My favorite commanders (3 Viewers)

Dave,Hi and thanks.Sorry i didn't spot your post at first!.


Brad,the trouble is this act of mass rape,murder and abuse was not a spur of the moement outpouring of rage.This was a systematic officially sanctioned policy of revenge.Encouraged by educational classes before the campaign about how to take revenge on the populace,and also encouragement of ordinary soldiers to make lists of crimes to be avenged.Females of 8yrs upwards with no upper age limit were raped over and over.I don't think this is ever understandable.Our country was heavily bombed in WW2 but Churchill did not instruct our boys to rape German women on an almost industrial level.The Russian soldiers had the chance to prove they were a much more civilised breed of people than the SS but they failed miserably.

Rob
 
Rob

I have the book 'Armageddon' and will now let myself loose on it your comments were right about the Russkis, and even thougth the Grermans(ss mainly) did what they had did on the travel over Russia two wrongs do not make a right.

Anyway just getting into this forum stuff so hopefully chat again
 
Hi Robert,welcome to the forum mate.It is a very difficult subject indeed,but i loved the book and now want to read his book on D day before the one on Japan comes out.Lots of reading for me to do then!.Look forward to reading your posts.

Rob
 
Harrytheheid said:
Well, unfortunately that's the risk you take if you want to set yourself up as the holier-than-thou politically correct voice of the forum.
And not all of us have 24/7 access to the internet either. I'm still catching up on posts that I've missed while I didn't have the said access and fully intend to reply to zombie threads that deserve to die, wherever I find them. :D:D:D
Click to expand...

You're right, I guess I should have expected it since you've clearly set yourself up as Her Majesty's Royal Corgi, yapping away at any post that even hints at questioning the Glory That Was the British Empire. :rolleyes: Up above Rob just criticized Monty... you better go defend the greatest general in history again.

Regarding 24/7 internet access, from what I've seen you eat, bath and sleep in the K&C section of this forum.

If an honest, sober and ethical assessment of humanity's storied history is politically correct, so be it. If Max Hasting or any other highly published modern history author was on this forum they would argue for "politically correct" interpretations as well.
 
Rob said:
Dave,Hi and thanks.Sorry i didn't spot your post at first!.


Brad,the trouble is this act of mass rape,murder and abuse was not a spur of the moement outpouring of rage.This was a systematic officially sanctioned policy of revenge.Encouraged by educational classes before the campaign about how to take revenge on the populace,and also encouragement of ordinary soldiers to make lists of crimes to be avenged.Females of 8yrs upwards with no upper age limit were raped over and over.I don't think this is ever understandable.Our country was heavily bombed in WW2 but Churchill did not instruct our boys to rape German women on an almost industrial level.The Russian soldiers had the chance to prove they were a much more civilised breed of people than the SS but they failed miserably.

Rob
Click to expand...


When I first read Armageddon, I was of the same mind as you. However, since then I've done some further reading and thinking. I don't believe there was any comparison with what happened in the War in the West v. the East. The War in the East was of such a savage nature that it is beyond any capacity on our part to understand. The Germans looked on the eastern peoples (Russians, Slavs, Jews, etc.) as animals, filth to exterminate. There is a book called The War of the World by Niall Ferguson (that I strongly recommend) that makes this point clear. Unlike the war in the West, this was a war of extermination, with the Nazis determined to eliminate the Russians and all ethnic groups. The ferocity was shocking. That's the only word that comes to mind. Whereas the war in the West was between enemies, the level of combat was different; "no quarter asked, no quarter given."

Two wrongs never make a right but the actions are certainly understandable. We cannot look at the War in the East from the mindset of the War in the West.
 
jazzeum said:
When I first read Armageddon, I was of the same mind as you. However, since then I've done some further reading and thinking. I don't believe there was any comparison with what happened in the War in the West v. the East. The War in the East was of such a savage nature that it is beyond any capacity on our part to understand. The Germans looked on the eastern peoples (Russians, Slavs, Jews, etc.) as animals, filth to exterminate. There is a book called The War of the World by Niall Ferguson (that I strongly recommend) that makes this point clear. Unlike the war in the West, this was a war of extermination, with the Nazis determined to eliminate the Russians and all ethnic groups. The ferocity was shocking. That's the only word that comes to mind. Whereas the war in the West was between enemies, the level of combat was different; "no quarter asked, no quarter given."

Two wrongs never make a right but the actions are certainly understandable. We cannot look at the War in the East from the mindset of the War in the West.
Click to expand...

I've heard of this book too,will give it a go Brad.Absolutely agree with you about the differences in the war in the East and West.It could have almost been a whole different War.This is not to play down in anyway what allied troops from rom UK/US went through from D Day onwards,all war is hell.

Rob
 
Whilst we are on the subject Anthony Beevors two books 'Stalingrad' and 'Berlin' are very good books on the subject of Germany v Russia.
 
The sacrifice of British troops in the war of 1812 allowed us to maintain our independence
Click to expand...

Yeah, but on the other hand, the US could have had about 60 states now...:D

To explain my top two as requested:

1) Stephen Decatur--I don't blame Brits or Canadians for not knowing this one, though Horatio Nelson referred to one of Decatur's actions as "The most bold and daring act of the age!" Coming from Nelson, that means alot.

Stephen Decatur was a heroic US Naval Officer of the early republic, serving very successfully in the Barbary Wars and the War of 1812. He is considered by many to embody the ideals of a perfect officer, and was famous for being extremely honorable, daring, and brave. His most famous act was leading a party of sailors disguised as Arabs to burn the USS Philadelphia, which had been captured by Tripoli, while it lay in the harbor at Tripoli under the guns of the fortress. This is what Nelson referred to.

2) Commodore Edwin Moore--I don't blame anybody for not knowing this one. Moore started as an officer in the US navy in the post-1812 years, but with promotions moving like snails, he sought a career as a Commodore in the navy of the Republic of Texas.
Unlike Texas' worthless army, the navy was very professional, and very powerful (and was singlehandedly responsible for ensuring that the Colt firearms company did not go under). It defended Texas agains numerous Mexican attacks, ensuring its independence, and eventual annexation by the US. The most famous battle was Campeche (which was subsequently engraved on the cylinder of colt revolvers).
Edwin Moore was a charismatic, practical leader. He was multilingual, very knowledgeable in foreign affairs, and extremely good at diplomacy, having to represent the Texas Government so often. He was also a good sailor, and, unlike many traditionalists in foreign navies at the time, he was very forward thinking, and accepting of technology. For instance, he ensured that Texas sailors and marines had repeating rifles--this is in the early 1840's, long before the US made any move toward modern repeating rifles. He was also a naval inventor, designing a kind of naval gun that would be used in the Civil War. Unfortunately, when Texas was annexed, the Texas naval officers were not recommissioned in the US navy (though one did become a US Marine Corps Officer). Moore then, as I recall, turned his full attention to inventing.
 
Canadian Samurai said:
You're right, I guess I should have expected it since you've clearly set yourself up as Her Majesty's Royal Corgi, yapping away at any post that even hints at questioning the Glory That Was the British Empire. :rolleyes: Up above Rob just criticized Monty... you better go defend the greatest general in history again.

Regarding 24/7 internet access, from what I've seen you eat, bath and sleep in the K&C section of this forum.

If an honest, sober and ethical assessment of humanity's storied history is politically correct, so be it. If Max Hasting or any other highly published modern history author was on this forum they would argue for "politically correct" interpretations as well.
Click to expand...

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha :eek::eek: At least I do bathe - do you? And BTW, although I don't have too much time for Lizzie, I'd say its much more Pit Bull Terrier.
What's up? Rattle fall out of the pram again cos someone dared to take you to task?
And Monty deserves critisism for some of his decisions - Just like every other commander in history, he wasn't above making mistakes - unlike some armchair generals....!!!!
 
Last edited:
Rob said:
Whilst we are on the subject Anthony Beevors two books 'Stalingrad' and 'Berlin' are very good books on the subject of Germany v Russia.
Click to expand...

I've just finished some historical fiction on the French and Indian War Rob. Think I'll start reading Beevors "Stalingrad" again. Looking forward to "Nemesis". I ought to be able to pick it up either in an airport or in Hong Kong. Agreed that some parts of it may be harrowing, but no more so than "Armaggedon".
 
Tex said:
To explain my top two as requested:

1) Stephen Decatur
2) Commodore Edwin Moore
Click to expand...

Thanks for the comprehensive post Tex. I have to admit that I had never heard of either of these officers before. Don't know anything about the Barabary War either, so I'll see what I can find on it later today.
 
You might recognize a famous quote of Decatur's, a toast he proposed:

"To my country, in her intercourse with foreign nations may she always be in the right, but my country right or wrong."
 
Yes, he was mortally wounded in a duel against Commo. Barron, a former mentor. The details are tragic--Barron and Decatur may have been at the point of reconciliation at the site of the duel, but officers Jesse Elliot and Bainbridge prevented it. There are conspiracy theories--people think Bainbridge had much to gain by Decatur's death, despite his being Decatur's second. Elliot probably had much to gain aswell, considering that Decatur was in possession of papers that ****ed Elliot's war reputation. Mrs. Decatur was totally unaware that her husband was out fighting a duel, and was prevented from seeing him in his deathbed. I forget the details, though.
An excellent biography is "My Country, Right or Wrong" by Leonard Guttridge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2024 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top