[Closed] appropriateness of the battle of britain flypast.

they don't like it up 'em they don't like it up 'em 🙂

The German people and their politics have learned and benefited more than the British/US from the outcome of WW2. They have Constitutional protection and keen awareness of how they (and the rest of Europe) suffered as a result of the process that allowed the Third Reich to seed and flourish, and are determined that it can not occur again. The same can probably not be said of British and US people and politics.

The same can probably not be said of British and US people and politics.

The British might once again fall for the folly of allowing a wartime national coalition government ?

Indeed.

Look at it this way, alot of children will be present at the events etc etc. Would it be fair to say that they can see 'duty' as meaning do what a Politician wants and/or for private (profit) interest but dressed up as essential and 'take pride'?

I'm sick of seeing young men and women being killed and badly maimed- loosing their wedding tackle for ****s sake and rather than being seen as victims of a hopeless situation they are called 'heroes'.

We are leaving Afghanistan. That is for sure, its just going to get a whole lot worse and back to similar pre-'intervention'.

I remember years ago there were reasons given as Taliban treating women badly. Have a look under our own noses with the wearing of the bhurka and living behind closed-doors for some women here in the UK.

BAE, Babcock etc etc are all doing well due to the perpetual war(s) overseas. It creates jobs (politicians satisfied along with donors..). So does constant active service war and deployment along with the contractors.

So to get to the point, I'd like to see war stop being glorified. Non-military fly pasts.

I'd like to see war stop being glorified. Non-military fly pasts.

Whilst there might be a case to be made that Britain should be ashamed of the supporting role it gives the world's number one bully boy, Britain has absolutely nothing to be ashamed of concerning its behaviour during World War II. It was an immensely proud period in Britain's history, indeed some might say its Finest Hour.

I think it is very fitting that it should be remembered and recalled during historical events, particularly with Spitfires, Hurricanes, and Lancasters. And not least because some of those whom we owe a debt to are still with us today. Although I hope they will be remembered for many years to come.

Britain has absolutely nothing to be ashamed of concerning its behaviour during World War II

So we'll ignore the oppression of a foreign nation (India)and the firebombing/carpet bombing of civilian targets then.

Yep, the bombing of Dresden was unacceptable. But Britain's involvement in World War II is absolutely nothing to be ashamed of. It was indeed an immensely proud period in Britain's history and I stick by all my comments.

There will be individual events in wars which will clearly be judged as unacceptable, and I will bear in mind your comment if I ever stand up and make a speech to the House hora, but that does not invalidate the righteousness of fighting a war.

It wasn't just Dresden though. Far from it.

My dad was a radio operator in a Wellington bomber for most of the war, [he became an instructor in late 44]
I don't think he would of cared less what people now think of what he and 100s of thousands of others did to try to protect us from the immediate threat and the potential future threats, he 100% believed he was right and so do I.
He flew lots of raids into Europe and had no real interest in the target per se, the only thing that they endlessly talked about was what the flak was like enroute and over the target [that and the cold] That's also all he ever mentioned about raids, if someone mentioned something like Frankfurt in conversation, he'd often chirp up with "terrible flak"
My parents went on a bus tour around Europe some years ago and he gave the whole coach the benefit of his knowledge of whether or not the flak was OK for the next town they were approaching 😀

hora - Member

It wasn't just Dresden though. Far from it.

Yeah ok, Britain should be ashamed of its role during World War II. All flypasts by Spitfires, Hurricanes, and Lancasters, should be banned. And all memories of that dreadful period in British history should be erased from the collective mind. Good luck with convincing the rest of the British people in agreeing with your ultra pacifist views.

But Britain's involvement in World War II is absolutely nothing to be ashamed of. It was indeed an immensely proud period in Britain's history and I stick by all my comments.

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ww2peopleswar/stories/82/a1934282.shtml ]debateable[/url]

Sorry to piss on your bonfire Ernie, Britain didn't win the war. Russia did.

debateable

All famines in recent history are "artificial"........they are the result of a shortage of money, not a shortage of food.

But anyway, I have already conceded that Britain should be ashamed of fighting the Nazis, so I'm happy to also concede that Britain should be ashamed of fighting the Japanese. Although I'm not sure what the two million Indians who volunteered to help Britain during World War II (the largest volunteer army in human history) would have made of it.

Sorry to piss on your bonfire Ernie

You're not in the least bit sorry. I can tell.

To me it's not really looking back at *war* as a good thing. It's appreciating our technical skills, enjoying seeing some of our best engineering and appreciating the loss that folk took for our freedom. That doesn't mean I don't agree we could have our most modern hardware etc on display to show how forward thinking we are (though I don't think we really have much?).

History repeats itself and each time the cost is higher. Does presenting them make people think "yeay, war, ace" or "think of the loss that those amazing bits of engineering go along with". To me it's the latter.

I can see why you might suggest those in some ways, but Concorde, first flight 1969, the harrier taken out of service and again first flight 1967, hardly the pinnacle of british technology?

I was of the general impression that making concorde happen took a lot more technological advances than getting man on the moon. And Concorde flew a lot longer that the Saturn V.

And contrary to your false claim, the Battle of Britain was won by Britain.

And lost by germany...

Do enlighten me Zokes on how the BoB was "lost" by Germany. Germany switched to bombing rather than fighter engagements because of losses.(I assume you are referring to Goering's decision to switch to a bombing campaign, rather than trying to thin out our air defences enough to make an invasion viable.)

I think we've had this argument already on this thread.

I was under the impression the Luftwaffe switched to bombing cities in retaliation for a raid on Berlin by the RAF, which in turn was in retaliation for bombs dropped on London. by accident. by a german bomber that was lost & decided to ditch his bombs & go home...

And lost by germany...

Yep, let's not forget that Germany lost World War II. That's one of the reasons why I always like to mention the war - we've got a young German guy who sometimes comes on bike rides with my CC. I think he found the occasion when we stopped at the War Memorial on Warlingham Green (to two world wars) particularly instructive. They forget sometimes you know.

Sorry, based on the subject matter, four pages, and my experience of STW; I skipped to the end. I am quite interested in it,this is my understanding of it;
The Germans were losing pilots as such a rate they were having to put bomber pilots into fighters,(having to fight over British airspace meant they had less fuel, could be quickly outnumbered by our very,very clever fighter command, couldn't clear out of a dog fight)In fact German pilots during the BoB talk about quickly being outnumbered 3 to 1; this was accelerating the rate of losses, so a change of tactics was necessary.
Germany had,by this point, introduced Spain to the bomber,the results of which was a major reason for the policy of appeasement, so they felt it would be a better use of resources, and would allow them to force Britain either to surrender,or make a land invasion easier. The counter claims about killing civilians was rubbish on both sides.The Germans were very aware of fighting on too many fronts,as WW1 had taught them, and didn't really want to invade Britain. Italy played a big part in helping us to win the war by getting into trouble in North Africa and then asking Germany for help. As did Hitler's not-unfounded fear of Russia.

So if Germany lost the BoB because we killed so many of their pilots, then Zokes is correct.

I'd have thought that towing one of the surviving TSR2 airframes down the Mall would have been appropriate, both in historic and current contexts.

Regarding having modern aircraft in the display, apart from the Typhoon, what others have we got? C17 Cargomasters?
Only leased, and hardly our cutting edge tech.

Sorry to be a pedant, but I think that beating ourselves over the head with our terminal decline is a British disease, and it's made worse by inaccuracies!
The C17 Globemaster is the backbone of Uncle Sam's heavy lift fleet, with no plans to replace it any time soon. If it's good enough for them....
The RAF [u]owns[/u] 8 of them. They were originally leased but bought, and extras ordered, after their usefulness became clear and we put way too many hours on them for the lease!

Tornado? Well, I think we've got one or two left.

About a hundred I think, in various degrees of serviceability/deployedness etc.

Regarding the Typhoon, how many do we actually have available, that aren't in the Falklands/in maintenance/ whatever? I've been told the Typhoon is something of a hanger queen, but that could be hearsay.

It is. If you talk to people who actually know, rather than read Max Hastings or some other journo with an axw to grind, it's a great aeroplane and developing all the time, thanks to the hard work of a lot of people.
Apologies again for the pedantry, but I don't like to see the modern RAF slated!

Regarding our less commendable actions during the war, such as the Bengal famine, and comparing them to the Holocaust, is it not possible to distinguish between deliberate genocide of a people and that caused by neglect, mismanagement or simply having other priorities? Remember this was total war, difficult for modern minds to picture, with people in power having to make terrible decisions between the lesser of two evils. Not a position I'd want to be in.

I agree with Ernie and Churchill, the BoB was the Empire's finest hour.

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[IMG] [/IMG]

woow thinks i'll be waiting for a ban has my reply has been deleted but i don't have my old hot mail account
so one lies down n waits 😥

What did you say? If it was directed at me, feel free to PM.

Do enlighten me Zokes on how the BoB was "lost" by Germany.

As it clearly wasn't a draw (not even in the Monty Python's Black Night sense of the word), presumably as one side (Britain) won the BoB, the other side (Germany) must have lost? Unless you live in a parallel universe in which both opposing sides won?

zokes - Member

As it clearly wasn't a draw (not even in the Monty Python's Black Night sense of the word), presumably as one side (Britain) won the BoB, the other side (Germany) must have lost? Unless you live in a parallel universe in which both opposing sides won?

Indeed zokes, so perhaps you can explain why you felt the need to emphasise that Germany had lost, after I had pointed out that Britain had won the Battle of Britain.

As you say, unless you live in a parallel universe in which both opposing sides won why would anyone want to say that ? What was the point which you were trying to make ?

and back to the original question, is it appropriate to celebrate beating one of your major trading partners 70 years later, when the coronation happened 60 years ago and thus isn't directly relevant to the battle of britain. BoB at remembrance day, air shows, VE day etc fine. but for the celebration of the coronation or other even more tenuous events?

and back to the original question, is it appropriate to celebrate beating one of your major trading partners 70 years later

yes - the queen grew up during the war, she was clearly pleased to see the fly past, plus germany 'dragged' us into two wars last century, and war is a terrible thing and people should be reminded of this and the huge cost regularly...

[i]the queen grew up during the war, she was clearly pleased to see the fly past, plus[s] germany[/s] the Queens Great Uncle 'dragged' us into [s]two wars last century[/s] WWI leading to WWII,[/i]

FIFY

is it appropriate to celebrate beating one of your major trading partners 70 years later

Of course it is. Specially when the consequences of your major trading partner beating you, invading you, and occupying you, would have been so horrendous. Remember there are very good examples of this major trading partner doing precisely that to other major trading partners. I can't imagine why anyone wouldn't want to celebrate.

Unless you live in a parallel universe in which both opposing sides won?

Strange; given your previous,I thought you would have been keen to claim WW11 as a British victory, while claiming that as England had the biggest population,it is only fair that England got most of the credit....While suggesting any campaign for Scottish independence is an ungrateful slap in the face for all the dead of every major conflict ever....Rather than suggest Germany lost it, which is the emphasis you put. (as noted by others)

And back to the original question; Yes a flypast is entirely appropriate.

As I said in the thread about favourite sounds. I find it a bit weird/unsettling the way so many people (well blokes actually) seem to have such a hard-on for military planes etc. Yes I enjoyed playing with model spitfires etc when I was a kid, but I grew out of it - and anyway was always taught that glorifying war wasn't something to be proud of.

Yeah you can argue it's just about remembrance and celebrating our engineering history etc - but I don't think that's the whole story for many people.

I find it a bit weird/unsettling the way so many people (well blokes actually) seem to have such a hard-on for military planes etc.

+1

But STW has helped me greatly in understanding this kind of thing to be fair.

but I don't think that's the whole story for many people.

Clearly, it isn't. For some, for sure, it is. For others it's a pile of jingoistic shite. But it's not going to stop anytime soon. There are plenty in the country who still like to do the more formal version of singing "two world wars and one world cup".

I find it a bit weird/unsettling the way so many people (well blokes actually) seem to have such a hard-on for military planes etc. Yes I enjoyed playing with model spitfires etc when I was a kid, but I grew out of it

And I find a bit weird and unsettling that anyone should equate an appreciation of the Spitfire and the role it played with sexual arousal.

Still I guess it takes all sorts.........it's a funny ol'world ain't it ?

And I find a bit weird and unsettling that anyone should equate an appreciation of the Spitfire and the role it played with sexual arousal.

It's the way you lot talk about it. It's quite clear you're getting a little bit [i]too[/i] excited about the idea of big engines, guns, explosions etc.

I love it when you talk dirty Grum.

It's the way you lot talk about it. It's quite clear you're getting a little bit too excited about the idea of big engines, guns, explosions etc.

Do you sometimes wonder what we're wearing ? As you imagine all these sexually aroused men.

And I find a bit weird and unsettling that anyone should equate an appreciation of the Spitfire and the role it played with sexual arousal.

Still I guess it takes all sorts.........it's a funny ol'world ain't it ?

[img] [/img]

Do you sometimes wonder what we're wearing ? As you imagine all these sexually aroused men.

I know exactly what you're wearing.