Did the U.S defeat Hitlers Germany?

1…171819202123»

Comments

  • tybird
    tybird Posts: 17,388
    redrock wrote:
    Yes, he is very popular for some reason. Was it his 'vision'? His strategies (highs and lows!). There are greater and more charismatic 'great commanders' than him. Personally, I'd take Alexander over Napoleon any day (but that's my opinion!).
    You pretty much answered yourself there, Sparky.....one reason that the majority might show more interest in him than your favorite, Alexander, would be that Alexander was around before the printing press and fewer contemporary accounts of him made it this far forward in history.
    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.
  • redrock
    redrock Posts: 18,341
    tybird wrote:
    You pretty much answered yourself there, Sparky.....one reason that the majority might show more interest in him than your favorite, Alexander, would be that Alexander was around before the printing press and fewer contemporary accounts of him made it this far forward in history.

    Of course.. but so much has been written about Alexander. People know about cleopatra, Nero, Ceasar, etc. Time shouldn't matter for historical figures. Alexander is from an exciting era and there is so much more to him and his times than the battles, etc. It's just a very interesting and 'full' time in history - could fill loads of exhibitions!
  • tybird
    tybird Posts: 17,388
    redrock wrote:
    Of course.. but so much has been written about Alexander. People know about cleopatra, Nero, Ceasar, etc. Time shouldn't matter for historical figures. Alexander is from an exciting era and there is so much more to him and his times than the battles, etc. It's just a very interesting and 'full' time in history - could fill loads of exhibitions!
    You're not getting an argument from me....I would rather read about hundreds of other historical figures besides Napoleon....of course, I am not a trendy person...more of a marching to a different beat kinda guy.

    The point that I was trying to make about "contemporary accounts" is their value in showing many sides to a single event, era or person. The fewer contemporary accounts that exist of something often results in a bias...in other words were the accounts of Alexander that survived written by those with an axe to grind against him or those that adored him or by someone who was impartial? Or do we have to interpet what we know about Alexander by digging up artifacts? That is a process that is rift with modern day bias and interpetation of meanings.
    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.
  • sponger
    sponger Posts: 3,159
    Songburst wrote:
    The Finns out-killed the Russians 20-1, but the sheer volume of death that the Russian were willing to accept finally overwhelmed the Finns until they had to give up a major part of their country.

    You are comparing pre-Stalingard tactics to post-Stalingrad tactics. Apples and oranges...
    reigning champion

    http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
  • forgotten_child
    forgotten_child Posts: 54
    in a few words....NO THEY DIDNT WIN THE WAR..

    THEY WOULD LIKE TO THINK THEY DID BUT THEY DIDNT

    THEY PLAYED A BIT PART, HELPED OUT, HELPED WIN IT
  • Sonja_S
    Sonja_S Vienna Posts: 444
    This discussion could go on forever. History is taught differently in every country. I'm sure I learned totally different things about WWII in school here in Austria than German, British, American, let alone Russian students do/did. Plus it's a war that many people cannot talk about anymore because they are dead and others refuse to talk about which of course still fuels speculation.
    You can tell a man from what he has to say - Neil & Tim Finn
    They love you so badly for sharing their sorrow, so pick up that guitar and go break a heart - Kris Kristofferson
  • tybird
    tybird Posts: 17,388
    Sonja_S wrote:
    This discussion could go on forever. History is taught differently in every country. I'm sure I learned totally different things about WWII in school here in Austria than German, British, American, let alone Russian students do/did. Plus it's a war that many people cannot talk about anymore because they are dead and others refuse to talk about which of course still fuels speculation.
    Is there anything wrong with a never-ending discussion? As long as it doesn't become circular?
    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.
  • Jackhammer
    Jackhammer Posts: 122
    tybird wrote:
    Is there anything wrong with a never-ending discussion? As long as it doesn't become circular?

    Nuclear, wou mean? :)
    Reality isn't what it used to be.
  • tybird
    tybird Posts: 17,388
    Jackhammer wrote:
    Nuclear, wou mean? :)
    naw......talking in circles is bad......nuclear? I signed the treaty. :)
    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.
  • Jackhammer
    Jackhammer Posts: 122
    Good. Won't have to report it to the gov ;)
    Reality isn't what it used to be.
  • tybird
    tybird Posts: 17,388
    truroute wrote:
    i've never heard that before. Interesting. got any links?
    In regards to Jews in the Kriegsmarine (Nazi Germany's Navy).....I found a brief mention in one book that I had easy access to (i.e. that I could locate among the vast collection of books owned by the wife and I)...."Under Grand-Admiral Erich Raeder, the Kriegsmarine had retained the traditional naval salute except for official occasions such as this one (the commissioning of the K.M.S. Bismarck), had refused to dismiss its Jewish officers and had forbidden all officers to get involved in politics." "THE DISCOVERY OF THE BISMARCK" by Robert D. Ballard with Rick Archbold 1990.

    This is just quick reference, but I have heard it (in the past) from other sources.

    This line of thinking by the Navy is probably one of the reasons that the Allies accepted Karl Donitz, Naval Commander, as the head of state at war's end. Admiral Donitz was later absolved of war crimes.
    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.
  • Collin
    Collin Posts: 4,931
    Interested thread, Byrnzie.

    I'll have to read it through...
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • Collin
    Collin Posts: 4,931
    I completely agree with you by the way, it's absolutely disgusting when Americans claim to have won the war, or that we'd be speaking German if it wasn't for the US.

    From a statement like that you can only conclude that that person doesn't know enough about WWII. What he does know seems to be pure ethnocentrism.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    sponger wrote:
    I can't say I've read this entire thread, but I did read most of it, so my apologies in advance if this has already been brought up and thoroughly trounced upon.

    I think what's being overlooked here is the fact that Russia never had to face Mr. Erwin Rommel aka "The Desert Fox" f'n badass tank commander of the century.

    There's a reason why Russia never had to deal with Rommel, and that reason is that Rommel was too busy giving the allies a run for their money in Africa.

    Thus far, I think we can all agree that Stalingrad was pretty much the turning point of WWII. FYI: The person commanding the 6th German Army, the army that was annihilated at Stalingrad, was Field Marshal Friedrich Paulus. In spite of being encircled by the Russians, he blindly obeyed Hitler's orders against his own better judgment and held his position in Stalingrad.

    Rommel would not have been so obedient. It was because he disobeyed Hiter's orders to stand his ground in El Alamein that he was able to regroup and defeat the US II Corps in the battle of Kasserine Pass.

    So, had the 6th German army been commanded by Rommel instead of Paulus, we may or may not have seen a German defeat in Stalingrad.

    I'd say that Zhukov was a superior commander than Rommel. In fact I'd say that Zhukov was the most succesful and significant commander of the entire war.
    From the Battle of Khalkhyn Gol - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Khalkhin_Gol (before the war) - to the defence of Leningrad, the battle of Moscow, Stalingrad, Kursk, and the Battle for Berlin.
    Seems to me he pisses on the competition.

Categories