June 4th, 5th and 6th: a couple of interesting anniversaries

[Karl Heidenreich]

June 4-5th, 1942:

BATTLE OF MIDWAY!!! One of the three super decisive naval battles in History (Trafalgar being the one and the other Lepanto). Since the days of Gettysburg the US forces had never fought such a decisive battle as this one. And after it the US had never fought one neither. As a matter of fact the US has never known desperation since those early days in the Pacific Theatre.

June 6th:

Operation Overlord. When US-Canadian and British forces land on the northern coast of France to rescue (the second of three times) the europeans from their own blindness. In 1937 when Hitler marched upon the Rhineland with a couple of drunks and a "military" band the French had 60 divisions + BEF to send the nazis back home and overthrew Adolf. But they waited enough to let Hitler seize Austria, Chechoslovaquia and Poland.... and after that the european military proficiency and numerical superiority over a not so big Wehrmacht got kicked by Manstein, Guderian, the SS and Rommel. Not being for the British all Europe might have been a great German Province for the Arian Race to go shopping and for vacations. Of course that fate was aborted on June 6th when the US-Canada and England spilled their blood for others... only for the great measure of gratitude these countries had given Uncle Sam when it needed them... of course there´s still the posibility that the russians got the idea of seizing Europe again and there will be no US to help, after all there is no commie menace this time.

Best regards.

[paul mercer]

Hi Karl,
An interesting post, not sure about the last bit about no commie menace because of the latest developments in Eastern Europe - old Putin threatening to point his missiles our way again!!

[RF]

In 1937 when Hitler marched upon the Rhineland with a couple of drunks and a "military" band the French had 60 divisions + BEF to send the nazis back home and overthrew Adolf. But they waited enough to let Hitler seize Austria, Chechoslovaquia and Poland....

Best regards.

The reoccupation of the Rhineland was actually March 1936, using 600 men who had orders to scuttle back across the Rhine at the first sign of resistance.....

The responsibility for keeping the German military out of the Rhineland lay with the French and the Belgians, the BEF did not come into being until October 1939.
The French had already in 1934 completed the Maginot Line covering the German border on Alsace-Lorraine, and at the moment of German re-occupation didn't actually have a government in place. The French response was to rely on the fortifications and not intervene.
The Belgian response, largely due to the failure to act by the French, was to declare their neutrality, and rely on the Fort Eben-Emael.....

This is all very different to the situation in 1923, when German failure to deliver a consignment of railway sleepers and telegraph poles as part of the Versailles reparations provisions led to joint French/Belgian occupation of the Rhineland. The French deliberately sought to rub the Germans noses into the ground by using Foreign Legion troops, especially troops of black African descent, as part of the occupation forces.....

[RF]

- old Putin threatening to point his missiles our way again!!

This is purely political posturing to keep Putins' own domestic position secure, particulary as he has no other bargaining ploy.

[RF]

Karl, you have missed a third anniverary, falling on your middle date in the title of your post - can you recall what it is?

[ostriker]

June 6th:

Operation Overlord. When US-Canadian and British forces land on the northern coast of France to rescue (the second of three times) the europeans from their own blindness.

I totally agree for the "own blindness" in the 1930's but i disagree for 1914. D'ont make a mixture of politics and citizen. The farmer of the languedoc province no wanted these wars as his westphalian counterpart no wanted it no more. War are political products, like the irak one for exemple

... only for the great measure of gratitude these countries had given Uncle Sam when it needed them...
Best regards.

Sorry Karl but in don't understand this part

[Karl Heidenreich]

RF:

Karl, you have missed a third anniverary, falling on your middle date in the title of your post - can you recall what it is?

Well, I know is political incorrect but it goes with the Romans destroying Jerusalem and showing the world how you destroy a "civil war" and wiping a guerrilla from the face of the earth. June 5th, 70 AD.

paul:

Hi Karl,
An interesting post, not sure about the last bit about no commie menace because of the latest developments in Eastern Europe - old Putin threatening to point his missiles our way again!!

Of course he does. I don´t know what´s the fuss about it: it only takes some coordinates to "point" the missiles, they can do it in minutes if want to. But he will not do it because need "european money". Anyway the missile shield is a stupid idea: Shields are defensive means and as such they can never win wars. And missiles from whom? Russia? Putin and Russia are not enemies. The islamic fanatics are the enemy.

ostriker:

I totally agree for the "own blindness" in the 1930's but i disagree for 1914. D'ont make a mixture of politics and citizen. The farmer of the languedoc province no wanted these wars as his westphalian counterpart no wanted it no more. War are political products, like the irak one for exemple

I don´t agree with Bush´s "stupendous strategy" and believe that the US must have never invaded Irak. Not because I believe the invasion was inmoral but because it was military stupid: erasing Iran with nuclear weapons is a better way to get rid of the islamic terrorists (please read about Genghis Khan dealing with Persians). But the US needed friends in 2003 as Europe needed them in several occasions. If they spilled their blood in 1917, back again in 1941 and were ready to spill it again in the Cold War fighting the commie vermin to keep Europe free (including France that left NATO only because Charles de Gaulle was not named as C i C as Field Marshall of the World and supreme astronaut) the less most Europeans could have done was to back up their effort as... well, with Bosnia and Kosovo were all the europeans cross their arms expecting US to solve their problem... again. There is something called honor and military dignity which were elements not shown in 2003.
And by saying this I will say: God save England, that perfid Albion that is always there to fight injustice and evil. God save her now and forever...

Best regards...

[ostriker]

ostriker:

I totally agree for the "own blindness" in the 1930's but i disagree for 1914. D'ont make a mixture of politics and citizen. The farmer of the languedoc province no wanted these wars as his westphalian counterpart no wanted it no more. War are political products, like the irak one for exemple

But the US needed friends in 2003 as Europe needed them in several occasions.

Karl how do you want that Europeans (especially french and german) could agree with such a war.

In 2001, when the us went in Afghanistan, EU countries inclunding France and Germany understood that very well, it was obvious that this war was usefull and inevitable. But it is a this point that the problem started.

When Germany And France proposed their participation , not directly on the ground, but air and sea, for patrol, a US general replied with a sentence a bit too strong for the old ears of old countries. Of curse, this sentence was true, very true, bur it lacked of diplomacy, especially when a supposed friend proposed her help, as light she is. This sentence was "We don't need french and german, if they were here, we would do the kitchen, and them to make the crockery".

And in 2003, England, Spain, Italia, supported the US action in Irak, via their government. Today these government have disappear, condemned.
In France, and Germany, this time we didn't hear "we don't need you", but "you are coward". The US media, and the ENglish one too, found a toy, and enjoy. All the french history (the german were forgotten) was cut and described as a people of coward, but nobody, or almost, tried to understand why they didn't support this war.

Nobody say that one 1/3 of the french petrol was coming from Irak, and these frogish were not very happy to pay indirectly the bush vision, every time when they go to refuel their car.

Nobody , or almost, (french and germany), said "no", when the ONU investigator said that they were no massive destruction weapon in Irak.

Nobody or almost, has the honesty to say that is was less expensive and more easy for the bush administration, to look for invoice, bills, and other paper, on which they could clearly see what weapons Irak had, because they weapons were sold by occidental countries.

I can add to this that the French (again) were condemned to have given high technology to Irakis, but nobody said that the iranian one was given by the US administration.

As i said, this war was a political one. "Enjoy with petrol"
My opinion, is, that you have not to say always "yes" at you friend only because they saved your life.

...were ready to spill it again in the Cold War fighting the commie vermin to keep Europe free

I have to stop you, reading your sentence we coud have the impression that the western european coutrines would have onpen the door to the red army "come on, it is quiet open".

including France that left NATO only because Charles de Gaulle was not named as C i C as Field Marshall of the World and supreme astronaut)

Incredible. I can imagine that a men such like could clearly believe this.
De Gaulle vas very very very anti-US, no doubt, but the reason why he left NATO are these:

- In 1954 The french parliament rejected the european defense community treaty, which had to create a an common army for France, Italy, and Germany. This army would be under a US commander.
Nonsense

-1956: The french army and the UK one went to Suez. Who did the pressure (not only the soviet) on the british to go back home?

-1958: The France is going to have her own atomic bomb. Because of this fact, (no nuclear monopole) De gaulle proposed that the NATO should be carry out by a US-UK-French trio, and not only by the US one with a pseudo-consultative English one. Due to the reply, he decided to, in normal time, that the french army had to be under french control. In other time, all these consideration should be reviewed. He hihlighted the point that to left the NATO didn't mean the end of the cooperation between both countries.

- 1959: Eisanowher is in Paris to meet De Gaulle. "Eike" is applaused by the parisians who, contrary as we can read everywhere, have not forgotten their debt to the us people. De Gaulle explain his point of view to Eike, and he also said that France is going to make all the effort for not being the "nuclear buffer" between USA and URSS. This buffer is going to be moved on the east.

- 1960: The first french atomic bomb explose ( an US story i like a lot ) and in 1967 France is going to have her own SSBN, putting her two feet in the MAD. At this point, all political consideration can disappear.

Here are the reason: A the time of the URSS get the nuclear bomb, and the France too, and because he not wanted a unilateral commander, he left NATO, hoghlighting the point that France would not forget her duty whith her ally.

the less most Europeans could have done was to back up their effort as... well, with Bosnia and Kosovo were all the europeans cross their arms expecting US to solve their problem... again

Sure the European countries didn't the best to solve this problem in Kosovo, but they were Here. France, Germany, Italy, Belgium and even Luxembourg were here.

. There is something called honor and military dignity which were elements not shown in 2003.

Karl the military dignity is not to attack a country for the petrol, disregarding her supposed ally. I don't see "bravery", dignity, in this war. "Only Sadness".

And by saying this I will say: God save England, that perfid Albion that is always there to fight injustice and evil. God save her now and forever...
Best regards...

And i totally agree with you. God save the perfide albion. Because we always need counterpart to give another advice. Because this country has fought against all evil. And because they have the most beautifull national anthem (with deutschland uber alles).

BUt, honestly, in Irak, i don"t see dignity, no justice at all. The only positive point is that Saddam is dead.

To sum up, all my deepest sympathy to the family of the 4000+ US soldier died in Irak, far from their home, for...... nothing only because a space man had space idea against his people advice.

Im sorry that you have a very bad opinion of European people.

[Karl Heidenreich]

Hi ostriker:

Vietnam
Argel

No comments...

[Karl Heidenreich]

I don´t have a very bad concept of the europeans: my family is from there in the first place. But I don´t see the reciprocity for the help given in the past. Of course you can have arguments and reasons, there are always arguments and reason for not doing anything. Conduct inertia is the "easy" state of matter anyway.
It´s not petrol the problem: is called friendship, is call camaderie, is called bravery. And for that the British are always ahead of all Europe.

Best regards...

[ostriker]

Hi ostriker:

Vietnam
Argel

No comments...

And what's the problem?

I don´t have a very bad concept of the europeans: my family is from there in the first place. But I don´t see the reciprocity for the help given in the past. Of course you can have arguments and reasons, there are always arguments and reason for not doing anything. Conduct inertia is the "easy" state of matter anyway.
It´s not petrol the problem: is called friendship, is call camaderie, is called bravery. And for that the British are always ahead of all Europe.

Best regards...

Braverie, camaraderie, friendship... I think the USA don't need help on the military and political area, they are more powerfull than all the european countries.
Inertia is the easy way, i agree. But in general terms. In 2003 in irak, inertia was not an easy way, simply because this war was not necessary, and on top of that, what could really do france with her 2 or 3 soldier, their half-carrier...

It is not because your friend goes on a fight, that you'll go with him if this friend is a the origin of this fight.
Sure if the situation get worse, you can help him.

And France and Germany have no weapons. USA doesn't need help in these way.

I forget to say that there is a big difference of culture between Europe and USA, it can explain some things... For England it is easy, the US citizen is a modified english citizen. They have a culture very near.

In any case you can say all you want, to be norrow minded and to no trying understand other point of view is often the begining of the problems.
This is often the USA's problem: one point of view, only one, no try to understand nothing, the US culture is the good one!

[Karl Heidenreich]

No offense taken, don´t worry.

[Karl Heidenreich]

Hey!!!

Today is D-Day´s anniversary!!! 63 years ago the Anglo-Canadian-American forces under General Eisenhower landed on the northern coast of France and began the liberation of Europe from the nazi opression.

Best regards...

[tommy303]

Let's not forget the Free French forces who landed with the others.

[Karl Heidenreich]

I´ll bring forward the allied order of battle for Overlord.

The order of battle was approximately as follows, east to west:


British sector (Second Army)
6th Airborne Division was delivered by parachute and glider to the east of the River Orne to protect the left flank.
1st Special Service Brigade comprising No.3, No.4, No.6 and No.45(RM) Commandos landed at Ouistreham in Queen Red sector (leftmost). No.4 Commando were augmented by 1 and 8 Troop (both French) of No.10 (Inter Allied) Commando.
I Corps, 3rd Infantry Division and the 27th Armoured Brigade on Sword Beach, from Ouistreham to Lion-sur-Mer.
No.41(RM) Commando (part of 4th Special Service Brigade) landed on the far right of Sword Beach.
Canadian 3rd Infantry Division, Canadian 2nd Armoured Brigade and No.48 (RM) Commando on Juno Beach, from Saint-Aubin-sur-Mer to La Rivière-Saint-Sauveur.
No.46(RM) Commando (part of 4th Special Service Brigade) at Juno to scale the cliffs on the left side of the Orne River estuary and destroy a battery. (Battery fire proved negligible so No.46 were kept off-shore as a floating reserve and landed on D+1).
XXX Corps, 50th (Northumbrian) Infantry Division and 8th Armoured Brigade on Gold Beach, from La Rivière to Arromanches.
No.47(RM) Commando (part of 4th Special Service Brigade) on the West flank of Gold beach.
79th Armoured Division operated specialist armour ("Hobart's Funnies") for mine-clearing, recovery and assault tasks. These were distributed around the Anglo-Canadian beaches.

U.S. Sector (First Army)
V Corps, 1st Infantry Division and 29th Infantry Division on Omaha Beach, from Sainte-Honorine-des-Pertes to Vierville-sur-Mer.
2nd and 5th Ranger Battalions at Pointe du Hoc (The 5th diverted to Omaha).
VII Corps, 4th Infantry Division and the 359th RCT of the 90th Infantry Division on Utah Beach, around Pouppeville and La Madeleine.
101st Airborne Division by parachute around Vierville to support Utah Beach landings.
82nd Airborne Division by parachute around Sainte-Mère-Église, protecting the right flank.

Naval participants

Large landing craft convoy crosses the English Channel on June 6, 1944.The Invasion Fleet comprised about 6,938 vessels: 1,213 warships, 4,125 transport vessels (landing ships and landing craft) and 1,600 support vessels which included a number of merchant vessels.

The overall commander of the Allied Naval Expeditionary Force, providing close protection and bombardment at the beaches, was Admiral Sir Bertram Ramsay. The Allied Naval Expeditionary Force was divided into two Naval Task Forces: Western (Rear-Admiral Alan G Kirk) and Eastern (Rear-Admiral Sir Philip Vian).

The warships provided cover for the transports against the enemy whether in the form of surface warships, submarines or as an aerial attack and give support to the landings through shore bombardment. These ships included the Allied Task Force "O".