SmithVery nice photos indeed.
That yellow monoplane # 854. What is it?
many thanks
SmithWOW – they are astounding! I just fell over this thread by accident – pushed the thread button and up they came in 5 star order. Silly me, must have been sleeping under a rock a few weeks ago.
And they are SO Italian – the way Italian designers of go fast things seem able to blend performance with elegance.
I now have another reason to get back to my favourite country in the world … where in Italy is this place?
bellissima
SmithI have an image in my minds-eye – snapper, masticating, head bent over towards EN830’s feet.
Uh-oh – I have another image – what were you two doing?
SmithThe colour scheme is entirely incorrect. I just put Red Bull, Red Bull, Red Bull into bablefish and it came out Tora, Tora, Tora.
Obviously it should be green with red spots.
SmithOrville & Wilbur Wright (can I count that as 1?)
Leonard Cheshire
Chuck Yeager
Helmut Wick
That preposterous Czech or Hungarian stunt pilot we see around the place these days
Smith… I don’t think it’s a matter of ‘getting over it’ – how wonderfully modern! I shall ask my friend Mr Clutton at the weekend (a tail end charlie) if he is ‘over it’ !
You’re quite right David, not the right phrase at all. What I was trying to say (and it’s the essence of my argument) is that I would like us to remember and learn and “get over” using war as a method of sorting out political differences. War is hell. Iraq at present is a case in point – it’s costing everyone involved dearly and (obviously not using hindsight) it’s very hard to see how the ultimate benefit will be a positive. My contention is that this is “as usual”. Wars don’t help a hell of a lot. We don’t remember much when we get angry.
The obvious response to this point is of course to say – would I rather be living in the 3rd Reich? Nope. Sometimes, despite the cost to all concerned, we fight for what we think is right. But let’s not stoop to the lowest common denominator when we do it. In fact you could say we overthrew the immoral – let’s be honest enough to reflect on our own actions in that light.
So Moggy’s original question (were the lives of the aircrew wasted bombing Dresden in early 1945) remains valid. Absolutely they did their duty – no one’s pointing an accusing finger at them. But should they have been sent? I contend that in fighting for what is right we overstepped the mark on that occasion (and probably some others too).
Remember though Sebald’s view (noted in my first post) that to some degree German survivors thought fair enough – just retribution for our sins or something like that – does that make it right?
BTW – my uncle was a tail end charlie too. Say well done to your friend – he has my utmost respect.
SmithBack to the topic – these sox that had a thought apparently – how do you enter the world series?
SmithSuch threads as these, written with perfect hindsight are a insult to the vets, usually written by people who weren’t there and are academic.
I said I wouldn’t rise to this anymore – I lied.
The impression I get is that I’m the only one being insulted around here, for expressing my opinion on an open discussion forum.
For the record, I’m not a vet of any war
My grandfather fought at Gallipoli and the Somme
My father in the Pacific (NZ army)
His brother, my uncle, lost his life in a Lancaster whilst bombing Germany.
I remember and respect them and their kind.
Nor am I an academic – just someone who as a result of his family history has read widely and thought about these things – primarily to attempt to get around hindsight.
And I fully appreciate the reality of “total war” as Oscar puts it. It’s been the normal human way for centuries – kill the b’s, every mother and child.
I just think it’s time we got over it.
SmithPrince Charles was driving home very late one night, in somewhat of a hurry, when he ran over one of the Queen’s corgi’s. Checking that the animal was really dead, the Prince puzzled about how to hide this tragedy from his mother. Near the road was a very large boulder, so the Prince figured he could hide the body under that and no-one would ever know.
With a bit of luck the Queen would never notice the loss of only one, because she had so many. After shoving and heaving for a few minutes he managed to move the rock enough, when all of a sudden out popped a leprechaun. The little being was beaming from ear to ear.
“Oh, thank you, kind Sir” he said to a startled Prince Charles. “I’ve been under that rock for so many years I was despairing of ever seeing the sun again. I will now reward you by granting you a wish. Just tell me what it is you would most like at this time”.
“Well”, said the Prince, “If you could just bring that little dog to life you would certainly help me a great deal and save my mother a whole lot of grief”.
“I’m sorry”, said the Leprechaun. “That little dog is really gone, and is beyond even my help. I am ashamed to be unable to grant you your first wish, so please tell me another and I will try to fulfil your biggest wish”.
“O.K.” said the Prince. “Could you please make Camilla beautiful?”
The Leprechaun shook his head sadly. “I think we better take another look at that dog”.
SmithGnome – the amount of bombs dropped during the later stages of the war doesn’t have any bearing on anything. The RAF was under instructions to destroy the war machine of the Third Reich. Do you allow the enemy to regroup ? Is it advisable to allow the manufacture of more weapons that can be used against you?
The dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan finally made the Japanese realise that the war was over – the conventional bombing of Germany sapped the moral of the Germany people and their ability to fight .
Do I? Don’t I? Oh well, into the valley we go.
The RAF instructions were found by Portal and Harris to be unachievable early on – accuracy and losses being the problem.
The modified response was – destroy the workers.
It didn’t work. The industrial capacity of Germany grew throughout the war (until it’s borders shrank as invading armies closed in from East and West).
And dropping bombs on people doesn’t sap their morale, it p!sses them off. Reflect on the Blitz.
The atomic bombs dropped on Japan were different. Japan’s cities had already been area bombed in much the way Germany’s had (and yes, London, and Rotterdam, etc.). A raid on Tokyo (in I think May 1944, not sure) killed more people than any air-raid anywhere ever did or has since. But the US also set aside a number of don’t-bomb cities so that they could subsequently be destroyed. They showed Japan the first A-bomb test results and asked if they’d like to negotiate a surrender. They weren’t believed. So they dropped one bomb and asked “do you give up?” No answer. Dropped another “do you give up?” Answer “Yes”. This in recognition of inability to cope against such a weapon.
I’m not going to rise to this anymore. As I said in my first post I struggle with this. I find it appalling and don’t care whose side you support. The thinking of the times was not ours today.
And as much as I admire our old warbirds (and therefore inhabit this forum), when I look at a Lancaster I see more than a wonderful machine, I see a weapon of mass destruction. Or as a very, very good documentary I picked up on the telly some years ago phrases it (“night bombers” I think it is) … nocturnal predators of 20th century mechanised war
SmithI think it was the other way around.
Dresden was understandable, but very nearly inexcusable. We had descended into a situation where we had a vast war weapon and nothing ‘sensible’ to use it against.
Moggy
I referenced W G Sebald’s book in your Dresden thread Moggy. He makes the point you (possibly unconsciouly) make that (amongst other things) the war took on an economic dimension. The vast Allied airforces and the absolutely huge industrial might benhind them had to be utilised. It would have been wasteful not to have done so.
And please, before anyone shoots me over this, I’m making the point this was a factor – not the sole driver.
As to apologising – typically when we end a fight we apologise to each other. I think there’s little doubt there will come a time, arguably after the living memories are extinguished, when all parties to this insanity apologise to each other.
SmithHmmm, so Germany should have been alowed to fight a limited war that suited their capabilities and the Allies should only have fought with proportional force?
Not at all … as I said in my post I struggle with this. I fundamentally don’t think war is a useful way of resolving political differences … but I also don’t like fascism and/or dictators. And yes, Germany started it no doubt. But, BUT, much of that excess bomload was dropped in the last few months of the war (I don’t have the data on me, but there’s some sort of – every year the bomb tonnage equalled the aggregate of what had been done to date – something like that) and Moggy’s question is whether this degree of overkill was reasonable in February 1945.
I don’t think it was.
SmithI have so struggled with this Moggy.
My Uncle was one of those men who gave their lives in the cause of the “strategic bombing campaign”. He was one of those who unleashed unimaginable destruction on Hamburg, later repeated by others like him at Dresden. And he was one of the 60% of Bomber Command aircrew killed in the prosecution of this campaign. Yes 60%!
The arguments, that the UK had nothing else to hit back with early in the war, that night bombing was the only semi-safe way to send out bombers, that accuracy was so limited that only a city sized target was viable have been thrashed. Your point, and a very trenchant one it is, is that by Valentines Day 1945 none of those arguments held true any more.
I am appalled by what I see looking back on this, but honestly wonder what I might have thought at the time. For example, whilst I decry the coalition’s attack and war on Iraq, I feel for the problem the ground forces have at this time, their very limiting rules of engagement (re. civilian casualties, entering mosques, etc) that tie their hands behind their backs. If they could hit out hard the conflict could perhaps be subdued – but I can’t justify that – I am appalled by the very thought. Was this thought (hit them hard, hit them again) in the minds of the commanders of the time? I suppose so.
Famed German author W G Sebald in his “On The Natural History of Destruction” writes of the terrible effect this had on the psyche of the German people. All of their big cities and many smaller ones besides, and hundreds of thousands of civilians were annihilated. The vast majority of survivors (unconsciously) adopted the natural human defence mechanism of denial/forgetting. We all know the tendency of veterans not to talk of their experiences. Well this was the same. And many felt a degree of justification, but not as Mark12 suggests (because to paraphrase “we started it”) rather because they had allowed a holocaust to unfold in their support of fascism.
As to reaping the whirlwind, the bombload dropped was (I think) 149 times that dropped by Germany. Overkill in every sense of the word.
Here’s a review gleaned off Amazon on Sebald’s book – it should be on the bookshelf of every armchair historian of these terrible events. But don’t put it on the shelf until after you read it ….
W G Sebald “On The Natural History of Destruction”
reviewed by Friederike Knabe of Ottawa, Canada
This posthumous volume of Sebald’s non-fiction writing is a major contribution to German literary criticism and politico-cultural analysis. Accompanying his reflections on the traumatic impact of the air war against German cities are essays studying the very diverse reactions of three `witnesses’ of that time as reflected in their post-war literary works. In AIR WAR AND LITERATURE, originally presented as the Zurich Lectures, Sebald delves deeply into some very uncomfortable questions. The air war on 131 German cities killed some six hundred thousand civilians and destroyed more than the homes of seven and a half million people. Why have these events resulted mostly in public silence for decades? Why have so few literary works attempted to speak to the traumatic impact on the population? Most Germans seem to have tried to come to terms with the realities of the war years by suppressing their immediate pain and the longer-term suffering. Sebald has thoroughly researched a multitude of authors, both in fiction and non-fiction. Yet, he deems their explanations unsatisfactory. Heinrich Boell is cited as one of the early exceptions, yet publication of his book, The Silent Angel, was delayed by forty years.
Sebald contemplates the different causes for this persistent silence. For example, basing himself on a range of contemporary sources, he confronts the reader with a detailed description of the Hamburg firestorm. As disturbing as his account is, Sebald’s reflective style makes it readable. His objective reporting neither criticises the Allies’ campaign nor does he apologise for German actions leading to the war. He wonders, though, whether the depth of the traumatic experiences of this and other air attacks may have left many people numb and dazed, unable to express their reactions for a long time. The account of a young mother wandering through the station confused and stunned is one of several examples. Her suitcase suddenly opens onto the platform revealing the charcoaled remains of her baby.
Sebald’s intent is not to shock but to explain the deep sense of loss that must have been felt by people like her. He further contends that at that time in the war, the growing acceptance of guilt for the Nazi’s atrocities led in many civilians to an acknowledgment of justified punishment by the Allied forces. Last, not least, after the war many Germans experienced a `lifting of a heavy burden’ that they felt they had lived under during the Nazi regime. Concentrating on building the new Germany focused their minds on a better future. The publication (in German) of his Lectures in 1997 resulted in a range of reactions from readers. He reflects their varied views and comments in a postscript, thereby adding a fascinating 1990’s dimension to his “rough-and-ready collection of various observations, materials, and theses”.
SmithAnd the News of the World. I believe a WWII bomber (specifically a B24), lost somewhere in that traingular area turned up on the moon. A first class paper (NotW).
SmithTwenty pounds? The cheque’s in the mail.
As for me, I am 100% above board. Never have I so much as thought about proferring misinformation in the greater cause of an open and honest debate. Never have I refrained from returning excess change. Never have I dredged up a marginally inventive excuse for proceding home via the pub. Nor have I ever revised my CV or the exact extent of my responsibilty for things that have gone right or wrong.
And that’s the truth; as we all know, gnomes never lie.
Sign In
