What exactly did WW2 in Europe Accomplish? - Page 11 - Aircraft of World War II

river · 08-01-2009, 09:29 AM

Hi,

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amsel

Nobody gives a dang about the Bush's over here.

Is that how the Presidents family are portrayed outside of the country? That is interesting.

Most people over here have liittle respect or love for most Presidents, and think even less of their fiscal and foreign policies.

river

michaelmaltby · 08-01-2009, 09:38 AM

Sorry River ... "over here". Where's that, please

MM

parsifal · 08-01-2009, 09:50 AM

all the elements for achieving victory were there, it was just that people didnt yet know how to put it all together.

At sea, the U-Boat would come within an ace of defeating the allies. The most effective defence was the convoy, but it took some time for this to sink in . The battlefeets mostly cancelled each other out, but since the british fleet was better positioned, and was stronger in numbers it was given the defacto control of the seas (this was a strategy never really explored by the Germans after Jutland.....an attempt to wrest control of the seas by way of surface battle)

On land was where the major changes were occurring. The machine gun was the overwhelming firepower of the batlefield. The traditional killer of small arms, was artillery, but in WWI the techniques of how to achieve this were badly misread until the very end of the war. The Allies appear to have lost sight of the fact that the object was not so much to tackle and destroy the front lines so much, as to keep the enemy busy whilst the friendly infantry advanced at night, in small groups, accross no-mans land, to penetrate the enemy line, and then push on through that breach with the aim of exploiting into the enemy rear areas. Each side held pieces of the jigsaw. The Germans developed the idea of short duration rapid fire artillery bombardments, and then slightly after that the formation of special assault Infantry teams (Sturmbattalion or Stosstruppen) that hit the enemy defences at a concentrated point, rather than across a broad front. These tactics were first employed by a German called Von Hutier at Riga in 1917, and were later used in the 1918 offensive.

In an echo of the 2nd war, the German supply system and manpower levels broke down which was their ultimate undoing.

For the allies, the solution incorporated the German ideas (eventually, as men such as John Monash began to have an effect on tactical concepts). However grafted on to that was the use of tanks, to provide cover for the elite Infantry formations as they crossed no mans land. The idea of the tank as an Infantry support weapon had been born, and eventually its was very successful. Grafted onto that, but never really attempted, because of the armistice was the idea of using Tanks and motorized Infantry as break through weapons.

Both of these basic concepts....tanks and renewed tactics were under development. For a host of reasons both sides thought they could win in 1916....not so much because the repective high commands embraced these new concepts, but because each side believed they could break the deadlock....the Germans with their efforts on the eastern front, and in the battle of attrition at Verdun, and the allies with their big pushes at the Somme and the so called "Nivelle Offensive" The Russians too believed that victory was in their grasp under Brusilov.

In short, there was no possibility of an armistice in 1916.

river · 08-01-2009, 10:04 AM

Hi,

Quote:

Originally Posted by michaelmaltby

Sorry River ... "over here". Where's that, please

Australia.

However, let me add, that most people I know find the average American to be pleasant, down to earth and quite a nice person. I don't think you can judge the people of a country by their governmental policies.

river

michaelmaltby · 08-01-2009, 11:42 AM

" ... I don't think you can judge the people of a country by their governmental policies."

In democracies, River, the government represents the general will of the people.... so, if I can't judge people (in democracies) then I guess it isn't true that people get the governments they deserve.

How's your new PM? He seems to be catching on real fast to what Mr. Howard knew

MM

river · 08-01-2009, 05:44 PM

Hi,

We ostensibly have a 2 party government, so it is sort of like watching a perpetual car race between Ford and GM. It gets kind of boring seeing the same two manufacturers going about the track.

You always are picking the lesser of two evils, rather than something that is new and different.

Our new PM is okay, and I prefer him to the previous PM. I find that the longer a party is in power the worse they become and the more out of touch they are, and hubris seeps in.

river

michaelmaltby · 08-02-2009, 03:02 PM

"it is sort of like watching a perpetual car race between Ford and GM.."

.

I sorta know what you mean ... but that's starting to change ... just as the auto business has.

Cheers,

MM
Toronto

FLYBOYJ · 08-02-2009, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pbfoot

Kennedys , Bush family just off the top

40 years ago I'd believe you, in this day and age so called "elite US families who you might want to label as monarchs, have had their power and influence dwindle. I'm not saying that money can't buy power in any country or society, but just look at folks like William Kennedy Smith, Michael C. Skakel (a Kennedy) Joe Nachcho and more recently Jenna Bush - I don't care how much money you have, in the US you could be a member of one of those power elite families, but in these days you are not above the law.

pbfoot · 08-02-2009, 07:40 PM

Its no different in any country some people are more equal then others

Amsel · 08-02-2009, 07:43 PM

Your heart bleeds heavily, but I like that.

FLYBOYJ · 08-02-2009, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pbfoot

Its no different in any country some people are more equal then others

Especially if you're a Kennedy and get picked up for DUI. You'll still share a holding cell.

Condora · 08-03-2009, 06:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by river

Hi,

We ostensibly have a 2 party government, so it is sort of like watching a perpetual car race between Ford and GM. It gets kind of boring seeing the same two manufacturers going about the track.

You always are picking the lesser of two evils, rather than something that is new and different.

Our new PM is okay, and I prefer him to the previous PM. I find that the longer a party is in power the worse they become and the more out of touch they are, and hubris seeps in.

river

On the other side of the world, the scenario is about the same.
The feeling is that the guys in charge are getting less competent, and more interested in stuffing their pockets with all they can grab.
But as the "common people" just looove the show they put for the media, they stay in charge.

A bit like having the Titanic ram full-steam into the iceberg, and instead of thinking it might not be a good ideia, everybody is cheering the pilot who's doing it.
Really sad.

river · 08-03-2009, 07:17 AM

Hi,

Quote:

Originally Posted by Condora

But as the "common people" just looove the show they put for the media, they stay in charge..

Hehehehe, maybe it would be more accurate to say "The show the media puts on for the common people?"

river

Condora · 08-03-2009, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by river

Hi,
Hehehehe, maybe it would be more accurate to say "The show the media puts on for the common people?"
river

Unfortunately, no: they do, not their best, but some effort to get the local authorities & government's lies, but people forget or leet themselves be swindled by the show the politicians put on.

For instance, the PM constantly lies on several subjects, and now the media are simultaniously interviewing/filming the PM AND his assessors/other ministers, because that way they cannot deny what they said, or phone each other to aggree on a common version on the subject they've just been talking.
Almost every week there's something that was found out, and yet... as the elections are right after Summer Break, everyone will have forgotten it all.

A maire was found out with her hands on the money, was warned that she was going to be arrested by someone "up high" (same party as the Gvmnt), escaped by car to Spain, then flew to Brasil, had also brasilian nationality (that was a surprise!), and brasilians do not extradite their people... so she was on the run at Copacabana for 1,5 year, until she returned to be arrested... and released, because she was once more running for maire! When finally she was convicted, she had suspended sentence (I'm not sure that's a correct translation, you are guilty, get 2 years, but do not go in jail, unless you break the law).

She had almost an hour prime-time TV, saying the relief she had that it was over, that she had been set free and got rid of the charges... For someone who did not hear the sentence, she had been acquitted!
She was re-elected once more, and is going to run again, has more charges against her, but manages to escape them all, even when convicted. And the locals love her!

That's just an example, there are several cases more.

In the 30s-70s, people would leave to other countries because Porugal was poor, a dictatorship, and had a useless war going on.
Now, they're leaving because you have a incompetent clique running the country.

Sorry, it got a bit long, political, and personal, but there's a groing feeling that the revolution had too many flowers and too little blood...

Condora · 08-19-2009, 10:58 AM

Hey, guys!?

Forget what I said, I don't want to kill the conversation...

Just geting something off my chest, that's all.

08-01-2009, 09:50 AM	#153
parsifal Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 2,465	all the elements for achieving victory were there, it was just that people didnt yet know how to put it all together. At sea, the U-Boat would come within an ace of defeating the allies. The most effective defence was the convoy, but it took some time for this to sink in . The battlefeets mostly cancelled each other out, but since the british fleet was better positioned, and was stronger in numbers it was given the defacto control of the seas (this was a strategy never really explored by the Germans after Jutland.....an attempt to wrest control of the seas by way of surface battle) On land was where the major changes were occurring. The machine gun was the overwhelming firepower of the batlefield. The traditional killer of small arms, was artillery, but in WWI the techniques of how to achieve this were badly misread until the very end of the war. The Allies appear to have lost sight of the fact that the object was not so much to tackle and destroy the front lines so much, as to keep the enemy busy whilst the friendly infantry advanced at night, in small groups, accross no-mans land, to penetrate the enemy line, and then push on through that breach with the aim of exploiting into the enemy rear areas. Each side held pieces of the jigsaw. The Germans developed the idea of short duration rapid fire artillery bombardments, and then slightly after that the formation of special assault Infantry teams (Sturmbattalion or Stosstruppen) that hit the enemy defences at a concentrated point, rather than across a broad front. These tactics were first employed by a German called Von Hutier at Riga in 1917, and were later used in the 1918 offensive. In an echo of the 2nd war, the German supply system and manpower levels broke down which was their ultimate undoing. For the allies, the solution incorporated the German ideas (eventually, as men such as John Monash began to have an effect on tactical concepts). However grafted on to that was the use of tanks, to provide cover for the elite Infantry formations as they crossed no mans land. The idea of the tank as an Infantry support weapon had been born, and eventually its was very successful. Grafted onto that, but never really attempted, because of the armistice was the idea of using Tanks and motorized Infantry as break through weapons. Both of these basic concepts....tanks and renewed tactics were under development. For a host of reasons both sides thought they could win in 1916....not so much because the repective high commands embraced these new concepts, but because each side believed they could break the deadlock....the Germans with their efforts on the eastern front, and in the battle of attrition at Verdun, and the allies with their big pushes at the Somme and the so called "Nivelle Offensive" The Russians too believed that victory was in their grasp under Brusilov. In short, there was no possibility of an armistice in 1916. __________________ Do not judge on abilities, but on choices

08-02-2009, 07:43 PM	#160
Amsel Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Texas Posts: 1,860	Your heart bleeds heavily, but I like that. __________________

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

08-01-2009, 09:38 AM	#152
michaelmaltby Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 260	Sorry River ... "over here". Where's that, please MM

08-01-2009, 11:42 AM	#155
michaelmaltby Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 260	" ... I don't think you can judge the people of a country by their governmental policies." In democracies, River, the government represents the general will of the people.... so, if I can't judge people (in democracies) then I guess it isn't true that people get the governments they deserve. How's your new PM? He seems to be catching on real fast to what Mr. Howard knew MM

08-01-2009, 05:44 PM	#156
river Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 78	Hi, We ostensibly have a 2 party government, so it is sort of like watching a perpetual car race between Ford and GM. It gets kind of boring seeing the same two manufacturers going about the track. You always are picking the lesser of two evils, rather than something that is new and different. Our new PM is okay, and I prefer him to the previous PM. I find that the longer a party is in power the worse they become and the more out of touch they are, and hubris seeps in. river

08-02-2009, 03:02 PM	#157
michaelmaltby Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 260	"it is sort of like watching a perpetual car race between Ford and GM.." . I sorta know what you mean ... but that's starting to change ... just as the auto business has. Cheers, MM Toronto

08-02-2009, 07:40 PM	#159
pbfoot Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: niagara falls Posts: 5,941	Its no different in any country some people are more equal then others

08-19-2009, 10:58 AM	#165
Condora Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Europe, currently Portugal Posts: 205	Hey, guys!? Forget what I said, I don't want to kill the conversation... Just geting something off my chest, that's all.