D Day.
Posted by: oldie on 06 June 2004
This is something that I would not normally propose but at this one time. Would you all spare a moments thought For all those, of all nationalities that didn't make it,so that we could.
oldie.
oldie.
Posted on: 06 June 2004 by Geoff P
Here,Here
Listening every day planning to "not fade away"
Listening every day planning to "not fade away"
Posted on: 06 June 2004 by Tim Jones
oldie -
I agree entirely. It was moving this morning to hear that this may be the last such commemoration when large numbers of veterans will gather.
However, I worry that we are all being presented with a picture in which D-Day is portrayed as the 'turning point' of the war; that the heroic sacrifices of those men - and especially those of the Americans on Omaha beach - 'began the fight against Hitler in Europe'.
This is rewriting history and smacks very slightly of Hollywood. By June 1944, the Wehrmacht was being routed by the Red Army, in battles the scale of which are almost incomprehensible in the West. By August that year the Russians were over the Vistula and into Poland and Czechoslovakia.
The other thing that annoys me about the 'heroic sacrifice' stuff is that actually many of those men died because of rank cowardice and incompetence on the part of senior officers.
For instance, the Americans on Omaha would have had tank support (which they desperately needed) had not a certain Naval Commander decided, against very strong advice from junior officers, to launch the amphibious Shermans prepared for the task so far off the beach that they were overwhelmed by the swell and all of them (25?) immediately sank straight to the bottom. This didn't happen at the British beaches.
However, what did happen at the British beaches was that another Naval commander decided it would be too risky to get too close in, so fired his hundreds of rockets, designed to blast the German positions, from so far away that they fell into the sea - watched by astonished British troops.
Many of the men who died on D-Day did so because they were left helpless in the face of an industrial killing machine - by the incompetence and cowardice of others.
Tim
I agree entirely. It was moving this morning to hear that this may be the last such commemoration when large numbers of veterans will gather.
However, I worry that we are all being presented with a picture in which D-Day is portrayed as the 'turning point' of the war; that the heroic sacrifices of those men - and especially those of the Americans on Omaha beach - 'began the fight against Hitler in Europe'.
This is rewriting history and smacks very slightly of Hollywood. By June 1944, the Wehrmacht was being routed by the Red Army, in battles the scale of which are almost incomprehensible in the West. By August that year the Russians were over the Vistula and into Poland and Czechoslovakia.
The other thing that annoys me about the 'heroic sacrifice' stuff is that actually many of those men died because of rank cowardice and incompetence on the part of senior officers.
For instance, the Americans on Omaha would have had tank support (which they desperately needed) had not a certain Naval Commander decided, against very strong advice from junior officers, to launch the amphibious Shermans prepared for the task so far off the beach that they were overwhelmed by the swell and all of them (25?) immediately sank straight to the bottom. This didn't happen at the British beaches.
However, what did happen at the British beaches was that another Naval commander decided it would be too risky to get too close in, so fired his hundreds of rockets, designed to blast the German positions, from so far away that they fell into the sea - watched by astonished British troops.
Many of the men who died on D-Day did so because they were left helpless in the face of an industrial killing machine - by the incompetence and cowardice of others.
Tim
Posted on: 06 June 2004 by MichaelC
Let us not forget those who didn't make it, be it at D-Day or the countless other battles on all fronts.
Mike
Mike
Posted on: 06 June 2004 by HTK
Yeah. Respect and gratitude.
Harry
Harry
Posted on: 06 June 2004 by Bob Edwards
Tim--
Although the tendency on the part of the public to underestimate the Russian contribution to defeating Germany in WW2 definitely exists, your post goes a bit too far the other way...
You might enjoy reading, if you haven't already, John Keegan's fine book "Six Armies in Normandy." He compares Normandy with Tunisia, the destruction of Army Group Center, and Stalingrad, and concludes that the invasion in the west was Hitler's greatest military disaster of the war.
Best,
Bob
Although the tendency on the part of the public to underestimate the Russian contribution to defeating Germany in WW2 definitely exists, your post goes a bit too far the other way...
You might enjoy reading, if you haven't already, John Keegan's fine book "Six Armies in Normandy." He compares Normandy with Tunisia, the destruction of Army Group Center, and Stalingrad, and concludes that the invasion in the west was Hitler's greatest military disaster of the war.
Best,
Bob
Posted on: 06 June 2004 by Justin
I've just finished Cornelius Ryan's "The Longest Day" and have started "A Bridge too far", the first a victory, the last a defeat.
Ryan's account lays a good part of the victory at Normandy on the hardheadedness of Hitler himself and the absence of Rommel from his post. Two critical decisions are instrumental. First, the only German airpower in the area had been moved off the lines just a few days before the invasion, leaving only TWO pilots and two planes on the lines. The second was the insistence by Hitler to have personal control over Panzer divisions, and his refusal to "release" the 21st Panzer division before it was too late.
Interestingly, on his return to his post, Rommel is reported to have said, "You know. . . if I was commander of the Allied Forces right now, I could finish off the war in fourteen days."
I've no insight into whether Ryan knows what he is talking about or is otherwise respected among WWII historians, but having read the first book in his historical trilogy, the one thing I was most struck by was the way he was able (perhaps unwittingly, but i doubt it) to "humanize" the Nazi field commanders. I think it is easy to imagine the whole of Nazi Germany command to be (1) war mongering, (2) jew hating, (3) snivelling synchophants (sp.) - all of which may be true - I've no clue. But while celebrating the Allied invasion (and I think it is fair to call Ryan's book just that) he presents commanders like Rommel and many other as - for lack of a better word - normal people, albiet military people. They complain about poor equipment, even poorer leadership and generally comport themselves in exactly the same way I imagine American and British troops would have. There's no sense that every Nazi was a sort of Joseph Mengelov figure in command dress or a sort of Ray Fines character (for those who have seen Schindler's List).
I've not read anything on the life of figures like Rommel (so, for all I know he was everything I imagined him to be) but I was struck nevertheless on reading the accounts of German command on D-day.
Anyway, as I said, this was a good book.
Judd
Ryan's account lays a good part of the victory at Normandy on the hardheadedness of Hitler himself and the absence of Rommel from his post. Two critical decisions are instrumental. First, the only German airpower in the area had been moved off the lines just a few days before the invasion, leaving only TWO pilots and two planes on the lines. The second was the insistence by Hitler to have personal control over Panzer divisions, and his refusal to "release" the 21st Panzer division before it was too late.
Interestingly, on his return to his post, Rommel is reported to have said, "You know. . . if I was commander of the Allied Forces right now, I could finish off the war in fourteen days."
I've no insight into whether Ryan knows what he is talking about or is otherwise respected among WWII historians, but having read the first book in his historical trilogy, the one thing I was most struck by was the way he was able (perhaps unwittingly, but i doubt it) to "humanize" the Nazi field commanders. I think it is easy to imagine the whole of Nazi Germany command to be (1) war mongering, (2) jew hating, (3) snivelling synchophants (sp.) - all of which may be true - I've no clue. But while celebrating the Allied invasion (and I think it is fair to call Ryan's book just that) he presents commanders like Rommel and many other as - for lack of a better word - normal people, albiet military people. They complain about poor equipment, even poorer leadership and generally comport themselves in exactly the same way I imagine American and British troops would have. There's no sense that every Nazi was a sort of Joseph Mengelov figure in command dress or a sort of Ray Fines character (for those who have seen Schindler's List).
I've not read anything on the life of figures like Rommel (so, for all I know he was everything I imagined him to be) but I was struck nevertheless on reading the accounts of German command on D-day.
Anyway, as I said, this was a good book.
Judd
Posted on: 07 June 2004 by oldie
Judd,
There is a brilliant book by GITTA SERENY called Albert Speer: his battle with Truth
Published by PICADOR [in the UK]it gives a fantastic insight into what was going on, not just in Hitlers mind but also the minds of his supporters,such as Goring and Goebbels as usual with the so called Politicians/ Military they were only intersted in their own welfare and wealth ,the amount of infighting that went on was unbelievable fortunatly for all of us and not the overall picture.
If you can get hold of a copy well worth the read.
oldie
There is a brilliant book by GITTA SERENY called Albert Speer: his battle with Truth
Published by PICADOR [in the UK]it gives a fantastic insight into what was going on, not just in Hitlers mind but also the minds of his supporters,such as Goring and Goebbels as usual with the so called Politicians/ Military they were only intersted in their own welfare and wealth ,the amount of infighting that went on was unbelievable fortunatly for all of us and not the overall picture.
If you can get hold of a copy well worth the read.
oldie
Posted on: 07 June 2004 by andy c
Hi,
I see what you say, Tim.
I still think that regardless of the reasons the troops still went on with their task regardless, showing amazing courage and bravery. Both my grandfathers survived the war, both were infantry. The storys they tell of death and killing were told with such humility, it was as if they felt they too should not have survived...
respect to all those that fought on D day, whether they made it past that day of days or not, I say.
andy c!
I see what you say, Tim.
I still think that regardless of the reasons the troops still went on with their task regardless, showing amazing courage and bravery. Both my grandfathers survived the war, both were infantry. The storys they tell of death and killing were told with such humility, it was as if they felt they too should not have survived...
respect to all those that fought on D day, whether they made it past that day of days or not, I say.
andy c!
Posted on: 07 June 2004 by Rasher
My children will learn all about it. It is my duty as a parent to ensure that they do now that the last veterans are fewer. I have been to Auschwitz, the Cabinet War Rooms and to Bletchley Park. It sounds as if I am particularly interested in war, but I'm not - only history. I do believe that it is essential that past events should never be allowed to happen again, and awareness in our children is our responsibilty.
Obviously that goes for racism, sexism - the whole thing really.
Obviously that goes for racism, sexism - the whole thing really.
Posted on: 07 June 2004 by Tim Jones
Bob -
I've read Keegan's book. It's very good.
Trying to identify a particular moment as the 'turning point' in a conflict is invidious at best. Perhaps what I mean is that there comes a point in total war where one side's economic ability to replenish its materiel is finally exhausted by its combat losses. I think this point (or better - process) had already happened in the East well before June 1944 - probably at Kursk.
oldie - the Sereny book on Speer is very good. And a great lesson for civil servants everywhere....
Tim
I've read Keegan's book. It's very good.
Trying to identify a particular moment as the 'turning point' in a conflict is invidious at best. Perhaps what I mean is that there comes a point in total war where one side's economic ability to replenish its materiel is finally exhausted by its combat losses. I think this point (or better - process) had already happened in the East well before June 1944 - probably at Kursk.
oldie - the Sereny book on Speer is very good. And a great lesson for civil servants everywhere....
Tim
Posted on: 07 June 2004 by Rasher
When my kids are at an appropriate age, I will take them to these places, and yes, Normandy would be good too.
In Eastbourne, they have a second world war tank on the seafront. I think that is inappropriate and unnecessary glorification of war. I wish they would take it away and put it in a museum. I don't think it has any connection to the town.
In Eastbourne, they have a second world war tank on the seafront. I think that is inappropriate and unnecessary glorification of war. I wish they would take it away and put it in a museum. I don't think it has any connection to the town.
Posted on: 07 June 2004 by oldie
Patrick,
A good few years ago whilst touring the Continent we spent quite a few hours driving through the areas where the war graves are for both the 1914/18 war and the Second World War.After seeing War Graves that went on for literally mile after mile after mile it's not a place that I would in all honesty recommend people to go to, Yes I have heard and given all the arguements in the past about people actually seeing what conflict really is all about [normaly gross stupidity from their/our leaders both political and military] but the sight of all those Graves is such a harrowing experance that sears a image into your mind that never recedes so I would not advise such a visit to anybody especially if they were on holiday.
oldie.
A good few years ago whilst touring the Continent we spent quite a few hours driving through the areas where the war graves are for both the 1914/18 war and the Second World War.After seeing War Graves that went on for literally mile after mile after mile it's not a place that I would in all honesty recommend people to go to, Yes I have heard and given all the arguements in the past about people actually seeing what conflict really is all about [normaly gross stupidity from their/our leaders both political and military] but the sight of all those Graves is such a harrowing experance that sears a image into your mind that never recedes so I would not advise such a visit to anybody especially if they were on holiday.
oldie.
Posted on: 07 June 2004 by Paul Ranson
I recommend Antony Beevor's 'Stalingrad' and 'Berlin' for an insight into the Eastern Front.
Keeping war graves is a relatively recent invention. And I think a good thing. It raises the bar for war if the results are laid out in rows, all the names written down in stone.
Paul
Keeping war graves is a relatively recent invention. And I think a good thing. It raises the bar for war if the results are laid out in rows, all the names written down in stone.
Paul
Posted on: 07 June 2004 by Bhoyo
quote:
Originally posted by Justin:
I've not read anything on the life of figures like Rommel (so, for all I know he was everything I imagined him to be) but I was struck nevertheless on reading the accounts of German command on D-day.
Judd:
Rommel was an amazing general in the wrong uniform. Churchill even praised Rommel's leadership when explaining to the House of Commons about another setback in the desert campaign. Understandably, this was not appreciated by Members of Parliament.
Davie
Posted on: 07 June 2004 by Geoff P
Some of the things about the D-Day parade that caught me most emotionally were subtle little demonstrations of an attitude to life and a set of values that I feel made a significant contribution to the final vital success of the invasion.
The old soldiers carried themselves with proudness and at the same time clearly purveyed a sense of humility at the magnitude of what they were remembering both demonstrably and I am sure in the their personal thoughts.
I also felt that the queen must have been remembering the impact the war and the blitz of London had on her parents. It seemed clear that she felt more closely the debt owed to the few that were there, representing the thousands that were'nt.
I don't want to sound like an old grumbler, but probably will, in stating that the values that drove those old soldiers to their selfless efforts are becoming harder to find in the rat race of modern life. Any effort to educate the young to, not just the bare facts of the world wars, but the elements of courage and character that played such as important part in these conflicts is a worthwhile effort.
regards
GEOFF
Listening every day planning to "not fade away"
The old soldiers carried themselves with proudness and at the same time clearly purveyed a sense of humility at the magnitude of what they were remembering both demonstrably and I am sure in the their personal thoughts.
I also felt that the queen must have been remembering the impact the war and the blitz of London had on her parents. It seemed clear that she felt more closely the debt owed to the few that were there, representing the thousands that were'nt.
I don't want to sound like an old grumbler, but probably will, in stating that the values that drove those old soldiers to their selfless efforts are becoming harder to find in the rat race of modern life. Any effort to educate the young to, not just the bare facts of the world wars, but the elements of courage and character that played such as important part in these conflicts is a worthwhile effort.
regards
GEOFF
Listening every day planning to "not fade away"
Posted on: 07 June 2004 by Bob Edwards
Geoff said "Any effort to educate the young to, not just the bare facts of the world wars, but the elements of courage and character that played such as important part in these conflicts is a worthwhile effort."
Very well said! And exactly correct...
Bob
Very well said! And exactly correct...
Bob
Posted on: 08 June 2004 by Tarquin Maynard - Portly
I was over in Normandy for the weekend, most of my time spent at or near Pegasus Bridge where I met one of my war heroes: Wally Parr of the Ox & Bucks Light Infantry. He was in the very first glider that touched down at 00:16 on D Day. I have read a great deal about the actions of his battalion on the day, and it is depicted very well ( according to Wally ) in "The Longest Day." I had the pleasure and honour of meeting many veterans: a day I will remember for the rest of my life.
Regards
Mike
Spending money I don't have on things I don't need.
Regards
Mike
Spending money I don't have on things I don't need.
Posted on: 08 June 2004 by JohanR
Tim wrote:
How true.
I would say that it was the Soviets that saved us from the Nazis, and the Americans that saved us from the Soviets. The Russians wouldn't have stopped in Berlin if left to themselves. They would have gone on and "freed" all of us like they did to the countries that ended up inside the iron curtain.
So D-day WAS very important.
JohanR
quote:
Trying to identify a particular moment as the 'turning point' in a conflict is invidious at best. Perhaps what I mean is that there comes a point in total war where one side's economic ability to replenish its materiel is finally exhausted by its combat losses. I think this point (or better - process) had already happened in the East well before June 1944 - probably at Kursk.
How true.
I would say that it was the Soviets that saved us from the Nazis, and the Americans that saved us from the Soviets. The Russians wouldn't have stopped in Berlin if left to themselves. They would have gone on and "freed" all of us like they did to the countries that ended up inside the iron curtain.
So D-day WAS very important.
JohanR
Posted on: 08 June 2004 by Tim Jones
Yes - just not quite in the way people think. If the allies had been beaten back, how much bigger would the Warsaw Pact have been?
Tim
Tim
Posted on: 08 June 2004 by Geoff P
quote:
I would say that it was the Soviets that saved us from the Nazis, and the Americans that saved us from the Soviets. The Russians wouldn't have stopped in Berlin if left to themselves. They would have gone on and "freed" all of us like they did to the countries that ended up inside the iron curtain.
So D-day WAS very important.
For the record the stuation was somewhat diffrent than that. As a result of the success of the D Day landings Montgomery wanted to push on through and occupy as much of Germany as possible and bring it under allied control all the way to Berlin and beyond.
Einsenhower had overall command responsibility and ORDERED Montgomery to follow his consolidation plan instead.
The isolation of Berlin and the erection of the wall together with the horrendous cost in terms of human suffering and the logisitics of the air lift would have been avoided if Montgomery had had his way.
This is of course historic opinion, there is no way to absolutely declare any of this would have happened or made a difference but the scio-political map of western europe would have been a lot different if this had happened.
GEOFF
Listening every day planning to "not fade away"