Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle" couldn't happen

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle" couldn't happen Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/20/2016 1:43:58 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Ah, the European demand for centralized control.

Here it wouldn't take a leader giving orders. County level or even lower. Extended families even. Get your gun, kill anyone wearing THAT uniform. Once you do kill them pick up their hardware. Rinse, repeat.

The US population in 1940 was about 130 million. Mostly educated, mostly, even the rural women, familiar with firearms. And really, REALLY pissed off at invaders. I knew about 1775 at the same time I learned to read (age 4). And the Brits weren't even invaders, sorta kinda.




The average American in 1940 was a lot more sophisticated about machinery than the average person in any other country. GIs in the field were much more adept at getting captured equipment to work than soldiers of other nations. The US was also the only combatant in WW II who had a pool of already trained drivers at the start of the war. Everyone else had to train people to drive trucks and tanks.

Consider the hell the Germans had to deal with partisans in Russia, the Balkans, etc. when most of those people were uneducated peasants. Imagine the French Resistance on steroids. By 1940 things like gasoline were also widely available and quite a few Americans knew how to distill alcohol. Molotov cocktails for everyone!

Even if the US was caught flat footed by an isolationist government, any attempt to invade the US would have been very difficult. The chances of success would have been very, very small.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 31
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/20/2016 2:09:19 AM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

It's not to say Germany probably couldn't have made atomic weapons eventually, but it probably would have taken a fair bit longer than the Manhattan Project took.


I'm not sure what 1940s A-weapons get you against the US in that era. They were small and the US was a 50% rural nation. A huge, heavily-armed one.

If you just want to kill the urban population gas is a lot cheaper and easier. If you want to destroy the industry then fire works too. But after you burn the cities and destroy the factories you still don't control the US or get any production out of it. And has been said, we have guns.


I think it would be more of a breakdown of political will than the national resolve of the country to keep fighting.

If your enemy drops a bomb that vaporizes your biggest cities in an instant, it takes a special kind of leader to put that to one side and demand that the fight is carried on in the countryside with shotguns and hunting rifles. If that leader isn't in the right place at the right time, then what good is it?



Ah, the European demand for centralized control.

Here it wouldn't take a leader giving orders. County level or even lower. Extended families even. Get your gun, kill anyone wearing THAT uniform. Once you do kill them pick up their hardware. Rinse, repeat.

The US population in 1940 was about 130 million. Mostly educated, mostly, even the rural women, familiar with firearms. And really, REALLY pissed off at invaders. I knew about 1775 at the same time I learned to read (age 4). And the Brits weren't even invaders, sorta kinda.




Would the insurrection during the War of Independence have been as widespread if the Continental Congress decided to sue for peace after Brandywine?

In the novel the US surrender is precipitated by two atomic bomb attacks that cause the US Government to sue for peace. Hearing that over the radio is a pretty big incentive to co-operate. I could understand the situation you're imagining if the government had taken the opposite tack - run for the Rockies and blast calls for insurrection all over the airways, but if you hear your government on the radio telling you that it's over, people tend to accept that it's over. August '45 in Japan is proof of that.



I disagree, particularly in a country as geographically large as the US. wdolson's point about garrisoning the US being essentially impossible is, as Bullwinkle has said elsewhere, "on fleek."


The books has a collaborationist government installed in the Eastern USA. I imagine that in a real-world scenario that the transition to being a Nazi client state would have been a gradual process. Japan and post-war Germany didn't become what they are today overnight.

Take Japan in '45 as the textbook example. There was a willingness (begrudging, if not outright fatalistic) that the American invasion was to be met with every able-bodied person armed with what-ever they could get their hands on.

Two atomic bombs, the Soviet invasion and a speech on the radio and it was all over. Bar a few isolated fanatics and the holdouts, the war ended pretty abruptly.

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 32
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/20/2016 2:12:27 AM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

Consider the hell the Germans had to deal with partisans in Russia, the Balkans, etc. when most of those people were uneducated peasants. Imagine the French Resistance on steroids. By 1940 things like gasoline were also widely available and quite a few Americans knew how to distill alcohol. Molotov cocktails for everyone!


All contributing factors to the eventual outcome of the war, but resistance movements were far from decisive.

You're also forgetting the collaboration, especially in countries where it occurred on quite a large scale. Russia and the Balkans being the prime examples.

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 33
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/20/2016 2:49:57 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline



quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

Consider the hell the Germans had to deal with partisans in Russia, the Balkans, etc. when most of those people were uneducated peasants. Imagine the French Resistance on steroids. By 1940 things like gasoline were also widely available and quite a few Americans knew how to distill alcohol. Molotov cocktails for everyone!


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
All contributing factors to the eventual outcome of the war, but resistance movements were far from decisive.

You're also forgetting the collaboration, especially in countries where it occurred on quite a large scale. Russia and the Balkans being the prime examples.


Partisans did have outside help in most places, though the Polish resistance was able to scrounge some weaponry without any help. The US had a lot of weapons in the hands of people, plus National Guard armories all over the place. Even at the peak of isolationism in the US, the US was still very interested in outside interference in the Western Hemisphere and was very interested in home defense. The B-17 was initially conceived as a weapon to be used against any invasion force trying to land in the US.

The US was the most industrialized country in the world in 1940. An insurgency would have access to lots of home grown resources for building arms. Factories would have been stripped of equipment before being occupied and there would have been thousands of basement gun smiths making arms and ammunition. It would have been more primitive than regular army weapons, but it would have been plentiful.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 34
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/20/2016 11:01:11 AM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline
Took a pic of the two games I mentioned earlier.

Invasion America was hex based and set in a fantasy future where the three antagonists didn't so much represent countries as continental alliances.

The USA was invaded by the European Socialist Coalition (ESC), the Pan Asiatic League (PAL) and the South American Union (SAU).

Tomorrow the World by 3W was a point to point movement game based on Germany and Japan setting out to conquer the world.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 35
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/20/2016 11:28:44 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Would the insurrection during the War of Independence have been as widespread if the Continental Congress decided to sue for peace after Brandywine?

In the novel the US surrender is precipitated by two atomic bomb attacks that cause the US Government to sue for peace. Hearing that over the radio is a pretty big incentive to co-operate. I could understand the situation you're imagining if the government had taken the opposite tack - run for the Rockies and blast calls for insurrection all over the airways, but if you hear your government on the radio telling you that it's over, people tend to accept that it's over. August '45 in Japan is proof of that.



RE Brandywine, I don't know. There was far less cohesion as a nation at that time. As Shelby Foote said of the USA pre- and post Civil War, beforehand people spoke of "the United State are" and afterward "the United States is." The CC was pretty jury-rigged, comms were slow, and local government was given a lot more credence than central. Colonial support for the revolution differed markedly by region as well.

By 1940 that was very different. The premise of the novel demands a surrender for it to work, and I don't think one would have been forthcoming. If there had been one large swaths of the USA would have ignored it. Pearl Harbor was fairly like an atom bomb compared to peace, and Hawaii wasn't even a state. I think the ferocity of the US population would have been exponentially higher had two attacks taken place in CONUS. A president who surrendered would have been immediately impeached IMO.

For that matter, if London had fallen to Hitler would Churchill have ordered the Empire to surrender? I doubt it. And the island is tiny compared to the USA, and had far fewer weapons in private hands.

Using Japan 1945 as an argument doesn't work for either the USA of the British Empire. We don't worship our president as a god. Nor was Japan a continental power with deep natural resources and an armed population. Hence bamboo pikes on the invasion beaches.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 36
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/20/2016 11:30:57 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


Two atomic bombs, the Soviet invasion and a speech on the radio and it was all over. Bar a few isolated fanatics and the holdouts, the war ended pretty abruptly.


But the comparison is a January 1942 Japan surrendering, not a battered August 1945 version. No chance that early Japan gives up after two set-backs.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 37
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/20/2016 3:15:35 PM   
jamesjohns

 

Posts: 135
Joined: 12/2/2013
Status: offline
"Invasion America" I had that game also. Didn't they have "shock wave" attacks from China or South America option?

No way anyone gets past the one-man armies of Chuck Norris, Stallone, Arnold & Steven Seagal Just put one on the east coast, west coast, north and south borders!

I did read an Alt History book, can't recall the title but basically America never entered the war, or entered after the UK had been been defeated, and was set in the 60's??? Was basically a cold war between Germany and the US, seemed more possible.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 38
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/20/2016 3:28:29 PM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline
Back around the turn of the century, Wilhelm II was considering an invasion for force concessions with colonial holdings.

Yeah, I do have 1901 by Robert Conroy.

_____________________________


(in reply to jamesjohns)
Post #: 39
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/20/2016 5:14:44 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jamesjohns

"Invasion America" I had that game also. Didn't they have "shock wave" attacks from China or South America option?

No way anyone gets past the one-man armies of Chuck Norris, Stallone, Arnold & Steven Seagal Just put one on the east coast, west coast, north and south borders!

I did read an Alt History book, can't recall the title but basically America never entered the war, or entered after the UK had been been defeated, and was set in the 60's??? Was basically a cold war between Germany and the US, seemed more possible.
warspite1

Fatherland?


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to jamesjohns)
Post #: 40
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/20/2016 5:59:32 PM   
jamesjohns

 

Posts: 135
Joined: 12/2/2013
Status: offline
Fatherland, that was it, thanks warspite1

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 41
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/20/2016 9:21:13 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
That was a gooooood book.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to jamesjohns)
Post #: 42
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/21/2016 4:40:11 AM   
pelthunter

 

Posts: 84
Joined: 2/14/2011
Status: offline
People speculate about Germany winning the war so much that they ignore the fact that USA is a fascist state in itself.

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 43
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/21/2016 4:43:28 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
Oh dear......

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to pelthunter)
Post #: 44
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/21/2016 4:46:01 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
Don't feed the troll.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 45
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/21/2016 4:46:56 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
Please refrain from commenting on modern politics. Matrix doesn't allow it.

Thank you,
Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 46
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/21/2016 5:26:24 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Don't feed the troll.
warspite1

Not really feeding him - just showing disdain in a 'I can't ignore such a childish remark but I cannot be bothered to waste any time on you either - sort of way.


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 47
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/21/2016 5:59:31 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline
Back to topic: "SS-GB" by Len Deighton comes to mind as a good book postulating a German Sea Lion victory.

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 48
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/21/2016 6:21:02 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody

Back to topic: "SS-GB" by Len Deighton comes to mind as a good book postulating a German Sea Lion victory.

Cheers,
CC
warspite1

+1

Strange - I only read SS-GB a couple of years before Fatherland, but unlike the Robert Harris novel, I cannot remember a thing about it. I do know I enjoyed it at the time - as it was this that got me into other Deighton books.

I should re-visit it but there are just toooo many books out there begging to be read for the first time.


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 49
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/21/2016 9:41:23 AM   
Leandros


Posts: 1740
Joined: 3/5/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1]Strange - I only read SS-GB a couple of years before Fatherland, but unlike the
Robert Harris novel, I cannot remember a thing about it. I do know I enjoyed it at the time - as it was this that
got me into other Deighton books.

Could it be a case of "total denial"".......Maybe I should read it? I just bought Leo McInstry's "Operation
Sealion" (strange how dully all those books are named), but it was simply too much of the "good" so I've never finished it.
Yes, I'll give it another try.

But, please don't let this derail into another Sea Lion discussion.....

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1]I should re-visit it but there are just toooo many books out there begging to be read for the first time.


So true...


_____________________________

River Wide, Ocean Deep - a book on Operation Sea Lion - www.fredleander.com
Saving MacArthur - a book series on how The Philippines were saved - in 1942! https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07D34QCWQ/?ie=UTF8&redirect=true&ref=series_rw_dp_labf

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 50
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/21/2016 11:24:27 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jamesjohns

Fatherland, that was it, thanks warspite1


I remember the movie of this after I read the book. I think Rutger Hauer was the lead. Don't know if it was theatrical or made-for-TV. I remember it following the book pretty closely.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to jamesjohns)
Post #: 51
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/21/2016 3:33:22 PM   
pontiouspilot


Posts: 1127
Joined: 7/27/2012
Status: offline
"Fatherland"..both book and movie very good.

The premise here is far fetched. One of the great US conservative idles, (not spelled wrong), Newt, wrote 1 or 2 novels with the same premise. My recollection is that Len Deighton is a much better writer of such things!!

I wouldn't place much weight on a flock of partisans. Partisans may make an occupation painful but they would not determine the military outcome....at least not against a ruthless enemy. To think that US partisans would have been any more effective than anybody else's is the sort of myth that makes a Patrick Swayze movie and not much else.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 52
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/21/2016 6:12:37 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

"Fatherland"..both book and movie very good.

The premise here is far fetched. One of the great US conservative idles, (not spelled wrong), Newt, wrote 1 or 2 novels with the same premise. My recollection is that Len Deighton is a much better writer of such things!!

I wouldn't place much weight on a flock of partisans. Partisans may make an occupation painful but they would not determine the military outcome....at least not against a ruthless enemy. To think that US partisans would have been any more effective than anybody else's is the sort of myth that makes a Patrick Swayze movie and not much else.


We'll agree to disagree in a nation as large as the US and with a population as small as Germany's.

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 1/21/2016 7:13:56 PM >


_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to pontiouspilot)
Post #: 53
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/21/2016 7:09:42 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

Could it be a case of "total denial"".......Maybe I should read it? I just bought Leo McInstry's "Operation
Sealion" (strange how dully all those books are named), but it was simply too much of the "good" so I've never finished it.
Yes, I'll give it another try.

But, please don't let this derail into another Sea Lion discussion.....


Hee hee, very good Leandros

Although this thread could – and indeed has - veered into other countries experience (UK, Japan) I have not brought up Sealion. Although two books have been mentioned that bring up a German victory in Europe, I did not bring up Sealion.

But you do bring up Sealion, and you give me the waggly finger warning me not to….

So please Leandros, no more bringing up Sealion please . Oh and please tell me why Sealion would be verboten but not The Heroes of Telemark? Jus' askin'.

I have no reason to be ‘in denial’ – I can enjoy Fatherland and SS-GB in the same way an American can enjoy TMITHC. It’s a bit of harmless fun – it does not mean the events depicted were possible.

As far as this topic is concerned, it’s a bit of a strange one that quickly went off at a tangent about partisans and stuff as if that was even relevant.

But anyway…. For the story to be true the US needs to have installed an isolationist President before the war (not impossible). Thereafter, as the Axis powers steamroller through Europe, no one in the US is clever enough to realise what Roosevelt understood all too well. But, it goes on - as the Japanese then roll up south-east Asia and then China, India, Australia, New Zealand and the Eastern Soviet Union, the US (and think of the personalities alive at that time) still buries its collective head in the sand and does nothing. As the knock-on effects of a Fascist victory starts to be felt firmly in many South American countries, the US still don’t react. Really? What has happened to the peoples of the US in this imaginary world?

Even if such a scenario was imaginable, and that involvement in overseas matters(!) is still not of interest to this strange administration (even when considering the nature of these regimes taking over the free world), is it really possible to believe that the US would not build up their own defences at least? Once the US put their mind to it, how quickly were carriers and battleships built? How quickly was the Manhattan Project brought to a successful conclusion? Even with a head start is Germany going to beat the US to the bomb?

And as for an amphibious landing? An amphibious landing! Against the US….. Er right……of course....

< Message edited by warspite1 -- 1/23/2016 5:37:53 AM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 54
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/21/2016 8:34:41 PM   
bomccarthy


Posts: 414
Joined: 9/6/2013
From: L.A.
Status: offline
Although not an account of an invasion/occupation, Philip Roth’s The Plot Against America (2004) presents an interesting alternative history based on an isolationist U.S. president. It posits Charles Lindbergh defeating FDR in the 1940 election on an isolationist platform. Lindbergh then proceeds to enter into an “accord” with the Nazi government to remain neutral, while implementing a “Jewish policy” in the U.S.

Roth tells the story from his own viewpoint as an adolescent growing up in an American Jewish family in Newark. It’s been over 10 years since I read it, so I don’t recall many of the story details, but it’s a fascinating take on the U.S. political and social environment in 1940. In the appendix, Roth provides details on his research, including Lindbergh’s personal papers (some of which Lindbergh excluded from the 1970 publication of his Wartime Journals).

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 55
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/21/2016 10:49:30 PM   
Leandros


Posts: 1740
Joined: 3/5/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1Hee hee, very good Leandros

Please don't overdo it now....

quote:

Oh and please tell me why Sealion would be verboten but not The Heroes of Telemark? Jus' askin'.

Gladly. It's because ******* is the mother of all derails. I simply haven't time for it, too busy "saving MaArthur"
these days. Hmm, Telemark.?...Could it be the nuclear connection?

Fred



_____________________________

River Wide, Ocean Deep - a book on Operation Sea Lion - www.fredleander.com
Saving MacArthur - a book series on how The Philippines were saved - in 1942! https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07D34QCWQ/?ie=UTF8&redirect=true&ref=series_rw_dp_labf

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 56
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/22/2016 4:21:13 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Leandros

quote:

Oh and please tell me why Sealion would be verboten but not The Heroes of Telemark? Jus' askin'.

Gladly. It's because ******* is the mother of all derails. I simply haven't time for it, too busy "saving MaArthur"
these days. Hmm, Telemark.?...Could it be the nuclear connection?

Fred


warspite1

Re Telemark - fair point.

Sealion - The mother of all de-rails? You clearly haven't been on this interweb thingy for very long Have you never heard of 'the 2nd Amendment', 'was Bismarck sunk or scuttled?' or 'which was better the Zero or the Sherman?'

I would have to say though that it is quite difficult to see how the Sealion operation could be brought into this discussion. Sure it was an invasion that never happened and of course, like the one in TMITHC, it was an impossible operation. But there the similarity ends and adds nothing to this discussion.

But to be clear, it was you - and only you - that brought Sealion up so there really was no need to bring up Sealion for the purposes of telling me not to bring up Sealion



_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Leandros)
Post #: 57
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/22/2016 9:56:31 AM   
Leandros


Posts: 1740
Joined: 3/5/2015
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Sealion - The mother of all de-rails? You clearly haven't been on this interweb thingy for very long Have you
never heard of 'the 2nd Amendment', 'was Bismarck sunk or scuttled?' or 'which was better the Zero or the
Sherman?'

Hmm...when did this interweb thingy start...?...I had my first PC in...was it 1980's something. A beautiful
machine - Dynabyte - US-made, of course. At that time everything was made in the US. The Norwegian distributor was
a friend of mine. It had the keyboard, disk drives and screen built together in a nice, "spacey"-looking cabinet.

Then came the MacIntosh Plus, a machine I acquired specifically for a magazine editor job. I hooked up a 20-inch
screen to it. Quite advanced at the time, actually, cost me a fortune! After that, back to the stone age with my
first 286-machine, MacIntosh was losing ground - too special.

No, don't think I've heard of that Bismarck problem. How could that be a discussion? If it didn't sink by enemy
action, surely a scuttling was caused by the same. I suppose there was no discussion whether Hood was sunk or
scuttled?

My reference for "mother of derails" was the TTTSNBN thread on Armchairgeneral.com. It went on for several
years with 15.000 postings. It was also very helpful for my book to put it all in perspective. A problem with all
******* discussions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1But to be clear, it was you - and only you - that brought Sealion up so there really
was no need to bring up Sealion or the purposes of telling me not to bring up Sealion

The wonderful last word. You can have it...

Fred



< Message edited by Leandros -- 1/22/2016 11:06:53 AM >


_____________________________

River Wide, Ocean Deep - a book on Operation Sea Lion - www.fredleander.com
Saving MacArthur - a book series on how The Philippines were saved - in 1942! https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07D34QCWQ/?ie=UTF8&redirect=true&ref=series_rw_dp_labf

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 58
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/22/2016 5:12:20 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Leandros

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Sealion - The mother of all de-rails? You clearly haven't been on this interweb thingy for very long Have you
never heard of 'the 2nd Amendment', 'was Bismarck sunk or scuttled?' or 'which was better the Zero or the
Sherman?'

Hmm...when did this interweb thingy start...?...I had my first PC in...was it 1980's something. A beautiful
machine - Dynabyte - US-made, of course. At that time everything was made in the US. The Norwegian distributor was
a friend of mine. It had the keyboard, disk drives and screen built together in a nice, "spacey"-looking cabinet.

Then came the MacIntosh Plus, a machine I acquired specifically for a magazine editor job. I hooked up a 20-inch
screen to it. Quite advanced at the time, actually, cost me a fortune! After that, back to the stone age with my
first 286-machine, MacIntosh was losing ground - too special.

No, don't think I've heard of that Bismarck problem. How could that be a discussion? If it didn't sink by enemy
action, surely a scuttling was caused by the same. I suppose there was no discussion whether Hood was sunk or
scuttled?

My reference for "mother of derails" was the TTTSNBN thread on Armchairgeneral.com. It went on for several
years with 15.000 postings. It was also very helpful for my book to put it all in perspective. A problem with all
******* discussions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1But to be clear, it was you - and only you - that brought Sealion up so there really
was no need to bring up Sealion or the purposes of telling me not to bring up Sealion

The wonderful last word. You can have it...

Fred


warspite1

quote:

The wonderful last word. You can have it...


Thank-you

quote:

No, don't think I've heard of that Bismarck problem. How could that be a discussion? If it didn't sink by enemy action, surely a scuttling was caused by the same.


You'd be surprised how many don't understand that concept....

quote:

I suppose there was no discussion whether Hood was sunk or scuttled?


Well no of course not. The mighty Hood was obviously scuttled

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Leandros)
Post #: 59
RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle&q... - 1/22/2016 5:49:08 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline
Just me, but instead of surprised I'd use words like confused, stunned or appalled.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Semi-OT: Reasons "The Man in the High Castle" couldn't happen Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.098