My favorite commanders (2 Viewers)

This could be similar to a painting or a sculpture where it's left up to the viewer to interpret the intent of the artist.
 
Gentleman,
I was discussing the set 'jes make sure he's dead" with Tim Tyler when I was at Troops of Time yesterday and we determind that he is not kicking the soldier or about to blast away at him at point blank range. He pointed out that the soldier is turning him over to see what kinds of wounds he has etc. He might hav killed him latter but not with a BAR.

I agree that the set is open to a variety of scenarios, but how could you guys be certain the German wasn't going to be killed later with the Browning Automatic Rifle :confused:

barao9.jpg
 
I hate to break it to everyone, but killing prisoners and the like was done by virtually every army in history. Didn't Henry V kill the French knights at Agincourt and Saladin executed all the Kinights Templar at Hattin. If a frbnech voltigeur was captured by Spanish partisans in the Penisnsualr war then things were not much fun for him either. Accroding to John Keegan in the Face of Battle there were several reported incidents of this by the Australians and British and Canadians during the first world war. The point is that these were by and large the exceptions. Other armies carried this out almost as a matter of routine. Breaker Morant proably was a victim of the need for a scapegoat but the practice of killing Boer prosoners was proably widespread. Certainly putting them into concentration camps and burning their farms caused a great deal of suffering. The practice of paying ransom for captured SWAPO geurillas menat that the SA police units had to bring back dead bodies to claim their bonus. They used to strap the corpses to the back of their armoured vehicles.

In light of all this could we pLease be a litle less thin skinned about our national honour in our discussions.
 
Whilst not so senior in rank as other leaders mentioned I think Oddball from Kelly's Heroes has to rank highly !!! Now don't ruin it by telling me he wasn't real. How about a Ltd Ed set of his Sherman shooting the back of a Tiger with paint. Classic !

lol. Oddball and his band were very funny. A great movie. I forgot the paint!
 
I hate to break it to everyone, but killing prisoners and the like was done by virtually every army in history. Didn't Henry V kill the French knights at Agincourt and Saladin executed all the Kinights Templar at Hattin. If a frbnech voltigeur was captured by Spanish partisans in the Penisnsualr war then things were not much fun for him either. Accroding to John Keegan in the Face of Battle there were several reported incidents of this by the Australians and British and Canadians during the first world war. The point is that these were by and large the exceptions. Other armies carried this out almost as a matter of routine. Breaker Morant proably was a victim of the need for a scapegoat but the practice of killing Boer prosoners was proably widespread. Certainly putting them into concentration camps and burning their farms caused a great deal of suffering. The practice of paying ransom for captured SWAPO geurillas menat that the SA police units had to bring back dead bodies to claim their bonus. They used to strap the corpses to the back of their armoured vehicles.


In light of all this could we pLease be a litle less thin skinned about our national honour in our discussions.

You comments on bringing back SWAPO guerrillas reminded me of a story I had from a Guards Officer. He told me that in Malaya he was supposed to take all dead insurgents back – instead of carrying dead bodies around he just put their heads in a sack and took them back as proof.
 
I hate to break it to everyone, but killing prisoners and the like was done by virtually every army in history. Didn't Henry V kill the French knights at Agincourt and Saladin executed all the Kinights Templar at Hattin. If a frbnech voltigeur was captured by Spanish partisans in the Penisnsualr war then things were not much fun for him either. Accroding to John Keegan in the Face of Battle there were several reported incidents of this by the Australians and British and Canadians during the first world war. The point is that these were by and large the exceptions. Other armies carried this out almost as a matter of routine. Breaker Morant proably was a victim of the need for a scapegoat but the practice of killing Boer prosoners was proably widespread. Certainly putting them into concentration camps and burning their farms caused a great deal of suffering. The practice of paying ransom for captured SWAPO geurillas menat that the SA police units had to bring back dead bodies to claim their bonus. They used to strap the corpses to the back of their armoured vehicles.

In light of all this could we pLease be a litle less thin skinned about our national honour in our discussions.

It isn't up to me, and other members, to be less thin skinned about national honour etc. It's more a matter of certain members being more careful about what they post.
 
Perhaps it is a combination of both. There is, however, absolutely nothing wrong with patriotism, in my opinion.

I'd say that the US troops are just rolling the body over. I say this because the soldier with the thompson is leaning in to get a closer look, and if they were about to blast the body away, esp. with a BAR, that soldier would be completely splattered with, well, use your imagination.

As an aside, when I was in Europe a month ago for my first time, I noticed that, except for the British, no one seemed to care much about national honor, and people frowned on patriotism in general. I am sorry, but to me, that is somewhat backwards. Maybe it was just the folks I met. In any case, I am a patriotic American, and I respect anyone who is patriotic to their own country, or not, as long as they have good reason. I don't much respect folks who won't take a stand either way.
But that is just my opinion, and you are all entitled to your own. I mean no offense to anyone, just stating my take on things.:)
 
And, in addition, I am grateful of the opportunity that this forum presents to discuss things with people of other nationalities.
 
Perhaps it is a combination of both. There is, however, absolutely nothing wrong with patriotism, in my opinion.

I'd say that the US troops are just rolling the body over. I say this because the soldier with the thompson is leaning in to get a closer look, and if they were about to blast the body away, esp. with a BAR, that soldier would be completely splattered with, well, use your imagination.

As an aside, when I was in Europe a month ago for my first time, I noticed that, except for the British, no one seemed to care much about national honor, and people frowned on patriotism in general. I am sorry, but to me, that is somewhat backwards. Maybe it was just the folks I met. In any case, I am a patriotic American, and I respect anyone who is patriotic to their own country, or not, as long as they have good reason. I don't much respect folks who won't take a stand either way.
But that is just my opinion, and you are all entitled to your own. I mean no offense to anyone, just stating my take on things.:)

The "Jess" set is open to several scenarios and perhaps I imagined the worse one, and I agree that they are standing very close to the prostrate German if they intend to shoot him. In anycase, when you look at the image below the detail of the BAR weapon is amazing, and demonstrates the progress K & C have made.

I'm not sure what your discussion with those Europeans was about in particular. But truth be told I've never heard an Australian say "I'm a patriot", so I had to check my Australian (Macquarie) Dictionary for the correct meaning, which is: "a person who loves his country, zealously supporting and defending it and its interests."

Australians are very proud of their country, but we are not a zealous people, being more reserved like the British tend to be. I admit that we could do with some more American optimism, but I feel our cynicism has served us well over the years. For example, it has made us very wary of politicians and we keep ours on a tight leash. I have never been in a war but I have spoken to several Australian soldiers including my Grandfather who served in WWI and a cousin that fought in Vietnam. All said that they soon forgot about any "fighting for your country" thoughts as they were to busy fighting for each other.

I know what you meant when you said "I don't much respect folks who won't take a stand either way" because you feel a person should at least make a committment. However I feel that about 80% of any population are ambivalent on most subjects, unless something affects them on a personal level.

For example, I'm currently reading a rather rare book called "Eclipse" by Alan Moorehead, which is about the allied victory over Hitler. The author was an Australian war correspondent and relatively famous back in 1945 when the book was originally published: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Moorehead

When he encountered the locals in Normandy he said some were collaborators and some were in the resistance. However the majority were happy to keep to themselves and continue farming and selling produce to the Germans who were treating them relatively well. However on the sly they supported the resistance fighters because they didn't want foreigners in their country and they also developed a bitter hatred of the collaborators because they were making more money out of the Germans than they were. So it's personal experience winning out on ideals yet again.

I've only started reading this book but I can see why he was such a successful author as it is very well written and not flowery and overblown like some more current publications on the late period of WWII.
 
Alan Moorehead is a wonderful writer. His book about the Desert War is one of those must read, IMHO. I would also recommend his books on the Nile (The Blue Nile and the White Nile). Thanks for the recommendation on Eclipse. I am going to order it.
 
Alan Moorehead is a wonderful writer. His book about the Desert War is one of those must read, IMHO. I would also recommend his books on the Nile (The Blue Nile and the White Nile). Thanks for the recommendation on Eclipse. I am going to order it.

I've read "Gallipoli" that he wrote, but despite being keen on the Western front of WWII I've never heard of his "Eclipse" book and just chanced upon it recently at my local library. Most people, including myself, would not be aware that "Eclipse" was the allied code name for the occupation of Germany, and therefore not a word most would google/search for. A poor commercial title for a book in hindsight.

It's a very interesting book because it was published shortly after the war and written by someone that was there who didn't have the bias of some other authors with a political axe to grind. It's also clear that he had a good understanding of military matters and was also able to observe some of the antics of the key allied leaders first hand and discuss things with them.
 
Oz,

I've just ordered it so hopefully I'll get it by end of next week. I, also, was not aware that Eclipse was the code name for the occupation. I just saw a book about the Allied occupation of Germany in the local Borders but can't remember the title. I'll see if I can get over there this week to see the name of the book and author.
 
Australia and Canada should never have been over there doing the British Empire's dirty work. That was a pretty shameful war for all concerned.

Excuse me CS, just exactly what British Empire's dirty work are you referring to? I understood you are part Slovak anyway.
 
Who dredged up this old thread again? :rolleyes:

Harry, the other half of me is pure UK: English, Irish, Scottish mix. I don't want to get into a huge debate with you about the merits of the Boer war, but as Damian has already indicated a lot of very, very bad things happened (i.e. the first modern concentration camps) because the British came along and decided they wanted to uproot those evil little Boer farmers from their land.

As for patriotism, it's like Goldilock's porridge: it's best to have not too little and not too much. There are higher ideals in the world than patriotism.
 
Who dredged up this old thread again? :rolleyes:

Harry, the other half of me is pure UK: English, Irish, Scottish mix. I don't want to get into a huge debate with you about the merits of the Boer war, but as Damian has already indicated a lot of very, very bad things happened (i.e. the first modern concentration camps) because the British came along and decided they wanted to uproot those evil little Boer farmers from their land.

As for patriotism, it's like Goldilock's porridge: it's best to have not too little and not too much.

Likewise, I also am reluctant to get into some debate that really has nothing to do with collecting toy soldiers. I would, however, point out that there are several people on this forum, including me, who are actually intensely proud of our heritage and history - despite some of the somewhat less clean episodes. Sweeping and self-opinionated statements such as "The British Empire's dirty work" ought to be carefully considered before they are posted - IMHI.
 
In effect The Boer War came down to two colonial empires (Holland and Great Britain) fighting over the resources being discovered in the South African areas. Initially Australia was happy to take part but as the war progressed it lost its attraction, a situation found in most conflicts sooner or later. It wasn't the first war where an organised army was obliged to use concentration camps to quell guerilla activites and I'm sure it won't be the last: http://www.awm.gov.au/atwar/boer.htm
 
Oz, it is not really accurate to portray the Boer war as an evenly matched struggle between two empires. The Boers (who were French as well as Dutch) first arrived in the 1650s but by the late 1800s they had become a distinct people with their own identity and culture (much like America). Consequently they couldn't count on a lot of support from their ancestral home. They had to rely on their own militia to fight a guerrilla campaign against professional British Empire soldiers, and their objective was just to be left alone to continue their lives as farmers, not ship Africa's resources back for the glory of the home empire like Britain intended. Britain waged total war against a small group of freedom-loving people, not an empire. Consequently the majority of the Boers who died in the British concentration camps were civilians: women and children. If that's not something to be ashamed of, I don't know what is. We certainly haven't ever let the Germans forget the same kind of behaviour during WW2.
 
Oz, it is not really accurate to portray the Boer war as an evenly matched struggle between two empires. The Boers (who were French as well as Dutch) first arrived in the 1650s but by the late 1800s they had become a distinct people with their own identity and culture (much like America). Consequently they couldn't count on a lot of support from their ancestral home. They had to rely on their own militia to fight a guerrilla campaign against professional British Empire soldiers, and their objective was just to be left alone to continue their lives as farmers, not ship Africa's resources back for the glory of the home empire like Britain intended. Britain waged total war against a small group of freedom-loving people, not an empire. Consequently the majority of the Boers who died in the British concentration camps were civilians: women and children. If that's not something to be ashamed of, I don't know what is. We certainly haven't ever let the Germans forget the same kind of behaviour during WW2.

Here we go again. Same tired old story. Evil British Nazi scum.
When did you ever hear of British camp guards gasing innocent people then feeding them to the ovens? That's a new one on me. Very educational - thanks very much.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top