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

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by Dutch_851

This seems to confirm what I've suspected for a while, i.e. you don't appear to have read Bungay's book.

Consequently your opinions of Bungay's book are not your own and are based on the opinions of others.

Regurgitation of hearsay is no different whatsoever to propaganda in this context and also demostrates a good deal of bias.

Given the above quote, I'm also beginning to wonder whether you've read James Holland's book also, which you advocated as being 'the definitive book'. More hearsay?

Your 'historical references' so far in this thread seem to come from either Wikipedia or a bonus DVD. Surprising from one who considers himself a member of the historical acadaemia.

I'd be happy to stand corrected of course.

Sorry folks, this is a bit out of context from the way the thread has progressed.

I have indeed, in fact my Bungay's copy is signed as well, it was a present from a friend who works at a bookshop where Bungay made a presentation, otherwise I don't think I would have ever read it. It's enjoyably well written, but it lacks on some points (I have jumped on a couple of chapter I have to admit), and even if you might think that his conclusions are similar to mine, this doesn't make his book a better source for a reliable reference.

Holland's book I bought personally the first week it came out, and albeit being a much harder one to read, I find it more complete and complying to the academic standards of a reliable history books. His conclusions are his own, not mine or someone elses.

You can appreciate that the Wikipedia references that I posted are ALL sourced from, and the DVD I mentioned was just an example that you're taking out of context.

I also mentioned Winston Churchill and Harris, but that must have gone past..

don't remember seeing much posted by you in terms of sources.. oh yes, cos you shared your own opinions, like the rest of us.

This whole thread is getting an immature twist driven by some obtuse nationalistic pride, which has NOTHING to do with the original thread.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

Really?....so youre just here for the argument, I saw at least 2 posts where you promised no further contribution yet you are still here displaying massive double standards.....

No, I'm here to express my opinion, an opinion that is different and based on another approach, but which apparently doesn't deserve any respect cos it questions the concept of "winning the battle of britain"..
a bit fascist, but hey, as you say history repeats itself..

My contribution to this thread at this stage is only in response of who has been accusing me of being anti-British, which is completely uncalled for and has no factual reason.

Had to quote this bit again....it's just so immaculate in its hipocricy

why, as opposed to "I have my own ideas, they've been told me by my Government through his propaganda"?

Is it much of a shock to you guys that not everyone thinks the same way as you do?

[bongodriver]

Stearn....have you read 'fighter boys' by Patric Bishop?, I just got it and haven't read it yet, what is your oppinion on this book?

[Sternjaeger II]

I'm a victim of the same compulsory "buy a book and read it later" syndrome, got so many I have haven't read yet!

I have the book in paperback, but never got around to read it, why?

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

I'm a victim of the same compulsory "buy a book and read it later" syndrome, got so many I have haven't read yet!

I have the book in paperback, but never got around to read it, why?

No particular reason really, I don't have a great library, most of my books are reference material and not historical analysis, the few I do have I haven't read, I am not a great one for reading that type of stuff....I even have a signed copy of 'tumult in the clouds' that I never finished (Reason I have a signed copy is that James Goodson was a patient of my farther)

Despite our differences, you may still give me an isight to what it may be all about...

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

and even if you might think that his conclusions are similar to mine,

Far, far from it. Not even remotely close and precisely my point.

The references to Churchill, Montgomery, Harris et al were simple provocations to which i did respond in one or two sentences.

The historical references I quoted were from your own recommended source.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

No particular reason really, I don't have a great library, most of my books are reference material and not historical analysis, the few I do have I haven't read, I am not a great one for reading that type of stuff....I even have a signed copy of 'tumult in the clouds' that I never finished (Reason I have a signed copy is that James Goodson was a patient of my farther)

Despite our differences, you may still give me an isight to what it may be all about...

sorry mate, I haven't managed to read it

I can recommend you First Light by Geoffrey Wellum though, as an aviator yourself you might find his description of his first solo with a Tiggie the best written rendition of the experience

Uh and since he was mentioned before, Stephilner's book Spitfire On My Tail is quite a read, if anything a different one, that shows what it was like on the other side.

If you find it hard to read extremely academic books though, I would still recommend to read Bungay's one, if anything it flows better than Holland's.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by Dutch_851

Far, far from it. Not even remotely close and precisely my point.

The references to Churchill, Montgomery, Harris et al were simple provocations to which i did respond in one or two sentences.

The historical references I quoted were from your own recommended source.

the bits you quoted were Holland's opinions.

What you don't seem to get is that I'm making a distinction between the factual gathering of data vs the conclusions that an author reaches.

I can read, agree or dissent with someone's conclusions, but what really matters is that the data gathered to reach this conclusion are more complete and accurate. In this aspect I think Holland wins.

I'm debating the academic value of a book here, not the author's conclusion.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

No particular reason really, I don't have a great library, most of my books are reference material and not historical analysis, the few I do have I haven't read, I am not a great one for reading that type of stuff....I even have a signed copy of 'tumult in the clouds' that I never finished (Reason I have a signed copy is that James Goodson was a patient of my farther)

Despite our differences, you may still give me an isight to what it may be all about...

uh and another thing, I read pilot's bios more for the descriptions of events and emotions than for the conclusions that they might reach, because even if they are cool, pilots are still human beings, not the custodians of the ultimate truth, although some get damn close to it.

When reading a "history book" it's important to understand beforehand the context in which it was written, if it's a witting or unwitting testimony, if it was written during or after the war etc..

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

Stearn....have you read 'fighter boys' by Patric Bishop?, I just got it and haven't read it yet, what is your oppinion on this book?

Sorry Bongo, not directed at me, but I have.

Fighter Boys - Patrick Bishop - Published by Harper- Collins:

Page 404 para3;
''Fighter Command dealt Hitler's forces the first defeat they had suffered since the war began. The battle of attrition that the Luftwaffe was forced to fight had a profound effect on it's future efficiency. A Luftwaffe General, Werner Kreipe, later judged that the decision to try to destroy the RAF had marked a turning point in the history of the second world war. The German airforce was bled almost to death and suffered losses which could never again be made good throughout the course of the War.''

It's a very very good book.