Battle of Midway: June 4, 1942

From the Washington Naval Treaty to the end of the Second World War.
User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica

Battle of Midway: June 4, 1942

Post by Karl Heidenreich »

Yesterday, 64 years ago was the climatic battle between USN and IJN. Since 24th May there have been a lot of important dates!
Well, with this human conduct we can search and find an important battle anniversary everyday. :think:
User avatar
Gary
Senior Member
Posts: 706
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 3:37 pm
Location: Northumberland

Post by Gary »

And tomorrow is D-day
God created the world in 6 days.........and on the 7th day he built the Scharnhorst
User avatar
nwhdarkwolf
Member
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:42 pm
Location: Appleton, USA

Post by nwhdarkwolf »

Yes, today is D-Day. :)


A moment of silence for those brave men and women that went before us.
User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica

Post by Karl Heidenreich »

D-Day: a date that must make us ponder more than all the others. It was the beggining of the end of the nazis in the West (the Russians have been fighting like tigers in the East since 1941). Did those who died are really given their proper credit? :think: Did the world acknowledges who made the sacrificies, who fought and who just went to be aclaimed as a victor without fighting? :think: I ever been of the opinion that Monty or Patton would have been the ones that must been permited to enter Paris first, they deserved the honor more than De... :silenced:
User avatar
nwhdarkwolf
Member
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:42 pm
Location: Appleton, USA

Post by nwhdarkwolf »

I don't believe that proper credit has been given.

No offense to the French, as their sacrifice was no less great. However, I do feel that, as the ones who bore the brunt of the fighting and rebuilding costs, the UK and USA should have gone in to Paris first. Instead, the French saw that they had liberated themselves, IMO. Now, I'll grant that the French people were very nice to the troops. But, I still think things would be a bit different today, if the various parties were seen as the liberators that they were.

D-Day was the beginning of the end for the 3rd Reich, and liberation of the battered peoples that Hilter's regime took over. But, who paid the cost to rebuild those areas? The French couldn't afford to do it by themselves now could they? No one could, honestly. It took the whole world to put things back to right.
User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica

Post by Karl Heidenreich »

In Stephen Ambrose´s book "Band of Brothers" the US airborne veterans say that, concerning peoples, the Germans were nicer to them than the rest of the "liberated nationalities". At least the Germans, after the artillery barrages and bombings, went out to the streets at once to clean the debris and rebuild. The French just sit expecting the US and UK troops clean and rebuild for them.
No offense intended: it´s History
There is a story about a Dutch town Major in mid 1990ies who refuse to shake hands with Gen. Norman Schwarchkoft because the Major insisted that the US Gen. was some sort of criminal. One US veteran of Market Garden read this and wrote to the Major that the Dutch doesn´t thought that of US Generals when it comes to liberate Holland from the nazis. That if he (the veteran) would have known that something like that would happen then he would have refuse to fight and liberate Holland. In that book, and various other articles and other books, many things like that surfaced.
Europe was "liberated" of the nazis by the US-UK coalition, and later saved from the "commies" also by a US-UK led coalition that took the name of NATO (which main bulk was US, UK and German).
But after US-UK allies accomplished all this what was De Gaulle´s gratitude and answer: get France out of NATO, order the exit of US-UK forces of her territory and obstruct Great Britain to get into the European Market.
That´s just not decent!
User avatar
nwhdarkwolf
Member
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:42 pm
Location: Appleton, USA

Post by nwhdarkwolf »

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/app ... 60452/1269

I'll further post this as well. It's an opinion page from the Green Bay newspaper. Makes a lot of sense to me. ;)
Bgile
Senior Member
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Post by Bgile »

Karl Heidenreich wrote: There is a story about a Dutch town Major in mid 1990ies who refuse to shake hands with Gen. Norman Schwarchkoft because the Major insisted that the US Gen. was some sort of criminal.
I seem to recall that it was Dutch troops who caved in at Srebrenitza and allowed the Serbs to massacre thousands of innocent civilians. There is plenty of guilt to go around.
iankw
Member
Posts: 196
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Rotherham, England

Post by iankw »

Well I might be a little biased, and I do wonder about offending anyone on here who, after all, do not choose where they are born. But I do find it hard to understand the animosity that seemed to come from De Gaulle towards Britain (I don't know if this was also directed at the USA). Since then the attitude doesn't seem to have changed much either. I'm puzzled.
User avatar
nwhdarkwolf
Member
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:42 pm
Location: Appleton, USA

Post by nwhdarkwolf »

iankw wrote:Well I might be a little biased, and I do wonder about offending anyone on here who, after all, do not choose where they are born. But I do find it hard to understand the animosity that seemed to come from De Gaulle towards Britain (I don't know if this was also directed at the USA). Since then the attitude doesn't seem to have changed much either. I'm puzzled.
No, you certainly can't, can you?

I wonder that myself. I know that, as an American, the French don't look too highly upon us, but I don't understand the reasons why? I can imagine that it would have been the same way back then, but I can't be sure.

Either way, it doesn't make much sense. If we stop to consider our collective histories, France, United Kingdom, and the US, we are attached at the hip, for the most part. I have never really understood some of the misplaced, in my opinion, animousity that exists.

I play a game, called navyfield, and belong to a team that has players from around the world. Maybe the game transcends these attitudes, but I don't seem to get that attitude, but I certainly hear about it often enough. I wonder how much of that is self-induced. Some people, when they go to other countries, develop this air about them, that almost states supremecy. I have never felt it myself, even going to other countries, but I have seen the results by people who do have it. It's all very strange to me.
User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica

Post by Karl Heidenreich »

Iankw wrote:
Well I might be a little biased, and I do wonder about offending anyone on here who, after all, do not choose where they are born. But I do find it hard to understand the animosity that seemed to come from De Gaulle towards Britain (I don't know if this was also directed at the USA). Since then the attitude doesn't seem to have changed much either. I'm puzzled.
Iankw:
It´s quite simple: the attitude is called "inferiority complex". The French managed to be beaten by the Germans the first time they (the Germans) fought as a unified nation in 1870; the French were being beaten again in WWI and was the BEF the one that save the day in Mons and Marne in 1914; they were losing (again) in 1918 but then came General Pershing (with old Doug MacArthur an Geogie Patton) and won the war saving their souls from the Kaiser; in WWII the French managed to got beaten in record time and finished surrendering in the same train wagon of the WWI armitice; De Gaulle had to run and ask protection and help from the Britons (if I was them I would had thrown him into the Channel); then the US came and with the UK went to Normandy (why they didn´t land in Norway or as far from France is still a mystery to me) and "liberate" occupied Europe; the US-UK alliance + USSR won WWII, let´s forget all that talk about the 4 powers, there have been only 3 since Waterloo in 1815 (plus the bad guys: Germany and Japan); then the ruskies became unfriendly and US-UK coalition had to come again to save Europe from the red horde (don´t forget that it was hideosly imperialist Uncle Sam the one that put the big money to help Europe rebuild and forbid a commie takeover of the continent). The commies would had thrown De Gaulle in the Channel themselves while singing and drinking Vodka. Then the French put to test their military performance against subdeveloped colonies like Viet Nam and Argelia and caught the Dien Bien Flu. I believe that somewhere lies the reason of the complex, don´t you think? :wink:
Disclaimer: no offense intended, just open a History Book.
User avatar
Gary
Senior Member
Posts: 706
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 3:37 pm
Location: Northumberland

Post by Gary »

The day after tomorrow (8th June) is the Anniversary of the Sinking of HMS Glorious, Ardent and Acasta by Scharnhorst and Gneisenau.
God created the world in 6 days.........and on the 7th day he built the Scharnhorst
iankw
Member
Posts: 196
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Rotherham, England

Post by iankw »

Maybe that's it Karl, something as simple as that! I have to say that it doesn't seem to be an individual thing, more of a national feeling, presented to the world. Very odd.

regards
Post Reply