Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Pilot's Lounge

Pilot's Lounge Members meetup

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #15  
Old 04-10-2012, 10:52 PM
Sternjaeger II Sternjaeger II is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,903
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taildraggernut View Post
Ok, answer my point then, is history as we know it a lie? did the holocaust happen and was it perpetrated by the Nazis? if none of that is a lie then why should the Battle of britain speciffically be a lie?
no, but there are many darker and controversial events of history that are deliberately overlooked. The holocaust did happen but it wasn't the biggest genocide of history, yet it's portrayed as the most horrific thing ever (probably because it's so well documented). The Battle of Britain isn't a lie, the aerial clashes over the Channel in 1940 were real and fierce, but one side perceived it in a way and the other in a totally different way. The use of the concept of "battle" is somehow wrong, since Great Britain wasn't sure of what was going to happen, whilst the Luftwaffe knew that their intervention was part of a much bigger operation.

Quote:
I never brought the Soviets into the argument, they have nothing to do with the Battle of Britain directly, I personally don't think there was any choice with that regard, my enemy's enemy is my friend until such time the immediate threat is over, hence why immediately after the second world war the 'cold war' started, do you really think there was a chance of a good outcome had the allies decided to fight the Russians too? Fighting the nazis was the best decision because they were the 'worst' of a bad lot and they started the bloody war in the first place, the Russians didn't, Look, if you start a fight with me and start gouging my eyes out I'm going to kick you in the nuts.....this is a hypothesis both are dirty tactics, which one is worse?
I'm not justifying area bombing, I'm just trying to stop you from using it as a validation for your arguments, it wouldn't have happened if Germany hadn't started the war, I don't care how many alternate views on History you have managed to read, it's just simple fact and you don't have to be British to understand the Germans started the war.
my whole point is that there's no absolute goodies or baddies, we all have our fair share of despicable actions. It's all about who overcomes who and they will claim to be the good ones.

Quote:
No but I am saying you are a Nazi appologist, based on what I'm reading here, it's just the study material I'm being provided to blame.
I don't think of myself as a Nazi apologist, there's not much that can be justified in their conduct, so no.

Quote:
and why exactly were there no opponents? oh yes, something to do with nobody else being competent enough to complete the challenge, so we just turned up....no biggie, it was a very prestigious prize and everybody else just effectively chickened out, and apparently this makes the Brits look bad, typical, the Brits get good at something and everybody else just goes home with a right cob on complaining and saying it's just a stupid game and they don't want to play any more.
well obviously you don't know much about the story of the Schneider Trophy: there were no opponents cos France had an accident and lost their plane, whilst Italy wasn't ready yet. It happened before and the race was called off, but the Brits won 2 times in a row already, and to win the Trophy for good you needed to win it 3 times in a row. So they decided to race alone, nice uh?

Quote:
Maybe, I don't personally know but I think they were aimed at ending the worst global conflict since the first one, as far as I know germany still exists, had things gone the other way I don't think many ethnicities and cultures would even be in history books, and hiroshima and Nagasaki you can blame on the Amricans not the British.
again, look at the broader picture, not the national individualities.

Quote:
Well we have common ground perhaps, let's just blame it all on Hitler and accept what happened was because of him, certainly thats how the British feel about it, no animosity towards Germany per se but there wasn't much else that could be done other than fight a war with germany because Hitler pushed them into it, if only Germany had allowed the allies to march through Germany straight to his door so we could take him out it could have avoided alot of unpleasantness.
Yes, Nazi Germany started WW2.

Quote:
you like to use this line alot, apparently you are infallible and beyond question, and like to question anybody who disagrees with you's intelligence, I'll let it slide as i'm pretty comfortable with my understanding of things, but if you are going to use lines like 'let's try and keep it civilised and I will be glad to answer your points.. ' then please extend a similar courtesy.
fair enough.
Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.