The Battle of Britain Was The First Defeat For The German Luftwaffe.

[blackmme]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

Great Britain achieved its goal when Germany surrendered.

So what do you make of Pearl Harbour? Was that a Japanese victory? It was a part of a larger conflict.

Yes Pearl Harbor was a big tactical Japanese Victory.

Could you do me a favour and run the Battle of Midway through your personal 'What constitutes a victory' filter and let me know the results?

Regards Mike

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

With all this talk of British inferior machines but territorial advantage and German leadership ineptitude blah.....we really just need to weigh up each sides wakness and strenght and it will pretty much equate to an even match....which the Germans came off worst from.
p.s. just to add I'm talking in that particular battle with the immediate forces involved and not the German military as a whole or their other conflicts at the time.

NO, they didn't. GB came off worst because of the bombing damage and casualties, the air forces suffered similar losses.
Imaging walking around Coventry or London in 1940 and say "hey! We won the battle!", how awkward and out of place you reckon it would have been?
The whole postwar celebration of the Battle of Britain on the British side is because there actually wasn't one back then, cos war carried on, and so did the Blitz.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

By the rules of the competition at the time....yes we did.

Just out of interest, what exactly is the agenda here with trying to discredit every achievent Britain ever made?

Yeah, racing alone while others deliberately didn't sounds like a great challenge uh?

No, I've listed before the successes and achievements of Britain.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

The whole postwar celebration of the Battle of Britain on the British side is because there actually wasn't one back then, cos war carried on, and so did the Blitz.

'The official Government publication called The Battle of Britiain, which tells the story of those glorious days when the R.A.F. hurled back the overwhelming might of the Luftwaffe between August and October last year, has proved of so great interest to the public that all copies have been sold out at His Majesty's Stationery Office, Kingsway, London.

http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/r...reenwidth=1903

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by blackmme

To address your points

1.
I'm seriously going to leave the DVD, I think ignoring a vast amount of information and deciding that a DVD extra is the best source is just daft.

It's your opinion, mine was an example.

2.
What has the Schneider trophy got to do with this?

It was meant as a provocation in regards to the definition of "victory". But then again I suppose you think it was a honourable victory..

3.
Well the square, the preserved HMS Victory, the currency (up to quite recently), the Trafalgar day celebrations (widely celebrated on the 200th anniversary) , the beer... hmmmmmm beer etc, etc.

Regards Mike

I agree about the beer... hmmmmmmmm beer

Originally Posted by blackmme

Yes Pearl Harbor was a big tactical Japanese Victory.

Could you do me a favour and run the Battle of Midway through your personal 'What constitutes a victory' filter and let me know the results?

Regards Mike

Really? Why there needs always to be this "winning and losing" scenario? Pearl Harbour was a surprise attack, it was a success, but not a victory.

I gave you the example of the battle of Kursk.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by Dutch_851

'The official Government publication called The Battle of Britiain, which tells the story of those glorious days when the R.A.F. hurled back the overwhelming might of the Luftwaffe between August and October last year, has proved of so great interest to the public that all copies have been sold out at His Majesty's Stationery Office, Kingsway, London.

http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/r...reenwidth=1903

Which year is this?

[blackmme]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

NO, they didn't. GB came off worst because of the bombing damage and casualties, the air forces suffered similar losses.
Imaging walking around Coventry or London in 1940 and say "hey! We won the battle!", how awkward and out of place you reckon it would have been?
The whole postwar celebration of the Battle of Britain on the British side is because there actually wasn't one back then, cos war carried on, and so did the Blitz.

Now why do you think the two things in the eye's of the British people were two seperate things each with their own name?

It's because the Battle of Britain was understood to be about preventing invasion and the Blitz was about bombing the civilians with the aim of breaking the countries will to carry on fighting.

The british public well knew that they had 'survived' that the invasion hadn't happened (how ever likely it was) and they knew that the RAF was responsible.

If you had said to someone in London or Coventry (or many other cities) hey we won the Battle of Britain I fully would have expected them to reply 'But were bleedin well losing the Blitz!'

Regards Mike

[blackmme]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

It's your opinion, mine was an example.

I gave you the example of the battle of Kursk.

Not me about Kursk. I'm interested in your view on Midway.

Regards Mike

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by blackmme

Now why do you think the two things in the eye's of the British people were two seperate things each with their own name?

It's because the Battle of Britain was understood to be about preventing invasion and the Blitz was about bombing the civilians with the aim of breaking the countries will to carry on fighting.

The british public well knew that they had 'survived' that the invasion hadn't happened (how ever likely it was) and they knew that the RAF was responsible.

If you had said to someone in London or Coventry (or many other cities) hey we won the Battle of Britain I fully would have expected them to reply 'But were bleedin well losing the Blitz!'

Regards Mike

I'm sorry Mike, but the RAF was up there mainly to stop bombers, not to fight against Luftwaffe fighters. Although they shot down many, many others delivered their lethal load to hundreds of targets in Britain, making thousands of victims. Is that a victory?

[blackmme]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

I'm sorry Mike, but the RAF was up there mainly to stop bombers, not to fight against Luftwaffe fighters. Although they shot down many, many others delivered their lethal load to hundreds of targets in Britain, making thousands of victims. Is that a victory?

Yep sure is. The Luftwaffe's job (according to FD16) was to make an invasion uneccessary (by getting the Brits to the negotiating table, which Hitler expected) or make it possible.

It failed in both, lots of people were killed by bombs, lots of RAF fighters were shot down and the Germans never got close to achieving either aim.

The RAF succeeded in what it had to do. The Luftwaffe failed in what it had to do.

So yes that's a victory.

Is your definition of a victory that for it to be so you can't sustain any damage or casulties?

Regards Mike