RE: The question to ask about The Italians (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

Buckrock -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (10/27/2020 6:50:26 PM)

Perhaps if you just continue on with reading Tooze, you may well answer your own questions. I'd love to see your review of the book. You can post it on the WitP AE forum, just like you do with other books you've read that have nothing to do with the Pacific War.[:'(]



warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (10/27/2020 8:02:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buckrock

Perhaps if you just continue on with reading Tooze, you may well answer your own questions.

warspite1

Well perhaps you've read the book and so know more than I about what is to come? However I'm now in 1934 and so I really don't understand how or why Tooze is going to revisit the 1920's later in the book to answer those questions. I asked those questions simply because UP844 seemed to suggest he understood the point. That is all [&:]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buckrock

I'd love to see your review of the book. You can post it on the WitP AE forum, just like you do with other books you've read that have nothing to do with the Pacific War [:'(].

warspite1

I don't really understand the need for that. Maybe you refer to the thread about In Passage Perillous. You know, the thread started in the WITP-AE forum by an American, long-time poster on that forum, who used the book to enquire about the Regia Marina in WWII? Clearly someone was interested in that thread as it had over 26,000 hits - more than most threads in that forum.

Funny isn't it? Have a glance at that forum - have a look at how many OT threads there are; OT not just because they are not about the Pacific War, but OT because they aren't even about the war. But you seem to be making a point about books I've mentioned that are to do with WWII but that aren't to do with the Pacific War on the WITP-AE thread? Why?




Buckrock -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (10/28/2020 9:22:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Well perhaps you've read the book and so know more than I about what is to come? However I'm now in 1934 and so I really don't understand how or why Tooze is going to revisit the 1920's later in the book to answer those questions. I asked those questions simply because UP844 seemed to suggest he understood the point. That is all [&:]

It's been some time since I read Tooze but I'd still highly recommend you read it (as you appear to be doing anyway).

I didn't think he specifically blamed either the US or the UK for the path Germany took, rather he just noted that their own nationalistic approaches to economic problems (including the dropping of the gold standard) ended any immediate opportunity for international financial and economic co-operation to be the way out for many of the other struggling countries at the time.

What he should have said was that Churchill was to blame for re-introducing the gold standard for the english pound in the first place during the 1920s.[:'(]

quote:


I don't really understand the need for that. Maybe you refer to the thread about In Passage Perillous. You know, the thread started in the WITP-AE forum by an American, long-time poster on that forum, who used the book to enquire about the Regia Marina in WWII? Clearly someone was interested in that thread as it had over 26,000 hits - more than most threads in that forum.

And how many of those hits were you making multiple re-writes of your posts until they achieved literary perfection.[:'(]

quote:


Funny isn't it? Have a glance at that forum - have a look at how many OT threads there are; OT not just because they are not about the Pacific War, but OT because they aren't even about the war. But you seem to be making a point about books I've mentioned that are to do with WWII but that aren't to do with the Pacific War on the WITP-AE thread? Why?

No need for all this sudden seriousness given the nature of my original comment. The AE forum is open to all. The topics there are primarily but not exclusively about the game and the theatre. You are always free to post there about some book you've read or intend to read or wish to share your review of. It's just disappointing that you picked the wrong theatre to be so fascinated about.

Pacific Rules!



warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (10/29/2020 8:01:36 AM)

I am continuing with the book - it is an interesting read. Glad to see the dig at Churchill - I don't expect any WWII conversation to last more than 5 minutes without a dig at Churchill or Montgomery so I was starting to feel a little off balance. So equalibrium restored [:'(]

Obviously no one could be interested in the Med War so I suspect 26,000 of those 26,200 hits were mine....

I am interested in all naval warfare in WWII. The 'problem' if one can call it that, with the Pacific is that apart from some of 1942, the thing was so one-sided and so there is a lessening of interest from that point of view.



Buckrock -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (10/29/2020 10:24:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Glad to see the dig at Churchill - I don't expect any WWII conversation to last more than 5 minutes without a dig at Churchill or Montgomery so I was starting to feel a little off balance. So equalibrium restored [:'(]

What goes around, comes around. You slighted the great man's reputation earlier when you outrageously suggested he would willfully ignore the objections of the CoS to get his way. I naturally leapt to his defense.

So I thought it only fair to give you the same opportunity.

quote:


I am interested in all naval warfare in WWII. The 'problem' if one can call it that, with the Pacific is that apart from some of 1942, the thing was so one-sided and so there is a lessening of interest from that point of view.

"Some of 1942"? Without writing an essay length answer for you, I'd point out that even in 1943, very few of the dozen naval clashes that occurred in the Pacific during that year would qualify as "one-sided". The USN's superiority over the IJN was building through this period but it would not translate into anything like "one sided" naval warfare until 1944.

Anyway, when is your hypothesis on a German Med strategy going to move beyond the start line. I'm getting tired of regularly having to come all the way over to the General Forums just to check its pulse.



warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (11/1/2020 9:25:36 AM)

I suspect that there were one of two individual battles that weren't victories for the US. But that is not what I meant. Even those that were such, were not key battles that meant anything really in terms of the overall war.

I would love to hear from you on why you think that is wrong - and if you were to write an essay length piece, I would not make comment on my lap top battery or suggest you are drowning me with verbiage (not one of yours) but would instead welcome your thoughts on why you believe that comment was false.




Buckrock -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (11/1/2020 12:33:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I suspect that there were one of two individual battles that weren't victories for the US. But that is not what I meant. Even those that were such, were not key battles that meant anything really in terms of the overall war.

I was responding to your amusing "one-sided...except for some of 1942" comment regarding naval warfare in the Pacific. If instead you meant the study of WWII naval warfare in the Pacific is of limited interest simply because Japan was always fated to lose against the power of the US in the long run, then I'll happily leave that one to you.

quote:


I would love to hear from you on why you think that is wrong - and if you were to write an essay length piece, I would not make comment on my lap top battery or suggest you are drowning me with verbiage (not one of yours) but would instead welcome your thoughts on why you believe that comment was false.

If I were to do that in this particular thread, I'd just be adding a fresh cherry topping to an otherwise old and very smelly sandwich. About the only purpose I can see for this thread now is to perhaps justify all the previous verbiage by establishing once and for all through the balance of historical probabilities what the most likely timeline was for Germany to conduct a Med strategy and where it would end up.

Or perhaps simply start a new thread for that specific purpose and leave this one's baggage behind.

Either way, I'm here waiting to be dazzled like the HMS Warspite's camouflage during a RN Pride Month.[:)]



warspite1 -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (11/1/2020 7:12:05 PM)

I'm not too sure what any further additions on the timeline would add here. There was only one person who thought that a summer of 1940 (July!) timeline was ever possible. Indeed I can't recall any other contributors - and certainly not myself - believing that the Germans would ever have contemplated invading Spain. As such, and with the proposer of the "draft study" gone, there is not much in the way of motivation to continue with further comment other than what has already been suggested. Even if not just one hurdle - a Med first strategy - is overcome, but then a second - Hitler invades Spain - then I still don't see such an invasion much before real life Felix.

If others wish to add further comment then they of course can do so.




Buckrock -> RE: The question to ask about The Italians (11/2/2020 5:25:49 AM)

quote:

Previously on warspite1

And so now, for the first time, with France being routed and a Mediterranean front opened up, I think its the very earliest opportunity for any consideration to be given to Gibraltar.

But given the personalities involved, given the way Hitler and Mussolini work, what is possible here? (Remember the only key alteration at this point is that Hitler can and will be persuaded to adopt a Med-first strategy. But how, realistically could this have come about?

- When?
- From whom?
- What about Spain?

Remember to that at this point, Italy has simply entered the war and Germany do not yet know what France will do.....So from 10th June 1940 how does the early summer pan out?

quote:

Currently on warspite1

I'm not too sure what any further additions on the timeline would add here. There was only one person who thought that a summer of 1940 (July!) timeline was ever possible. Indeed I can't recall any other contributors - and certainly not myself - believing that the Germans would ever have contemplated invading Spain.

From what I saw, there was no detailed effort to address the questions you set out other than "Nah, it just wouldn't have happened, lets move on". I didn't realize it was that easy to shut down one of your hypotheticals. Must remember that for the future.

Anyway, what a gyp. I even bought popcorn and chose a seat up front. This European Theater sucks. Where's the manager!!!



Page: <<   < prev  44 45 46 47 [48]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.890625