Debate and argument mean the same thing... ;)

I fly whatever I fancy but on a lighter note.....

My mother fought with the Greek resistance and my dad was in the Eighth Army under Montgomery in North Africa. During the invasion of Italy my dads unit were shipped to Greece to help re-instate the Greek Monarchy and quell the communist movement - my mother then fought with the communists once the Germans withdrew from Greece though she was more anti Royalist than a communist.

I asked my dad how he met my mum and he told me she chatted him up. Unfortunately for my dad, she was setting him up as he was on guard duty and a bunch of Greek partisans nicked trucks, arms and munitions while distracted - he was court martialled as a result......but hey, they got together anyway, married, had me.....and my brother.

So whatever the politics......I owe my very existence to them......:grin:

errrr, its you doing (trying but not succeeding) the "ignoring" thing though, not them...


no they don't Farber... ;)

Awesome storey See, its like something out of a movie.

:-P

youre like a dentist taking the hipocratic swearing :)

As I'm the OP, may I add the following?

England and Germany have been linked by culture and Royalty long before WW2.

My issue with flying German aircraft over England has nothing to do with Germany. If the aircraft instead of being German had been French, Swiss or Dutch, I would have had the same concerns.

Its the concept of 'flying' an enemy aircraft over your home town that concerns me.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

Maybe you just feel the greater sense of immersion flying for your own country over your own soil. So much so that flying for the opposition does not compare.

The Worst mistake this country ever made was the 'entente cordiale' if you ask me. (Sorry, sorry... said I wouldn't post again in this thread, but erm...:lol:.)

After Waterloo, you'd've thought that Britain and Germany would've remained staunch allies in Europe. If they had've, things could have been so, so different.....;)

But of course, if my Auntie had a pair, she'd be my uncle.

I look at it this way. It's all the governments fault we get into these wars not the soldiers who fight them. When I or you are flying over each others towns bombing them we are doing it because our governments have told us to do it. Are fighter pilots going to keep sitting at the card table play gin or scat while bombs are raining down day and night on their towns.....no. There's nothing immoral about that it's the idiots that let the killing go on and on and on. Another thing I always have in the back of my mind is my best friend's mother I could be fighting for her lol

You shouild look up some of Kitchener's antics, especially around the time of the boer wars

This saddens me. You're basically missing half the game.

Would you be a little more at ease say in North Africa? I can see your point if you're in England though. Being Canadian I didn't have 109s or Ju-88s flying over my town 72 years ago. I did have a Dad who was over seas though for three years. He was the one that got me hooked on 109s. Funny how things go.

What you really mean to say is - Britain is bad because they created concentration camps. Look how nasty they are. I quite agree, they're nasty and evil and the lesson hasn't been learned by lots of other nations. No doubt you're currently saving up to buy the aborigines a bit of desert as recompense for your ancestor's actions.

I'm struggling to see what that has to do with Avro's original post or follow up comment though.

Pure troll as I see it, that or an inveterate (or should that be invertebrate) Brit hater.

Hood

Actually, those actions were from the British as well... thanks for the reminder


Just a bit of a "come back to Earth" reminder that the "homeland" isn't as innocent as those flyers who won't fly another nation's plane over it seem to believe.

the politicians of yesterday and today are the real "nazis" (old men start wars etc. )
nobody hate the average us citizen couse bush and his generals are mass murderers- the same with any other nation.

the only options 99% of people have are do it or starve, be executed for trason and so on.
to end my little post its just a game (the sim)

Thanks for the laughs!!

:grin:

No doubt you're currently saving up to buy the aborigines a bit of desert as recompense for your ancestor's actions.

Nah, he's probably too busy denying Asylum seekers basic human rights and inflicting terrible abuse to people who have committed no crime whatsoever in Oz 'concentration camps' like the modern day 'Christmas Island', for example!

I think the 'Moral relativists' here have to re-examine their Morality, and think again. As to the "The British created Concentration camps" baloney.......Lets put that record straight. A concentration camp is by definition a concentration of persons.....usually by forcible internment. What the tents in South Africa were very much not however, were part of a very deliberate and calculated, perverse, wicked mission to exterminate, permanently, with no remorse vast swathes of the Human race who did not conform to some twisted "Ideal".


Ridiculous. As to Farber, Adonys etc......Jesus Christ. Some people are so apocalyptically effin stupid it is untrue. Since when (in A-holes case) was borderline Holocaust Denial deemed acceptable on this forum? Are you kidding me? In farbers case in particular, I am personally ashamed to call delusional imbeciles like this my fellow countrymen. They are as far as I am concerned* p*ssing on the graves of those who nobly kept them free, so that they can continue their preposterous, ludicrous rants. I bet they are so proud to be British! Aye, sure sounds* like it. Anyone who espouses or condones this outrageous twaddle is no true Briton, nor friend of mine. Out of here before I lose me temper. Again. ;)

http://grapeinvestor.com/BoerWar/camps.html

The English term "concentration camp" was first used to describe camps operated by the British in South Africa during this conflict.
The camps had originally been set up by the British Army as "refugee camps" to provide refuge for civilian families who had been forced to abandon their homes for one or other reason related to the war. However, when Kitchener succeeded Roberts as commander-in-chief in South Africa in 29 November 1900, the British Army introduced new tactics in an attempt to break the guerrilla campaign and the influx of civilians grew dramatically as a result. Kitchener initiated plans to "flush out guerrillas in a series of systematic drives, organized like a sporting shoot, with success defined in a weekly 'bag' of killed, captured and wounded, and to sweep the country bare of everything that could give sustenance to the guerrillas, including women and children.... It was the clearance of civilians - uprooting a whole nation - that would come to dominate the last phase of the war."

As Boer farms were destroyed by the British under their "Scorched Earth" policy - including the systematic destruction of crops and slaughtering of livestock, the burning down of homesteads and farms, and the poisoning of wells and salting of fields - to prevent the Boers from resupplying from a home base many tens of thousands of women and children were forcibly moved into the concentration camps. This was not the first appearance of internment camps. The Spanish had used internment in the Ten Years' War that later led to the Spanish-American War, and the United States had used them to devastate guerrilla forces during the Philippine-American War. But the Boer War concentration camp system was the first time that a whole nation had been systematically targeted, and the first in which some whole regions had been depopulated.

Eventually, there were a total of 45 tented camps built for Boer internees and 64 for black Africans. Of the 28,000 Boer men captured as prisoners of war, 25,630 were sent overseas. The vast majority of Boers remaining in the local camps were women and children. Over 26,000 women and children were to perish in these concentration camps.

The Germans used concentration camps in German South-West Africa during the Herero genocide between 1904 and 1907. The camp at Shark Island, Namibia was of the nature of an extermination camp, arguably the world's first.

The Herero and Namaqua Genocide is considered to have been the first genocide of the 20th century. It took place between 1904 and 1907 in German South-West Africa (modern day Namibia), during the scramble for Africa.

On January 12, 1904, the Herero people, led by Samuel Maharero, rebelled against German colonial rule. In August, German general Lothar von Trotha defeated the Herero in the Battle of Waterberg and drove them into the desert of Omaheke, where most of them died of thirst. In October, the Nama people also rebelled against the Germans only to suffer a similar fate.

In total, from 24,000 up to 100,000 Herero and 10,000 Nama died. The genocide was characterized by widespread death by starvation and thirst because the Herero who fled the violence were prevented from returning from the Namib Desert. Some sources also claim that the German colonial army systematically poisoned desert wells.

In 1985, the United Nations' Whitaker Report classified the aftermath as an attempt to exterminate the Herero and Nama peoples of South-West Africa, and therefore one of the earliest attempts at genocide in the 20th century. The German government recognized and apologized for the events in 2004, but has ruled out financial compensation for the victims' descendants.

Thank you Al. I have raised these points before. Other "Inconvenient subjects" for the apologists are the German Policy of "Total War", and the Zeppelin and Gotha TERROR RAIDS of WWI, burning hundreds of British Women and Children alive with incendiary devices. Terribly rum bunch, these Huns.

Little wonder, then, that the British Public have little to no sympathy for what ensued.

I stand with Harris (an RFC Fighter Ace, one whom can hardly be accused of cowardice). Harris was particularly moved as he surveyed the devastation wrought by Gotha and Zeppelin Bombers on the City of London in 1917-18. They bombed people indiscriminately, including my own Tyneside, Sunderland, and even Edinburgh and Glasgow too.

Do we see a "pattern" emerging, here....or is it just me?

"They that sow the wind, shall reap the whirlwind" .

You kill 1000 of our Women and Children, we will do our utmost to kill 10 thousand of our Enemy. All is fair, in love and War. Hard lines.

No sympathy. None. Zilch. Nada. Cry me a river.

End of story.

The difference is, Germany errects memorials for the victims, you guys errect memorials for the perpetrators. And this post of yours is the perfect example of the mindset behind that.
Better hope other ppl have moved on, as that quote of yours about "sowing the wind" fits to quite a few situations of a certain wholier then you country.

I refuse to cuddle with WW2 WAAF hottie. Why?

Cause dem gals just too damn old but if I can hook up with current WAAF hottie I mos def would.

The difference is, Germany errects memorials for the victims, you guys errect memorials for the perpetrators.

LMAO...."the perpetrators"..........In Denial.....Much?

Meanwhile, back on Planet Earth.......


Never mind.

I would say its quite typical of the British mindset that they developed in their colonial wars. They thought themselves to be superior to anyone else, but when their arrogance fails against a superior military force on the battlefield, they tried terror on the enemy population.

Harris tried exactly that - and he failed. What he DID achieve is getting the best educated younger British men killed and drive his country bancrupt with the staggering costs of Bomber Command's ultimately ineffectual terror offensive.

LOL. Most countries erect memorials commemorating successes in war or battle. A lot of countries erect memorials for the memory of those that have died in battle. In the UK there are lots of memorials commerating the civilian dead though they're not so prevalent.

The most famous victim memorial is probably the Holocaust memorial in Berlin and there's a reason for it being there. Personally I don't think it should be there as it rubs the noses of German peoples in their country's less than pleasant history, and that can't be right. I do however believe there should be such a memorial somewhere.

Reap what you sow seems about right to me.

Hood

As opposed to the Nazis who did the terror thing right from the off, lol.

@ Avro, you are the master!!!!!!

Now I thought that Kurfurst was Hungarian? Not sure why I think that but there you go.

Anyone he's just baiting with such nonseniscal arguments. Nothing to back it up and he's just regurgitating arguments learnt by rote.

Ignore it.

Hood

yes he is, but i wasn't calling him a Nazi, merely commenting on the Nazis;)

Of course they were. It must really hurt that you're descended from British settlers. I think you should give up everything you have to the aborigines to assuage some of the guilt you must feel.

I'm not sure what is meant by the second sentence as there has not been any discussion about the rights and wrongs of a country, only that some find it difficult to fly the enemy's aircraft over the game's depiction of their homeland, whether thats a 109 over London, a Spitfire over Berlin or a Zero over Sydney.

Nice attempt to hijack the thread to post your rather skewed ideas though.

Hood

Thank You 1c for the ignore list ... now I know what it is good for!

reality check. none of the planes are german. everything in the game is russian. made by russian "programmers" that work for a russian software company. if you "kill" a pilot, he's russian and his name is luthier. if you "bomb" a town, it's ubisoft or steam headquarters somewhere in russia. if you meet up with a disconnect pilot online, his name is oleg. if you see a total newbie online, his name is bee-sex. if you see some white beeeaches, that's where the E3 russian babes hang out, with the game's beancounters and investors, drinking chivas regal all day long wondering where their $8 millions dollars went. so fly low and think of what could have been. i mean, you are an investor too! you paid for the game. probably also had to pay to upgrade your computer to make it "workable". now, do you want to get your monies worth out of it? or do you want the russians to steal it from you? or is "london, england (not european)" more important. he he. no euro cooties for you. lol. really, ever since invention of modern day transportation, its been worldwide socialist orgy-fest. the internet, making the party all the bigger. the lowest common denominator in play and can't be stopped. we all going down the toilet like clod. you know the song. "diarrhea...people think it's funny, but it's really hot and runny...etc.” that's the world now. turd soup. same as clod. yum, yum, can I have another? sure. hear’s some bom for you. tell me now you still feel guilty after getting pooped on.:rolleyes:

you've given that a real good go yourself ;)

Amazingly I read all of the posts in this thread...

I was on a conference where Jan Eliasson spoke some month ago (the newly assigned Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations). He said a lot of interesting stuff but what stuck was that he talked about the fact that every war that has started in history started with people misunderstanding each other - and not listening to the other side... :)

This thread is a good example...

I understand them perfectly well. They, however, do not understand us.

Dishonour not your Mothers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRj01...feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikynTH9oJg8

They bore me. Whether they like it or not, is quite irrelevant. There will ALWAYS be an England.....

D-.....Must try harder.

:D

Words of wisdom.

It could all have been so simple, Hitler could have annexed the parts of Europe he wanted, the French could have had a humiliation and Hitlers Empire would have been a Jew/Pole/non aryan/other ethnic groups/mentally ill/disabled/other phisically challenged persons free eutopia, we all know he would have stopped there and tried to live in peace with his reluctant neighbours, but 'oh no!' those blood thirsty Brits just couldn't see it his way, we just couldn't make time to listen to him.

Er.....just off the top of my head, North Korea invading South Korea in 1950, Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941, the Soviet invasion of Finland in 1940, the German invasion of Norway, Denmark and Holland in the same year, the Italian invasion of Abyssinia in '36. There didn't seem to be any evidence of misunderstanding or confusion, they were straight acts of deliberate armed aggression.
However, I'm now confused. Is this a thread about how people think when they play games or is this a thread about the origin's of the second world war?

Haha! :-P

Just for the record please remember I did say Germany's invasion of Poland to regain its land there was over the top!

Tin hat on - check!

Ok so what about American which went to war against its constitution?

It did? When was this then?

Interesting Avro, and I have to say as regards a thread starter, you've done it again. :)

RedToo.

Seriously, Orville, this just makes you come across as a total tw@t. At least Avro was just (mostly) having a laugh. 'Cry me a river'? You're talking about women and children for Christ's sake.

Yes and no. Or both;)

As the OP, I'm exploring how computer simulations are perceived by players. Who and what do we identify with? And why? Are our emotions,experiences and desires reflected within this medium?

It may amaze some of you, but I am human. Yes, my mother was a Cyborg, but time and medical science have moved on. It is time to forget our past mistakes and rejoice as one.

How is the Euro at the moment?

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

I agree in part. Yes, the best educated young men were killed, and all were volunteers. And yes, WW2 bankrupted Britain. Maybe BC's campaign was not as effective as expected. But how is effectiveness measured in this context?

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

The way I see it , this is a fighter plane simulator , not a politics simulator . Pilots back then were pilots , not politicians . Either side's pilots had to do as they were told . Period . That was then .This is now . Lighten up already .Some would call this a video game . Don't get all effed up about it .And yes, I prefer to fly the 109 .Why ? Looks meaner and has waaay better fire power . Also love the camo schemes and the whole cigar shape themed fuselage .Just waiting for my fave the FW190 to come out in the next version .Something about allied planes just bores the crap out of me although I do agree with what they stood for ..Perhaps it's the pea shooter guns .

When I was a kid I made Airfix models and hung them from my bedroom ceiling and thought wouldn't it be cool if they could really fly? Well now they do from the comfort of my own living room on my PC. What a blast!
Do I make any connection with all these neat little pixels to a historical reality? Not at all.
The only thing thats made me think about that reality is seeing a burning aircraft in Rise of Flight 'cause that looks really nasty!

+1. Mmmmmmm...it may take five, six or seven years but looking forward to taking a 190 up against P47's on the ATAG server on a Normandy map one day.

I used to make them too! Cut them carefully from the sprues and clean off the flash. Do my up most best to get the glue right and paint them properly with no brush marks. Carefully apply the decals and then admire them. Then when it was a nice day I would take them outside and shoot them to pieces with my air rifle. Awww those were the days! :-P

I think the crisis came around the age of twelve/thirteen. The girl next door was becoming more interesting than airplane glue. My eldest brother came home on leave with some thunderflashes and a warped sense of humour.
I came home from school to find him and my other brothers "re-enacting" the BoB by running the clothes line from my bedroom window and with the aid of bent coat hangers and the contents of a few thunderflashes my airforce were flaming down the garden. Bastards! Lol.:-)

Well, that is your opinion Brutus, which you are of course entitled to. Now have a long, hard think about WHY and how you are allowed to have this opinion. Hint maybe it had something to do with those who had more balls than you will EVER have, doing something about it.

I am sick and tired of reading this bleeding heart "Oh....the Poor Germans" type rubbish. How much "mercy" do you think would have be extended by Herr Hitler, and his grisly gang of thugs....If they had the means to Annihilate each and every British person on the planet? How long do you think that he would have debated the "morality" of such an action?

Sometimes, as horrible as this may sound.....one must fight fire, with fire. You ask someone from Coventry, for example.....how much "sympathy" they have for what happened. The prevalent mood in Britain was indeed one of vengeance, and I for one do not cry about those who would not even give me a second thought....whilst on their Merry Jaunt of Teutonic World Domination.

Bottom line is...The scourge of German Militarism is no more. I think they "got the idea" of why they cannot conduct themselves in such a way....Not by limp wristed apologia, but by extreme violence. Sad, but true.

You have sympathy for the Devil. I do not. Fair enough. Carry on. :grin:

Whatever Orville:rolleyes: He's right though. You do come across as a tw@t when you post this kinda stuff.

Whatever, arthur. I am glad that my home land was defended by LIONS Circa 1939-45.

It would be great to hear the opinions of all the bleeding Heart WEAKLINGS on this forum when Nazism became reality, and their savage dream was fulfilled.

Oh........wait. You would not be allowed an opinion. Think about it.

Aye.

I dunno Arthur, I find Orville's posts a refreshing change from those of people who think national pride is some sort of crime.

Of course it doesn't help when dubious political parties are allowed to use the national flag as some sort of party political marketing tool, but this year in particular is as good a time as any to reinject some pride in our nation that the war years brought out in people to such good effect, and which has been sorely lacking for a good number of years.

As for computer games, yes it's daft from one perspective, but you won't see me flying anything but RAF planes in Cliffs of Dover. ;)

Well orville , what do you think the victims of British expansionism thought of the way they were slaughtered way back in the day . Or Blacks in the US way back when ? My point , most countries were guilty of some sort of atrocity back in history .What the Germans did under hitler was gruesome and atrocious .One more thing , the Russians were even worse .If you buy BoM will you refuse to fly Russian fighters ?

A lot actually.
The Brits the Americans [and even the French-Canadians;)] were considered Westerners, Arian - it would have been pointless to get rid of them them, unless they were Jewish of course.

The funny thing is, your definition of devil not only includes Hitler&co, but every German citizen as well.
Makes you sound pretty smart and superior compared to those guys.
Different flavor, same contents.

For a time, maybe.
On the other hand, Europeans have showed a talent in the past to get rid of unwanted Kings and governments. :cool:
I'm not sure what makes you think the historical outcome turned the planet into a better place - we simply don't know.

Seriously? Are you saying that the fall of the 3rd Reich didn't have a positive effect? We do know that the 'historical outcome' had an immediate positive effect. The war ended, or is that a bad thing? It certainly turned the world into a better place in 1945.

You might think getting rid of the British and Americans was 'pointless', Hitler didn't. He intended to remove most of the male population in the UK.

On the wider point it seems that it's easy to criticise the UK for air raids.

Sadly that's what it took to get Germany to finally surrender, to blame the British for fighting back in the exact same way as they were attacked seems unfair.

In 1939 the German army was firing 30,000 shells a day into Warsaw. What's the difference between that and dropping bombs on a city? They also continuously attacked the city from the air. That set the tone for WW2.


In the grand scheme of things the German civilians got off a lot lighter than allied civilians. Hitler had no regard for his own people, the only way the air offensive could have been stopped was for Germany to surrender. It had become a machine designed to destroy Germany, nobody on the allied side was ever going to stop the air raids, they had the planes, they had the bombs... What else were they going to do? Sadly for the German people Hitler thought more about his ego than he did his people.

Don't think for a second that if Germany had the Bomber force that the allies had that they wouldn't have done the same thing.

Don't get me wrong, there was no glory in Dresden or Hamburg, but that was where the world was at. To judge it using today's standards, the whole bloody thing was wrong.

It was then though, not now. That's what it took, that's what happened. I hate to say 'they started it' because it sounds childish, but there's a fundamental truth to it to. For a nation to attack so many countries and for it to then try to make people feel guilty about attacking it back dosn't wash with me.

None of the sides involved showed much regard for civilian deaths, yet it's used as a stick to beat the British with, time and time again. Everybody was doing it.

If you don't want dead civilians then don't start wars, because in the age of high explosives it's always the civilians who die.

Great post Winny, but before someone jumps on the above statement I'd like to add two points -

1) The bombing campaign itself was conducted by both Britain and America, but people continue to believe the American propaganda of 'precision bombing', which was there only to placate the Germanic and Italian American voters at home and is still widely espoused today.

2) The bombing campaign didn't bring about a surrender, but had the finances and resources earmarked for the invasion of Europe been handed over to the American bomber forces and Bomber Command, this would've been the case, as Speer himself stated in the past.

Unfortunately, what Arthur Harris failed to realise (having read his book) was that the invasion of Fortress Europe was entirely necessary in order to put Western Allied troops on the ground in Europe. Otherwise there was a potential for Stalin to march right on to the channel coast and down through Italy himself. Harris was commited to forcing Germany to surrender by using the Bomber force, and may have managed this given the resources, but seems not to have seen the potential further consequences of this. All he was concerned with was saving the lives of the Allied soldiers sent to invade by rendering an invasion unnecessary. Hence the 'bones of a British Grenadier' statement.

Alternatively, Harris may have been fully aware of this but foresaw a potential return to the horrors of 'Trench warfare' of 14-18, whether initially against Germany, but also subsequently against Russia. Maybe he was afraid of the cold war warming up a few degrees, and the existence of an unstoppable Bomber force would be enough to dissuade Stalin from further terratorial gains.

But again, if my Auntie had........;)

Uhm, it was Britain who did declare war on Germany, refused German peace offers during the war (several times in fact), and it was Britain who started bombing German cities.

To put it like the poor British were 'forced' to fight back against an agression is pure BS.

They had a choice in the matter. It was the Brits who choose war, and it was the Brits to choose to wage that war by targetting the enemy cities and civillian population itself.

Don't blame it anyone else. Britain was not 'attacked' and Britain was not fighting 'back'. Britain wanted to fight and it wanted to fight in this rather dirty way. At least be a man about it.

It set nothing - an army besieged a city and took it. There's hardly anything special about it. Bombarment of a besieged city is permitted under the rules of war, within some reasonable limits - some sort of military advantage from the bombardment, some sort of restraint from pointless destruction IS required, however.

It set the tone for war propaganda perhaps, but certainly not for the conduct military operations. The French and British militaries were well aware of that fact, but of course their propaganda sold a different picture to their public.

Uhm, they didn't. They had quite a serious bomber force and in fact dropped more bombs until about the end of 1943 than the RAF and USAF combined.

The difference was not capacity, but doctrine. Germany did not have 'bomber barons'. They didn't believe in terror bombings unlike Harris, save a small minority in the LW (the most vocal being v. Richthofen). Most of the German leaders, including Hitler and Goering, Speer etc. thought terror bombing is ineffective and wasteful and the bombers are to be used for better effect against the industries and operational bombing (communication and transportation). Moral reasoning hardly played a role, they simply did not believe it was worth it.

I agree that its wrong to apply today's rather soft standards to the 1930s/40s. Racism and racist remarks for example for pretty much general, and openly communicated by even top politicians. Unthinkable today. But mass murder was mass murder even back then, as it was even in the middle ages. That does not mean people didn't get away with it, but they were not trumpheting about it either.

November 1940.

Notable Luftwaffe Operation - Devastation of Coventry.

Notable Bomber Command Operations - Krupps factory at Essen.

I am afraid to say it was we the Brits that led to the mass bombing of civilians, the first case of the Luftwaffe doing it was actually a mistake which they apologised for but the allies used it as an excuse to bomb Berlin which in turn led to the Luftwaffe targeting towns!

P.S. "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel" Johnson, Samuel

Some of you may need to read this....

http://www.zundelsite.org/english/debate/013_jam.html

Wow Krupi, a link to a site that still refers to 'the Fuehrer'.

No thanks. ;)

P.S. I'm a scoundrel then. :(

Peacemongers Germany, who knew!:rolleyes:

Right. Because there was no aggression to be fought in Europe at that time.:rolleyes:

I thought war started with Germany`s aggresion to Poland earlier:confused:

Right. They should have stayed out until they`re all alone.

Also straffing thousands of civilians leaving the city. They did set a tone for leading a war - a total war once again.

Because Hitler never conducted anything other than a military operation:rolleyes:

Fair enough but what Orville posted sounds just like a speech by Goebells.
I must say I'm quite sure Avro is laughing his socks off at the moment as the usual suspects rush pell-mell to defend their beloved LW, eh Kurfy?:-)

Btw, your'e quite right about Krupi's post. Heres what wiki has to say about the delightful author of his link;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Z%C3%BCndel

I'm constantly amazed by some of the links people provide in these forums!

All this talk of bombing innocent civilians gets me totally pumped UP and looking forward to the later periods of IL-2 where we can get into our B-17s finally and into large formations and go to Dresden again. 8!!!

You git! I've just sprayed coffee all over my laptop. lol.

Enough with the Nazi apologist BS!
Theirs was a belief system based on extermination of those whom they considered 'untermenschen' after they had sucked all the energy they had to give. They manipulated genuine grievances to nefarious ends and damn near destroyed their own people in the process. The atrocities they committed were almost beyond comprehension, and the wretched fate of nations such as Ukraine and Poland was to be caught between the twin horrors of Stalin and Hitler.
It was an ignoble cause and unfortunately some noble men fought for them, whilst other noble German men were killed by that feral regime because they dared to oppose it.

Hitler was a ruthless, amoral politician who routinely betrayed agreements he made with opponents once he had the power to do so- he nearly won the war in the West in May 1940 when Lord Halifax almost got the numbers in the British parliament to begin negotiations with Hitler for an armistice.

Both sides of the conflict began the war expressing noble intent to avoid civilian deaths and even attempting to avoid the destruction of private property, but once the dogs of war are set loose there is no controlling whom or what they will consume.

I have no doubt the allied nations winning the conflict saved Western Europe from a new dark age. I play a flight simulator GAME to test my skill and enjoy the thrill of virtual combat, not pretend that I am actually engaged in a life and death struggle that has the potential to wipe liberal democracies off the face of the planet. That's why i can get routinely shot down and laugh as i say 'Damn, i got shot in the head again!'

Corrected for factuality. ;)

Both sides attempted to hit industries, but there was of course a lot of collateral damage.

Bomber Command started its attacks on German cities on the night of 11 May 1940, a plan that was considered for some time by the War Cabinet, well before any German meaningful bombing of British soil occured (a few bombs fell on Orkney island, killing a single man iirc)

RAF Bomber Command was authorized to attack German targets east of the Rhine on May 15, 1940; the Air Ministry authorized Air Marshal Charles Portal to attack targets in the Ruhr, including oil plants and other civilian industrial targets which aided the German war effort, such as blast furnaces (which at night were self-illuminating).

The underlying motive for the attacks was to divert German air forces away from the land front. Churchill explained the rationale of his decision to his French counterparts in a letter dated the 16th: "I have examined today with the War Cabinet and all the experts the request which you made to me last night and this morning for further fighter squadrons. We are all agreed that it is better to draw the enemy on to this Island by striking at his vitals, and thus to aid the common cause."

Due to the inadequate British bomb-sights the strikes that followed had the effect of terror raids on towns and villages. On the night of 15/16 May, 96 bombers crossed the Rhine and attacked. 78 had been assigned oil targets, but only 24 claimed to have accomplished their objective.

On the night of May 17/18, RAF Bomber Command bombed oil installations in Hamburg and Bremen; the H.E. and 400 incendiaries dropped caused six large, one moderately large and 29 small fires. As a result of the attack, 47 people were killed and 127 were wounded. Railway yards at Cologne were attacked on the same night.

During May, Essen, Duisburg, Düsseldorf and Hanover were attacked in a similar fashion by Bomber Command. In June, attacks were made on Dortmund, Mannheim, Frankfurt and Bochum. At the time, Bomber Command lacked the necessary navigational and bombing technical background and the accuracy of the bombings during the night attacks was abysmal. Consequently, the bombs were usually scattered over a large area, and the bombing was seen as indiscriminate. There was an uproar in Germany, Jodl wanted retalitory bombing attacks, but Hitler turned him down.

RAF BC during this period in May-June 1940 attempted to limit the bombing to military/industrial targets, just like the Germans tried to do so in Battle of Britain.

Operation Abigail Rachel was the bombing of Mannheim the first deliberate terror raid on Germany on the 16 December. The British had been waiting for the opportunity to experiment with such a raid aimed at creating a maximum of destruction in a selected town since the summer 1940, and the opportunity was given after the German raid on Coventry.

Internally it was declared to be a reprisal for Coventry and Southampton. The new bombing policy was officially ordered by Churchill at the start of December and the operation on condition it receive no publicity and be considered an experiment. Target marking missed the city center and most bombs missed the city center. This led to the development of the bomber stream.Despite the lack of decisive success of this raid, approval was granted for further Abigails. This was the start of a British drift away from precision attacks on military targets and towards area bombing attacks on whole cities.

Do you know what happened if there wasn't Stalin and the rise of the red star?
I don't.

Of course you can supply sources for this statement...

Your opinion beggars belief.

The word is Führer. It means leader. It doesnt say "mein Führer" which would give it the meaning of alligence.

Its a common German world still in use:

http://www.dict.cc/?s=F%C3%BChrer

:rolleyes:

I know, I have a grade 'B' O level in German. However the umlaut is an abbreviation for 'ue' and I don't have an umlaut on my keyboard as far as I know. :rolleyes: Back, too. :grin:

As a german I'd find this this third-hand rage amusing if it wasn't so sad. Haven't you guys something better to do? http://www.siliconknights.net/forums...s/facepalm.gif

Well, well well. At least we know where this drivel is coming from. A website that has such illuminating articles as 'Jewish Criminals and Their Activities' http://www.zundelsite.org/english/jewish_criminals/ being cited for 'evidence'. All denials to the contrary, it seems self-evident that this forum has been hijacked by far-right bigots. I shall of course be reporting this to 1C (and Steam, and Ubisoft, who will I assume not wish to be associated with such objectionable behaviour), and calling for a boycott of the forum from all who wish CloD well, and proposing to 1C that they find an alternate venue for communication with those customers and potential customers actually interested in the simulation, rather than in propagating Nazi-supporting filth and other delusional garbage - the 'climate change' thread comes to mind as another obvious example where such POV-pushing trolls were allowed to spurt ludicrous conspiracy theories attacking all and sundry on the forum with complete impunity. I fully expect to be blocked for this post, but don't care, since it is self evident that the moderators who have allowed (or encouraged?) this to happen have a great deal of responsibility for this mess, and without question need to go.

Goodbye to the forum. I'm off to play Rise of Flight, where it is possible to participate in a community that isn't full of closet neo-Nazis trying to rewrite history, rather than recreate it in simulation. If CloD improves, I may return to it, but I very much doubt that I'll ever want to fly online if it means meeting up with the obnoxious scum that seem to be attracted here. Fortunately, I'm sure they are very much a minority amongst those interested in CloD and its successors, and any half-decent system of moderation would have ensured that they remained in the closet, or in the dustbin of history that they so deserve.

it caught my attention how many avatars got removed by the no swastica rule

wwii is not over

I keep waiting for someone to cite "the protocols of the elders of Zion" as a source...lunatics.
Seriously, how has this thread been allowed to live?

only this game got it right:

a murder is a murder even if a duel or a war

thats why i dont virtually murder in no game

Good questions and a difficult one to answer, Avro. Early RAF BC operations had some excuses Technology was simply not up to the task to perform anything but area raids initially. Daylight bombing was out of the question with the LW day fighters there, no bombing/navigational aids, bombers too small for effective load, low cap. bombs, no other way present to actually wage war on Germany etc., all very well known.

But these excuses were no longer there when Oboe, H2X, Pathefinders etc. become operational. They were not perfect but they permitted hitting specific targets, certainly ones large enough like industrial complexes with a reasonable degree of success. This coincided with the appointment of Harris, who dismissed the opportunity and kept going for the cities. The attacks on oil targets for example were extremely successfull even during the night, which Harris only grudgingly agreed to, and only temporarily.

Harris kept using (and wasting IMO) this expensive and high tech force area attacks, even after the failure of this tactic was obvious to anyone (i.e. the Air Battle of Berlin, culminating the Nurnberg raid).

This is BTW pretty much what Max Hastings (and some others, most famously Albert Speer was dismissive of area/terror bombing) wrote on the subject, and I agree with him completely. In short, the (from a pragmatic military POV) the criminality Harris was that Bomber Command was kept misused even by the time there were better alternatives, given its increase in size and accuracy. The human perspective is far too obvious for any healthy soul IMHO.

BTW back to the OP, I agree its difficult to fly the invader above your own country. I would have difficulty doing that on the Balaton map, too.

Nazi is nazi.

IN HUMAN BEING HISTORY, THE FIRST MASS BOMBING OF CIVILLIANS IS GUERNICA.


Guernica is a painting by Pablo Picasso. It was created in response to the bombing of Guernica, Basque Country, by German and Italian warplanes at the behest of the Spanish Nationalist forces, on 26 April 1937, during the Spanish Civil War. The Spanish Republican government commissioned Picasso to create a large mural for the Spanish display at the Paris International Exposition at the 1937 World's Fair in Paris.

Guernica was a quiet village. The nearest military target of any consequence was a factory on the outskirts of the town, which manufactured various war products. The factory went through the attack unscathed. Thus, the motivation of the bombing was clearly one of intimidation. Furthermore, a majority of the town's men were away as they were fighting on behalf of the Republicans. Thus, the town at the time of the bombing was populated mostly by women and children.[14]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guernica_(painting)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...soGuernica.jpg

"Well done", German bombers, and their fans 70 years later.

You're seriously playing the 'poor old Germany' card?

The Brits did chose war. And as a Brit I'm quite proud that they took a stand against a man as pathetically egotistical as Hitler.

He was warned that if he invaded Poland that Britain and France would declare war. He didn't believe them, more fool him. They guy was an idiot and his people paid a heavy price because of, and NEVER forget this, him.

And the first air raids of WW2 on civilians were carried out by the LW in Poland.
Like I said, they set the tone.

As for Britain fighting in a dirty way, how about the deliberate starvation of people In eastern europe by nazi Germany? Is that clean? Or the industrialisation of executions? Or the many air raids that they carried out?

At the end of it all there is one man responsible, and he took the cowards way out, hiding in a bunker whilst he continued to let his people die.

As a Brit I'm not proud of Dresden or hamburg but Adolf didn't care so why should I?

To blame the british for starting the war smacks of nazi sympathy speak.
So are you? It would explain a lot.

Incredible bit of revisionism there. At the very best Hitler's aggression towards Poland could be filed under miscalculation - i.e. Germany attacked with full knowledge of Britain's commitment to come to Poland's aid. Thinking you can get away with your latest subjugation of another country without causing a third party to intervene hardly qualifies for the Nobel Peace prize in my book.

As for 'refusing German peace offers', thank God they did.

Presumably the invasion of Russia in 1941 is another example of peace-loving Germany's harmless intentions - or maybe you can manufacture an alternate history justification for that one too? (and i don't consider 'They were Commies, they had it coming' to be adequate justification)


One thing that always puzzles me amidst this high-minded moral refusal to stoop to British levels is what the German rationale was for the 'Vengeance' weapons (V1 and especially V2). Well-known for their pin-point accuracy and ability to target enemy industry with precision.

London was only spared devastating levels of destruction and civilian deaths because the Allies targeted the production facilities and launching sites and then over-ran them.

Don't even mention the possibility that they had got the A-bomb first to put atop the V2 or the next generation, but i presume some of you may have actually preferred that outcome to the historical one.

Nothing left to say here.

Too many Nazi apologists here for me as well.

It's called freedom of speech Andy , please do go and whine somewhere else . Perhaps the rise of flight forum people will agree with your every thought and you won't be forced to label them with lefty OWS insults .Please inform us all in advance when you make your triumphant return to these forums , we will wait with great anticipation .Ps You're not that actor who plays that skinny nerdy guy on "the Big Bang Theory " are you ?

Furfurst's opinion about history is distorted. As a man from allied side, I support you. :)

Luftwaffe tried to kill children and women BEFORE WWII in Spain civil war in 1937.

Britain has beaten several autarchy countries in history, I am proud of Britain's contribution to free world.

WTF... did i mention nazi's my post was about the blame of civilian terror bombing which was done much more by the allies....

It was a means to an end, its war everyone gets there hands dirty just some more so than others.

Hardly. Guernica was a propaganda stunt of the anti-fascist powers, inflating

Also mass bombing of civilians preceeded Guernica by decades. The Italians excercised it in their Ethiopian campaign, the British bombed arab villages to terrorize the population in Iraq, the French bombed Damascus in 1925, and there are the Zeppeling raids.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._en_flamme.jpg http://www.syrianhistory.com/image_w...4622.jpg&s=557
Damascus in flames as the result of the French air raid on October 18, 1925. / French officers inspecting the damage

"Quiet village"? With pastors and lambs and stuff like that? :D Get real.

Sure, it was a perfectly normal little town, in the frontline, with two Basque battalions in it.

The Germans and Italians simply bombed a strategic chokepoint, and attempted to block the roads leading in and out of the city, and thus trapping the Republican forces.

Regrettably about four hundred innocents died in the process (the exact number was never really established though, nobody kept record how many died in the bombing, how many in the fighting and how many 'suspicious ones' were executed as typical in this civil war).

Allied and Soviet press boosted this again tenfold, up to 6000 dead were claimed.

Military situation

Advances by Nationalist troops led by Generalísimo Francisco Franco had eaten into the territory controlled by the Republican Government. The Basque Government, an autonomous regional administrative body formed by Basque nationalists and leftists, sought to defend Biscay and parts of Guipuzcoa with its own light Basque Army. [b]At the time of the raid, Guernica represented a focal strategic point for the Republican forces./b] It stood between the Nationalists and capture of Bilbao. Bilbao was seen as key to bringing the war to a conclusion in the north of Spain. Guernica also was the path of retreat for the Republicans from the northeast of Biscay.
Prior to the Condor Legion raid, the town had not been directly involved in the fighting, although Republican forces were in the area; 23 battalions of Basque army troops were at the front east of Guernica. The town also housed two Basque army battalions, although it had no static air defences, and it was thought that no air cover could be expected due to recent losses of the Republican Air Force.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing...tary_situation

Once again it's a SIM people , none of us alive today were personally involved. Would you German haters buy this sim if there was no enemy to fight ? Perhaps you guys should buy a sim where people sit in rocking chairs and sip lemonade .Flying a German plane in this SIM does not make a person a nazi sympathizer any more than flying a Russian plane in the next sim will make you a communist . Or flying a British plane will make you a tea sipper . Get a grip . It's a SIM and a video game. I also fly an Fw190d9 RC plane but I don't profess to any nazi sympathies .I think the interest people have in flying the LW planes is in some ways similar to the interest they have In watching mafia movies and other crime stories .Didn't Britain at one time have a massive "British Empire " ? How do you suppose that happened ? Did they impose it by being nice to the countries they conquered ?One more thing , some of you better not fly the Italian planes either , they were German allies .

Posting pro-Nazi material and links to holocaust-denial websites does, you clueless troll.

And P.S. I've flown Luftwaffe planes in sims often enough. I can tell simulation from reality. I am also aware that not everyone may feel comfortable associating themselves, even indirectly, with the political regime sponsoring such planes. This is of course an individual ethical choice - one that needs to be considered in the context of a simulation that seems to encourage lunatic-fringe far-right participants to engage in soapboxing to push their vile agenda. In such a context, to say that it is 'just a simulation' and ignore what is going on is quite possibly morally questionable. I suggest that those with any morals ask themselves the question, and make their own decisions.

Urgent ccc request to all flying admins commanders - stop

close that thread by all manners - stop

public reward and gratification granted - stop

tc & all willing associates

end

And I thought you left these forums for good ? Wow you're back already .You wouldn't like the rise of flight forums anyway ,nobody to trade insults with .I think you DO in fact have trouble seperating this Sim from reality .ps Nowhere did I make excuses for or sympathize with nazi tactics or political agenda . I merely like to fly the German planes on this sim .To me this is a video game .To you , it's life or death it seems . I'm so hurt by you calling me a troll .Almost as much as your other over used and tired word - bigot.If you would like to hurl further cliched insults my way I'll brace myself for it ...

Kurfurst, it is a classic sign of someone losing the original argument when they suddenly broaden the context like that. We were talking about causes of WW2 and the respective approaches of Germany / the Allies to bombing strategy.

Now suddenly it's about Britain's colonial past? I am not going to make any attempt at justification for the actions of the colonial regime of that era. I personally despise those attitudes, actions and the weasly get-outs mouthed by some modern-day apologists for them.

But, for Christ's sake take the plank out of your own eye before you start complaining about the speck in other people's!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEjgPh4SEmU

I'm a Geordie. Love a good auld Scrap. Bring it! Sorts the Men out from the Boys.

:grin:

What the f..?

How is this relevant in an argument about the British use of air power during WW2. It isn't. It's an attempt to highlight some nasty British history simply for point scoring and shock factor..

You're pathetic Kurfurst.

If you walked up to me in the street and punched me in the face and then I put you in hospital in return, and you stated moaning that I hurt you, that would, in my book, make you a pussy.

Germany as a nation, at the time had to be shown what war was like

Were German civilians of more value than Russian or Polish civilians?
Nazi Germany had no problems with killing civilians, they were systematic in it.

Just to clarify my position, I spent a lot of time in Munich, I like Germany and in general I like Germans. I don't think bombing civilians is a good thing, I do however understand that sadly that is how the 2nd world war was fought, by all participants.

I didn't really appreciate how badly Germany was hit during WW2 until I noticed all the little plaques on historic buildings that say "rebuilt 1948" or "reconstructed 1950", I felt some sympathy for them, the flip side is whilst I was there I also visited Dachau I felt sympathy for the people who were murdered there too.

You can say what you want about how bad Britain has behaved in the past, it's probably true. That has no effect whatsoever on how they conducted themselves once the idiot that was Adolf Hitler decided that lots of people needed to die because he didn't like them, or because he wanted their resources..

haha i knew it the only reason they let this thread go is get rid off the bad boys

Easy now tiger! :grin:

Who was doing that?

OT Yes Britain had an Empire We were the only nation to do this except for in no paticular order
Spain
Portugal
France
Holland
Germany
Italy (twice if you count the Romans)
Austria
No offence to anybody but it seems to me that some feel that only the Brits should feel the need to appologise for their past.

The thread is closed.