I have tremendous personal respect and admiration for ALL Allied Forces that fought (and still fight) and gave (and give) their lives in all conflicts.

I also count many veterans as personal friends and I am in regular contact with many of them all around the world; wherever possible trying to help acknowledge the sacrifices and contributions they made.

That said I do find it offensive when people seek to belittle similar sacrifices and losses suffered by wartime factory workers. 🙁

Gooday All

Interesting consider WW2 and the industrial situation/financial situation that existed then and now.

I would like to know did the companies like RR make a lot money out of the war like the Americian military complex makes out of the current wars.

Another thing that comes to mind is that with the drones in Pakastan War, normally a airman goes to war with a high risk that they mightn’t return.

In the Pakastan War, the CIA civilians are running the war (office hours) and their is no risk to them personally. Bit like the civilians working in the manufacturing entities referred to elsewhere in the thread.

cheers

The concept of ‘remote war’ in the current conflicts is an acknowledged difference in many quarters to previous conflicts.

This is totally unlike wartime factory workers who were often under the daily threat of bombing by the Luftwaffe as compared to the relatively sterile conditions of the current ‘computer operatives’, who aren’t exposed to such risks.

My grandfather never talked about the horrors that he encountered whilst helping to rescue the wartime factory workers; he was too badly affected by the experience. However I don’t doubt that in the fullness of time there will be some new ‘disorder’ suffered by the ‘computer operatives’ you referred to.

I feel that this original post and the subsequent ‘Poms’ and ‘two fingered salute’ comments in later posts are both stereotyped, patronising and quite frankly mildly offensive; and if I may say so – a bit sad!

However that’s just my opinion.

I’m involved with the Newark Air Museum and they are planning a Canberra Anniversary event next May; some details here!

In the late 1990s and early 2000s they had some contact a group called the Canberra Association, but I’m not sure that they’re still in existence. :confused:

As this thread develops I’m sure that several other ‘Canberra Groups’ will make themselves known. 🙂

As some people seem to like tangents I’ll throw this into the debate.

Spare parts and documentation (particularly for early airframes) might be another interesting issue. IIRC there are certain parts that have been spares recovered from ‘most’ of the SHAR fleet, which can best be described as being like ‘rocking horse pooh!’

I have heard tell of silly figures being offered for these items!! 😉

Isn’t it in the book? :confused:

Well yes, it is, at least on the face of it. But it’s a bit like laying-down membership criteria for a sports club, specifying admissible height, weight, shoe size and eye colour, and then when a club manager complains that somebody doesn’t meet the criteria, they say “we’d love to allow you to join, but it’s out of our hands”… Point is, they set-out the criteria in the first place!

Perhaps he’s got it really – they’re called Regulations!! :rolleyes:

:rolleyes: OK I was wrong!!