Posted on 07/30/2017 6:16:31 AM PDT by Twotone
I highly recommend the new 3 part BBC series available on iTunes. Accurate and dramatic — It’s free to preview it.
This is a really bad idea, oftentimes because it is hypocrite Boomers who are thereby projecting their own ignorance and lack of courage, they who raised the Millenials AND botched up their at-bat as grownups pretty thoroughly, IMHO.
I suggest we all bring the Millennials along, just as many conservatives among us were brought along by older, wiser people who helped us understand the world and shake off the brainwashing of the schools and the media.
We were not all born FReepers, you know.
Apologies for the digression, not trying to hijack this thread.
Not a word of the Germans. Well, I suppose that would have somehow insulted the present invading force.
It was not so much eerie as insulting to the intellect
Cowardly politically correct. The movie will not be a classic No hero no villain
Caddie,
That’s the best post I’ve read in years.
I was not born a creeped I was born into an opposite environment boomer post Christian New York suburb.
Prayers for the site this Sunday
Boats that normally would never be able to cross went out and came back with their load.
Dude, you’ve got it backwards. Heinz Gruderian was the architect of victory in France in 1940.
And mores the shame that those born in the eighties and beyond are so ignorant of history
In 1940 The Germans launched a feint into Belgium to draw in the Allied Armies and it worked. This is how the British ended up being trapped with their backs to the sea. The main thrust came through the Ardennes, across the Meuse River at Sedan, the German Army wheeled right and took Paris. Please, go back and read the history and pay particular attention to Sedan. My main point is three times the Germans came through the Ardennes and three times the Allied Armies ignored the lesson. And the Germans did draw on the Schlieffen Plan because they did not have the chance to put it to full use in WW1. Armored warfare did not exist in 1914 and the Germans misjudged the Belgians will to resist.
I have nothing backwards. Heinz Gurderian was instrumental in developing the Panzer arm but it was Erich von Manstein who developed the risky and very successful plan for a drive through the Ardennes.
Look up the Manstein plan and see how it is very different from the Schlieffen plan. Gurderian was not shy about giving Manstein credit in 1940 and for all of Manstein’s contributions to German arms thereafter.
I have. And it all points to Gurderian. And Rommel.
In RISE AND FALL OF THIRD REICH it was said that Hitler nixed idea of destroying Brits army cause he didnt wast the Belgians to think he was trying to annhilate all of his enemies or conquered nations. He wanted some cooperation from the Belgians...also he wanted Britain to withdraw from war effort from beginning of war...and he knew the Brits would adamantly pursue war if he annhilated army..and Hitler didnt want a 3 front war (eastern front...western front...and southern front)...He knew he would be unable to supply all his armies...I recommend a read of that book to fill in lots of the glossed over poorly informative baloney that is being passed off as history..
I saw it Thursday. Really enjoyed it. Took a little while to figure out the three separate timelines. I would definitely see it again. I highly recommend seeing it in iMAX.
Hitler was an Anglophile. He really felt the two countries and peoples , Britain and Germany were alike.
von Ribbentrop was the one who hated Britain, mainly because he felt slighted when he was the German Ambassador to Britain.
Pretty much the only things they teach now about WWII is how bad we were for dropping the bombs on Japan and Dresden.
Yes Thanks I know all this...I read history...I didn’t want to get into the Franco-Prussian War nor bring up Bulge in that post. I did forget about the feint in 1940, so thanks for reminding me. And I know about the weakened Von Schlieffen Plan in 1914. Corps were drawn off of the original plan for defense of east Prussia. The German general staff had a higher opinion of Russian mobilization efficiency then apparently did Von Schlieffen (I think the original plan was drawn up in the 1890s - 1900s. I could be wrong about that but it wasn’t brand spanking new in 1914!). Considering Russian performance at the Battle of Tannenberg, Von Schlieffen was probably correct. Those missing Corps might have made the difference in the Battle of Marne.
With a German victory at Marne, France would have probably sued for peace and we would have had a different world. Don’t know if it would be a better world but it would be different!
Just one question. Who begat the Boomers?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.