WWII Truth and?

I have it on dodgy authority that it is all the BBC’s fault, in cahoots with the illuminati and the lizards.

Curses – he’s found out the true culprit!!:eek:

From a slightly different point of view,weren’t the designers of German ww11 aircraft and rockets/jets then employed by the allies after the war,same types of job but different masters.
Is this a case of keeping your friends close but your enemies closer ,maybe to keep the Eastern bloc countries at bay.
With the formation of East v West Germany surely completely shutting down all available forces would not be a good idea.

I have it on dodgy authority that it is all the BBC’s fault, in cahoots with the illuminati and the lizards.

I blame the Illuminati. Or is it the shape-shifting lizards? :confused:

It’s easy to mix the two up.

I don’t disagree with any of that rant, nor I would guess do most of the members here. It’s an open secret that there as many versions of history as people writing about it. I was merely querying the relevance of your specific post, that’s all…..:rolleyes::)

You are all making the same mistake that has bedevilled researchers and historians down the ages. That is to believe (unless accurate information to the contrary is available) that what is written by Monks, Govts, or Politicians, and/or Journalists, in their various publications (Official, or not) is The Whole Truth, and nothing but The Truth. How naïve! There is no such thing as The Truth, The Whole Truth, and Nothing But The Truth. There is no difference between a War History and points on a Speeding Ticket!

Some accounts are better (and, therefore, nearer The Truth) than others. But you pays your money and you takes your choice. Some Authors (and Govts) have “axes” to grind. The researcher has to have a care that ‘axe grinding’ – however carefully camouflaged as The Truth – is not transmitted downwards in time (and the Internet is more guilty of this than most!) to the detriment of future researchers.

Whilst I do not necessarily agree with Nolan then we should, at least, have the grace to examine the proposition rationally. It would seem that there were actually some unofficial, and tentative, contacts between some senior personnel in the German armed forces and the Allies (possibly via intermediaries) long before the end of WW2. These may, or may not, have led to a tentative, unofficial, accommodation of the top, professional (and non-political), German military with the Allies.

Politicians are fickle beasts – viz Churchill distancing himself from Harris after Dresden which he, Churchill, had ordered/encouraged Harris to perform. But are the current accounts of that episode accurate?

It is a simple task to dig up an aircraft (if it exists!), and to measure it from ‘x’ to ‘y’, and to count the rivets between frames 19 and 20. But why was it actually built? Did we need it? Or was it to be built in the deprived constituency of a politician who was fretting about his/her Parliamentary majority?

Read Chester Wilmot’s book “The Struggle For Europe”. Read it slowly and carefully. This was first published in 1952 (before Wilmot was allowed, openly, to describe the work of Bletchley Park). Yet it was Required Reading at Sandhurst and the Staff Colleges – forming the opinions of many Officers. Wilmot’s pen pictures of the senior Army commanders have undergone some severe revision since then – and rightly so. It was – at that time – The Truth about the European aspect of WW2.

All I’m saying is that the original post may not be accurate, or popular with some sections of this Forum, but it should – at least – be viewed, and discussed, rationally. But these subjects do tend, from experience, to generate more heat than light. It’s an intellectual problem!! Say no more!
HTH
Resmoroh

But the book quoted was written by Arthur Smith in 1977 not Churchill. So whether or not history was kind to him is irrelevant in this context, isn’t it….or did I misinterpret your post?

History will be kind to me for I intend to write it.
Sir Winston Churchill British politician (1874 – 1965)
HTH
Resmoroh

As a new participant in the forum, I have read much good information and some myths. Neither the British nor German government admit to the fact that the Luftwaffe was NOT completely disbanded but kept in readiness for re-establishment fully in the early ’50’s. Nor was the German Navy.. and units of the Army were kept full equipped under various guises. And when you push beyond a certain point in historical research, doors close rather abruptly.So we must rely on aging RAF and Luftwaffe personnel, hoping their memories are still good. An interesting fact confirming what happened is that German military pensions include WWII uninterrupted!!

The part marked in red is the only true fact… as described in “Churchill`s German Army” in the 1977 book:

http://books.google.de/books?id=6PpNUK5u1lkC&pg=PA125&lpg=PA125&dq=Arthur+Smith++%22Churchill%27s+German+army%22&source=bl&ots=g-C7FNQ2Nr&sig=vI98wcfSAP1Is5ySwMgeKdaPGaQ&hl=de&sa=X&ei=UFtHUbKMHaWH4ATL3oDoBA&ved=0CC4Q6AEwADgo#v=onepage&q=Arthur%20Smith%20%20%22Churchill%27s%20German%20army%22&f=false

…during the summer of 1945. That`s all. :rolleyes:

Kesha

With minimal aviation content I think this will sit better in General Discussion, the natural home of the conspiracy theory.

Moggy
Moderator

As a new participant in the forum, I have read much good information and some myths. Neither the British nor German government admit to the fact that the Luftwaffe was NOT completely disbanded but kept in readiness for re-establishment fully in the early ’50’s. Nor was the German Navy.. and units of the Army were kept full equipped under various guises. And when you push beyond a certain point in historical research, doors close rather abruptly.So we must rely on aging RAF and Luftwaffe personnel, hoping their memories are still good. An interesting fact confirming what happened is that German military pensions include WWII uninterrupted!!

Welcome to the Forum, There will be times you feel like a Gladiator in the ring, faced by a Pride of hungry Lions, and unarmed.

Jim.
Lincoln .7

I have never heard of rearmament, secret or otherwise. From the small amount I understand of postwar german (west) military, the first talks of rearmament of West Germany began quietly (but not secretly) in 1950, only 5 years after the war.

But I have read postwar information on the debriefing of German Military personel. A lot of detail in particular was collected on teaching the West how to deal with any potential conflicts with the Soviet military.

Oh dear.

History, in its various guises, is not actualitie. It is the nearest approximation to the truth – of the time in question – that researchers can get to. Govts, Services, etc, can – and DO – lie even in “Official Documents” as it suits them. Those who have, naively, not been involved in central govt deceptions should now turn away!
Immediate post-WW2 the threat was that Ivan would be at Cap Cris Nez before we all knew what was happening.
The Allies had problems. The US just wanted to go home. The UK was broke (big time!). There might have been the case that ANYTHING that could stop that happening was “a good thing”. Nolan has just opened what might be a big can of worms! I think he may have a very good case!
HTH
Resmoroh

Where is this going…..Germany wasn’t actually defeated during World War II? :rolleyes:

A bit of Leeway here chaps, I think he knows the Germans surrendered, after realising they couldn’t win, perchance he mis- wrote it.

However it leaves me too, a little perplexed.
Jim.
Lincoln .7

Nolan

I am probably not alone in being a little perplexed in trying to understand where you are going with this or if you are truly suggesting that the British and German governments deny that the Luftwaffe was re-formed in (then) West Germany in 1956?
Hardly some blinding revelation, Nolan.

Where is this going…..Germany wasn’t actually defeated during World War II? :rolleyes: