D-DAY June 6,1944
Comments
-
couldn't even get off the first page without someone marginalizing some of the bravest soldiers in American history. surprise surprise0
-
cropduster82 wrote:OffHeGoes29 wrote: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.0 -
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.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.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.0 -
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: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.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.0 -
Kel Varnsen wrote: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!0 -
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 on0 -
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?0 -
Byrnzie wrote:
yea I am. did you ask the mods I be banned because I dont bow down to your every word?0 -
but I'm done responding to you in this thread. sadly others will take your bait and this thread, honoring those who died on D-Day, will be ruined. good job.0
-
I am also through with you....You know nothing about history or the real world, since it deals with facts. You are a hatemonger with subtle ways...pushing your Anti-Western, especially American, views anyway that you can. Your lack knowledge on this subject is very overt, and your knowledge of the real world was shown by your lack of knowledge concerning North Korea. Good DayByrnzie wrote: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.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.0 -
OffHeGoes29 wrote:Sometimes I wonder if our generation could do what they did during their time, survive a depression and fight a world war.
amazing to ponder, isn't it?
such a different time period, and a very different mindset.
both my father and my father-in-law fought in WW2. my father was stationed in hawaii and my fil in italy. both products of the great depression, as was my mother albeit she is far younger. amazingly, the war *inspired* my father's chosen career.....after being stationed on an aircraft carrier. my dad was also a first generation american, so everything about the start of his life and forward......always so fascinating to me. he really always was such a walking example of the 'american experience' of that time period.OffHeGoes29 wrote: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.
Stay with me...
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow0 -
tybird wrote:I am also through with you....You know nothing about history or the real world, since it deals with facts. You are a hatemonger with subtle ways...pushing your Anti-Western, especially American, views anyway that you can. Your lack knowledge on this subject is very overt, and your knowledge of the real world was shown by your lack of knowledge concerning North Korea. Good Day
Cheerio!0 -
Clearly anyone who doesn't toe the American line is a hatemonger and anti-Western. What a fucking joke.0
-
decides2dream wrote:OffHeGoes29 wrote:Sometimes I wonder if our generation could do what they did during their time, survive a depression and fight a world war.
amazing to ponder, isn't it?
such a different time period, and a very different mindset.
both my father and my father-in-law fought in WW2. my father was stationed in hawaii and my fil in italy. both products of the great depression, as was my mother albeit she is far younger. amazingly, the war *inspired* my father's chosen career.....after being stationed on an aircraft carrier. my dad was also a first generation american, so everything about the start of his life and forward......always so fascinating to me. he really always was such a walking example of the 'american experience' of that time period.OffHeGoes29 wrote: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.
well if there was any point in history that was comparative its now, no? we were attacked on 9/11 (pearl harbor), leading to two war fronts and going through what say is close to a depression. heres to hoping we can prevail as well as that generation did. 0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.9K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 275 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help