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

[bongodriver]

Was BoB a necessary battle? No.

Are you really sure about this......seriously, not necessary from whose perspective? and why the hell did it happen if thats the case?

Did it bring any change to the conditions at the beginning of the conflict? No.

Obviously because you can't change the actual events of history.....thats only done in forums, what it did do was change the conditions at the time i.e. the Germans expected to invade britain and they were denied so.

Was it a victory for the British? It surely was for morale and propaganda.

and our self preservation....somebody comes at you with a knife intending to stab you, you fight back and sefend yourself successfuly and escape the attack....thats a win for the defender and a lose for the attacker, even though he still has the knife and possibly the intent.

Was it a military victory? No.

So what....the RAF and LW are not military?

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

Hmmm......history repeats itself, all it takes if for the world to drop it's guard in false sense of security and whammo, some nutjob is trying to take over the world, I'm sorry but if the rest of the world want's to be sheep for the next time thats your choice, I like what we have now.

and I'm afraid a bit of National pride will give the incentive to defend it.

That is a highly probelamtic stance. If every potential development gets rejected just because something "could" go wrong, then I'd say that is a sorry and rather cynical state of mind.

Today most people on this planet have ready access to information far, far surpassing the possebilities of any era before. They also have access to other countries news and motivations unprecedendet in history. In all seriousness, if ppl do not get their act together under such positive circumstances, they probably never will. The implications of that for a world that just passed the 7 billion mark are, well, not so good.

This is just a matter of will, nothing more.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

That is a highly probelamtic stance. If every potential development gets rejected just because something "could" go wrong, then I'd say that is a sorry and rather cynical state of mind.

Today most people on this planet have ready access to information far, far surpassing the possebilities of any era before. They also have access to other countries news and motivations unprecedendet in history. In all seriousness, if ppl do not get their act together under such positive circumstances, they probably never will. The implications of that for a world that just passed the 7 billion mark are, well, not so good.

This is just a matter of will, nothing more.

Well maybe.......all I see is the EU, what a eutopian shiny rainbow coloured happy melting pot that is, Islamic fundamentalism....Hmmmm.....I like my head just where it is, no offence to them but I dont want to be forced to wear sandals and wail about Allah all the time, potentially the chinese are lining up for something big.........not sure, but if so I don't know what to expect with that one.

[RCAF_FB_Orville]

Originally Posted by PeterPanPan

Reported. Idiotic, tactless and offensive post.

Peter, you're right but if you think this thread is bad have a peep at the 'water cannon' thread in the pilots lounge. It took a supreme effort of will not to respond there, in which it is 'open season' on the UK with numerous frankly juvenile, offensive and utterly preposterous insults. How they have gone un moderated is beyond me.....but that's not my call.

I had to laugh though when I realised that its an ITALIAN who lives and works here dishing out the abuse on that thread.....LMAO. Oh, and according to a Mr El Aurens our country is en route to being a 'cesspool'. This from a 58 year old US bloke. Charmed. Thanks pal. That's ok though, I'll take my 'cesspool' where I'm 8x less likely to be randomly murdered over his any day of the week. No offence, of course.

I don't take this rubbish seriously. Why? Because I know for a fact had they would never say these things to a persons face....and that is why they do it here. Had they done so, they would most likely be swiftly hospitalized, and when they emerged from their coma (about 3 months later) would probably feel very apologetic about the whole affair. IRL, I can guarantee they'd be as nice as ninepence; and that's what cracks me up. Hilarious. The internets, eh?

I have never 'reported' anyone, and never will. I don't believe in it and that's the way it is. I do however understand why you did.

Cheers.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

Are you really sure about this......seriously, not necessary from whose perspective? and why the hell did it happen if thats the case?

Hitler could have waited to bring such an attack on Britain, but he didn't, he was afraid that waiting too long before dealing with the "British matter" could be counterproductive. It's probably this haste that cost him that battle.

Obviously because you can't change the actual events of history.....thats only done in forums, what it did do was change the conditions at the time i.e. the Germans expected to invade britain and they were denied so.

yes, but it didn't affect the offensive potential of the German machine, as some believe. The RAF didn't give the Luftwaffe a blow from which they never recovered: they both lost similar numbers of potential, but soon caught up with production and achieved immense tactical experience from the battle.

and our self preservation....somebody comes at you with a knife intending to stab you, you fight back and sefend yourself successfuly and escape the attack....thats a win for the defender and a lose for the attacker, even though he still has the knife and possibly the intent.

fair enough, but this is again your personal achievement. It has nothing to do with the actual outcome of the battle.

So what....the RAF and LW are not military?

of course they are, but for the two air forces it was a mere war of attrition, neither of the two was annihilated by it.

Why there isn't such a strong battle identification with the one that raged over Europe after the Americans joined, which was longer, more dramatic and above all more decisive than the Battle of Britain itself?

The Battle of Britain is considered more by a conflict per se here, unlike the rest that happened, and that's again only because of propaganda needs.

[Icebear]

Originally Posted by RCAF_FB_Orville

I have never 'reported' anyone, and never will. I don't believe in it and that's the way it is. I do however understand why you did.

Cheers.

+1

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by RCAF_FB_Orville

Peter, you're right but if you think this thread is bad have a peep at the 'water cannon' thread in the pilots lounge. It took a supreme effort of will not to respond there, in which it is 'open season' on the UK with numerous frankly juvenile, offensive and utterly preposterous insults. How they have gone un moderated is beyond me.....but that's not my call.

what does it have to do with this? And why don't you bless us with your supreme view on that matter in that thread?

I had to laugh though when I realised that its an ITALIAN who lives and works here dishing out the abuse on that thread.....LMAO.

so? Is being an Italian a bad thing now? Does the fact that Im a foreigner make my judgement less relevant, or isn't my tax money as good as yours? You sir fit perfectly in the category of the "worst that England can offer".

Oh, and according to a Mr El Aurens our country is en route to being a 'cesspool'. This from a 58 year old US bloke. Charmed. Thanks pal. That's ok though, I'll take my 'cesspool' where I'm 8x less likely to be randomly murdered over his any day of the week. No offence, of course.

..yep, talking stereotypes, as I said, the worst England.

I don't take this rubbish seriously. Why? Because I know for a fact had they would never say these things to a persons face....and that is why they do it here. Had they done so, they would most likely be swiftly hospitalized, and when they emerged from their coma (about 3 months later) would probably feel very apologetic about the whole affair. IRL, I can guarantee they'd be as nice as ninepence; and that's what cracks me up. Hilarious. The internets, eh?

Ah, another keyboard hero! It goes without saying that talking about adult, mature matters can't be done with little people of your stance, but if I really had to, I can assure you that I would know how to defend myself from someone who can't take a normal conversation and turn to physical aggression to make his point valid. But then again, you would never do it yourself, would you?

I have never 'reported' anyone, and never will. I don't believe in it and that's the way it is. I do however understand why you did.

Cheers.

probably because you find amusement in forum wars. I, on the contrary, do believe in the respect of forum rules.

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

Well maybe.......all I see is the EU, what a eutopian shiny rainbow coloured happy melting pot that is, Islamic fundamentalism....Hmmmm.....I like my head just where it is, no offence to them but I dont want to be forced to wear sandals and wail about Allah all the time, potentially the chinese are lining up for something big.........not sure, but if so I don't know what to expect with that one.

And you do not think that this stance is extrmely narrow and not doing any kind of justice towards both the EU and muslims in general? IMHO that threat perception is totally blown out of proportion. But that would be worth a thread on it its own

Being careful and on the watch is one thing, seeing dangers and threats around every corner is another one.

Provocative questions:

Could it be possible that the UK got burned so much in WW2 that it got its spyche damaged, like a person that got mugged always being afraid of the dark afterwards?

Why does that not apply to countries that suffered much more in WW2, like Poland, Russia or the Benelux countries?

Why is it that the UK had quite good relations with Germany until reunification, then afterwards starting one tabloid campaign after the other?

Those are honest question because quite franky, that is how some UK behaviours come over here.

[JG5_emil]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

I suppose it's not the specific case of the Battle of Britain, it's more a case of assigning improper definitions to events and giving special meanings to events that were important only in hindsight for the sake of national pride.

Was BoB a necessary battle? No.
Did it bring any change to the conditions at the beginning of the conflict? No.
Was it a victory for the British? It surely was for morale and propaganda.
Was it a military victory? No.

It's an important debate for many historians, and it's getting harder to deal with when thinking of recent conflicts (from the 80s onwards).

I really don't agree with this.

BOB was necessary for Hitler because he absolutely didn't want a war on two fronts. He knew he had to take the UK out of the equation because it would be a nasty thorn in his side as he turned east as proved to be the case especially when the bombing of Germany started but also because the UK and Empire had a large economy and would support Russian with materials and would continue to have a very powerful naval force which made bringing in materials from around the world much harder. Had he defeated Britain he could have had access to the oil in the Middle East as a starter.

The conditions at the beginning of the BOB were that Germany was an unbeaten force and had almost mythical attributes assigned to it. The out come of the BOB was enough to bring in massive amounts American credit. This saw the USA producing huge amounts of arms and Churchill cunningly believed that this would make it much more possible for the USA to be drawn into the war.

At the beginning of the BOB Britain stood alone, it looked like defeat was likely to the rest of the world and there was a great chance that the USA might twist Britain's arm in to negotiating (a bit like Suez) or become a political outcast. Churchill feared that Britain would become the most hated country on the planet because he refused to negotiate!

The victory was more than propaganda or moral and I agree it wasn't really a military victory (it was stalemate in military terms) BUT it was a political victory

[bongodriver]

Hitler could have waited to bring such an attack on Britain, but he didn't, he was afraid that waiting too long before dealing with the "British matter" could be counterproductive. It's probably this haste that cost him that battle.

Sorry but that is not what constitutes uneccessary, you see here again you are just downplaying the significance by using the German perspective here, clear example of your bias here, you are obviously enamoured with a strange romanticism about the Germans, facct is they 'did' come to fight and the British found it necessary to stop them, that has nothing to do with British nationalistic views.

yes, but it didn't affect the offensive potential of the German machine, as some believe. The RAF didn't give the Luftwaffe a blow from which they never recovered: they both lost similar numbers of potential, but soon caught up with production and achieved immense tactical experience from the battle.

Semantics again, an attempt at downplaying the significance through some 'dictionary' deffinition, the US won their war of independence(with help from the French)....were the British anhilated?

fair enough, but this is again your personal achievement. It has nothing to do with the actual outcome of the battle.

Oh but it does, it's a personal event for both parties, the defender won his objective (survival and escape) the attacker lost his objective (killing the victim) the battle ends there, the war between these two hasn't, you are just not making sense here mate.

of course they are, but for the two air forces it was a mere war of attrition, neither of the two was annihilated by it.

Why there isn't such a strong battle identification with the one that raged over Europe after the Americans joined, which was longer, more dramatic and above all more decisive than the Battle of Britain itself?

The Battle of Britain is considered more by a conflict per se here, unlike the rest that happened, and that's again only because of propaganda needs.

Ther you go with that anhillation stuff again.....why?

this topic started on the subject of the BOB, I thought it was etiquette to keep threads 'on topic' so the wider picture of the war has no relevance in this thread, that is not a denial of it's significance....just forum etiquette.

Conflict..battle...skirmish....WTF? give it whatever label you want, it happened, it was a fight, we won our objective....that is plain fact, that is all we celebrate about it, nobody suggests it was a total defeat of the wider German military...it was simply a fight the British won and it's wider significance became apparent later....yay lucky for us.....we survived that one and it all turned out pretty f***ing good in the end....lets celebrate it for it contribution for a better world wiithout the Nazis.......is that such a big deal?