| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Was Sealion ever possible to carry out?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Was Sealion ever possible to carry out?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Apr 2012 at 05:07
Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:

I don't believe I said anything about German paras invading anywhere. Their mission would be to hold and secure a couple of airports and sea ports. If anyone thinks the Australians and New Zealanders were a pushover in Crete they are very much mistaken. The Australians and New Zealanders were the very best the allies had.
You said the British army had just had 'its butt' handed to it. What you seem incapable for some reason of seeing is that the 'British army' in ww1 and ww2 included the Commonwealth contingents. In fact the Commonwealth forces in Crete were commanded by a New Zealander, and the force consisted, in active personnel, of one New Zealand division, minus a brigade, an Australian brigade group, and a British brigade. That's the army you were saying had its 'butt handed to it'.
 
In fact of course the whole thing was as closely run as any other campaign of the war.

 
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Apr 2012 at 06:15
Northman. The British Army had it's butt handed to it when the Wehrmacht ran you out of France and into the English Channel. This is what you thought could now take on German paras, and the Wehrmacht What were ya'al about to fight with? The home guard? To put an already defeated army up against the Germans would have been nothing short of lunacy.

The Australians and New Zealanders were the very best you had. There were not enough of them. You must be aware that Australians, Canadians, then the Americans, were aghast at how puny the average Brit soldier was. I think between wars you must have been harvesting veggies with a screwdriver. On his best day an Englishman was no match for the regular Wehrmacht, let alone German paras.
May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 08 Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 5000
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Apr 2012 at 06:43
You have no idea about what happened in France in 1940 do you Buck?
 
The British contribution to the battle of France was actually quite significant. It was the French army (which compromised 90% of all allied forces) that was defeated first in Sedan and then in Belgium (the tank battle of Hannut). The BEF succeeded in reaching its lines at Leuven and successfully defended them. The German success at Hannut, Rommel's advance on Namur and Guderian's breakout meant that the entire combined Franco British force was outflanked and threatened with encirclement. The French had the overall command and screwed things royally forcing the British to decide to evacuate.
 
After France fell Germany was in no shape ready to conquere Monte Carlo let alone conquere Britain. It took 200k casualties, it was thinly stretched and still had nearly 1 million armed Frenchmen and 4000 modern French planes (yes, believe it or not two thirds of all the French air force never left its southern bases) who were not happy with the humiliation and would join the fight. 
 
Also the claim that British forces had no arms and left most its equipment in France is as recent research proved completely wrong and was more of a WWII propaganda than reality. Britain lost alot of equipment yes but it still succeeded in fully arming 1 million men by the end of 1940. Again British war production was much greater than German one and accelerated after France.
 
One final point about English soldiers, Hitler and most of his generals considered the British soldier, not the Frenchmen nor the Americans, as the second greatest foe after the Russians, indeed some generals even put them ahead of the Russians. In Normandy the SS was depolyed against the 1st British army while the Americans faced savagely mauled wehmarcht divisions made up of old reservists and new conscripts. Plus in operation Varsity the British paras faced the German paras in battle. Guess who won?
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Paradigm of Humanity View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2011
Location: Konstantiniyye
Status: Offline
Points: 919
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paradigm of Humanity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Apr 2012 at 07:23
As war for Americans usually goes like "bomb the hill to reduce few 'feets' of its height, than attack with an overhelming force/firepower"... They will unlikely understand how much British cunning was... Cunning as they bring you to river and when you return, you will be still thirsty. Geek

Edited by Paradigm of Humanity - 04 Apr 2012 at 07:25
Back to Top
Birddog View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 386
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Birddog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Apr 2012 at 07:47
Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:

Northman. The British Army had it's butt handed to it when the Wehrmacht ran you out of France and into the English Channel. This is what you thought could now take on German paras, and the Wehrmacht What were ya'al about to fight with? The home guard? To put an already defeated army up against the Germans would have been nothing short of lunacy.

The Australians and New Zealanders were the very best you had. There were not enough of them. You must be aware that Australians, Canadians, then the Americans, were aghast at how puny the average Brit soldier was. I think between wars you must have been harvesting veggies with a screwdriver. On his best day an Englishman was no match for the regular Wehrmacht, let alone German paras.
 
 
And the Australians were in general very impressed with the courage, professionalism and discipline of the British army. Not always impressed with British High Command, but with the fighting battalons, very impressed.  
Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Apr 2012 at 11:32
Originally posted by Birddog Birddog wrote:

Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:

Northman. The British Army had it's butt handed to it when the Wehrmacht ran you out of France and into the English Channel. This is what you thought could now take on German paras, and the Wehrmacht What were ya'al about to fight with? The home guard? To put an already defeated army up against the Germans would have been nothing short of lunacy.

The Australians and New Zealanders were the very best you had. There were not enough of them. You must be aware that Australians, Canadians, then the Americans, were aghast at how puny the average Brit soldier was. I think between wars you must have been harvesting veggies with a screwdriver. On his best day an Englishman was no match for the regular Wehrmacht, let alone German paras.
 
 
And the Australians were in general very impressed with the courage, professionalism and discipline of the British army. Not always impressed with British High Command, but with the fighting battalons, very impressed.  

That would include those stalwart Australians that the British surrendered to the Japanese in Singapore? Between that and Churchill refusing to send back an Australian division when Australia was under threat from the Japanese, were among the events that turned Australia to a more reliable ally post war.
May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Apr 2012 at 11:36
Originally posted by Paradigm of Humanity Paradigm of Humanity wrote:

As war for Americans usually goes like "bomb the hill to reduce few 'feets' of its height, than attack with an overhelming force/firepower"... They will unlikely understand how much British cunning was... Cunning as they bring you to river and when you return, you will be still thirsty. Geek

Aye...aye...tis naught but the truth.....aye tis...kelvah is tha inglish folks...aye aye.....

If an American took you down to river. You would return with your thirst gone, and fish in your pockets.
May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
Birddog View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 386
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Birddog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Apr 2012 at 11:49
Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:

Originally posted by Birddog Birddog wrote:

Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:

Northman. The British Army had it's butt handed to it when the Wehrmacht ran you out of France and into the English Channel. This is what you thought could now take on German paras, and the Wehrmacht What were ya'al about to fight with? The home guard? To put an already defeated army up against the Germans would have been nothing short of lunacy.

The Australians and New Zealanders were the very best you had. There were not enough of them. You must be aware that Australians, Canadians, then the Americans, were aghast at how puny the average Brit soldier was. I think between wars you must have been harvesting veggies with a screwdriver. On his best day an Englishman was no match for the regular Wehrmacht, let alone German paras.
 
 
And the Australians were in general very impressed with the courage, professionalism and discipline of the British army. Not always impressed with British High Command, but with the fighting battalons, very impressed.  

That would include those stalwart Australians that the British surrendered to the Japanese in Singapore? Between that and Churchill refusing to send back an Australian division when Australia was under threat from the Japanese, were among the events that turned Australia to a more reliable ally post war.
 
I did say not always with the British High Command. Australians have not always been impressed with American High Command either, and not always impressed with American troops for that matter.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Apr 2012 at 12:24
Originally posted by Birddog Birddog wrote:

Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:

Originally posted by Birddog Birddog wrote:

Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:

Northman. The British Army had it's butt handed to it when the Wehrmacht ran you out of France and into the English Channel. This is what you thought could now take on German paras, and the Wehrmacht What were ya'al about to fight with? The home guard? To put an already defeated army up against the Germans would have been nothing short of lunacy.

The Australians and New Zealanders were the very best you had. There were not enough of them. You must be aware that Australians, Canadians, then the Americans, were aghast at how puny the average Brit soldier was. I think between wars you must have been harvesting veggies with a screwdriver. On his best day an Englishman was no match for the regular Wehrmacht, let alone German paras.
 
 
And the Australians were in general very impressed with the courage, professionalism and discipline of the British army. Not always impressed with British High Command, but with the fighting battalons, very impressed.  

That would include those stalwart Australians that the British surrendered to the Japanese in Singapore? Between that and Churchill refusing to send back an Australian division when Australia was under threat from the Japanese, were among the events that turned Australia to a more reliable ally post war.
 
I did say not always with the British High Command. Australians have not always been impressed with American High Command either, and not always impressed with American troops for that matter.


For the record, let's differentiate the type of soldiers the US produced from civilians back then with very few professionals then too train them, plus an imbalanced force e.g. more specialists and not enough infantry men; As compared to the volunteer force of today with far more career professionals of now & with a better balance of force.


Edited by Panther - 04 Apr 2012 at 12:25
Back to Top
Birddog View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 386
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Birddog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Apr 2012 at 12:54
Granted. The modern US Army is very professional and well equiped.
 
While their are reports of Australian soldiers not being impressed with the size of British Troops in both world wars, Australian soldiers have praised their fighting quilities. I am just also pointing out while Australian troops have admired the enthusiasim of US troops, their tactical abilties have been called into question. The same can be said of Americans reporting on Australians.
 
 'MacArthur refused to have Australians on his staff, and disparaged their quality when queried by Washington.

Jeffery Gray "The Australian Army, Volume 1, Chapter 5 Page 141.

Back to Top
Paradigm of Humanity View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2011
Location: Konstantiniyye
Status: Offline
Points: 919
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paradigm of Humanity Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Apr 2012 at 12:58
Hey, they have a common thing; all soldiers are cheap! I don't see any difference.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Apr 2012 at 21:33
It's not uninteresting that ww2 saw revived the proverb current among British and (mutatis mutandis) German troops that went "When the British shoot, we duck; when we shoot the British duck; when the Americans shoot, everybody ducks."
 
I've seen appended "when the Italians shoot, nobody ducks" but I don't think that's part of the original saying.
 
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2012 at 01:23
Originally posted by Birddog Birddog wrote:

Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:

Originally posted by Birddog Birddog wrote:

Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:

Northman. The British Army had it's butt handed to it when the Wehrmacht ran you out of France and into the English Channel. This is what you thought could now take on German paras, and the Wehrmacht What were ya'al about to fight with? The home guard? To put an already defeated army up against the Germans would have been nothing short of lunacy.

The Australians and New Zealanders were the very best you had. There were not enough of them. You must be aware that Australians, Canadians, then the Americans, were aghast at how puny the average Brit soldier was. I think between wars you must have been harvesting veggies with a screwdriver. On his best day an Englishman was no match for the regular Wehrmacht, let alone German paras.
 
 
And the Australians were in general very impressed with the courage, professionalism and discipline of the British army. Not always impressed with British High Command, but with the fighting battalons, very impressed.  

That would include those stalwart Australians that the British surrendered to the Japanese in Singapore? Between that and Churchill refusing to send back an Australian division when Australia was under threat from the Japanese, were among the events that turned Australia to a more reliable ally post war.
 
I did say not always with the British High Command. Australians have not always been impressed with American High Command either, and not always impressed with American troops for that matter.

 Hard to impress aintcha.
May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2012 at 01:28
Originally posted by Birddog Birddog wrote:

Granted. The modern US Army is very professional and well equiped.
 
While their are reports of Australian soldiers not being impressed with the size of British Troops in both world wars, Australian soldiers have praised their fighting quilities. I am just also pointing out while Australian troops have admired the enthusiasim of US troops, their tactical abilties have been called into question. The same can be said of Americans reporting on Australians.
 
 'MacArthur refused to have Australians on his staff, and disparaged their quality when queried by Washington.

Jeffery Gray "The Australian Army, Volume 1, Chapter 5 Page 141.


MacArthur was a ham. Westmoreland said that the average Australian private would be an NCO in any other army in the world.


May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2012 at 01:33
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

It's not uninteresting that ww2 saw revived the proverb current among British and (mutatis mutandis) German troops that went "When the British shoot, we duck; when we shoot the British duck; when the Americans shoot, everybody ducks."
 
I've seen appended "when the Italians shoot, nobody ducks" but I don't think that's part of the original saying.
 

 A certain Austrian also said The British are a nation of shopkeepers. Now do you really want a list of British friendly fire that killed fellow Brits?
May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2012 at 05:27
Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:

 A certain Austrian also said The British are a nation of shopkeepers.
Let me take you by the hand and lead you gently back to sixth grade or wherever you dropped out and explain to you carefully that Napoleon was not an Austrian. He was born Corsican and Corsica became part of France, he served in the French army, and became ultimately Emperor of France.
 
But he was not Austrian.
Austria had its own Emperor.
 
And Wellington and Nelson, inter alia, soon enough demonstrated to Napoleon that he was just as wrong as you are.
Quote
Now do you really want a list of British friendly fire that killed fellow Brits?
Nope, because it would mean I had to go look ujp a longer list of US friendly fire incidents. Every army occasionally gets into trouble with friendly fire. But the proverb is the way that the front line soldiers saw it.
 
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2012 at 05:40

 A certain Austrian also said The British are a nation of shopkeepers.
Quote
Let me take you by the hand and lead you gently back to sixth grade or wherever you dropped out and explain to you carefully that Napoleon was not an Austrian. He was born Corsican and Corsica became part of France, he served in the French army, and became ultimately Emperor of France.
 
But he was not Austrian.
Austria had its own Emperor.

Graham *cough* Hitler and Nap were the same person? I knew I could learn from you.
May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
Birddog View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 386
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Birddog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2012 at 07:34
Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:


 A certain Austrian also said The British are a nation of shopkeepers.
Quote
Let me take you by the hand and lead you gently back to sixth grade or wherever you dropped out and explain to you carefully that Napoleon was not an Austrian. He was born Corsican and Corsica became part of France, he served in the French army, and became ultimately Emperor of France.
 
But he was not Austrian.
Austria had its own Emperor.

Graham *cough* Hitler and Nap were the same person? I knew I could learn from you.
 
It was said by Napoleon, and not by at Hitler, but I am ready to be stood corrected. Napoleon apparantly got the phrase from Adam Smiths "The Wealth of Nations".
 
 
Back to Top
Birddog View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 386
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Birddog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2012 at 07:50
Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:

Originally posted by Birddog Birddog wrote:

Granted. The modern US Army is very professional and well equiped.
 
While their are reports of Australian soldiers not being impressed with the size of British Troops in both world wars, Australian soldiers have praised their fighting quilities. I am just also pointing out while Australian troops have admired the enthusiasim of US troops, their tactical abilties have been called into question. The same can be said of Americans reporting on Australians.
 
 'MacArthur refused to have Australians on his staff, and disparaged their quality when queried by Washington.

Jeffery Gray "The Australian Army, Volume 1, Chapter 5 Page 141.


MacArthur was a ham. Westmoreland said that the average Australian private would be an NCO in any other army in the world.
 
 

Oh, Agreed MacArthur was a huge ham, a full rear end of a pig.

 

Unfortunately he was the Ham in charge of the South West Pacific, with his little Bataan gang that were so brilliant in Macs eyes they could not be replaced by inferior Australian Officers. The only senior officer on Mac’s staff was Blamey, the fat Australian Army Commander, who became Commander of Ground  Forces, (if and only the ground forces were not American). An atmosphere of contempt for the Australian soldier started at the top and went through all ranks, so American Officers would frequently ignore advice or even orders from battle experienced Australian Officers. Australians were accused of incompetence and cowardice in the face of the Japanese. American GIs were told they were going in to save the Australian Army. And the Australians Troops also got used to the fact that if the radio said it was a American Victory, it was true. If it was declared an Allied Victory, it meant they (the Australians) probably did it. So you can understand the Australian Soldiers soft spot for the Tommy. There was mutual respect for the others fighting abilities.



Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2012 at 08:59
Originally posted by Birddog Birddog wrote:

Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:

Originally posted by Birddog Birddog wrote:

Granted. The modern US Army is very professional and well equiped.
 
While their are reports of Australian soldiers not being impressed with the size of British Troops in both world wars, Australian soldiers have praised their fighting quilities. I am just also pointing out while Australian troops have admired the enthusiasim of US troops, their tactical abilties have been called into question. The same can be said of Americans reporting on Australians.
 
 'MacArthur refused to have Australians on his staff, and disparaged their quality when queried by Washington.

Jeffery Gray "The Australian Army, Volume 1, Chapter 5 Page 141.


MacArthur was a ham. Westmoreland said that the average Australian private would be an NCO in any other army in the world.
 
 

Oh, Agreed MacArthur was a huge ham, a full rear end of a pig.

 

Unfortunately he was the Ham in charge of the South West Pacific, with his little Bataan gang that were so brilliant in Macs eyes they could not be replaced by inferior Australian Officers. The only senior officer on Mac’s staff was Blamey, the fat Australian Army Commander, who became Commander of Ground  Forces, (if and only the ground forces were not American). An atmosphere of contempt for the Australian soldier started at the top and went through all ranks, so American Officers would frequently ignore advice or even orders from battle experienced Australian Officers. Australians were accused of incompetence and cowardice in the face of the Japanese. American GIs were told they were going in to save the Australian Army. And the Australians Troops also got used to the fact that if the radio said it was a American Victory, it was true. If it was declared an Allied Victory, it meant they (the Australians) probably did it. So you can understand the Australian Soldiers soft spot for the Tommy. There was mutual respect for the others fighting abilities.




I'm taking your word  on your post. I must say it's the first I ever heard of anyone criticizing the Australians. Consider the source if true. S@it rolls downhill.
May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2012 at 09:32


Hitler, who fancied himself an artist, labeled the British a "nation of shopkeepers"

http://samvak.tripod.com/pp168.html

But Hitler's respect for England had its limits. He also referred to der Englanders as that "nation of shopkeepers."

Source(s):
College world history teacher (American)

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081216110850AAu7nTO

No one was talking about Nap. It was about so called quotes from "Front line troops" British and German.
May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
Birddog View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 386
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Birddog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2012 at 09:33
Have at look at the Battle For Australia thread in the "Australia, South East Asia and Pacific" area. Lirelou went into the subject of Australian/US World War 2 in some detail a couple of years ago.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2012 at 21:13
Originally posted by Buckskins Buckskins wrote:

Hitler, who fancied himself an artist, labeled the British a "nation of shopkeepers"
What in the guy's entire CV makes you think he has any knowledge at all aout either history or economics. I don't think someone promotiing an e-book called Malignant Self Love (who isn't even a psychologist either) counts as an authority on history.
Quote
But Hitler's respect for England had its limits. He also referred to der Englanders as that "nation of shopkeepers."
Source(s):
College world history teacher (American)
Which is about as authoritative about history as it is about German grammar. You don't look at high school answers to get authoritative references.
 
Just put "nation of shopkeepers" into Google.
 
I took Napoleon, rather than Smith, because you obviously meant it in a derogatory way, as did Napoleon. Smith saw it rather as a compliment.
Quote
No one was talking about Nap. It was about so called quotes from "Front line troops" British and German.
No-one was talking about Hitler either.
 
Not the first time you have changed the subject, then complained someone responding to you was off topic.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Apr 2012 at 04:46
Anything you say Graham Thumbs Up
May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.