|
Klaus88 posted:I committed three extravagant mistakes lately. Edit: wait your username is Klaus88
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 17:01 |
|
|
# ? May 26, 2024 11:53 |
|
Klaus88 posted:I committed three extravagant mistakes lately. I've made the mistake of reading all of his "Ghost" books, plus that awful Kratmann-coauthored love letter to the Wehrmacht. Ringo is a hack, but a mostly harmless hack. He comes dangerously close to writing really good airport grade fiction, but then goes off the rails with completely descriptions of pedophilia and child-rape. If you really want to dive down that rabbit hole I did a "lets read" of Ghost for TFR a while back. It seemed pretty well received. As for the clean wehrmacht: Omer Bartov is the go-to guy on that. In particular "Hitler's Army" and "The Eastern Front '41-45: German troops and the barbarization of warfare" explode any notion of a guilt-free Wehrmacht pretty spectacularly.
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 17:04 |
|
Klaus88 posted:I committed three extravagant mistakes lately. Extensively in german accademia. Do you speak german? That discussion was hot from the start of the first Wehrmachtsausstellung to about 2005. If you speak german, I could give you a poo poo load of titles Power Khan fucked around with this message at 17:53 on Apr 26, 2015 |
# ? Apr 26, 2015 17:42 |
|
How respected is Sven Hassel as a historian? Edit: Honestly I'm just fishing for disses. Those books are hilariously lovely. Lest we forget the francophile Muslim eunuch legionnaire who packed an AK-47 in Monte Cassino. Gargamel Gibson fucked around with this message at 18:32 on Apr 26, 2015 |
# ? Apr 26, 2015 18:08 |
|
ArchangeI posted:I once asked John Ringo on a forum why German soldiers in his book still wore fieldgrey given that flecktarn has been used for decades. He replied that the PE uniform was kinda grey and then changed the topic.
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 18:27 |
|
Gargamel Gibson posted:How respected is Sven Hassel as a historian? He's one of the best sources on WW2, in the same vein that Monty Python is the authoritative source on medieval England or ancient Palestine.
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 18:31 |
|
ArchangeI posted:I once asked John Ringo on a forum why German soldiers in his book still wore fieldgrey given that flecktarn has been used for decades. He replied that the PE uniform was kinda grey and then changed the topic. Watch on the Rhine was the first book which made me genuinely angry after I had finished it. Later I threw it into my recycling-bin to be transformed into toilet paper. A fitting punishment. I'm still not sure if that book was a huge troll by Kratmann or if that guy really has no loving selfawareness. That ending convinced me humanity would have been better off if the angry aliens had eaten all Germans, which is some feat considering the aliens genocided at the end of the book were assholes and I'm German, too.
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 19:04 |
|
Libluini posted:eat all Germans What's the effect of the Weisswurstgrenze on this? Do Bavarians taste worse, or wurst? Inquiring minds (vast, cool, unsympathetic) want to know.
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 19:14 |
|
tonberrytoby posted:But the modern German PE uniform is blue. Soldiers jogging through the Forrest are even nicknamed Smurfs. I think Ringo may have seen a German soldier in the flesh once sometime in the early 80ies, during a night exercise in the pouring rain. Or maybe he believes the German dress uniform is actually the PE uniform, which is also worn in combat. Honestly, the latter explanation is more likely.
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 19:16 |
|
LowellDND posted:In the last post on Fascism, you (Disinterested) talked about how there is a revisionist line about Stalin and the Terror/famines. Is there any decent histiography to it, or is it Stalinist apologetics? I can't really speak to the Terror, but as regard to the Famines, there's a thread that considers it largely hijacked by Ukrainian nationalism and completely distorted as a result. Their basic argument is that it wasn't just the Ukraine, it wasn't deliberate or targeted, it didn't kill as many as reported (though we're still talking in the millions -- this isn't denial here), and was largely the result of bureaucracy at once callous and incompetent, an overreliance on Marxist theory solving all problems (Collective Agriculture is the future; the tractor will solve all things; the peasant/kulak class enemies are secretly hoarding grain and working with the capitalists!), a desire for foreign cash to power industrialiation (which means selling off food even when you don't have enough), a desire to show the world in the midst of depression that the Soviet Union was the future of civilization, and a deathly fear of anyone actually reporting what was actually happening for fear of being executed/purged. Davies and Wheatcroft (on the Soviet agriculture side) and John Paul Himka and others (on the Ukrainian side) are probably the best people writing about this angle. The problem is that there is in fact Stalinist apologetics for all this too, so anyone questioning the Holodomor tends to get tarred as a Soviet/Putinist puppet. Read (or better yet, don't) Douglas Tottle for a Stalinist apologia par excellence. Xotl fucked around with this message at 19:49 on Apr 26, 2015 |
# ? Apr 26, 2015 19:41 |
|
Phanatic posted:Why? Conventionally-powered CVs with steam catapults have been successful for decades. Had been successful (yeah I know Foch and Kitty Hawk are still technically in service). None nuclear modern power plants just don't have waste (or spare if you like) heat like something designed in the 1950s. The build and running costs for CVF demanded something like IEP. The UK Manufacturing base has moved on and it's not possible to knock out a 2010 edition of Ark Royal (R09) at anything approaching a realistic cost. India is likely to move to nuclear for INS Vishal .
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 20:04 |
|
Koesj posted:What's the effect of the Weisswurstgrenze on this? Do Bavarians taste worse, or wurst? Inquiring minds (vast, cool, unsympathetic) want to know. eat the bavarians first
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 20:05 |
|
For some reason I'm thinking of Augustus Gloop and I have no idea why 100 Years Ago Back to Gallipoli, where things are mostly going better than yesterday, which admittedly isn't difficult. Hard-won progress is being made. Strong-points are being captured. The French are being withdrawn from Kum Kale, job done, and will soon be arriving as reinforcements. Almost everywhere, this improving situation prevails. Except at Y Beach, which is currently hosting a true clusterfuck for the ages, and one which proves to private soldiers everywhere that occasionally, there's a valid reason for officers to exist.
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 20:46 |
|
Trin Tragula posted:100 Years Ago quote:When in far off ages men discuss over vintages ripened in Mars the black superstitions and bloody mindedness of the Georgian savages, still they will have to drain a glass to the memory of the soldiers and sailormen who fought here. Well, that sure is something.
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 21:18 |
|
Not to take anything away from Disinterested (loving your fascism effortposts), but this afternoon I saw a link from Brad DeLong's blog to Mussolini's "What is Fascism?" entry for the Italian Encyclopedia. So, from the horse's mouth, as it were (I've highlighted the bits that stuck out in my mind as the tl;dr answer to the question):quote:Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace. It thus repudiates the doctrine of Pacifism -- born of a renunciation of the struggle and an act of cowardice in the face of sacrifice. War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have courage to meet it. All other trials are substitutes, which never really put men into the position where they have to make the great decision -- the alternative of life or death....
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 21:47 |
|
Libluini posted:Watch on the Rhine was the first book which made me genuinely angry after I had finished it. Later I threw it into my recycling-bin to be transformed into toilet paper. A fitting punishment. Kratmann actually showed up one of the forums I used to frequent to proclaim that airdropping two Fallschirm divisions in southern England would be enough to occupy UK. Also, his response to Royal Navy sinking german river barges in English Channel in the event of Operation Sea Mammal? Germans troops would just swim ashore and continue to fight. I don't think he has any self awareness whatsoever.
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 22:12 |
This ties in to what I said about the aestheticisation of poltics in fascism, the Walter Benjamin point. Fascists have to be able to cast themselves as part of a heroic struggle, that appears to be vital. It's a kind of corrupted Nietzschean superman impulse.
|
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 22:25 |
|
Tekopo posted:I just recently read The Myth of the Eastern Front which is a good start. I was never a member of Ze Nazi party! :Will Ferrell: I've had this username since I before I was aware of the unpleasant associations that might come with the number 88 and a random German name and I guess I should put up the to change it someday. Cyrano4747 posted:I've made the mistake of reading all of his "Ghost" books, plus that awful Kratmann-coauthored love letter to the Wehrmacht. Ringo is a hack, but a mostly harmless hack. He comes dangerously close to writing really good airport grade fiction, but then goes off the rails with completely descriptions of pedophilia and child-rape. I'd love to see you tear down Ringo's work but I can't find the thread. Can you throw me a link? JaucheCharly posted:Extensively in german accademia. No, I don't speak German, is there anything else for a dumb American looking to expand his horizons a bit? Gervasius posted:Kratmann actually showed up one of the forums I used to frequent to proclaim that airdropping two Fallschirm divisions in southern England would be enough to occupy UK. Also, his response to Royal Navy sinking german river barges in English Channel in the event of Operation Sea Mammal? Germans troops would just swim ashore and continue to fight. Do you think that people of this stripe even bother to read a popular history of WWII, let along a more serious minded work on the subject?
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 22:35 |
|
Klaus88 posted:
He was a Lieutenant Colonel in US Army, so my guess is "yes".
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 22:54 |
|
Gervasius posted:He was a Lieutenant Colonel in US Army, so my guess is "yes". Waitwaitwait Someone let this guy command troops?
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 23:07 |
|
Klaus88 posted:I'd love to see you tear down Ringo's work but I can't find the thread. Can you throw me a link? I think by now it requires archives, here's the link: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3385144. It takes a very special kind of author to take the idea of "the protagonist should have flaws to make them believable and relatable" and decide that the best way to do that is by making him an unrepentant serial rapist.
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 23:08 |
|
The Lone Badger posted:Waitwaitwait Let's hope he never had to do any amphibious attacks.
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 23:19 |
|
The Lone Badger posted:Waitwaitwait Haha you didn't think "waist deep in the big muddy" was an allegory did you? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXnJVkEX8O4
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 23:27 |
|
Perestroika posted:I think by now it requires archives, here's the link: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3385144. It takes a very special kind of author to take the idea of "the protagonist should have flaws to make them believable and relatable" and decide that the best way to do that is by making him an unrepentant serial rapist. I didn't think that that part was Ringo trying to give the protagonist flaws because that would require him seeing that as a flaw.
|
# ? Apr 26, 2015 23:29 |
|
Perestroika posted:I think by now it requires archives, here's the link: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3385144. It takes a very special kind of author to take the idea of "the protagonist should have flaws to make them believable and relatable" and decide that the best way to do that is by making him an unrepentant serial rapist. Hahaha holy poo poo, this is amazing(ly terrible). Edit: The book, obviously, not the thread.
|
# ? Apr 27, 2015 01:26 |
|
Perestroika posted:I think by now it requires archives, here's the link: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3385144. It takes a very special kind of author to take the idea of "the protagonist should have flaws to make them believable and relatable" and decide that the best way to do that is by making him an unrepentant serial rapist. Is this the guy who wrote about nude women reloading his rifle while he was fighting off terrorists or somesuch craziness? Cuz that was almost singularly funny.
|
# ? Apr 27, 2015 03:10 |
|
Reading through the thread I'm once again disappointed that Waffleimages went down, since I really want to see what the result of that word cloud was.
|
# ? Apr 27, 2015 04:08 |
|
Libluini posted:Watch on the Rhine was the first book which made me genuinely angry after I had finished it. Later I threw it into my recycling-bin to be transformed into toilet paper. A fitting punishment. The latter, I can assure you. Watch on the Rhine is hilarious when you find out that the guy's main book series is pretty much a charismatic leader taking over a country, training a paramilitary force into an unbeatable army and then taking over the world. And that that charismatic leader is Kratmann in everything but success and name. For a laugh, check out any 1 star review for his books on amazon and you'll probably find him arguing with the reviewer in comments.
|
# ? Apr 27, 2015 05:58 |
|
Cyrano4747 posted:I've made the mistake of reading all of his "Ghost" books, plus that awful Kratmann-coauthored love letter to the Wehrmacht. Ringo is a hack, but a mostly harmless hack. He comes dangerously close to writing really good airport grade fiction, but then goes off the rails with completely descriptions of pedophilia and child-rape. Ringo wrote a book called The Last Centurion. He figured it was terrible and shouldn't be published but apparently Jim Baen kept arguing with him. I don't recall it having rape but it's worse then the Ghost series. It's basically 90% politics and his lovely political opinions with no filter.
|
# ? Apr 27, 2015 06:24 |
|
Frostwerks posted:Is this the guy who wrote about nude women reloading his rifle while he was fighting off terrorists or somesuch craziness? Cuz that was almost singularly funny. I'm really worried by how convinced I am that he's writing what he knows with his main character's mental state.
|
# ? Apr 27, 2015 06:25 |
Thomamelas posted:Ringo wrote a book called The Last Centurion. He figured it was terrible and shouldn't be published but apparently Jim Baen kept arguing with him. I don't recall it having rape but it's worse then the Ghost series. It's basically 90% politics and his lovely political opinions with no filter.
|
|
# ? Apr 27, 2015 06:27 |
|
100 Years Ago Smith-Dorrien's letter recommending withdrawal from most of the Ypres salient reaches Sir John French. The reaction is, ahem, not exactly positive. By the end of the day, plans are indeed in motion for a withdrawal to the GHQ line, but that's far from all. Elsewhere, the ANZACs beat off a heavy counter-attack, Grigoris Balakian is imprisoned at Cankiri, and the French Council of Ministers once again discusses General Joffre's conduct of the war at length. Oh, and there's a top-drawer advert for Zam-Buk.
|
# ? Apr 27, 2015 10:38 |
|
Klaus88 posted:No, I don't speak German, is there anything else for a dumb American looking to expand his horizons a bit? The Nazi thread. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3541449
|
# ? Apr 27, 2015 10:45 |
|
I missed a lot of the thread due to a sudden attack of marriage. Here we are 100 years later, and Gallipoli was a complete failure of leadership, and even if they DO force the Dardendalles, it dosn't change a damm thing because they don't have enough troops to conquer Turkey and secure both sides of the straights. Is that right or wrong?
|
# ? Apr 27, 2015 11:39 |
|
The original idea IIRC, which ties in with why they attempted to force the straits as well, was that they would just need to get ships into the Sea of Marmara (which could potentially be done if they manage to capture one side of the strait), they just need to shell Istanbul and then the Turks would just collapse and sue for peace. If this was actually feasible or possible is unclear to me.
|
# ? Apr 27, 2015 12:00 |
|
Comstar posted:I missed a lot of the thread due to a sudden attack of marriage. The aim of the Dardanelles campaign wasn't to take both sides of the strait or conquer Turkey - the idea was to force the straits for naval traffic which would both let Allied navies threaten/bombard Constantinople and let supplies reach Russia. It was also going to be the 'soft underbelly' option compared to the slog in the West. The point of the army landings was to take the mobile field artillery which was bombarding the minesweepers trying to sweep the channel, as the navy had proved incapable of forcing the straits due to the triple threat of the heavy fort guns, the mobile guns, and the mines. Politically the Dardanelles campaign was a sideshow to get at the 'soft underbelly' of Turkey, since they were viewed as an easy target, even though many people (like Jackie Fisher) saw that this was not going to be nearly as easy as people thought. As soon as the battleships start sinking and the landings falter with heavy casualties, people lose heart in the supposed 'quick victory' and the plug gets pulled on the whole thing. Tekopo posted:The original idea IIRC, which ties in with why they attempted to force the straits as well, was that they would just need to get ships into the Sea of Marmara (which could potentially be done if they manage to capture one side of the strait), they just need to shell Istanbul and then the Turks would just collapse and sue for peace. If this was actually feasible or possible is unclear to me. The entire Dardanelles campaign was made a reality because charismatic people like Winston Churchill said the Royal Navy could do the job with no meaningful losses and the Turks would roll over. It would have been physically possible to take the straits with enough resources and planning, but politically there was no way that campaign would have been undertaken if people knew in advance how hard it was going to be. In particular it never would have gotten off the ground if it was known that an army landing was necessary (it was sold as a naval only gambit, the landings came later) - GHQ would have blocked the diversion of any more troops to Gallipoli past the amount that was sent in the first place. MikeCrotch fucked around with this message at 12:19 on Apr 27, 2015 |
# ? Apr 27, 2015 12:12 |
|
Speaking of Churchill and soft underbellies, in WW2 before the decision was made to land US troops in Africa before anywhere else, didn't Churchill lobby for a landing in Italy not just for the underbelly obsession, but because he advocated marching straight to Berlin from Italy since it's a relatively short distance (never mind the huge mountain range in between)? Edit: Cursory wikipediaing implies Torch was actually the British preference and it was the Americans who wanted to go straight to Europe. By the way, sorry for managing to bring up WW2 in the middle of WW1 discussion. Sulphagnist fucked around with this message at 12:54 on Apr 27, 2015 |
# ? Apr 27, 2015 12:50 |
|
Churchill was pretty bad at the whole "war" thing, yeah. His assets lay elsewhere (mainly in oratory tbh, but there are worse qualities in a leader of a democracy during total war)
|
# ? Apr 27, 2015 13:16 |
V. Illych L. posted:Churchill was pretty bad at the whole "war" thing, yeah. His assets lay elsewhere (mainly in oratory tbh, but there are worse qualities in a leader of a democracy during total war) Although the fact he was sort of fond of war in many ways was beneficial at the time.
|
|
# ? Apr 27, 2015 13:31 |
|
|
# ? May 26, 2024 11:53 |
|
Disinterested posted:Although the fact he was sort of fond of war in many ways was beneficial at the time. And the reason he was kicked out of office the moment the war was over.
|
# ? Apr 27, 2015 13:34 |