Speaking of WWI (and remembrance thereof, or not)

5,441 Views | 68 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by CanyonAg77
cbr
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:27a, 6/10/18
AG
Ww2 was too easy to,propagandize. It will always be well remembered.

Ww1, in the lense of perspective, was less ideological but was really one of the most momentous defining moments in human history.

It was the birth of 'communism' and the destruction of the west and western values that seems likely to be bringing a new dark ages.
Reply Quote
2
BigJim49 AustinNowDallas
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Apache • 2:12p, 6/10/18
AG
Apache said:
Wasn't this guy from Europe ?
BigJim49AustinnowDallas
Reply Quote
commando2004
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ja86 • 10:26p, 6/10/18
AG
ja86 said:
Irish_Man said:
I'm curious to know more about this.

What happened on that day before the guns went silent?
As was mentioned above, front line commanders continued to assault right up to 11 am.
An American soldier was shot dead at 10:59.
Reply Quote
2
Corporal Punishment
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to commando2004 • 7:22a, 6/11/18
AG
commando2004 said:
ja86 said:
Irish_Man said:
I'm curious to know more about this.

What happened on that day before the guns went silent?
As was mentioned above, front line commanders continued to assault right up to 11 am.
An American soldier was shot dead at 10:59.


Unforgivable:
Quote:
Subsequent investigations revealed that on the last day of World War I, between the beginning of the armistice negotiations in the railroad cars encampment at the Compiegne Forest, French commander-in-chief Marshal Foch refused to accede to the German negotiators' immediate request to declare a ceasefire or truce so that there would be no more useless waste of lives among the common soldiers. By not declaring a truce even between the signing of the documents for the Armistice and its entry into force, "at the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month", about 11,000 additional men were wounded or killed far more than usual, according to the military statistics.[12]
Reply Quote
2
aggiejim70
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:24p, 6/11/18
AG
Somewhere either side of 1970, when these old boys were in their 70's, the national convention of the Veterans of WWI was held at the Rice Hotel in Houston. A bellman comes up to a group of men including my granddad and asks them if they we all WWI vets. When they said yes, the bellman says he was too. When my granddad wants to sign him he tells him, I'm not sure you'd want me, I was in the German Army.

My other grandfather, my dad's father, was a 1st Sergeant in the Texas National Guard. He's getting his men on the ship to go to France in NYC when a motorcycle messenger comes down the dock,runs over my granddad and broke both his legs. If that hadn't happened, I wouldn't be here, as he met my grandmother while recuperating in an Austin hospital.
The person that is not willing to fight and die, if need be, for his country has no right to life.

James Earl Rudder '32
January 31, 1945
Reply Quote
2
commando2004
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Corporal Punishment • 7:43p, 6/11/18
AG
History Stack Exchange recently had an interesting discussion about this issue.

Why was World War I ended on Nov 11 11:00, rather than immediately upon signing the armistice?

The accepted answer is that communication was slow in those days, so it was necessary to give advance notice.
Reply Quote
1
et98
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:51p, 6/11/18
AG
This is a really interesting topic, and it's something I think about a lot, especially as a history teacher.

It's amazing what is remembered about history. Most people know nothing about current events before they were about 8 yrs old, so anything prior to this moment is history to you. It's not something you remembered, it's something that's remembered for you and taught to you. To simplify it as it's taught, each era/decade/time period is broken down into just a few events.

The farther away the time period, the fewer moments are taught and retained. The average young adult aged 25-35 knows nothing about 1918. I'd expect them to know only 1 thing about the entire decade of the 1910s...WWI. The only things they can probably recall about their studies of the war was that we won, it was in the trenches, we fought the Germans, and the British & French were our allies. Naming the Germans as our enemy and the French as our allies might actually be stretch, and naming any other countries would be nearly impossible. To expect the average young adult to know specific years, treaties, battles, generals, political leaders, etc would be way too much to ask.
Reply Quote
1
et98
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:57p, 6/11/18
AG
My students are already clueless about the various wars, battles, leaders, nations, & factions within the Middle East. Most think our problems in the Middle East started with 9/11. Most think that Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, Isis, Al Quaeda, the Taliban, and the governments of Afghanistan, Iraq, & Iran are all 1 big group of allies united against us.

Some of my students this past year were born within 12 months of 9/11 (some before, and some after). Obviously, none can remember it. It has more in common with Pearl Harbor, Fort Sumter, and Paul Revere's Ride than it does with anything happening today because it's just another story from history.
Reply Quote
et98
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:33p, 6/11/18
AG
September 11 will be a huge deal for the next 50 years or so, but it will go the way of the Lusitania and the USS Maine as soon as we are all dead.

The memory of Pearl Harbor, however, will live forever. I think it has more to do with WWII simply being more interesting than "The War on Terror."

In WWII, our biggest enemy was Hitler. He is intriguing to everyone, especially kids and teenagers who are the ones learning this information, because he's a real-life cartoon character. The way he looked, the way he spoke, his mannerisms, and of course what he did...no real human may ever be that intriguing again.

In WWII, the world was united against the Holocaust, the greatest atrocity known to man...at least since American has existed. The pictures & stories are things kids are still affected by today and likely always will.

WWII ended with the atomic bomb. While kids can no longer really relate to the fear of the Arms Race and the Cold War without us hammering the hell out of it, they all get the fact that the war ended with a devastation and destruction never known to man before or since. One day, we may see an even greater single event of war, but until we do, many more generations of teenagers will have this one stick out in their brains permanently.

The reality (arguably), is that Stalin was more evil than Hitler and killed more innocent people. The gulags were worse than the concentration camps. Conventional fighting would've killed more soldiers & civilians than the bomb. US entry into the war was inevitable within just a few months regardless of Pearl Harbor. But none of that is how it's remembered because WWII was intriguing.

WWII was the last truly traditional war. The good guys (Americans) vs. the bad guys. Soldiers in uniforms on both sides squared off against each other in battle. American Flags vs. Swastikas & Zeroes. 100% support from the country. Democrats & Republicans standing side-by-side in support of the war. Everyone was invested, even civilians. Rationing, women & minorities working in factories, war bonds, etc. It's all such a foreign concept to kids now, but they're mesmerized by it. The patriotism & heroism is enchanting to the boys in the class, and the girls find a certain romanticism about it all.

Nothing about the various Middle Eastern conflicts or the "War on Terror" is as memorable as WWII. Nothing as intriguing as WWII will ever happen again...and the students know it. It'll always be memorable. It will always overshadow WWI, and nothing that's happened after will be able to compare.

Reply Quote
5
et98
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:46p, 6/11/18
AG
Obama's presidency will be a major event in history class far into the future...even more than it is today. Since we are so close to it currently, we focus on the policy of the administration. But 100 years from now, it will be remembered only as one of the greatest milestones in the Civil Rights Movement...along side the Emancipation Proclamation, Integration, and gaining the right to vote. (Disclaimer - regardless if you think it should be remembered for this, it will be)

As of right now, I don't think anything about the Trump presidency will be remembered in 100 years. If something significant materializes from the obstruction of justice investigation resulting in an impeachment, that would change. Even if North Korea & South Korea kiss and make up, and Trump miraculously wins the Nobel Peace Prize in the process, it will merely be on par with Carter and the Camp David Accords. But none of the political theater that we see on a daily basis will be remembered, because it ultimately doesn't matter.
Reply Quote
1
who?mikejones
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to et98 • 7:55a, 6/12/18
AG
et98 said:
Obama's presidency will be a major event in history class far into the future...even more than it is today. Since we are so close to it currently, we focus on the policy of the administration. But 100 years from now, it will be remembered only as one of the greatest milestones in the Civil Rights Movement...along side the Emancipation Proclamation, Integration, and gaining the right to vote. (Disclaimer - regardless if you think it should be remembered for this, it will be)

As of right now, I don't think anything about the Trump presidency will be remembered in 100 years. If something significant materializes from the obstruction of justice investigation resulting in an impeachment, that would change. Even if North Korea & South Korea kiss and make up, and Trump miraculously wins the Nobel Peace Prize in the process, it will merely be on par with Carter and the Camp David Accords. But none of the political theater that we see on a daily basis will be remembered, because it ultimately doesn't matter.


Hypothetical solving of the Korea crisis I would be no big deal? A Nobel prize for a president who most thought wouldn't make it a year would be no big deal?

Take your tinted glasses off.
Reply Quote
2
commando2004
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to who?mikejones • 8:07a, 6/12/18
AG
who?mikejones said:
Hypothetical solving of the Korea crisis I would be no big deal? A Nobel prize for a president who most thought wouldn't make it a year would be no big deal?
Of course it would be a big deal now. And, if it leads to reunification, it would be a big deal for Koreans in the long-term.

The question is whether Americans would still care about it in the year 2118.
Reply Quote
1
who?mikejones
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to commando2004 • 8:14a, 6/12/18
AG
commando2004 said:
who?mikejones said:
Hypothetical solving of the Korea crisis I would be no big deal? A Nobel prize for a president who most thought wouldn't make it a year would be no big deal?
Of course it would be a big deal now. And, if it leads to reunification, it would be a big deal for Koreans in the long-term.

The question is whether Americans would still care about it in the year 2118.


Well, it's not happening in the continental United states so of course it wouldn't be remembered as well. But, it's a bigger deal than given credit for above, hypothetically speaking.
These are my people, Americans.
Reply Quote
1
et98
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to who?mikejones • 10:16a, 6/12/18
AG

Quote:
Hypothetical solving of the Korea crisis I would be no big deal? A Nobel prize for a president who most thought wouldn't make it a year would be no big deal?

Take your tinted glasses off.
I did not say it is no big deal. I said it would be comparable to the Camp David Accords within the context of this discussion, which is how memorable it will be in 100 years.

It's only been 40 years since the Camp David Accords, and if you go out on the street and ask 100 average adults younger than 45 years old what it was, 99 of them won't know.

I personally find the solving of the Korean crisis to be a HUGE deal (just as I find a peace treaty between an Arab nation and a Jewish nation to be a HUGE deal). But how important something is and how memorable it is are two different things.

This discussion isn't about politics. This isn't about tinted glasses or picking sides. This isn't the politics board.
Reply Quote
BQ78
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rabid Cougar • 11:00a, 6/12/18
AG
Holy cow so did Ginger Roger's husband, but he died in black and white, not color.
Reply Quote
1
Rabid Cougar
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:40a, 6/12/18
AG
So does anyone remember what Obama got his Nobel Peace prize about without Googling it? Something in the Middle East but for the life of me I cannot remember it.
Reply Quote
1
CanyonAg77
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rabid Cougar • 11:41a, 6/12/18
AG
Rabid Cougar said:
So does anyone remember what Obama got his Nobel Peace prize about without Googling it? Something in the Middle East but for the life of me I cannot remember it.
You can't remember it, because it was for nothing.

They gave it to him in hope he would do something.

If he had any integrity, he would have thrown it back in their face.
Reply Quote
commando2004
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rabid Cougar • 7:22p, 6/12/18
AG
Rabid Cougar said:
So does anyone remember what Obama got his Nobel Peace prize about without Googling it? Something in the Middle East but for the life of me I cannot remember it.
For not being George W. Bush.
Reply Quote
4
commando2004
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to et98 • 7:35p, 6/12/18
AG
et98 said:
Obama's presidency will be a major event in history class far into the future...even more than it is today. Since we are so close to it currently, we focus on the policy of the administration. But 100 years from now, it will be remembered only as one of the greatest milestones in the Civil Rights Movement...along side the Emancipation Proclamation, Integration, and gaining the right to vote. (Disclaimer - regardless if you think it should be remembered for this, it will be)
I agree that Obama will be remembered primarily for being the first Black president. Question is, what will this mean?

Will it be mere trivia, like on Jeopardy!?

"I'll take US presidential firsts for $5k."
"The first Black president."
"Who is Barack Obama?"
"Correct."
"$10k."
"The first president to die in office, after only 30 days."
"Who is William Henry Harrison?"

Or will it be used in the sense that today's SJWs use it: "Look at all these racists who dared oppose The First Black President!"

I guess it depends on what happens with race relations over the next 100 years.
Reply Quote
Quad Dog
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to commando2004 • 9:12a, 6/13/18
AG
The answer probably depends on how long it takes to elect a second black president.
Reply Quote
1
Vestal_Flame
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:51a, 6/13/18
AG
Quote:
For not being George W. Bush.
We are at a strangely bipolar moment in history. The people who complained about George W. Bush lacked imagination.
Reply Quote
1
Cinco Ranch Aggie
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:56a, 6/13/18
AG
Quote:
"The first Black president."

"Who is Barack Obama?"
No link for this, but I swear I recall Bill Clinton proclaiming himself to be America's first black president. Seems like a contestant may have something to argue if answering this question incorrectly.
Reply Quote
2
Rabid Cougar
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cinco Ranch Aggie • 1:30p, 6/13/18
AG
Cinco Ranch Aggie said:
Quote:
"The first Black president."

"Who is Barack Obama?"
No link for this, but I swear I recall Bill Clinton proclaiming himself to be America's first black president. Seems like a contestant may have something to argue if answering this question incorrectly.
Eddie Bernice Johnson and the CBC pronounced it to be so in 2008. Sorry Barry.

I did not make this up.

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/clinton-honored-first-black-president-black-caucus-dinner
Reply Quote
1
5 edits
DevilYack
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:37p, 6/15/18
AG
Dan Carlin did a great 5 or 6 part podcast on WW1 that's still free. I think each is about 3 or 4 hours, so lots of information and well presented. I had no idea until I listened to it about the carnage of that war. I know a lot about WW2, but had never really paid much attention to the first. This was eye opening.

i/https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-50-blueprint-for-armageddon-i/
Reply Quote
3
Corporal Punishment
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:22p, 6/15/18
AG
Dan Carlin podcast is fantastic
Reply Quote
Ag In Ok
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Corporal Punishment • 8:42p, 6/15/18
AG
Corporal Punishment said:
Dan Carlin podcast is fantastic


Very much so. I had never truly knew of passchendaele till i heard his podcast. It is truly a great work. And he holds back little.
Reply Quote
1 edit
commando2004
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:31p, 6/18/18
AG
Back to the topic of presidents passing the 100-year test. Here's a Sporcle quiz for naming US presidents. (I scored 43/45.)

At the end, it will show you how many quiz takers got each answer correct. Filtering down the list to those presidents who first got elected more than 100 years ago (up to and including Woodrow Wilson), the full ranking is:

1. (1789-1797) George Washington (98.2%)
2. (1861-1865) Abraham Lincoln (94.1%)
3. (1797-1801) John Adams (93.1%)
4. (1825-1829) John Quincy Adams (92.2%)
5. (1801-1809) Thomas Jefferson (91.4%)
6. (1901-1909) Theodore Roosevelt (90.7%)
7. (1865-1869) Andrew Johnson (86.8%)
8. (1829-1837) Andrew Jackson (82.7%)
9. (1809-1817) James Madison (80.4%)
10. (1817-1825) James Monroe (78.3%)
11. (1909-1913) William H. Taft (75.2%)
12. (1869-1877) Ulysses S. Grant (75.2%)
13. (1841-1841) William H. Harrison (72.5%)
14. (1913-1921) Woodrow Wilson (71.8%)
15. (1889-1893) Benjamin Harrison (71.7%)
16. (1885-1889 and 1893-1897) Grover Cleveland (70.9%)
17. (1845-1849) James K. Polk (70.6%)
18. (1841-1845) John Tyler (67.2%)
19. (1897-1901) William McKinley (66.4%)
20. (1881-1881) James Garfield (66%)
21. (1849-1850) Zachary Taylor (65.7%)
22. (1837-1841) Martin Van Buren (65.6%)
23. (1857-1861) James Buchanan (60.8%)
24. (1850-1853) Millard Fillmore (59.7%)
25. (1853-1857) Franklin Pierce (58.8%)
26. (1881-1885) Chester A. Arthur (56.5%)
27. (1877-1881) Rutherford B. Hayes (55.4%)

So, what distinguishes the remembered from the forgotten?
Reply Quote
Cinco Ranch Aggie
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:13p, 6/19/18
AG
I only managed 27 of the Presidents, with the first three, the last group since the Depression/WWII, and various others in between
Reply Quote
Cinco Ranch Aggie
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:22p, 6/19/18
AG
Quote:
In WWII, the world was united against the Holocaust
I'm unable to agree with this statement. It's not like the war started with any goals toward stopping the Holocaust. Anti-Semitism was well known in Nazi Germany, but nations all over, including the U.S., turned away ships bearing Jewish refugees because they were not wanted, for whatever reason. But I can't say exactly when the world learned of the Holocaust. Was it when the US Army over-ran some of those first camps, and Eisenhower ordered the local citizenry to walk through these death camps? Or did US/British intelligence know of it before all of that?

Regardless, the world was united against the fascist and imperialist tyrannies of Nazi Germany and the Empire of Japan.
Reply Quote
8
insulator_king
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to et98 • 7:34p, 6/19/18
AG
et98 said:
This is a really interesting topic, and it's something I think about a lot, especially as a history teacher.

It's amazing what is remembered about history. Most people know nothing about current events before they were about 8 yrs old, so anything prior to this moment is history to you. It's not something you remembered, it's something that's remembered for you and taught to you. To simplify it as it's taught, each era/decade/time period is broken down into just a few events.

The farther away the time period, the fewer moments are taught and retained. The average young adult aged 25-35 knows nothing about 1918. I'd expect them to know only 1 thing about the entire decade of the 1910s...WWI. The only things they can probably recall about their studies of the war was that we won, it was in the trenches, we fought the Germans, and the British & French were our allies. Naming the Germans as our enemy and the French as our allies might actually be stretch, and naming any other countries would be nearly impossible. To expect the average young adult to know specific years, treaties, battles, generals, political leaders, etc would be way too much to ask.
Mustard Gas. That is what I recall the most about WWI
Reply Quote
commando2004
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cinco Ranch Aggie • 8:07p, 6/19/18
AG
Cinco Ranch Aggie said:
But I can't say exactly when the world learned of the Holocaust. Was it when the US Army over-ran some of those first camps, and Eisenhower ordered the local citizenry to walk through these death camps? Or did US/British intelligence know of it before all of that?
The Allies knew by December 1942, at the latest.
Reply Quote
1
CanyonAg77
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to commando2004 • 8:36p, 6/19/18
AG
Quote:
Newly accessed material from the United Nations not seen for around 70 years shows that as early as December 1942, the US, UK and Soviet governments were aware that at least two million Jews had been murdered and a further five million were at risk of being killed, and were preparing charges. Despite this, the Allied Powers did very little to try and rescue or provide sanctuary to those in mortal danger.

I'm not sure what the hck we could have done in December 1942. Or even December 1944, for that matter.
Reply Quote
2
The Original AG 76
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to commando2004 • 6:28a, 6/20/18
AG
commando2004 said:
who?mikejones said:
Hypothetical solving of the Korea crisis I would be no big deal? A Nobel prize for a president who most thought wouldn't make it a year would be no big deal?
Of course it would be a big deal now. And, if it leads to reunification, it would be a big deal for Koreans in the long-term.

The question is whether Americans would still care about it in the year 2118.
You already know the answer. I doubt that hardly anyone under 40 has any idea that there was a West and an East Germany for much of the 20th century. The Berlin wall, the Airlift, Checkpoint Charlie will just be footnotes in history and answers to obscure trivia games.
BUT this does not mean to trivialize the huge significance to OUR TIME of the importance of the solution to the Korea issue.
Reply Quote
1
Cinco Ranch Aggie
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to commando2004 • 9:07a, 6/20/18
AG
commando2004 said:
Cinco Ranch Aggie said:
But I can't say exactly when the world learned of the Holocaust. Was it when the US Army over-ran some of those first camps, and Eisenhower ordered the local citizenry to walk through these death camps? Or did US/British intelligence know of it before all of that?
The Allies knew by December 1942, at the latest.
Good article. Thanks for sharing that.

The Wansee Conference happened in January 1942. So per the article, the Allies knew of the Final Solution no later than December of that same year. So then what? The article makes it clear that the Allies did not really understand the full ramifications of what their intelligence had provided. I have serious doubts that any military policy was ever enacted toward ending the Holocaust (the word Holocaust likely was a post-war term, I would guess), nothing was ever sent down the ranks to the average soldier, and thus it was a shocking revelation when they first entered the concentration camps. And like Canyon says, what could they have done in December 1942 or even 1944 to have stopped it?

In December 1942 the only war being waged on German territory was via heavy bombardment from the 8th Air Force and the RAF. At that time we were not sending bombers into the far eastern reaches of Germany, and certainly not into Poland, and while my knowledge of Soviet abilities is fairly limited, I'm reasonably certain they had their own issues at the time and would not have been able to mount any kind of aerial campaign against targets out of reach for the US and Brits. Not that bombing would have been an effective measure, given that the bombs would have killed Nazi and Jew alike if the bombs even hit the targets.

Ground troops would not enter Germany until the latter part of 1944, so yeah, there was nothing that we could have done militarily to stop the Holocaust.
Reply Quote
3
CanyonAg77
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cinco Ranch Aggie • 9:30a, 6/20/18
AG
Good points, and there's one other point that may or may not have happened.

I've read that part of the mission of the 8th Air Force (and others) over Europe, was to lure the Luftwaffe up to defend. The strategy was to destroy the Luftwaffe in fighter vs. fighter and fighter vs. bomber battles. It was considered imperative to have them brought down to an ineffective level by D-Day.

To that end, bomber squadrons were sacrificed to the greater good of protecting the June 6 invasion force. That apparently worked, I recall that a total of two German planes appeared over the beaches of Normandy. If The Longest Day is accurate, they made one half-hearted strafing pass and went home.

Now, suppose you're in the Allied High Command. You find out that your enemy is devoting immense resources to The Final Solution. Vital railroad engines, lines, and cars, soldiers guarding camps instead of the front line. Diversion of food, meager as it was, to prisoners instead of productive citizens and soldiers. Sabotage of German war industries by the prisoners. Etc. etc. etc.

Now, I have never read of a decision taken to allow the Holocaust to continue for strategic reasons. But when your enemy is hurting himself, shouldn't you let him? If an Allied Command was willing to sacrifice American airmen, how much more willing would they have been to sacrifice Polish Jews?

Possible, or did I use too much tin foil this morning?
Reply Quote
1
Refresh
Page 2 of 2 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.