PILOTS: LETS HEAR Ur STORIES AND THOUGHTS

[Luftwaffe_Rommel]

Originally Posted by BRIGGBOY

so you think the invasion of poland was justified.

The invasion of Poland was not justified, an invasion is never justied, A defense is. In this battle I throw my support to the Polish army ridding in horses "what a brave group of people" to face heavely armored Panzers.

[Soviet Ace]

Originally Posted by Luftwaffe_Rommel

The invasion of Poland was not justified, an invasion is never justied, A defense is. In this battle I throw my support to the Polish army ridding in horses "what a brave group of people" to face heavely armored Panzers.

I dunno, some invasions are justified. Like the invasion of France by the Allies in '44, and the Invasion of Italy in '43 and finally the Invasion of Germany in '44-'45 by the Soviet Union. Sure, they could have just kicked Germany off their land, but whatever.

[Luftwaffe_Rommel]

I do not justified any german attacks, I only like the planes, thanks, battleships [Geramans always make good stuff; take a look at their cars]

The only thing I blame on the allies is the bombing of Dresden. Dresden was more like an eye for an eye campaing on the Germans. Which bring me to my next point. I do not justified the bombing of london either. This is just a guy who likes to watch big explosions and that's all. Who doesn't find fireworks interesting and enjoyable. Going back to bombing, I only justified it in the game.

[Soviet Ace]

I think the Italian Campaigns in Africa were/are pretty interesting (What's cooler than MC.200, Fiat G.50s, and other early Italian fighters going up against Gladiators and Hurricanes?) Not much is known about them, and the whole Italian fight, but it's pretty interesting none the less. I'm sure people have heard of the Battle of Taranto where British Swordfish destroyed a good portion of the Italian Navy in the harbor, but hardly anyone I'm sure in the Western World (Britain, US, Germany, and France excluding Italy of course,) have heard of the other minor victory at Cape Matapan.

And I'm sure that hardly anyone knew that during the Battle of Britain, that there were actually Italian Fiat CR.42 Biplanes fighting over the channel (not many, but there was. And flown by Italians, not Germans.) Same goes for the Eastern Front. There were Italian units stationed on the Eastern Front fighting against the Soviet Union. (Ground troops, I'm not sure of Air units.) Plus, there were Italian units (ground/air) fighting in the Balkan States too.

[gbtstr]

On the subject of Rommel, I definitely admire him for his talents and abilities as a commander. He was arguably the best ground commander in WWII. What he lacked on most occasions where he was dealt defeat was sufficient support to press home the attack. If he had the same resources as Monty, I think he'd have kicked Monty's ass up and down the desert. Look at how much damage he did, how far back he pushed the British armies with the limited resources he had. Then, even after there was no hope of attacking any further and the initiative was totally with the British (through air superiority over the desert, and dominance over, on and under the Mediterranean) he still bloodied the Allies' noses in his fighting withdrawal.

What I can't admire him for is his politics. He was a Nazi. Maybe in the end he did finally see clearly who and what he had decided to support, but by then he had thrown his hat in with people who were responsible for terrible things. It's difficult to condemn him completely, but he can't just be forgiven either. A man that intelligent and close to the seat of power as he was, couldn't have honestly 'missed' the evil going on around him. And I do agree with LR's sentiment that WWII was the closest you could get to saying a war was fought between good and evil.

As for the bombing of cities and civilians (London, Dresden, Tokyo, etc.), I don't think you can justify it. But, you have to consider it in the context of the times. Aside from perhaps the initial raids on London and the reciprocation against Berlin, the bombing of cities was based on the idea that you could break the morale of the civil populations and have the enemy sue for peace through the use of bombing. The strategy was flawed. In every case, except perhaps Nagasaki and Hiroshima, bombing civilians may have caused much death and destruction, but it only served to increase the resolve of the bombed people to resist the enemy. It's possible to say, "Well, the Germans did it first," or whatever your argument may be, but both sides did it and their hands are just as bloody.

[flynlion]

Originally Posted by gbtstr

On the subject of Rommel, I definitely admire him for his talents and abilities as a commander. He was arguably the best ground commander in WWII. What he lacked on most occasions where he was dealt defeat was sufficient support to press home the attack. If he had the same resources as Monty, I think he'd have kicked Monty's ass up and down the desert. Look at how much damage he did, how far back he pushed the British armies with the limited resources he had. Then, even after there was no hope of attacking any further and the initiative was totally with the British (through air superiority over the desert, and dominance over, on and under the Mediterranean) he still bloodied the Allies' noses in his fighting withdrawal.

What I can't admire him for is his politics. He was a Nazi. Maybe in the end he did finally see clearly who and what he had decided to support, but by then he had thrown his hat in with people who were responsible for terrible things. It's difficult to condemn him completely, but he can't just be forgiven either. A man that intelligent and close to the seat of power as he was, couldn't have honestly 'missed' the evil going on around him. And I do agree with LR's sentiment that WWII was the closest you could get to saying a war was fought between good and evil.

As for the bombing of cities and civilians (London, Dresden, Tokyo, etc.), I don't think you can justify it. But, you have to consider it in the context of the times. Aside from perhaps the initial raids on London and the reciprocation against Berlin, the bombing of cities was based on the idea that you could break the morale of the civil populations and have the enemy sue for peace through the use of bombing. The strategy was flawed. In every case, except perhaps Nagasaki and Hiroshima, bombing civilians may have caused much death and destruction, but it only served to increase the resolve of the bombed people to resist the enemy. It's possible to say, "Well, the Germans did it first," or whatever your argument may be, but both sides did it and their hands are just as bloody.

Well said GBTSTR.

"Good people never fought harder for a worse cause" is a quote that pretty well sums up most Germans of the time, wish I could remember who said it. One important reason to study history is to try and understand how such a civilized and cultured society could be capable of such evil, yet the Germans had no monopoly on it and it is an evil almost any one of us is capable of. Anyone who honestly thinks that "it could never happen again" has a lot to learn about human nature. Kind of frightening when you think about it. A bit of loyalty and national pride can be a great thing, but too much of anything leads to disaster.

Anyhoo, I know that BoP is just a game and I do enjoy flying the Axis aircraft, I just have a hard time shooting at Hurricanes and Spitfires LoL