose his idea of proof will have an .RU suffix on the link......
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Quote from: Solar on June 10, 2014, 09:40:22 AM
:biggrin:
Just like his proof that the USSR invented the telephone and a myriad of other inventions exclusive to our evil Capitalist Nation.
Remember the old Star Trek episodes with Chekov?.... :biggrin:
Quote from: quiller on June 10, 2014, 09:57:43 AM
Remember the old Star Trek episodes with Chekov?.... :biggrin:
:biggrin:
They invented warp drive as well?
Quote from: Solar on June 10, 2014, 09:59:36 AM
:biggrin:
They invented warp drive as well?
Yes, yes they did.
Quote from: Harry on June 10, 2014, 10:00:11 AM
Yes, yes they did.
True story. I dated this girl about 40 years ago, she introduced me to her parents, Russian immigrants.
They were hardcore Dims, while watching TV, there was a program about the Apollo space program showing astronauts training for weightlessness in a 747.
He actually screamed "USA stole that technology from Russia".
I asked what tech was that? He said the anti-gravity machine. I explained there is no such tech, that they are training in a 747.
He said, "Bull Sheeet"! :rolleyes:
Typical lib.....
Quote from: Solar on June 10, 2014, 10:08:51 AM
True story. I dated this girl about 40 years ago, she introduced me to her parents, Russian immigrants.
They were hardcore Dims, while watching TV, there was a program about the Apollo space program showing astronauts training for weightlessness in a 747.
He actually screamed "USA stole that technology from Russia".
I asked what tech was that? He said the anti-gravity machine. I explained there is no such tech, that they are training in a 747.
He said, "Bull Sheeet"! :rolleyes:
Typical lib.....
On a similar note, they use warp drive on a daily basis. Or perhaps, I should say warped mind...
Quote from: Harry on June 10, 2014, 10:12:21 AM
On a similar note, they use warp drive on a daily basis. Or perhaps, I should say warped mind...
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Quote from: Solar on June 10, 2014, 10:08:51 AM
True story. I dated this girl about 40 years ago, she introduced me to her parents, Russian immigrants.
They were hardcore Dims, while watching TV, there was a program about the Apollo space program showing astronauts training for weightlessness in a 747.
He actually screamed "USA stole that technology from Russia".
I asked what tech was that? He said the anti-gravity machine. I explained there is no such tech, that they are training in a 747.
He said, "Bull Sheeet"! :rolleyes:
Typical lib.....
The Reds used monkeys as astronauts in their early days. I mentioned that to a Polish immigrant I knew at the time, and he insisted it was actually a Soviet. "They look so much alike!"
Quote from: quiller on June 10, 2014, 10:31:57 AM
The Reds used monkeys as astronauts in their early days. I mentioned that to a Polish immigrant I knew at the time, and he insisted it was actually a Soviet. "They look so much alike!"
Nope they just
claimed they were using monkeys, so when the vehicle burned up on reentry they wouldn't be embarrassed. As I understand it, they lost a couple of cosmonauts, before they got it right with Gagarin.
World War II: The Unknown War
http://www.opednews.com/articles/World-War-II-The-Unknown-by-Paul-Craig-Roberts-Oil_Propaganda_Putin_Russia-140609-762.html (http://www.opednews.com/articles/World-War-II-The-Unknown-by-Paul-Craig-Roberts-Oil_Propaganda_Putin_Russia-140609-762.html)
"...In my June 6 article, I said, following the consensus of historians, that Nazi Germany lost the war at Stalingrad. In this article: historian Dr. Jacques R. Pauwels says that Germany lost the war 14 months earlier at the Battle of Moscow in December 1941. He makes a good case. Whether one agrees or not, the facts he presents are eye openers for the "exceptional, indispensable Americans" who believe nothing happens without them.
Normandy, June 1944, is 2.5 years after Germany lost the war in the Battle of Moscow. As historians have made clear, by June 1944 Germany had little left with which to fight. Whatever was left of the German military was on the Eastern Front..."
Quote from: kalash on June 10, 2014, 08:45:27 PM
World War II: The Unknown War
http://www.opednews.com/articles/World-War-II-The-Unknown-by-Paul-Craig-Roberts-Oil_Propaganda_Putin_Russia-140609-762.html (http://www.opednews.com/articles/World-War-II-The-Unknown-by-Paul-Craig-Roberts-Oil_Propaganda_Putin_Russia-140609-762.html)
"...In my June 6 article, I said, following the consensus of historians, that Nazi Germany lost the war at Stalingrad. In this article: historian Dr. Jacques R. Pauwels says that Germany lost the war 14 months earlier at the Battle of Moscow in December 1941. He makes a good case. Whether one agrees or not, the facts he presents are eye openers for the "exceptional, indispensable Americans" who believe nothing happens without them.
Normandy, June 1944, is 2.5 years after Germany lost the war in the Battle of Moscow. As historians have made clear, by June 1944 Germany had little left with which to fight. Whatever was left of the German military was on the Eastern Front..."
Germany lost the war the moment the first Wehrmacht troops entered Russia. I don't think you'll find a lot of folks to argue that point, and I'm not one. I've made that exact point a number of times elsewhere on this board. When Hitler signed off on Barbarossa, he signed his own death warrant, and that of Nazi Germany.
Arguing that the American -- or British or French, for that matter -- contribution to the Soviet war effort was inconsequential is petty. It's a safe position here in 2014. Where were you seventy years ago?
In 1944 the Germans were fighting for their lives against ever-growing armies of the Soviet Union, and they were losing ground. But they still held the entirety of western Europe, excepting England, neutral Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, and Sweden, and the tiny toehold the Allies were clinging to on the Italian peninsula. They controlled all of France, Belgium, Austria, Norway, Holland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Denmark, Luxembourg, Yugoslavia, Rumania, etc. German U-boats were still sinking an astounding amount of shipping in the Atlantic. German buzz-bombs were raining down on London and other English targets daily. Luftwaffe squadrons were being introduced to the Me-262, the world's first operational jet fighter, which had a 100 mph advantage over the best the Allies had. The new V-2, the world's first operational ballistic missile, with a 2,200 pound Amatol warhead and an impact speed of over Mach 2, was being prepared for launch.
The first fighting Soviet man didn't set foot on German soil until well into 1945.
It's one thing to claim that it was "all over but the shouting" by June 1944. It's quite another to be in the shouting match.
TboneAgain wrote
QuoteLuftwaffe squadrons were being introduced to the Me-262, the world's first operational jet fighter, which had a 100 mph advantage over the best the Allies had.
Dont forget the Gloster Meteor..
QuoteThe Gloster Meteor entered service just after the Messerschmitt Me 262. In July 1944 the experimental unit Erprobungskommando 262 (Test Command 262) began to fly experimental interceptions of high flying Allied reconnaissance aircraft. On 25 July one of their Me 262s clashed with a RAF Mosquito, which escaped, allowing its crew to report their first encounter with a German jet. The first operational sortie of the Gloster Meteor came two days later, on 27 July.
The Gloster Meteor can claim to be the first jet fighter to enter operational service, while No.616 squadron of the RAF was the first operational jet fighter in the work. The first fully operational Me 262 squadron, Kommando Nowotny, was not formed until September 1944, under the command of the famous ace Walter Nowotny, flying its first operation on 3 October.
The Me 262 was a more capable aircraft than the wartime versions of the Meteor. Its top speed of 540mph was 50mphs faster than even the Derwent IV equipped version of the Meteor III. However by the end of the war the Meteor IV was almost ready, and had the speed to match the German jet. On the plus side the Meteor was much more reliable than the Me 262, which suffered from famously unreliable engines.
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_gloster_meteor_WWII.html (http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_gloster_meteor_WWII.html)
Quote from: kalash on June 10, 2014, 08:45:27 PM
World War II: The Unknown War
http://www.opednews.com/articles/World-War-II-The-Unknown-by-Paul-Craig-Roberts-Oil_Propaganda_Putin_Russia-140609-762.html (http://www.opednews.com/articles/World-War-II-The-Unknown-by-Paul-Craig-Roberts-Oil_Propaganda_Putin_Russia-140609-762.html)
"Normandy, June 1944, is 2.5 years after Germany lost the war in the Battle of Moscow. As historians have made clear, by June 1944 Germany had little left with which to fight. Whatever was left of the German military was on the Eastern Front..."
Ummmm ... yeah.
In a word. nonsense! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normandy_landings#German_order_of_battle)
As this indicates, there were 3 infantry, and 1 panzer divisions just in Normandy. Along the French and Netherlands coast Rommel had two Armies, with 3 panzer divisions (the Wikipedia article does not day how many infantry divisions, but a guesstimate of 6-9 infantry divisions seems reasonable, maybe even a bit low). And as the article indicates, there were 3 more panzer divisions further back in France under Geyr, and a further 4 panzer divisions in strategic reserve, under Hitler's direct control; again the corresponding number of reserve infantry divisions is not mentioned.
While it might be argued that these were depleted/skeleton divisions, that argument doesn't work, because the same was true of divisions on the Eastern Front.
The US Third Army did not enter France on D-Day, but their
After Action Report (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Army_(United_States)#World_War_II) report claimed:
QuoteThird Army After Action reports state that the Third Army captured 765,483 prisoners of war, with an additional 515,205 of the enemy already held in corps and divisional level POW cages processed between 9 May and 13 May 1945, for a total of 1,280,688 POWs, and that, additionally, Third Army forces killed 144,500 enemy soldiers and wounded 386,200, for a total of 1,811,388 in enemy losses.[3] Fuller's review of Third Army records differs only in the number of enemy killed and wounded, stating that between 1 August 1944 and 9 May 1945, 47,500 of the enemy were killed, 115,700 wounded, and 1,280,688 captured. Fuller's combined total of enemy losses is 1,443,888 enemy killed, wounded, or captured by the Third Army.[4] The Third Army suffered 16,596 killed, 96,241 wounded, and 26,809 missing in action for a total of 139,646 casualties.[5]
That's a Hades of a lot of, "little left with which to fight"! And that doesn't include stats for the US First, Ninth, and Seventh Armies, also in France and the Low Countries. Put those together and that might make 3M-4M "little left with which to fight"!
The "little left with which to fight" claim is not oversimplification or hyperbole, it's ludicrous agenda-driven nonsense!
Quote from: Akubra on June 15, 2014, 03:27:34 AM
TboneAgain wrote
Dont forget the Gloster Meteor..
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_gloster_meteor_WWII.html (http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_gloster_meteor_WWII.html)
During the Second World War, the Meteor was indeed forgettable. It was indeed the first Allied jet fighter, and came into service around the same time as the Messerschmitt counterpart, but it was considered such an "important" development that it was never permitted to fly over enemy territory. All its "kills" were planes sitting on the ground, and there were pitifully few of those. The Meteor was 50 mph slower than the Me262, and it may be best that they never tangled.
Quote from: kalash on June 10, 2014, 08:45:27 PM
World War II: The Unknown War
http://www.opednews.com/articles/World-War-II-The-Unknown-by-Paul-Craig-Roberts-Oil_Propaganda_Putin_Russia-140609-762.html (http://www.opednews.com/articles/World-War-II-The-Unknown-by-Paul-Craig-Roberts-Oil_Propaganda_Putin_Russia-140609-762.html)
"...In my June 6 article, I said, following the consensus of historians, that Nazi Germany lost the war at Stalingrad. In this article: historian Dr. Jacques R. Pauwels says that Germany lost the war 14 months earlier at the Battle of Moscow in December 1941. He makes a good case. Whether one agrees or not, the facts he presents are eye openers for the "exceptional, indispensable Americans" who believe nothing happens without them.
Normandy, June 1944, is 2.5 years after Germany lost the war in the Battle of Moscow. As historians have made clear, by June 1944 Germany had little left with which to fight. Whatever was left of the German military was on the Eastern Front..."
And if Great Britain, had made a separate peace with Nazi Germany and if Hitler had had enough sense NOT to declare war on the US.
Quote from: mdgiles on June 16, 2014, 08:32:48 AM
And if Great Britain, had made a separate peace with Nazi Germany and if Hitler had had enough sense NOT to declare war on the US.
We would still have gone to war after Pearl Harbor and drawn into the European theater due to the Axis alliance.
It certainly didn't hurt that the Huns ran out of fuel after losing the oil fields in Silesia.
Quote from: quiller on June 16, 2014, 09:20:17 AM
We would still have gone to war after Pearl Harbor and drawn into the European theater due to the Axis alliance.
It certainly didn't hurt that the Huns ran out of fuel after losing the oil fields in Silesia.
That was unfortunate for the Germans, but I think what iced the cake was the series of Allied bombings of synthetic petroleum facilities, especially the hydrogenation and refinery installations at Ploesti.
Even before the war, Germany had to import most of its oil, but by the mid-1930s had helped to establish the most modern and productive synthesizing facilities in the world. By 1943, Germany (and its Romanian ally) was making something like 36,000,000 barrels of oil per year out of coal.
Good article on the subject here (http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/aureview/1981/jul-aug/becker.htm).
Quote from: TboneAgain on June 16, 2014, 11:36:16 AM
That was unfortunate for the Germans, but I think what iced the cake was the series of Allied bombings of synthetic petroleum facilities, especially the hydrogenation and refinery installations at Ploesti.
Even before the war, Germany had to import most of its oil, but by the mid-1930s had helped to establish the most modern and productive synthesizing facilities in the world. By 1943, Germany (and its Romanian ally) was making something like 36,000,000 barrels of oil per year out of coal.
Good article on the subject here (http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/aureview/1981/jul-aug/becker.htm).
Coal? Those evil bastards! :biggrin:
Quote from: Solar on June 16, 2014, 11:52:53 AM
Coal? Those evil bastards! :biggrin:
Carbon Di. Ox. Ide. :tounge:
Quote from: quiller on June 16, 2014, 09:20:17 AM
We would still have gone to war after Pearl Harbor and drawn into the European theater due to the Axis alliance.
It certainly didn't hurt that the Huns ran out of fuel after losing the oil fields in Silesia.
Nope the Axis alliance only worked if one of the members was attacked. Since Japan attacked the US. Germany was under no obligation to declare war. Hitler declared war, in the hop that Japan would declare war on the USSR. He wasn't aware of the ass kicking that the Japanese had taken from the Soviets in Mongolia.
I can see from the above I need to re-read my Shirer on those events.
Quote from: mdgiles on June 16, 2014, 12:06:28 PM
Nope the Axis alliance only worked if one of the members was attacked. Since Japan attacked the US. Germany was under no obligation to declare war. Hitler declared war, in the hop that Japan would declare war on the USSR. He wasn't aware of the ass kicking that the Japanese had taken from the Soviets in Mongolia.
Incidentally, why did the Nazis wait thill the last minute to give the Japanese modern weapons? Image those battles in Mongolia, if the Japanese had 88's.
Quote from: quiller on June 16, 2014, 08:58:06 PM
I can see from the above I need to re-read my Shirer on those events.
Do you consider Shirer a good source?
I think of him as a sort of William Manchester, a whitewasher with liberal colors.
Quote from: TboneAgain on June 24, 2014, 05:00:08 PM
Do you consider Shirer a good source?
I think of him as a sort of William Manchester, a whitewasher with liberal colors.
Recalling that (1) Shirer was a CBS alumnus and (2) wrote most of Rise & Fall under Democratic administrations....yes. He was still more objective than most.
Quote from: quiller on June 24, 2014, 05:28:38 PM
Recalling that (1) Shirer was a CBS alumnus and (2) wrote most of Rise & Fall under Democratic administrations....yes. He was still more objective than most.
I think he brought good original material to light. But he was quite clearly a Democrat and a liberal. His histories didn't lean the way Manchester's did -- holy cow, Manchester probably had an FDR shrine in his home where her worshiped daily -- but the lean was still there.