Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

interestrateripoff

Who Started Wwii Anyone Read This Book?

Recommended Posts

It was the Germans. I hope that hasn't spoiled the book for you.

The first shot of World War II in Europe was fired 20 years, 9 months, 19 days and 18 hours after the last shot of World War 1 was fired. It was fired from the 13,000 ton German gunnery training battleship Schleswig Holstein (Captain Gustav Kleikamp) which was on a visit to Poland to honour the sailors lost on the German cruiser Magdeburg sunk in 1914, some of whom were buried in Danzig. It was anchored in Danzig (now Gdansk) harbour at the mouth of the River Vistula. At 4.30 am on September 1, 1939, the ship moved slowly down the Port Canal and took up position opposite the Westerplatte (an area containing Polish troop barracks, munition storage and workshops) and at 4.47 am, at point blank range, the order to 'Fire' was given. World War 11 had begun. Seven days later, on September 7, after a heroic defence by Major Henryk Sucharski and his troops, and a devastating attack by Stuka dive bombers, the 200 man Westerplatte Garrison surrendered.

The Schleswig Holstein berthed at Gdynia (Gotenhafen) till the end of the war. Attacked by the RAF on December 18, 1944, twenty eight crew members were killed. Attacked again in March, 1945, the burning ship was scuttled near the port on March 21.

http://www.worldnavalships.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1059

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, never read it.

I'm currently reading Albert Speer's book though, which is really quite interesting.

His lying BS at the end about his plan to assassinate Hitler is particularly amusing. But then, he was trying to evade the hangmans noose.

The rest of the book is quite interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the recommendation. The "Who Started WWII" book questions the usual black and white or good/evil historical judgements. Sure, nothing is black and white. And I agree that Stalin's killing machine (albeit less efficiently planned) was even more deadly than Hitler's.

However, anyone interested in the German day-to-day details of the methods of managing/governing occupied territories (in this case Poland) and their economy between 1939 and 1945, should look into this book:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dark-Heart-Hitlers-Europe-Government/dp/1780764774/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1466157919&sr=1-5&keywords=general+government+poland

↑ By far one of the most revealing WW2 books I've read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I know is that the mainstream history is largely victors' self-serving propaganda; alternative perspectives having been ruthlessly expunged.

It's all Hitler the mad racial imperialist and less about:

- Competing European Colonial powers

- USA banking/ financial hegemony and the need for markets for US industrial production.

- Countering the threat of Soviet Communism.

- The influence of Zionism.

I imagine it all looked very different at the time.

Amazing World War II Graffiti Uncovered:

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=44631

Amazing-WWII-Graffiti-cropped.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marshal Foch, the french commander in chief in the first world war, said of the Versailles peace treaty 'this isn't a peace treaty its a cease fire, I give it twenty years'.

Field Marshal Haig said 'We have won this war but if the politicians make a bad peace it will have to be fought again'

John Maynard Keynes then a senior British civil servant resigned in protest at the treaty.

You could make a case that WW2 began on 28 June 1919 at Versailles.

The politicians were not short of professional advice, they chose to ignore it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marshal Foch, the french commander in chief in the first world war, said of the Versailles peace treaty 'this isn't a peace treaty its a cease fire, I give it twenty years'.

Field Marshal Haig said 'We have won this war but if the politicians make a bad peace it will have to be fought again'

John Maynard Keynes then a senior British civil servant resigned in protest at the treaty.

You could make a case that WW2 began on 28 June 1919 at Versailles.

The politicians were not short of professional advice, they chose to ignore it.

Quite.

f5190374721b57b89a8d9b67bb2150ee.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I know is that the mainstream history is largely victors' self-serving propaganda; alternative perspectives having been ruthlessly expunged.

Yeah, history is written by that pesky Victor chap, which is why literally Franz Halder co-authored the US official history of WWII and people literally spout Goeballs propaganda about Dresden as if it was literally true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marshal Foch, the french commander in chief in the first world war, said of the Versailles peace treaty 'this isn't a peace treaty its a cease fire, I give it twenty years'.

Because the treaty wasn't harsh enough.

As it was, it would have besn easily sufficient to contain renascent German militarism by simply obliging Germany to abide by the terms of the treaty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, history is written by that pesky Victor chap, which is why literally Franz Halder co-authored the US official history of WWII and people literally spout Goeballs propaganda about Dresden as if it was literally true.

What was the Goebels propaganda about Dresden? Genuine question

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was the Goebels propaganda about Dresden? Genuine question

He inflated the casualties by a factor of ten. The actual number which the authorities arrived at at the time was 25,000. Which sounds bad, but it that was actually an average days work killing civilians on the eastern front for the Wehrmacht.

Whats more, that number makes Dresden unremarkable as a bombing raid, with the luftwaffe having killed many times this number in raids on Stalingrad, for example.

The other aspect was that Dresden had no military value, which is plainly wrong. It housed numerous war industries and was a major rail hub with potential to be used to counter attack the Soviets - who lets not forget - incurred over a quarter of a million casualties in the last few months of the war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He inflated the casualties by a factor of ten. The actual number which the authorities arrived at at the time was 25,000. Which sounds bad, but it that was actually an average days work killing civilians on the eastern front for the Wehrmacht.

Whats more, that number makes Dresden unremarkable as a bombing raid, with the luftwaffe having killed many times this number in raids on Stalingrad, for example.

The other aspect was that Dresden had no military value, which is plainly wrong. It housed numerous war industries and was a major rail hub with potential to be used to counter attack the Soviets - who lets not forget - incurred over a quarter of a million casualties in the last few months of the war.

Thanks for the info

But, in a total war where all sides deliberately targeted civilians, a bit of propaganda pales into insignificance. So, so what that he inflated the figure of casualties by a factor of 10, it did not change the allied bombing strategy one iota

And let's put the soviet casualty numbers at the end of the war into context. They were so high because Stalin put his commanders under enormous pressure to grab as much european real estate as possible as quickly as possible, and he was desperate to capture berlin before the more cautious allies and all the scientific knowledge that Berlin held

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bloody English again?

Exactly.

Yet again they rudely rebuffed polite overtures to bring them into a European superstate under German rule. Luckily they saw sense in 1973 and surrendered their soul pooled their sovereignty for the benefit of all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He inflated the casualties by a factor of ten. The actual number which the authorities arrived at at the time was 25,000. Which sounds bad, but it that was actually an average days work killing civilians on the eastern front for the Wehrmacht.

Whats more, that number makes Dresden unremarkable as a bombing raid, with the luftwaffe having killed many times this number in raids on Stalingrad, for example.

The other aspect was that Dresden had no military value, which is plainly wrong. It housed numerous war industries and was a major rail hub with potential to be used to counter attack the Soviets - who lets not forget - incurred over a quarter of a million casualties in the last few months of the war.

Somewhat more remarkable than Coventry, often cited in opposition to Dresden which suffered a total of 1236 deaths for the whole of WWII.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coventry_Blitz#August_1942

and Coventry was a centre of British War Production.

... speaking of propaganda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Next General Election   90 members have voted

    1. 1. When do you predict the next general election will be held?


      • 2019
      • 2020
      • 2021
      • 2022

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.