RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

tsimmonds -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 12:42:45 AM)

I like playing the Axis because of the cool-lookin' hardware. Seriously, these are some elegant designs. To wit:

PzKwV
Fw190
Ta152
Bismarck
Various Italian fighters
Scharnhorst
Littorio
Giuseppi Garibaldi
(and who can resist a radar apparatus named "Gufo" (owl)?
Zero
Tony
Mavis
Emily
Shokaku
Taiho
Yamato
Atago
Mogami
Tone
Yugumo
Shimakaze
Akitsuki
I15
and so on....



Damien Thorn -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 12:48:24 AM)

I saw on a preview for tonight's show that they have a picture (or statue) of 5 of the 6 men who commanded those midget subs in a meusem in Japan. The only one who's picture is not there is the one who survived and was captured. It shows that things haven't changed much from the days of "die with honor". Poor guy. It's not his fault his boat broke down.



olivier_slith -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 1:09:36 AM)

Thanks for the note Damien. Although I agree with you about the Bolsheviks, may be that the Nazis would have been unbeatable if they had managed to stay in Russia. May be you're right about the ancestry. I'm from French ancestry and I enjoy playing Napoleon (even though I realize he destroyed France's supremacy in manpower in Europe from which France never recovered) and hate playing Daladier.



carnifex -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 2:45:50 AM)

quote:

But I don't know why Americans find jerry to be particularly intriguing and even appealing. It's a mystery to me.


I'll tell you why.

Or rather I will show you:

Not Dangerous
[image]http://www.infopackets.com/graphics/sherman+tank.gif[/image]

Extremely Dangerous
[image]http://www.tiger-tank.com/secure/photos/preprod_sm.jpg[/image]

No Hat! Bald Head!
[image]http://www.germanheritage.com/biographies/atol/eisenhower.jpg[/image]

Super Hat!
[image]http://www.brienne1779.com/img/rommel.jpg[/image]

Hope this helps you understand [:D]



Caltone -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 2:48:54 AM)

ROFL agreed [:D][:D]



rogueusmc -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 8:23:54 AM)

That bald head beat 'em though...[:D]



Onime No Kyo -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 8:33:54 AM)

quote:

Super Hat!


...and you can't forget about his cool goggles.

Ancestry plays a role, sure. I'm Russian and there is certainly something endearing about T-34s. I see WW2 footage from the Russian front of Russian POWs and think that one of them may be my uncle who went MIA in '43.

But I think that the facination with the Wehrmacht revolves around the fact that they were the only truly professional army going at that time. Not the US, not the Russians, not even the Tommies (god bless em) could match that level of competence. You're talking about an army that managed to hold off the Russians for 3 years at something like a 2 to 1 inferiority at best.

The facination with the Japanese is the unfathomable kamikaze effect IMHO. We are stunned by the mere idea of a banzai charge. I mean, were talking "Starship Troopers" here. We have the same facination with the Chinese in regards to the Korean War.

At least that's what I think it is.



rogueusmc -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 5:13:32 PM)

As for the war with Germany...if the people in charge in Germany had been as intelligent as the people fighting the war, It would be a different history.
If it had been left to the Wehrmacht and the Luftwaffe to run the war, at least a good portion of Europe would have German as their official language.
The Wehrmacht and the Luftwaffe, for the most part, were very honorable and respectable warriors.



vonmoltke -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 5:18:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rogueusmc

As for the war with Germany...if the people in charge in Germany had been as intelligent as the people fighting the war, It would be a different history.
If it had been left to the Wehrmacht and the Luftwaffe to run the war, at least a good portion of Europe would have German as their official language.
The Wehrmacht and the Luftwaffe, for the most part, were very honorable and respectable warriors.

Sometimes I wonder how World War II would have been different had Germany's resurgence been led by a group representative of the old Prussian order rather than the Nazis.



carnifex -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 5:21:10 PM)

You mean like the old Prussian order that ran things during World War I? [:D]



gts2096 -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 5:27:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rogueusmc

As for the war with Germany...if the people in charge in Germany had been as intelligent as the people fighting the war, It would be a different history.
If it had been left to the Wehrmacht and the Luftwaffe to run the war, at least a good portion of Europe would have German as their official language.
The Wehrmacht and the Luftwaffe, for the most part, were very honorable and respectable warriors.


SOOOooooo true, at least from all the books i've read and i've read most of them........[:D]



rogueusmc -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 5:27:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: carnifex

You mean like the old Prussian order that ran things during World War I? [:D]

Point taken...the people figured that they did so bad, that an Austrian Corporal could do better...[:D]



TF 38 -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 5:51:54 PM)

Several years ago, 60 MINUTES aired a story detailing improper thought on the part of the editors of a student publication, the DARTMOUTH REVIEW. The stories talent, Ed Bradley, visited the dorm room of one of the offending students and noticed a book about the Waffen SS. This was proof enough for Ed, the CBS producers and likely much of the American public. The case was closed, symbolically in this instance, but also the American mind as relates to so many enlightening aspects of military history.

TF 38



MengCiao -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 5:59:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: carnifex

quote:

But I don't know why Americans find jerry to be particularly intriguing and even appealing. It's a mystery to me.


I'll tell you why.

Or rather I will show you:

Not Dangerous
[image]http://www.infopackets.com/graphics/sherman+tank.gif[/image]

Extremely Dangerous
[image]http://www.tiger-tank.com/secure/photos/preprod_sm.jpg[/image]

No Hat! Bald Head!
[image]http://www.germanheritage.com/biographies/atol/eisenhower.jpg[/image]

Super Hat!
[image]http://www.brienne1779.com/img/rommel.jpg[/image]

Hope this helps you understand [:D]


Well...when I started playing war games 35 years ago that was the
deal. Now it seems to me that, having talked to people who fought in
Shermans against Tigers (this guy, the intelligence officer for the 6th
Armored) said "We knew where they were and we had gas and they did not." -- anyway, I no longer see things with the simpler, purer glories of
youth and in the light of experience and in the aftermath of being bored with jerry's superficial charms -- I find the allies more intriguing. After all, surely the guys who won with "inferior" stuff must have had a more
complex and interesting way of dealing with things. And sometimes they
even had cool hats.



Damien Thorn -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 6:01:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TF 38

Several years ago, 60 MINUTES aired a story detailing improper thought on the part of the editors of a student publication, the DARTMOUTH REVIEW. The stories talent, Ed Bradley, visited the dorm room of one of the offending students and noticed a book about the Waffen SS. This was proof enough for Ed, the CBS producers and likely much of the American public. The case was closed, symbolically in this instance, but also the American mind as relates to so many enlightening aspects of military history.

TF 38


The thought police are here. [:@] 60 minutes is just another left-wing biased show on one of the libral networks. Only Fox News is fair and balanced.

So, did anybody actually watch the show last night? I missed it. Did they find the sub?



UncleBuck -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 6:01:57 PM)

If my reading room were ever raided am sure I would be in Deep trouble. I have two copies of Catcher in the Rye, a dog eared paperback from High school, and a Leather Bound version I got at an estate sale. I have an Anarchist cookbook and Books by Guderian, Patton and Rommel. I have a copy of Mein Kampf and lots of Clausowitz and Nitzche. Some others are The Framing and Ratification of the Constitution by Levy and Mahoney, The Trial of Peter Zenger by James Alexander, Jefferson and Madison by Koch, the Framing and The Fathers of the U.S. Constitution by Max Farrand, Two treatises on Government by John Locke, Democracy in America by Alexis de Tocqueville, George Washington by Woodrow Wilson, and the Declaration of Independence by Becker as well as others. I also have a copy of the US Constitution, Bill of Rights and US Code. We won't even get into the books on 500B.C. to 1700 time frame lol.

Yes I fear the re-education camps. It was hard work to read all that stuff and fight the professors.

UB



UncleBuck -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 6:04:48 PM)

Yeah they found the sub. it was a re-run of the show they had back in 2003 or 2002. They actually found it in 2002. Just outside of the Security Zone. It had a neat 4" hole in the conning tower right where the Ward said she hit it. Of Course the underlying theme was that the U.S. actually started teh war since we Technically fired the first shot. [8|] Just more of the insidious BLame America crowd. BTW they found the sub 2 miles off out of the Mouth of PH Channel.

UB



rogueusmc -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 6:13:09 PM)

It was found in 2002 I believe...it was a good show though.

The only thing I didn't like is the fact that they kept saying how the popular opinion is that the Ward sailors were talking story and didn't really see a sub. I've always seen it stated as fact in everything I have read. If guys like that say something is so, you give them the respect enough do believe them.



Damien Thorn -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 6:22:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: UncleBuck
Of Course the underlying theme was that the U.S. actually started teh war since we Technically fired the first shot. [8|] Just more of the insidious BLame America crowd. BTW they found the sub 2 miles off out of the Mouth of PH Channel.

UB



Well, 2 miles is within US waters so the Ward was justified in sinking it.



UncleBuck -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 6:42:49 PM)

Yeah I know, I know. They were not supposed to be there period. As for beleving teh WARD crew, I woudl think trained observers and Gun spotters should be taken as fact. They do it with other trained observers. I have never read it anywhere else that the sub was "CLaimed" but it was always fact. Regardless of what we now know, on Dec. 7th, the OOD should have run up the Aww S*&T flag when any warship reported an un-friendly sub in the security area and FIRED on it.

UB



rogueusmc -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 6:48:24 PM)

Agreed...hindsight is always 20/20 though



rogueusmc -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 6:58:05 PM)

quote:

They actually found it in 2002. Just outside of the Security Zone.

That's just where it settled on the bottom...It was well into the zone when it was hit.



UncleBuck -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 7:10:54 PM)

Right, I was just mentioning it was just outside, but was within 2 miles of PH Main CHannel. The fact it was outside of the Security ZOne, where it finally rested, is why it wasn't found before now. No one had ever looked outside of the ZOne.

UB



MengCiao -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 7:25:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rogueusmc

It was found in 2002 I believe...it was a good show though.

The only thing I didn't like is the fact that they kept saying how the popular opinion is that the Ward sailors were talking story and didn't really see a sub. I've always seen it stated as fact in everything I have read. If guys like that say something is so, you give them the respect enough do believe them.


I imagine the HC wanted to make it more sensational so they reported
a lot of scepticism about the observation of the sub that did not actually
exist...so that HC could build suspense etc. etc.



SunDevil_MatrixForum -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 7:28:10 PM)

I really did not like the show that much, they really did not focus on the history, but just seemed to use so much theory and fiction that when they finally found the sub, there was like 2 minutes left in the show. I much rather of seen a show that showed the sub at the bottom of the ocean in the beginning and then just told the history and events of what happened. Would that of been so hard or uninteresting?



MengCiao -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 7:47:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SunDevil

I really did not like the show that much, they really did not focus on the history, but just seemed to use so much theory and fiction that when they finally found the sub, there was like 2 minutes left in the show. I much rather of seen a show that showed the sub at the bottom of the ocean in the beginning and then just told the history and events of what happened. Would that of been so hard or uninteresting?


It would have been fine. And why not explain a lot about the sub and the
theory of its operations?

The basic HC script pours an amazing amount of vacuous sensationalization over things to the point of virtually excluding the topic from consideration in a frenzy of "but the real story is more incredible than what really happened" verbiage.

Anyone in this forum could do a better script than the average HC script.



rogueusmc -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 8:07:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MengCiao


Anyone in this forum could do a better script than the average HC script.

I don't know if I could...my script wouldn't have had the cool Aussie accent in it...[:D]

What is it with all the narrators for stuff like this are either Brit or Aussie? Even for American history stuff it's like that...nothing against Brits or Aussies...just a question.



vonmoltke -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 8:13:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: carnifex

You mean like the old Prussian order that ran things during World War I? [:D]

I will not defend Willie the Deuce, not von Moltke the Putz. [:'(]

The conduct and perception of the war would have been much different, though, even if the quality of the leadership was just as poor as the first time.



MengCiao -> RE: History Channel Monday 9pm EST (8/3/2004 8:44:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rogueusmc

quote:

ORIGINAL: MengCiao


Anyone in this forum could do a better script than the average HC script.

I don't know if I could...my script wouldn't have had the cool Aussie accent in it...[:D]

What is it with all the narrators for stuff like this are either Brit or Aussie? Even for American history stuff it's like that...nothing against Brits or Aussies...just a question.



When I was a kid, Walter Krankheit narrated "the 20th Century" which was mosty WWII newsreels. It was a hell of a lot better than HC...after
a decade of America's HC no American thinks an American could possibly know what he's talking about. "Just look at what we've been watching. After all that crap about how what really happened was stranger than what really happened how could we possibly form a rational thought, much less a believable narrative?"



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.46875