VE Day celebrations.

[bennett]

2 minutes ago, renton said:

Britain's contribution was a wee bit more than that. It included securing the supply line across the Atlantic in one the longest, most difficult campaigns of the war (without which not a single US soldier or tank heading to the USSR via lendlease could occur), providing the bulk of forces required to close off the Mediterranean to the Nazis and providing the base, and 50% of the troops to the Noramndy campaign which was really the decisive battle in Western Europe. It wasnt unti autumn 1944 that the US started to dominate the balance of forces significantly.

The often forgotten battle of the Atlantic (6 years) and the artic convoys which kept the Soviets in the war. 

 

If Germany had started the war with a larger U boat fleet rather than going for capital ships, they'd have either won or forced Britain into backing down.

[renton]

Just now, bennett said:

The often forgotten battle of the Atlantic (6 years) and the artic convoys which kept the Soviets in the war. 

 

If Germany had started the war with a larger U boat fleet rather than going for capital ships, they'd have either won or forced Britain into backing down.

To be fair, there was a lot of sense in trying to build a balanced fleet. The tactics for defending merchantmen from a submarine and a fast battleship are pretty much diametrically opposed. On the one hand, with Submarines  the convoy system was king: herd together and let the escort frigates hunt the subs around the perimeter. On the other, those frigates wouldnt stand a chance against a battleship, so the best bet in that instance is to break convoy and run like hell in every direction on the basis that the battleship could only hunt down a few in that time. 

So the problem for the British becomes what happens when the Germans can sustain a couple of battleships out in the Atlantic for a sustained period: more and more convoys needing to break and run and thus in turn becoming isolated and easy meat for submarines.

So it wasnt just pride that had the British putting so much effort into Bush whacking Bismarck...

[WhiteRoseKillie]

56 minutes ago, Have some faith in Magic said:

The positive is that the lockdown has stopped the bunting and street parties. 

It will just be the odd racist building papermache spitfires in their garden and BBC wanking themselves into a frenzy which is easily avoided.  

I wouldn't be too sure. With all the media (and Government) trailing a loosening of restrictions from Monday, there will be plenty of flag-happy fúckwits cavorting around on the premise that "a couple of days won't matter".

I'd guess you're in Scotland, where this kind of thing does seem to energise a smaller number of people (or peepul), but down here, the silly bastárds are mad for it. I hope for a peaceful and respectable celebration in line with current guidelines. I fear mayhem.

[WhiteRoseKillie]

49 minutes ago, J_Stewart said:

This genuinely brings a tear to my eye, and I will be following your example with my top off in the front garden, kissing my St George's Cross tattoo on the hour, every hour, showing the world just why we won the bloody war, and that Brexit means Brexit. Might try and rouse some community spirit with a few renditions of Ten German Bombers sung loud and proud as well. Just a bit of banter innit.

God save our gracious Queen.

You may laugh, but I genuinely know people like this. They walk among us.

[throbber]

1 minute ago, WhiteRoseKillie said:

You may laugh, but I genuinely know people like this. They walk among us.

Rangers fans?

[Steve_Wilkos]

I'll be locking down harder than I have ever locked down before. 

My area of Stockton-on-Tees is full of WW2 fetishists. 

Spotted this on my daily walk a few days ago, and some Battle of Britain slogans have been added to the grass next to the painted poppies as well. 

You can't buy taste etc.

 

[bennett]

1 minute ago, renton said:

To be fair, there was a lot of sense in trying to build a balanced fleet. The tactics for defending merchantmen from a submarine and a fast battleship are pretty much diametrically opposed. On the one hand, with Submarines  the convoy system was king: herd together and let the escort frigates hunt the subs around the perimeter. On the other, those frigates wouldnt stand a chance against a battleship, so the best bet in that instance is to break convoy and run like hell in every direction on the basis that the battleship could only hunt down a few in that time. 

So the problem for the British becomes what happens when the Germans can sustain a couple of battleships out in the Atlantic for a sustained period: more and more convoys needing to break and run and thus in turn becoming isolated and easy meat for submarines.

So it wasnt just pride that had the British putting so much effort into Bush whacking Bismarck...

They never going to go toe to toe with the worlds largest navy with surface ships, prewar Donitz called it right when he argued for more resources for his u boats. With a larger fleet the Wolfpacks could have crippled our merchant supplies before the navy got the convoys sorted out with better detection systems on ships and air.

Strangely enough one the Britains best ship designs was the flower class Corvettes which were quick and cheap to build in large numbers, offering ideal convoy protection. 

 

The worlds greatest battleship taken out by a fairey swordfish, having carriers was a great advantage. 

Half way through the war the germans spent most of their time hiding their last few capital ships. 

 

2 minutes ago, throbber said:

Rangers fans?

Dont get him started.

[renton]

1 minute ago, bennett said:

They never going to go toe to toe with the worlds largest navy with surface ships, prewar Donitz called it right when he argued for more resources for his u boats. With a larger fleet the Wolfpacks could have crippled our merchant supplies before the navy got the convoys sorted out with better detection systems on ships and air.

Strangely enough one the Britains best ship designs was the flower class Corvettes which were quick and cheap to build in large numbers, offering ideal convoy protection. 

 

The worlds greatest battleship taken out by a fairey swordfish, having carriers was a great advantage. 

Half way through the war the germans spent most of their time hiding their last few capital ships. 

 

Dont get him started.

On the other hand, the Battle of the Atlantic basically spun on a 3 month period where the technological and tactical pendulum swung so far in the allies favour that it broke the back of the U Boat arm.

It's not about going to to toe with British British surface units but German surface raiders would have allowed a more persistent presence, that would at least allow the germans to beat up a fair few more convoys before the presence of escort carriers wouldve made that proposition dicey.

Bismarck was always a bit hyped up. The design was flawed enough in that a torpedo could do the damage it did. Worth noting that its main armour wasnt brilliant. The British guns turned the German turrets into swiss cheese.

[WhiteRoseKillie]

43 minutes ago, Fullerene said:

It is not celebrating the war.  It is celebrating the end of it.

Yes we should engage more with the other countries and stop pretending we are somehow different while they are all much the same.

In the minds of the GBP, it's not celebrating the attainment of peace, it's celebrating beating the Germans, and proving British (i.e. English) superiority. As von Clausewitz might have said if he'd still been around, there's a lot of people who see war as an extension of football by other means.

 

[WhiteRoseKillie]

29 minutes ago, bennett said:

They never going to go toe to toe with the worlds largest navy with surface ships, prewar Donitz called it right when he argued for more resources for his u boats. With a larger fleet the Wolfpacks could have crippled our merchant supplies before the navy got the convoys sorted out with better detection systems on ships and air.

Strangely enough one the Britains best ship designs was the flower class Corvettes which were quick and cheap to build in large numbers, offering ideal convoy protection. 

 

The worlds greatest battleship taken out by a fairey swordfish, having carriers was a great advantage. 

Half way through the war the germans spent most of their time hiding their last few capital ships. 

 

Dont get him started.

In fairness, bennett, I've left your lot alone for a while as they become less and less relevant (still generally amusing and occasionally hilarious, mind). There is a "type", though, I'm sure you'll agree, who like that red, white and blue colour scheme which adorns your old club, the tribute act, and various nationalist projects.

[LondonHMFC]

20 hours ago, ali_91 said:

Finish the day with pie and mash and The Great Escape. 

Doesn’t sound that bad to be honest.

[101]

1 hour ago, Fullerene said:

It is not celebrating the war.  It is celebrating the end of it.

Yes we should engage more with the other countries and stop pretending we are somehow different while they are all much the same.

I don't think many people who will be actively celebrating will be celebrating a return to peace time it's far more, we won, Britain won the war, get it right up Germany etc.

1 hour ago, GordonS said:

I once visited a German ossuary in Normandy that holds the remains of 12,000 German soldiers. There's a little visitor centre and the clear message is "we got to this stage through hate, racism and a belief in ethnic superiority; let's make sure we never fkn do that again, eh?" There was a lot of stuff in international youth work, exchange trips, that kind of thing. It's quite a different message than anything you'll see at a Commonwealth war cemetery.

I can understand the sense of celebration around VE Day, but the jingoism is entirely missing the point. 

Correct, far too many people are deliberately missing the point. Flag waving nationalism with dog whistle racism and homophobia led in part to the world war perhaps it would be a good time to evaluate the current leadership of our country.

[Jacksgranda]

2 hours ago, GordonS said:

I wouldn't downplay the success of the Battle of Britain. German planes outnumbered British (and Polish and Czechoslovak, obv) by nearly 2 to 1. If Germany had gained air superiority then a naval invasion was next. Nobody should underestimate how utterly fkn horrific that would have been - not least to Britain's 300,000 to 400,000 Jews. The Battle of Britain was won through superior training, tactics and technology and it was the only time until Stalingrad that Germany suffered any meaningful reverse. 

I wouldn't underestimate the role Churchill played at that time either. Under a different leader Britain could have signed an agreement with Germany to stay out of the war after the Battle of Britain. Instead, he rallied people behind the idea of pushing on and opening new fronts, especially in Africa.

One of the things about remembering WW2 is most of what's said is true, both critical and glorious, at the same time. So Churchill was a poor tactical leader who allowed millions of Indians to starve and said racist AF stuff, but he was also an inspirational figurehead who really did help millions of people to persevere hold their nerve when everything looked lost.

Though what the flag-waving haufwits also forget is that the first thing Britain did at the end of the war was boot him out in a landslide election win for Labour.

More a rejection of the Conservative party rather than Churchill himself, I think. I dare say a Labour government with Churchill as PM would have been quite popular (assuming it had enacted the same legislation as was actually passed).

Edited May 7, 2020 by Jacksgranda
grandma

[Jacksgranda]

1 hour ago, renton said:

Britain's contribution was a wee bit more than that. It included securing the supply line across the Atlantic in one the longest, most difficult campaigns of the war (without which not a single US soldier or tank heading to the USSR via lendlease could occur), providing the bulk of forces required to close off the Mediterranean to the Nazis and providing the base, and 50% of the troops to the Noramndy campaign which was really the decisive battle in Western Europe. It wasnt unti autumn 1944 that the US started to dominate the balance of forces significantly.

Facts and dispassionate analysis won't wash with many of the contributors on this topic, I'm afraid

[Fullerene]

1 hour ago, renton said:

Bismarck was always a bit hyped up. The design was flawed enough in that a torpedo could do the damage it did. Worth noting that its main armour wasn't brilliant. The British guns turned the German turrets into swiss cheese.

Several ships were destroyed by a single bomb or torpedo.  For example the flagships Arizona, Hood and Akagi.

[Jacksgranda]

1 hour ago, renton said:

On the other hand, the Battle of the Atlantic basically spun on a 3 month period where the technological and tactical pendulum swung so far in the allies favour that it broke the back of the U Boat arm.

It's not about going to to toe with British British surface units but German surface raiders would have allowed a more persistent presence, that would at least allow the germans to beat up a fair few more convoys before the presence of escort carriers wouldve made that proposition dicey.

Bismarck was always a bit hyped up. The design was flawed enough in that a torpedo could do the damage it did. Worth noting that its main armour wasnt brilliant. The British guns turned the German turrets into swiss cheese.

I thought they were neutral?

[Jacksgranda]

31 minutes ago, 101 said:

I don't think many people who will be actively celebrating will be celebrating a return to peace time it's far more, we won, Britain won the war, get it right up Germany etc.

Correct, far too many people are deliberately missing the point. Flag waving nationalism with dog whistle racism and homophobia led in part to the world war perhaps it would be a good time to evaluate the current leadership of our country.

Homophobia led to the Second World War? Please elucidate.

[Herman Hessian]

1 hour ago, renton said:

swiss cheese.

4 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

I thought they were neutral?

they were for the most part but often indulged in a lot of aggressive sabre-racletting....

 

[renton]

8 minutes ago, Fullerene said:

Several ships were destroyed by a single bomb or torpedo.  For example the flagships Arizona, Hood and Akagi.

Aye, well battleships generally were not well armoured against air dropped bombs. Deck armour tended to be lighter as the armour was concentrated on the gun turrets and side belt - basically against other battleships.

Akagi got done because the deck was full of refueling and re-arming aircraft when the bomb hit. 

Hood, is more in the same category as Bismarck: Structurally flawed, shell passed right through into her magazines. The RN knew it as well, but in 1939 did not think they could dry dock her to fix the issues as they needed all their heavy units at sea - talk about a false economy.

Bismarck was flawed in so much as her under water protection was lacking, hence the critical damage done by the carrier planes. However, even her heavy armour proved no great match to the British battleships, her turrets were put out of action in short notice during the last battle. 

Generally, German surface units tended to be incredibly innovative: Deisel powered, all welded construction with modern guns, but usually lacking in one or two places that ultimately made them easy meat when lured into range of British surface units.

[GordonS]

8 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

I thought they were neutral?

So did I, until I read about this place recently, commanded by a Nazi p***k: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wauwilermoos_internment_camp