kiltboy 0 #101 February 18, 2003 Love the bit in the movie when the Polish squadron spots the Germans for the first time. Repeat please. David Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #102 February 18, 2003 Quote (I do however remember something about history being written by the winners though . . .) You must be thinking of the six-volume work "The Second World War" by Winston S. Churchill, for which (among other works) he won the Nobel Prize for Literature. http://www.nobel.se/literature/laureates/1953/, The set is still in print. Despite its length it is fairly easy going, has a lot of facts and figures in it, etc., but not one word about Enigma, which was still classified.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #103 February 18, 2003 QuoteQuoteThe one that would have left Europe speaking German if it wasn't for the Americans! Dave -- Americans and others. 39,000 Canadians died in the Second World War. 10 times as many Americans died, but then again, you have 10 times the population. Canada defended Europe, and battled Hitler's armies. Canadians died in Europe. It wasn't just your countrymen who were there. Here's the numbers of military killed in action of various nations, 1939 - 45: USSR 8,668,000 Nazi Germany 2,800,000 Japan 1,506,000 China 1,324,000 Britain 398,000 United States 295,000 France 211,000 Canada 39,000 other Brit. Empire (Aus, NZ, Rhodesia, S. Africa) 136,000 Civilians killed: USSR 15,000,000 Nazi Germany 500,000 Japan 300,000 France 108,000 Britain 65,000... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #104 February 18, 2003 QuoteI feel that war is sometimes necessary but should be an absolute last resort. We're not at that point just yet I'm sorry I just don't agree I believe we are well past last resort. if they don;t know it's turn or burn time they are idiots. With troops massing to attack if he had any ideas of changing he would have by now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #105 February 18, 2003 >I believe we are well past last resort. Why? What horror has befallen us from not attacking Iraq? We left him alone for 11 years after Gulf War I, what will another month matter? >if they don;t know it's turn or burn time they are idiots. Lots of people are idiots; doesn't mean 100,000 civilians deserve a horrible death just because their government is run by idiots. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,589 #106 February 18, 2003 Would your opinion change if Iraq were close to the US, and likely to lob stuff back that could damage us? Or would you want to keep trying to avoid war that would hurt people you know and family members. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #107 February 18, 2003 Quote I'm sorry I just don't agree I believe we are well past last resort. if they don;t know it's turn or burn time they are idiots. Why? Honest question here: What on earth have they ever done to the US? What are they threatening to do? _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Schroeder 0 #108 February 18, 2003 I'm canadian and if, say, the americans were to us as iraq is to you, still I'd want to keep avoiding it. Why? because, really, why does the family of the person in toronto mean more to me than the family in detroit? It doesn't, and I really think that drawing these lines in the sand/snow only makes things worse. So, I hope bill would say the same thing, because here, there, everywhere, a life is a life. To me, personally, the notion that something could happen in my backyard isn't enough to cause me to make an decision based on a border line. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #109 February 18, 2003 Here's the turning point of WWII, and I'll bet very few are aware of it. It concerns the fiasco started by Mussolini's attempt to invade Yugoslavia and Greece: ---------------------------------------------------- "Hitler was infuriated by the revolt. He did not want to hear explanations, apologies, or declarations of loyalty; the only thing that he wanted was the annihilation of those that dared to rebel against him, even briefly. He raged to his generals that Yugoslavia must be destroyed. In addition to attacking Greece, the Germans were now to attack Yugoslavia as well. Hitler called a military conference on March 27th and he ordered the Luftwaffe to completely destroy the city of Belgrade in what he called "Operation Punishment." Yugoslavia itself would be crushed and divided among Germany, Hungary, Rumania, and Italy. Due to the sudden change in the attack plans, Hitler announced: "The beginning of the 'Barbarossa' operation will have to be postponed up to four weeks." ---------------------------------------------- And so the fate of the Third Reich was sealed. See "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", William Shirer.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #110 February 18, 2003 QuoteNo - it was obvious that I was digging at politicians. LOL, are you as snobbish in real life as you appear on these boards? This could also be interpreted as calling soldiers the "dumb pawns of politicians". "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #111 February 18, 2003 QuoteI DO have something against those who believe history is only what Hollywood shows them - unfortunately this seems to be many Americans under the age of 45 or thereabouts. Well, I'm under 45 so I guess this will be a "Hollywood Version". Right? WWII was won on the Eastern front. The US gave the USSR a tremendous amount of armor and equipment that contributed to their success on the Eastern front. I agree the US didn't "win" the war but don't underestimate our contribution on all fronts. Even ones where we didn't send troops. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shark 0 #112 February 19, 2003 He may not be, but I was prompted by inferrence of being anti-american. Again, like everyone else, I was making assumptions. Sorry. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shark 0 #113 February 19, 2003 Not necessarily directed to anyone in particular. Just interesting. --------------- War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. John Stuart Mill (1806 - 1873) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerry81 10 #114 February 19, 2003 QuoteThis could also be interpreted as calling soldiers the "dumb pawns of politicians". Isn't that exactly what they are? Pawns that can be moved around by those with enough political power? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a good soldier one that doesn't question orders much? One that accepts the fact that others will decide about his life and that every battle he is sent to might be his last, whether he deems its cause noble and worth dying for or not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #115 February 19, 2003 QuoteIsn't that exactly what they are? Pawns that can be moved around by those with enough political power? No jerry, they are people, not pawns. A good soldier thinks, he doesn't just "follow orders". I commanded 130 men in the US Infantry (101st) and I never defined or heard any other officer define a "good soldier" as one that doesn't question orders. In the US military we issue "mission statements" for every operation. These "mission statements" tell the soldier who, what, when, where, and why they are doing the mission. We expected them to question and we were expected to provide answers. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Iflyme 0 #116 February 19, 2003 QuoteThis could also be interpreted as calling soldiers the "dumb pawns of politicians". Remove the word "dumb" (I'm not sure why you added that), and that is exactly what soldiers are. In democratic countries, the military is a tool the government uses to obtain objectives. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Iflyme 0 #117 February 19, 2003 QuoteWar is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of thingsYes, there are other problems that are much more of a threat to western society. How about the number of firearms used to commit crimes? How about the enormus amount of drug use? Go to a high school and see how many kids are too stoned to learn anything. What about children who grow up in poverty and have no future, so they turn to crime? How many people in North America die of smoking-related illnesses every year??? What about AIDS? But ya don't see governments spending trillions to fight any of these battles... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #118 February 19, 2003 QuoteRemove the word "dumb" (I'm not sure why you added that), and that is exactly what soldiers are. In democratic countries, the military is a tool the government uses to obtain objectives. Well, I was a soldier and I was never a pawn. I joined the Army voluntarily and did my job voluntarily. I was never pushed into service, I was allowed to think in accomplishing my job, and my leaders always explained why I was doing my job. If I didn't agree with what was going on I was allowed to voice my opposition and present an alternative. Maybe your Army is different but I was never a "pawn". "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shark 0 #119 February 19, 2003 QuoteQuoteWar is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of thingsYes, there are other problems that are much more of a threat to western society. How about the number of firearms used to commit crimes? How about the enormus amount of drug use? Go to a high school and see how many kids are too stoned to learn anything. What about children who grow up in poverty and have no future, so they turn to crime? How many people in North America die of smoking-related illnesses every year??? What about AIDS? But ya don't see governments spending trillions to fight any of these battles... Are you directing this towards me? Or John Stuart Mill? You must have been away.... See: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=387805#387805 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Iflyme 0 #120 February 19, 2003 Quote I was allowed to voice my opposition and present an alternativeLike what? "Sarg, I'd rather invade Kuwait ... I don't think they will use biological weapons on us.." "OK soldier, gather up the troops and we'll head there instead..." In the army, US and Canada alike, you are told what to do. You don't tell the government what to do. You get your orders and you go. Plain and simple. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #121 February 19, 2003 QuoteIn the army, US and Canada alike, you are told what to do. You don't tell the government what to do. You get your orders and you go. Plain and simple. You really do not have a clue what the military is like do you? Soldiers are allowed to have a voice about how the mission is accomplished. No, they are not allowed to decide whether or not they are deployed to a theater of war (that decision is made when they enlist, we don't have a draft). They are allowed to participate in the planning of operations. They are allowed to change the plan if the original plan is deemed not feasible or a better course of action is found. You do not just "get your orders and go". The decision on how to accomplish the mission is ultimately left to the commander but everyone is allowed to have input. They are not pawns. I don't believe there are very many good soldiers that would agree with your pawn theory. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #122 February 19, 2003 QuoteQuoteIn the army, US and Canada alike, you are told what to do. You don't tell the government what to do. You get your orders and you go. Plain and simple. You really do not have a clue what the military is like do you? Soldiers are allowed to have a voice about how the mission is accomplished. No, they are not allowed to decide whether or not they are deployed to a theater of war. They are allowed to participate in the planning of operations. They are allowed to change the plan if the original plan is deemed not feasible or a better course of action is found. You do not just "get your orders and go". The decision on how to accomplish the mission is ultimately left to the commander but everyone is allowed to have input. They are not pawns. I don't believe there are very many good soldiers that would agree with your pawn theory. Who decides to send them to war? The politicians. Soldiers may get to make tactical decisions, but not strategic ones. The grunts don't even get to do that. What is the punishment for mutiny in the US military? And then there's the draft, the ultimate loss of personal control. Kids still have to register for it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #123 February 19, 2003 QuoteQuoteRemove the word "dumb" (I'm not sure why you added that), and that is exactly what soldiers are. In democratic countries, the military is a tool the government uses to obtain objectives. Well, I was a soldier and I was never a pawn. I joined the Army voluntarily and did my job voluntarily. I was never pushed into service, I was allowed to think in accomplishing my job, and my leaders always explained why I was doing my job. If I didn't agree with what was going on I was allowed to voice my opposition and present an alternative. Maybe your Army is different but I was never a "pawn". Did you always get your way? What happened if your superior officer disagreed with your recommendation? Did you do it your way anyway? Why do they need a UCMJ if the military is such a democracy?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #124 February 19, 2003 Quote Did you always get your way? What happened if your superior officer disagreed with your recommendation? Did you do it your way anyway? Hell, I haven't always gotten my way in any job I've had or in anything I've ever done. I guess I'll always just be a pawn. Do you always get your way in your current job? If my superior officer disagreed then we did it his way. But, I had input. A pawn doesn't get input. A pawn is sacrificed with little thought and is worth very little. A soldier (human) is not a pawn. UCMJ is used to enforce discipline when a purely constitutional court system is not available. It reinforces the chain of command by letting the chain of command determine guilt or innocence and determining the punishment. The UCMJ is needed because discipline must still be maintained when deployed and civilian courts are not available. BTW......I never said the military was a democracy. It is not. Democracies do not work in combat. Decisions have to be made quickly and with minimal information. Democracies are slow and cumbersome. I said that soldiers are not pawns. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #125 February 19, 2003 QuoteWho decides to send them to war? The politicians decide to send the Army to war. The people decide whether to join the Army and be subject to that decision by the politicians. QuoteWhat is the punishment for mutiny in the US military? I don't know. I was in the Army. We didn't have many ships. QuoteSoldiers may get to make tactical decisions, but not strategic ones. The grunts don't even get to do that. Soldiers (even grunts, I was an Infantry officer ie a grunt) have input to tactical decisions in the modern Army. I, as a company commander, relied on my soldiers for recommendations on tactical decisions regularly. This method of leadership was taught to me in every Army School I attended. If you care for me to list them I will. Many strategic decisions are made by the civilian government. Soldiers have a lot of input into those decisions. Most strategic decisions are actually made by the JCS which is made up of soldiers. Now the decision to go to war is determined by the civilian government as outlined in the constitution. QuoteAnd then there's the draft, the ultimate loss of personal control. Kids still have to register for it. OK. There hasn't been a draft in quite a while. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)