maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Wed Aug 23, 2017 11:05 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


Trolls will feel the wrath of Kam



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: DUNKIRK
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 2:49 am 
Offline
Sergeant

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 3:43 am
Posts: 2725
Reputation points: 2562
EUBanana wrote:
reinald wrote:
Anyone know a good book on the evacuation? The more big picture, scientific, the better.


This one seems pretty hard core, not read it myself though...

https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/Books/Operat ... ion+dynamo



Thx!

_________________
"The seevens maehn... he wasn't wearing a vac suit!"

I know, but big girls need love too.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DUNKIRK
PostPosted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 6:09 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 7:44 am
Posts: 10452
Reputation points: 10823
Rather too arty for me. 3 out of 5 Dunkirk jacks.

The RAF pilot guy was a flippin' hero, though, made all the more heroic due to being surrounded by the arty bleakness of war and all. The stiffest of upper lips.

_________________
“The gap in EU finances arising from the United Kingdom’s withdrawal and from the financing needs of new priorities need to be clearly acknowledged.” - Mario Monti


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: DUNKIRK
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 12:53 am 
Offline
Sergeant

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 3:43 am
Posts: 2725
Reputation points: 2562
What is the history there? The RAF only tentatively engaged over Dunkirk to conserve for BoB?

Makes my head ache: What if Hitler had not halted his tanks for two days? Or in relation to the following BoB, what if certain interwar RAF generals had had their way and left Britain without fighter planes to build even more 4-engine bombers?

_________________
"The seevens maehn... he wasn't wearing a vac suit!"

I know, but big girls need love too.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DUNKIRK
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 10:40 am 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 13762
Reputation points: 8657


This is how it happened.

_________________
Use KISS or the old man won't understand.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: DUNKIRK
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 2:04 pm 
Online
First Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 8526
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 9548
abradley wrote:


This is how it happened.


Sorry, but I take anything the BBC says with a plate full of salt.

_________________
Nero: So what is your challenge?

Anthro: Answer question #2: How do "Climate Change models" mathematically control for the natural forces which caused the Ice Age(s) to come and go . . . repeatedly?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: DUNKIRK
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 2:33 pm 
Offline
Sergeant

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 3:43 am
Posts: 2725
Reputation points: 2562
Great find, thx for sharing.

I especially like their busting all those silly half educated myths about Dunkirk.

One little thing I disagree with, though: they focus too much on the power struggle between Hitler and OKH and at this being his only motive to halt the advance. In reality I think Hitler also was genuinely worried that the armored spearhead itself could be cut off.

_________________
"The seevens maehn... he wasn't wearing a vac suit!"

I know, but big girls need love too.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DUNKIRK
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:00 pm 
Online
First Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 8526
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 9548
How the hell could the German advance through the low countries in 1940 ever be considered "A surprise attack!?" which the BBC states at about 2:48 in that video.

Let me make sure I have the facts of history correct:
1931-1933 Nazi party seizes control
1933 -1934: Hitler gains dictatorial power

I would say that . . . if anyone of any political consequence in either France or GB were paying attention to events in Germany at the time, there should have been very LITTLE if any capacity for "surprise" at this point. An obviously violent, extremist political party had by end of 1934 gained complete control of Germany. A party which spoke of Lebensraum and of vindicating the wrongs committed by the Treaty of Versailles. In my opinion, the fact that the Western powers were caught with their pants down and their dicks waving in the wind some 5 years later AFTER the Germans had: reoccupied the Rhineland, annexed the Sudetenland, annexed Austria, AND invaded and conquered Poland is THE REASON for the disaster on the Western front in spring 1940.

The fact the BBC uses either fallacious or sloppy language like "surprise attack" to refer to the German advance into France in 1940 is all I need to hear to turn it off and disregard anything more they might have to say. Did they interview some old vets? Yes I can see that. Did they martial their cinematic and editorial and narrative skills? Obviously. But a cogent and insightful "How it really was" does not include bullshit like "surprise attack" to characterize the 1940 western "blitzkrieg."

_________________
Nero: So what is your challenge?

Anthro: Answer question #2: How do "Climate Change models" mathematically control for the natural forces which caused the Ice Age(s) to come and go . . . repeatedly?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: DUNKIRK
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 4:03 pm 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 13762
Reputation points: 8657
Anthropoid wrote:
How the hell could the German advance through the low countries in 1940 ever be considered "A surprise attack!?" which the BBC states at about 2:48 in that video.

Let me make sure I have the facts of history correct:
1931-1933 Nazi party seizes control
1933 -1934: Hitler gains dictatorial power

I would say that . . . if anyone of any political consequence in either France or GB were paying attention to events in Germany at the time, there should have been very LITTLE if any capacity for "surprise" at this point. An obviously violent, extremist political party had by end of 1934 gained complete control of Germany. A party which spoke of Lebensraum and of vindicating the wrongs committed by the Treaty of Versailles. In my opinion, the fact that the Western powers were caught with their pants down and their dicks waving in the wind some 5 years later AFTER the Germans had: reoccupied the Rhineland, annexed the Sudetenland, annexed Austria, AND invaded and conquered Poland is THE REASON for the disaster on the Western front in spring 1940.

The fact the BBC uses either fallacious or sloppy language like "surprise attack" to refer to the German advance into France in 1940 is all I need to hear to turn it off and disregard anything more they might have to say. Did they interview some old vets? Yes I can see that. Did they martial their cinematic and editorial and narrative skills? Obviously. But a cogent and insightful "How it really was" does not include bullshit like "surprise attack" to characterize the 1940 western "blitzkrieg."
Did the Allies know he was going to attack on 10 May 1940, did the allies know he was going to attack and capture Fort Eben-Emael opening the way for German troops into Belgium.

_________________
Use KISS or the old man won't understand.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: DUNKIRK
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 4:42 pm 
Offline
Sergeant

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:41 pm
Posts: 2447
Reputation points: 4420
Watched it, wedding anniversary gift from the wife.

I agree with EuB, 3 out of 5. IIRC the director said it was not a war movie like A Bridge Too Far, but more a sort of disaster type movie - which is correct IMHO. There is some attention given to the overall picture of the evacuation but mostly it follows a few induviduals in a not quite linear fashion.

There is a tip of the hat to the French holding the perimeter (did not think the French would at all be mentioned actually).

I'm currently reading Steinhoff's Messerschmitt's over Sicily so I found the air scenes more interesting...

Robert Jacksons Dunkirk: The British Evacuation, 1940 is a dated but decent book on the fighting around and evacuation of the channel ports.

Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: DUNKIRK
PostPosted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 10:27 pm 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 13762
Reputation points: 8657
Quote:
Saturday at the Movies: A Review of Dunkirk

Posted by Sgt. Mom on July 23rd, 2017 (All posts by Sgt. Mom)

I took it into my head to see Dunkirk in a movie theater on the opening weekend. I don’t think I have done since the early nineties (when we returned from Spain, where movies showed at the base theater six months to a year after premiering.) The last time I saw a movie in an actual theater, instead of at home on DVD or on streaming video was – if memory serves – The Kings’ Speech, in 2010, or it may have been The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug in 2013. We saw the latter in an Alamo Drafthouse cinema, notable for being set up in a civilized manner to serve tasty adult beverages before and during the showing, as well as equally tasty entrees. They also have a positively Soup-Naziesque attitude about talking, texting, ringing cellphones and children disturbing the movie experience – an attitude of which I regretfully approve. One toot on yer flute, or on your cellie, and you’re oot, as the saying about the woman in the Scottish cinema with a hearing horn used to go. Adding to the charm of the experience – you can book a ticket for a specific seat and showing through their website, and pay for it online in advance. Print out your ticket on your home printer, waltz into the theater at the appointed time – and yes, this is one thing I do like about the 21st century.
Back to the movie. The necessary trailers for upcoming releases reminded me powerfully about why I have not been to a movie theater for a movie since 2010 or 2013, especially a trailer for a superhero concoction called The Justice League. No, sorry; so much my not-cuppa-tea that I wouldn’t move two feet off a rock ledge to watch it, or anything else there was a trailer for. Fortunately, the pre-feature features were few and relatively brief.
Then to the main feature, which began very quietly, with a half-dozen British squaddies wandering down a narrow street on the outskirts of Dunkirk, under a fluttering of German propaganda leaflets … which set the situation as it exists, and supplies one of the young soldiers, appropriately named Tommy (Fionn Whitehead), with a supply of toilet paper. Read the rest of this entry »
http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/55642.html#more-55642

_________________
Use KISS or the old man won't understand.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group