D-DAY June 6,1944

WaveCameCrashinWaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
edited June 2009 in A Moving Train
In honor of all the american soldiers and all the allied forces who made the ultimate sacrifice. :(

Thank you
We will never forget.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«134

Comments

  • tybirdtybird Posts: 17,388
    +1

    Amen
    All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a thousand enemies, and whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you, digger, listener, runner, prince with the swift warning. Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be destroyed.
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    +2
  • keeponrockinkeeponrockin Posts: 7,446
    I can't imagine how frightening it must have been before they landed.
    Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
  • tybirdtybird Posts: 17,388
    I can't imagine how frightening it must have been before they landed.
    Never had the chance to speak to a D-Day survivor at length, but the owner of a company I used to work for was one of the Marines that landed on Iwo Jima...he told me how the night went to dead quiet to the greatest firework show that he ever saw to the sheer terror of sitting in the landing craft as you moved towards shore...then it became a blur.
    All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a thousand enemies, and whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you, digger, listener, runner, prince with the swift warning. Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be destroyed.
  • youngsteryoungster Boston Posts: 6,576
    Those men are heroes and will never be forgotten.
    He who forgets will be destined to remember.

    9/29/04 Boston, 6/28/08 Mansfield, 8/23/09 Chicago, 5/15/10 Hartford
    5/17/10 Boston, 10/15/13 Worcester, 10/16/13 Worcester, 10/25/13 Hartford
    8/5/16 Fenway, 8/7/16 Fenway
    EV Solo: 6/16/11 Boston, 6/18/11 Hartford,
  • OffHeGoes29OffHeGoes29 Posts: 1,240
    Sometimes I wonder if our generation could do what they did during their time, survive a depression and fight a world war.
    BRING BACK THE WHALE
  • WaveCameCrashinWaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
    Sometimes I wonder if our generation could do what they did during their time, survive a depression and fight a world war.

    sure we could. and were not that far from it IMO
  • youngsteryoungster Boston Posts: 6,576
    Sometimes I wonder if our generation could do what they did during their time, survive a depression and fight a world war.


    I wonder the same thing. Would high school/college age kids voluntarily give up their freedoms, cell phones, laptops and all their other possessions to go and fight in a world war? I definately think a good portion would, although not in the staggering numbers in WWII. Sometimes I also think that there is a lot of entitlement in today's youth and many believe that someone else should go to war instead of them. Many want the world to be a more peaceful place, but they are not going to risk their lives in uniform for it to happen.
    He who forgets will be destined to remember.

    9/29/04 Boston, 6/28/08 Mansfield, 8/23/09 Chicago, 5/15/10 Hartford
    5/17/10 Boston, 10/15/13 Worcester, 10/16/13 Worcester, 10/25/13 Hartford
    8/5/16 Fenway, 8/7/16 Fenway
    EV Solo: 6/16/11 Boston, 6/18/11 Hartford,
  • tybirdtybird Posts: 17,388
    Sometimes I wonder if our generation could do what they did during their time, survive a depression and fight a world war.


    I wonder the same thing. Would high school/college age kids voluntarily give up their freedoms, cell phones, laptops and all their other possessions to go and fight in a world war? I definately think a good portion would, although not in the staggering numbers in WWII. Sometimes I also think that there is a lot of entitlement in today's youth and many believe that someone else should go to war instead of them. Many want the world to be a more peaceful place, but they are not going to risk their lives in uniform for it to happen.
    Well, there was a draft then...but many did volunteer.
    All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a thousand enemies, and whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you, digger, listener, runner, prince with the swift warning. Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be destroyed.
  • WaveCameCrashinWaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
    Sometimes I wonder if our generation could do what they did during their time, survive a depression and fight a world war.


    I wonder the same thing. Would high school/college age kids voluntarily give up their freedoms, cell phones, laptops and all their other possessions to go and fight in a world war? I definately think a good portion would, although not in the staggering numbers in WWII. Sometimes I also think that there is a lot of entitlement in today's youth and many believe that someone else should go to war instead of them. Many want the world to be a more peaceful place, but they are not going to risk their lives in uniform for it to happen.

    good point I agree with most of your post. All you would have to do is walk through your local mall and you can tell who would go and who wouldn't.

    People back then cared about america more than people do these days IMO
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited June 2009
    By the way, the American soldiers and the allied forces are the same thing. The Americans who fought at D-Day were no different from the British, or Canadians, or Polish, or French e.t.c, who fought there, despite what Steven Spielberg may have you all believe.

    Shame the Yanks came 3 years too late. The Nazis were already on the back foot on the Eastern Front by the time the Americans saw a chance to cash in on post-war Europe.

    Still, better late than never.

    Edit: In light of the predictable backlash I'll no doubt receive for not regarding D-Day as the most important event in WWII - which it wasn't, by any stretch of the imagination - I'll just say that I have nothing but respect for all those soldiers who fought on that day, or on any other day in that war. And there were far more significant battles during WWII than D-Day, even on the Western front. I think D-Day is blown out of all proportion mainly for it's dramatic nature. The Battle of The Bulge was a more significant battle than D-Day.
    Post edited by Byrnzie on
  • OffHeGoes29OffHeGoes29 Posts: 1,240
    I just look at that generation and marvel at their accomplishments. Its not like they had a choice with what happen in their life time, but they kept it together and sacrificed a lot to give everone what we have today. I think they gave us everything we have to be thankful for today.
    BRING BACK THE WHALE
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    I just look at that generation and marvel at their accomplishments.

    50 million dead. Great accomplishment. Personally, I don't regard 6 years of slaughter as something we should beat our chests over. That period in human history was a fucking disgrace. Just my humble opinion.
    I think if we try hard enough we could find other things in history more worthy of celebration and reverence.
  • WaveCameCrashinWaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
    Byrnzie wrote:
    I just look at that generation and marvel at their accomplishments.

    50 million dead. Great accomplishment. Personally, I don't regard 6 years of slaughter as something we should beat our chests over. That period in human history was a fucking disgrace. Just my humble opinion.
    I think if we try hard enough we could find other things in history more worthy of celebration and reverence.
    Nobody's beating their chest we are honoring the lives of the fallen soldiers who died on d day. what the hell is your problem man. :x
  • WaveCameCrashinWaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
    I just look at that generation and marvel at their accomplishments. Its not like they had a choice with what happen in their life time, but they kept it together and sacrificed a lot to give everone what we have today. I think they gave us everything we have to be thankful for today.

    +1,000,000
  • WaveCameCrashinWaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
    Byrnzie wrote:
    By the way, the American soldiers and the allied forces are the same thing. The Americans who fought at D-Day were no different from the British, or Canadians, or Polish, or French e.t.c, who fought there, despite what Steven Spielberg may have you all believe.

    Shame the Yanks came 3 years too late. The Nazis were already on the back foot on the Eastern Front by the time the Americans saw a chance to cash in on post-war Europe.

    Still, better late than never.

    Edit: In light of the predictable backlash I'll no doubt receive for not regarding D-Day as the most important event in WWII - which it wasn't, by any stretch of the imagination - I'll just say that I have nothing but respect for all those soldiers who fought on that day, or on any other day in that war. And there were far more significant battles during WWII than D-Day, even on the Western front. I think D-Day is blown out of all proportion mainly for it's dramatic nature. The Battle of The Bulge was a more significant battle than D-Day.
    :roll: :roll: yeah OK Mr .WWII2 expert . were you there when this happened ? you weren't even born yet. why don't you go tell this to someone that survived any of these battles and see what kind of reaction you get. Especially what you think about D-Day. And your comment about the americans seeing a chance to cash in on post war Europe is despicable
  • tybirdtybird Posts: 17,388
    Byrnzie wrote:
    By the way, the American soldiers and the allied forces are the same thing. The Americans who fought at D-Day were no different from the British, or Canadians, or Polish, or French e.t.c, who fought there, despite what Steven Spielberg may have you all believe.

    Shame the Yanks came 3 years too late. The Nazis were already on the back foot on the Eastern Front by the time the Americans saw a chance to cash in on post-war Europe.

    Still, better late than never.

    Edit: In light of the predictable backlash I'll no doubt receive for not regarding D-Day as the most important event in WWII - which it wasn't, by any stretch of the imagination - I'll just say that I have nothing but respect for all those soldiers who fought on that day, or on any other day in that war. And there were far more significant battles during WWII than D-Day, even on the Western front. I think D-Day is blown out of all proportion mainly for it's dramatic nature. The Battle of The Bulge was a more significant battle than D-Day.
    The Battle of the Bulge would have never happened without D-Day. :roll:
    All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a thousand enemies, and whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you, digger, listener, runner, prince with the swift warning. Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be destroyed.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    tybird wrote:
    The Battle of the Bulge would have never happened without D-Day. :roll:

    D Day would never have happened without Stalingrad.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    prfctlefts wrote:
    were you there when this happened ? you weren't even born yet.

    Please explain to me how this is relevant.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    prfctlefts wrote:
    why don't you go tell this to someone that survived any of these battles and see what kind of reaction you get. Especially what you think about D-Day.

    I already have. I had a conversation with a D Day veteran in Korea about this and he agreed with me - in fact, not only did he agree with me, but he had a more passionate interest in the Russian war effort than me. We discussed how the Russian contribution far outweighed the American contribution - somewhere in the region of 100 - 1. Just the battle of Stalingrad alone eclipsed the entire American and British war effort combined in the impact it had upon the German army and in the numbers of dead.
    I also remember him being fascinated by the battle of Khalkhin Gol in 1939 (otherwise known as the Nomonhan Incident) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Khalkhin_Gol. He even carried around a folder with info on this battle that he'd acquired over the years. He was fascinated with how the Russians under Zhukov were able to so conclusively crush the Japanese despite being massively outnumbered.

    This man fought in D-Day. He also later fought in the Korean war. But even he was honest enough to place D-Day in perspective - something that many people seem unable, or unwilling, to do.
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    couldn't even get off the first page without someone marginalizing some of the bravest soldiers in American history. surprise surprise
  • Kel VarnsenKel Varnsen Posts: 1,952
    Sometimes I wonder if our generation could do what they did during their time, survive a depression and fight a world war.


    I wonder the same thing. Would high school/college age kids voluntarily give up their freedoms, cell phones, laptops and all their other possessions to go and fight in a world war? I definately think a good portion would, although not in the staggering numbers in WWII. Sometimes I also think that there is a lot of entitlement in today's youth and many believe that someone else should go to war instead of them. Many want the world to be a more peaceful place, but they are not going to risk their lives in uniform for it to happen.

    I wonder about the same thing too. Not only about the people who served, but the people who made so many sacrifices at home. I mean you hear all the time about people having to deal with things like food and fuel rationing, curfews and not using any light at night. I get the feeling today if government tried to implement any of those things today, even during a war, you would get people freaking out about how dare the government do this to them.
  • tybirdtybird Posts: 17,388
    Byrnzie wrote:
    tybird wrote:
    The Battle of the Bulge would have never happened without D-Day. :roll:

    D Day would never have happened without Stalingrad.
    We argued this many times before....you are wrong....Stalingard happened, but whether D-Day happened or not did not depend on what happened on the Eastern Front, outside of the complete surrender of the Soviets which might have happened if it weren't for the Allied Supply efforts through the Arctic Sea Route..the Soviet war effort did not exist in a vacuum, they did not defeat the Wehrmacht without help...they called it an Allied effort because all of the Allies sacrificed lives and wealth....the Eastern Front existed because the Nazis wanted it to....the Soviets' job was to trade land for time (Scorched Earth policy)....the tried and true Russian battle tactic going back to Peter the Great's war with Sweden and the Napoleonic wars....hold onto Baku and its oilfields...the two front war was a longtime goal of the Allied war planners...even prior to the worm turning on the Wehrmacht in the Soviet Union.....it's always easier to fight on your home ground than to invade a fortified continent from the sea and a neighboring island.
    All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a thousand enemies, and whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you, digger, listener, runner, prince with the swift warning. Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be destroyed.
  • tybirdtybird Posts: 17,388
    Byrnzie wrote:
    prfctlefts wrote:
    why don't you go tell this to someone that survived any of these battles and see what kind of reaction you get. Especially what you think about D-Day.

    I already have. I had a conversation with a D Day veteran in Korea about this and he agreed with me - in fact, not only did he agree with me, but he had a more passionate interest in the Russian war effort than me. We discussed how the Russian contribution far outweighed the American contribution - somewhere in the region of 100 - 1. Just the battle of Stalingrad alone eclipsed the entire American and British war effort combined in the impact it had upon the German army and in the numbers of dead.
    I also remember him being fascinated by the battle of Khalkhin Gol in 1939 (otherwise known as the Nomonhan Incident) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Khalkhin_Gol. He even carried around a folder with info on this battle that he'd acquired over the years. He was fascinated with how the Russians under Zhukov were able to so conclusively crush the Japanese despite being massively outnumbered.

    This man fought in D-Day. He also later fought in the Korean war. But even he was honest enough to place D-Day in perspective - something that many people seem unable, or unwilling, to do.
    He drank the same Kool-aid that you did, eh....winning a war is not about a body count....see the U.S. effort in Vietnam.....lots of dead Viet-Cong.....high body counts in favor of the Americans...but who won that one? Please don't tell me that you continue to reference "wiki" :roll:
    All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a thousand enemies, and whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you, digger, listener, runner, prince with the swift warning. Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be destroyed.
  • VINNY GOOMBAVINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,818
    I mean you hear all the time about people having to deal with things like food and fuel rationing, curfews and not using any light at night. I get the feeling today if government tried to implement any of those things today, even during a war, you would get people freaking out about how dare the government do this to them.

    Why wouldn't we freak out? It sounds like you're describing Martial Law to me. Curfews? You would want to willingly go along with that?

    If there ever were a scenario where food was being rationed in this country, it would in all likelihood come as a result of our government imposing and enforcing price controls, which would create further shortages. So yeah, we would have reason to be pissed at them for any of this-- it'd be their fault that it happened!
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited June 2009
    tybird wrote:
    the Soviets' job was to trade land for time (Scorched Earth policy)....the tried and true Russian battle tactic going back to Peter the Great's war with Sweden and the Napoleonic wars....hold onto Baku and its oilfields...the two front war was a longtime goal of the Allied war planners...even prior to the worm turning on the Wehrmacht in the Soviet Union.....it's always easier to fight on your home ground than to invade a fortified continent from the sea and a neighboring island.

    They didn't trade land for time. They fought the Nazis every step of the way and it cost them dearly in the first 6 months after Barbarossa, due primarily to Stalin being a control freak and a shit military strategist.
    Also, it's since been proven that the Nazis had no intention of invading Britain. They put across a pretense of wanting to invade but this has since been proven to have consisted of a bunch of decoys - jetties, landing boats, e.t.c.
    The fact is Stalingrad sucked in the best of the German army and it swallowed them up. It was a massive Russian sacrifice. And, yes, in this instance the number of dead is a factor worth mentioning. They sacrificed the city of Stalingrad and those sent to defend Stalingrad in order to give them the opportunity to hit the German 6th army on their flanks with a massive counter-attack. It worked, and the sacrifice they made in the number of dead soldiers and civilians was greater than the entire U.S and British war effort.
    Of course Hitler made a mistake in invading Russia. If those same German forces had been deployed on the Western front I doubt the Allies would have considered a D-Day type landing. They would have been overwhelmed. The majority of Nazi Germany's best forces were instead sent to the Eastern front.

    Victory in the 2nd World war is owed primarily to the Russians. I don't see how this can be seriously disputed anymore.
    Post edited by Byrnzie on
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited June 2009
    tybird wrote:
    He drank the same Kool-aid that you did, eh....winning a war is not about a body count....see the U.S. effort in Vietnam.....lots of dead Viet-Cong.....high body counts in favor of the Americans...but who won that one? Please don't tell me that you continue to reference "wiki" :roll:

    Nine out of every ten German soldiers killed in WWII died in Russia. The Russians captured Berlin. They liberated Auschwitz. The battle of Moscow in 1943, Stalingrad, and Kursk were the most important battles of the Second World War. What serious historian disputes this today?
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:

    Victory in the 2nd World war is owed primarily to the Russians. I don't see how this can be seriously disputed anymore.

    thats bullshit. and only a belief you hold because of your outright bias against America.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    jlew24asu wrote:
    Byrnzie wrote:

    Victory in the 2nd World war is owed primarily to the Russians. I don't see how this can be seriously disputed anymore.

    thats bullshit. and only a belief you hold because of your outright bias against America.

    Are you still here?
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    Byrnzie wrote:

    Victory in the 2nd World war is owed primarily to the Russians. I don't see how this can be seriously disputed anymore.

    thats bullshit. and only a belief you hold because of your outright bias against America.

    Are you still here?

    yea I am. did you ask the mods I be banned because I dont bow down to your every word?
Sign In or Register to comment.