Jump to content


Photo

Why Is Britain Broke?

dont have any money?

  • Please log in to reply
119 replies to this topic

#101 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,361 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 16 July 2019 - 0523 AM

If Indian inability to manage the essentials of modernism on their own is seen as an economic liability by some, it is seen as an economic opportunity by others.

 

If Britain and Britains are unwilling to compete beyond going through the comfort motions, exemplified by the sale of Land Rover to Indians versus putting in the work to make its products more competitive to sell to India and Indians in perpetuity, that is why they fail.

 

Why do you think Jaguar Landrover being owned by the Indian's is a failure? The Indians have put more money into them, and the remnants of what was British steel, than the British Government ever did when they were nationalized. Its not like the City of London was ever much bothered by investing in them either.

 

It doesnt matter who owns these companies, as long as they keep people employed. I personally have no issues with Nissan, or whatever foreign company build cars here. If they keep British workers employed, and keep these companies solvant, its no skin of my nose. These companies dont have to have born and bred Brits at the helm for the companies to be British. 

 

Ford owned Aston Martin for something like a decade, did it make it any less a British company? No.


  • 0

#102 urbanoid

urbanoid

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lodz, Poland

Posted 16 July 2019 - 0621 AM

 

Stuart, we were significantly less well prepared for war in 1938 in a variety of key area, most significantly our reserve army has half the size and our air warning and GCI network was non existent. There were far fewer AA and AT guns. If you dig deeper you will see that all sorts of preparations were at a far less advanced then than a year later. How exactly would we have intervened against German annexation of a land locked country? By your logic we really ought to crack on and kick the Russians out of Crimea and Eastern Ukraine now before they get any stronger. Good luck with that.

 

So was Germany. Their Army was massed on the Czechoslovakian border, and had nothing that could have stopped a French and British advance. By the time we took the Rhur, it would have been good as over. The Nazis themselves said they were not ready for war in France in 1940, till they captured all those Czech tanks and brought their tank production plants online.

 

Supposedly Pilsudski in 1937 approached the French about a preemptive attack on Nazi Germany, although the French deny any such thing happened. In light of what happened, it probably would have been an excellent idea. Aggressive, imperialist, cynical. and yet you would have had several million people surviving the second world that subsequently did not.

 

No, I dont think Chamberlain could have sold it to the Empire, as Harris relates in his novel, and I absolutely dont disagree. That is not the same as saying it wasnt the right thing to have done. It was.

 

 

And the French are right to deny that, having died in 1935 he couldn't have been planning any attack in 1937, preemptive or not.


Edited by urbanoid, 16 July 2019 - 0628 AM.

  • 0

#103 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,361 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 16 July 2019 - 0639 AM

 

 

Stuart, we were significantly less well prepared for war in 1938 in a variety of key area, most significantly our reserve army has half the size and our air warning and GCI network was non existent. There were far fewer AA and AT guns. If you dig deeper you will see that all sorts of preparations were at a far less advanced then than a year later. How exactly would we have intervened against German annexation of a land locked country? By your logic we really ought to crack on and kick the Russians out of Crimea and Eastern Ukraine now before they get any stronger. Good luck with that.

 

So was Germany. Their Army was massed on the Czechoslovakian border, and had nothing that could have stopped a French and British advance. By the time we took the Rhur, it would have been good as over. The Nazis themselves said they were not ready for war in France in 1940, till they captured all those Czech tanks and brought their tank production plants online.

 

Supposedly Pilsudski in 1937 approached the French about a preemptive attack on Nazi Germany, although the French deny any such thing happened. In light of what happened, it probably would have been an excellent idea. Aggressive, imperialist, cynical. and yet you would have had several million people surviving the second world that subsequently did not.

 

No, I dont think Chamberlain could have sold it to the Empire, as Harris relates in his novel, and I absolutely dont disagree. That is not the same as saying it wasnt the right thing to have done. It was.

 

 

And the French are right to deny that, having died in 1935 he couldn't have been planning any attack in 1937, preemptive or not.

 

My apologies, it was much earlier, in 1933.

http://josephpilsuds...hitler_302.html

Possibly as an additional means to discourage Hitler from exploiting the situation in Danzig, in early March 1933, rumors of a preventive war in which Poland would make a surprise attack on Germany became widely circulated. Adding credibility to the rumor, Polish troops had been assembled in the Polish Corridor, and while they were primarily a warning to Hitler to tone down Nazi revisionist agitation, many believed Poland was preparing to invade German territory. Pilsudski did not officially confirm the preventive war reports, but he did not deny them. Moreover, most experts acknowledged that Poland was in a position to carry out this threat if Pilsudski was so inclined. As Hitler knew, the Polish Army possessed over 250,000 highly trained and well-equipped soldiers. While in the process of secretly rearming, the German Army had no modern weapons such as airplanes, tanks, or armored cars, and according to the terms of the Versailles Treaty was limited to 100,000 men. In his memoirs, former chancellor of the Weimar Republic Heinrich Bruening recalled, “The fact that as soon as Hitler came to power, Marshal Pilsudski proposed to France joint preventive military action indicates how well-grounded our fears were.”[22]

Regardless of whether the rumor represented a legitimate threat or a ruse, Pilsudski used it as part of his strategy to stifle anti-Polish demonstrations in Danzig. The Marshal recognized that Germany was momentarily weak, and therefore could be maneuvered into an understanding with Poland. But there is evidence that Pilsudski was seriously considering military action against Germany. Official documentation is spotty due to the Marshal’s preference for secret and personal diplomacy, but in March 1933, Pilsudski dispatched Jerzy Potocki, his former aide de camp and soon-to-be ambassador to Italy, to Paris as his unofficial envoy. Potocki did not interact with the Polish embassy, but spoke directly with French prime minister Joseph Paul-Boncour, when he apparently explored the possibility of a Franco-Polish preventive war against Germany. At approximately the same time, Pilsudski sent another confidant, Colonel Boleslaw Wieniawa-Dlugoszowski, to Paris to sound out the French military’s views about this topic.[23]

Although documentary evidence is lacking, Pilsudski supposedly proposed that after arranging a suitable pretext, Poland would seize Danzig and key German territories in the east, while France would invade Germany from the west. A disgraced Hitler would be forced to resign and the new German chancellor would be required to pledge support to the Versailles Treaty. The objective of the military action was not to conquer Germany, as this was logistically impossible, but to thwart attempts to revise Polish borders and to prevent Germany from rearming.[24] It is perhaps no coincidence that the Westerplatte incident occurred at approximately the same time. The reinforcement of the Danzig garrison may have been designed as an opportunity for France, if she was so inclined, to exploit the incident and move against Germany. Beck alluded to this possibility when he told Polish diplomat Josef Lipski on the eve of the Westerplatte incident that “a determined attitude by Poland should be properly appreciated in Paris and London, rousing these countries to more energetic action in the face of the growing threat of Hitlerism.”[25] But the French did not respond positively to Pilsudski’s overtures, and the Germans did not react militarily to his provocations. Pilsudski’s supposed plan to strangle Nazism in its cradle never materialized. But it is interesting to speculate that if it had, Poland’s preemptive military action might have preserved the Versailles peace and the prevented the greatest mass murder in history.

 

There is no proof of this, only speculation, and as said the French deny it. But in light of how history turned out, would  it a good idea? Well, yes actually. The irony is, we would probably now be looking back on it as a war of aggression, just like Iraq. :)


  • 0

#104 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,536 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 16 July 2019 - 0835 AM

...

And the French are right to deny that, having died in 1935 he couldn't have been planning any attack in 1937, preemptive or not.

 

In 1933 or 1934. (IIRC) he did however meet with Alexander I of Yugoslavia discussing threet of Germany. Alexander went to France in 1934. to discuss emerging German and Italian threat and a broad front against, but was killed.

I think they are mixing dates and occasions.


Edited by bojan, 16 July 2019 - 0838 AM.

  • 0

#105 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,117 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 16 July 2019 - 1330 PM

Stuart, my knowledge of history is limited, but I think the forces massed against Czechoslovakia might have redeployed if it became obvious we intended to invade Germany - an act that would have taken significant and very obvious preparation. We weren't exactly big on rapid deployment or movement generally back then. As for Germany needing Czech tanks - most of the tanks we sent to France in 1940 were utter shite. It wouldn't have been better in 1938. You could make a pretty good argument that no one is ever really ready for the next war. It's how ready they are relative to their intended opposition that matters.


  • 0

#106 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,813 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, Canada
  • Interests:tanks, old and new AFV's, Landrovers, diving, hovercrafts

Posted 16 July 2019 - 2307 PM

reminds me how older land rover owners in east europe talk that this was such a nostalgia trip, like in soviet cars, after you got the brand new vehicle, first thing you took the wrench and re-tightened every nut 

With late IIA vehicle you need 3 sets of wrenches, Whitworth, Imperial and that new fangled metric.


  • 0

#107 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,727 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 17 July 2019 - 0127 AM

image002.jpg


Having gotten a 70 year old British made electrical regulator box working after it sat for more than 10 years with rain pouring into the crew compartment, I have to say that Lucas issues in the 60s was probably because they cheaped out on materials. The CAV and Lucas bits on Vandal were fine with the environment unless they were directly immersed in rain water and nothing lasts in that sort of environment unless you plate the whole thing in gold. 

The CAV regulator box needed light cleaning of the screw terminals and a bit of scraping of carbon off the contactor points for the voltage and amperage regulating functions. 

The battery cut off switch was likewise in need of some minor TLC And the most I did to the contact plates was run a Dremel polishing cotton wheel at them to brighten them up. Works great with starter level amperage through it and no problems at all. 

The 70 year old tar filled coils are rubbish and fail under high tension load but that's to be expected with what they are. 


  • 0

#108 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,361 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 17 July 2019 - 0202 AM

Stuart, my knowledge of history is limited, but I think the forces massed against Czechoslovakia might have redeployed if it became obvious we intended to invade Germany - an act that would have taken significant and very obvious preparation. We weren't exactly big on rapid deployment or movement generally back then. As for Germany needing Czech tanks - most of the tanks we sent to France in 1940 were utter shite. It wouldn't have been better in 1938. You could make a pretty good argument that no one is ever really ready for the next war. It's how ready they are relative to their intended opposition that matters.

Chris, even in 1940, the German Army on the Western Front was outnumbered by the British and French Forces. And whilst i would admit that they would assuredly be in smaller number in 1938, Ive no doubt the German Army  would still  be smaller than the British, French, Czechoslovak and almost certain the Polish Army as well. The Germany Army was good, but the Third Reich hadnt yet mastered the art of teleportation. :) More to the point, they had yet to have the campaign in poland and sorted out their doctrine. I seem to recall the poles in 39 gave them a bloody nose, contrary to the usual narrative of overwhelming victory the Nazis stamped on it.

 

Lets face it, we fucked up. I accept the politics were difficult, but not as difficult as the second world war. And war in 1938 probably wouldnt have been a world war.


  • 0

#109 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,624 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 17 July 2019 - 0442 AM

Stuart, there wasn't much of a bloody nose in '39 Poland, but one corps-level counterattack produced a local crisis that added delays to the overall campaign and the Polish air force successfully dispersed to secondary airfields (thus avoiding destruction).


  • 0

#110 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,361 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 17 July 2019 - 0453 AM

But there were more casualties than they were expecting. I have to question if it was such an overwhelming success, why the Germans had to invent utter fibs like the myth of the Polish Cavalry charging tanks? Its almost as if they were hiding something.

 

They had a message to sell, that it was an overwhelming victory. Well they certainly won, but that had at least as much to do with the Soviet intervention. We assume there was something inherently successful in the Germany Army, and they didnt need to learn any lessons from Poland to make it so. I dont believe thats so. For one thing they had reportedly great problems in coordinating the Luftwaffe with the ground forces.

 

A Germany Army in 1938 would simply not have fought the same as in 1940. Well, I dont doubt. But it wasnt even fully mechanised like the British Army was, for all its flaws. How was it going to move ALL the way back from the Czech border to face off against the Western Allies, with the same kind of alacrity it did in 1940? And it just wouldnt. It was horse drawn to a large extent, and the large tank forces they had in 1940 (not THAT numerous) simply didnt exist yet. They hadnt even completed integrating the Austrian divisions, which from German accounts had to be completely retrained and reequipped.


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 17 July 2019 - 0454 AM.

  • 0

#111 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,624 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 17 July 2019 - 0732 AM

The cavalry charge thing was propaganda. That doesn't matter for how the campaign went.

Look up how many casualties the German army suffered as the price for stomping a million men army.

I suppose you won't return believing that the casualties were higher than expected.

 

Setbacks were local or about air force performance only.


  • 0

#112 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,117 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 18 July 2019 - 1658 PM

But there were more casualties than they were expecting. I have to question if it was such an overwhelming success, why the Germans had to invent utter fibs like the myth of the Polish Cavalry charging tanks? Its almost as if they were hiding something.

 

They had a message to sell, that it was an overwhelming victory. Well they certainly won, but that had at least as much to do with the Soviet intervention. We assume there was something inherently successful in the Germany Army, and they didnt need to learn any lessons from Poland to make it so. I dont believe thats so. For one thing they had reportedly great problems in coordinating the Luftwaffe with the ground forces.

 

A Germany Army in 1938 would simply not have fought the same as in 1940. Well, I dont doubt. But it wasnt even fully mechanised like the British Army was, for all its flaws. How was it going to move ALL the way back from the Czech border to face off against the Western Allies, with the same kind of alacrity it did in 1940? And it just wouldnt. It was horse drawn to a large extent, and the large tank forces they had in 1940 (not THAT numerous) simply didnt exist yet. They hadnt even completed integrating the Austrian divisions, which from German accounts had to be completely retrained and reequipped.

 

And how would our army suddenly appear on the German border, Stuart?  I've played "Verdun" so I've seen groups of troops spawning in shell craters right next to the enemy front line trenches, or even in them, but I never realised that capability actually existed in RL. :)


  • 0

#113 Ssnake

Ssnake

    Virtual Shiva Beast

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6,559 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hannover, Germany
  • Interests:Contemporary armor - tactics and technology

Posted 18 July 2019 - 1849 PM

Land in France, sickle-cut through the Ardennes, secure the Rhineland, link up with the Netherlands.

Sure, it would violate Belgian neutrality, but if you have to make an omelette...


  • 0

#114 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,361 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 19 July 2019 - 0204 AM

 

But there were more casualties than they were expecting. I have to question if it was such an overwhelming success, why the Germans had to invent utter fibs like the myth of the Polish Cavalry charging tanks? Its almost as if they were hiding something.

 

They had a message to sell, that it was an overwhelming victory. Well they certainly won, but that had at least as much to do with the Soviet intervention. We assume there was something inherently successful in the Germany Army, and they didnt need to learn any lessons from Poland to make it so. I dont believe thats so. For one thing they had reportedly great problems in coordinating the Luftwaffe with the ground forces.

 

A Germany Army in 1938 would simply not have fought the same as in 1940. Well, I dont doubt. But it wasnt even fully mechanised like the British Army was, for all its flaws. How was it going to move ALL the way back from the Czech border to face off against the Western Allies, with the same kind of alacrity it did in 1940? And it just wouldnt. It was horse drawn to a large extent, and the large tank forces they had in 1940 (not THAT numerous) simply didnt exist yet. They hadnt even completed integrating the Austrian divisions, which from German accounts had to be completely retrained and reequipped.

 

And how would our army suddenly appear on the German border, Stuart?  I've played "Verdun" so I've seen groups of troops spawning in shell craters right next to the enemy front line trenches, or even in them, but I never realised that capability actually existed in RL. :)

 

 

 

Well we landed in France, in 1939, we were ready for operations in what, 6 months? 3? Its not the other side of the planet, its the other side of the bloody channel. What kind of state do you think the German Army is going to be in after fighting through the Czech defences, supported by the poles? And do you think they are going to pull off an appreciable number to man the western wall?

 

Well possibly. Even for all that, Its still far better odds for us than in 40.


  • 0

#115 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,624 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 19 July 2019 - 0713 AM

The German army had a munition crisis after the Poland campaign in late '39. It took months to produce enough stocks for mortars, artillery and the like.


  • 0

#116 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,361 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 19 July 2019 - 0720 AM

Its just one more exercise in the Germans mythmaking, the unstoppable, well equipped German army that could demolish anything in its path. They didnt even have enough tanks to launch an offensive west till 1940. How were they going to assemble 8 tank divisions with us sat in the Ruhr?

 

We post factually reinvented the threat of 1938 to make what we did reasonable. With what we knew in 1938 perhaps it was, but the first time I time I get my hands on a time machine im going to give Chamberlain a right old boot up the bum. Right after I call Hendrix an ambulance anyway.


  • 0

#117 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,117 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 20 July 2019 - 1443 PM

Stuart, I never said the Germans were unstoppable, but were WE so well prepared in 1938? My dad was in the BEF and his experiences in 1939-40 led him to conclude we weren't particularly well prepared two years later.
  • 0

#118 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,361 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 20 July 2019 - 1502 PM

We weren't well prepared. My point is the Germans lacked most of the things that made them unbeatable. That and we have 2 major allies we didn't have in 1940.

The problem I think is less us, than the complete political and military inability of the French to take to the offensive.
  • 0

#119 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,624 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 21 July 2019 - 1159 AM

Its just one more exercise in the Germans mythmaking, the unstoppable, well equipped German army that could demolish anything in its path. They didnt even have enough tanks to launch an offensive west till 1940. How were they going to assemble 8 tank divisions with us sat in the Ruhr?

 

Who TF are you replying to? To my reply about Poland campaign casualties?

 

Look up the casualties suffered by Germany in Poland 1939. There's no myth. Those figures are history.

The Polish land forces were technologically 95% stuck in the early 20's. They were off-balance most of the time in most places and had but local successes.


  • 0

#120 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,361 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 21 July 2019 - 1418 PM

I was replying to Chris actually. Though as you bring it up again, we are talking about the German army a year later, a year of production, not least integrating the Austrian Army. I'm 1938 the would have to fight Britain, poland, Czechoslovakia and maybe France too.

Who did they have to help them? Maybe italy. Yay.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users