Dunkirk

[butchna]

You said I was ignorant. I am not. Sorry if the response, which I thought was more than enough to prompt an actual discussion, was interpreted as some kind of insult on your part.



Sarcasm, sure, but you have yet to point out how this was anything other than an evacuation from one side of the English Channel to the other because of the arrogance of one world leader. Get over yourself.



Once again, this was major because Hitler, instead of reevaluating his trust of Goering, continued to do so. This would have drastic consequences for the war far more than the evacuation itself.

So if Britain had lost the core of it's army, Hitler's increase of faith in Goering would have been the bigger victory?

 

[mrorange211]

So if Britain had lost the core of it's army, Hitler's increase of faith in Goering would have been the bigger victory?

I see your point, but that was not the case. Britain saving their army was militarily significant, as I conceded to earlier, but in the long run I don't believe it was as big of a deal as his continued trust in Goering. This is a point of contention for many history buffs though, that's why I was expecting an actual dialogue. Dunkirk, to me, represents a huge allied propaganda lift in a time they needed it. That's why it rubs me the wrong way that a movie is being made. From my experiences with English people, they don't really recognize Dunkirk as this major event to be memorialized but instead one in which luck came down on their side mainly due to the idiocy of Hitler. Oh, and the fact that Petain was a dumbass and pulled his divisions as mentioned earlier in this thread.

 

[Toujours Pret]

The Luftwaffe destroyed the harbor before the Dynamo had launched in earnest, which is all that could've been expected. I have a hard time faulting Von Runsdedt for calling a halt to dress his lines and refit; the 2 pounders had done an admirable job and combined with mechanical failures many of the front echelon panzer units had a third of their complement out of the fight. It's a tossup in retrospect, but I can't blame anyone for not pressing it home immediately.

The ability of the British to successfully pull out over 300,000 to become the backbone of their war effort was simply splendid.

I believe just about everyone in the world outside of Churchill and cabinet expected Britain to sue for peace and walk away after they crossed the Channel.

 

[WarDamnVols]

Wow, this thread got interesting.

Great trailer. Love Nolan. Movie is gonna be great. Really looking forward to it.

 

[butchna]

I see your point, but that was not the case. Britain saving their army was militarily significant, as I conceded to earlier, but in the long run I don't believe it was as big of a deal as his continued trust in Goering. This is a point of contention for many history buffs though, that's why I was expecting an actual dialogue. Dunkirk, to me, represents a huge allied propaganda lift in a time they needed it. That's why it rubs me the wrong way that a movie is being made. From my experiences with English people, they don't really recognize Dunkirk as this major event to be memorialized but instead one in which luck came down on their side mainly due to the idiocy of Hitler. Oh, and the fact that Petain was a dumbass and pulled his divisions as mentioned earlier in this thread.

I think it's a fascinating historical story and don't understand how it could "rub you the wrong way". It's not interesting to you but why do you care that it got greenlit?

 

[Godfatha]

300,000 troops escaping capture isn't "morale". I'm sure Hitler's strategy was to take out as many opposing forces as possible. This was major.

True, but just a year later the Wehrmacht was able to field an army of over 4 million.

300,000 men is the approximate size of a field army. The Wehrmacht had 14 active in early 1941.

Now, it would have affected Operation Sea Lion, if that ever came to fruition, but the German Navy was afraid (and rightfully so) of the British Navy and it's doubtful Sea Lion would have ever taken place with or without those 300,000 men.

The 300,000 was significant in North Africa, and the Italian campaign, but these were truly backwater theatres that had were not make or break campaigns for the war.

 

[Godfatha]

If Dunkirk never happened, the British still would have not surrendered, imo. They still had the British Navy, the one that has always been their strength. They still had the USA sending shipments of food and arms. The only way I see them surrendering is if Barbarossa didn't happen, and the focus was kept on Britain with production of U-boats and an actual Luftwaffe strategy that made sense.

 

[mrorange211]

I think it's a fascinating historical story and don't understand how it could "rub you the wrong way". It's not interesting to you but why do you care that it got greenlit?

I will go watch it because I love Nolan. Interstellar is one of the best movies of the last 10 years in my opinion. That being said, I would have liked Nolan to explore the myriad world war II stories that have yet been told that in my opinion are more compelling than Dunkirk.

 

[butchna]

True, but just a year later the Wehrmacht was able to field an army of over 4 million.

300,000 men is the approximate size of a field army. The Wehrmacht had 14 active in early 1941.

Now, it would have affected Operation Sea Lion, if that ever came to fruition, but the German Navy was afraid (and rightfully so) of the British Navy and it's doubtful Sea Lion would have ever taken place with or without those 300,000 men.

The 300,000 was significant in North Africa, and the Italian campaign, but these were truly backwater theatres that had were not make or break campaigns for the war.

You lose 300,000 men in one fell swoop and it feels like you lost 300,000 men. This was a major heroic moment in British history...I'm glad they put it on the screen.

 

[butchna]

I will go watch it because I love Nolan. Interstellar is one of the best movies of the last 10 years in my opinion. That being said, I would have liked Nolan to explore the myriad world war II stories that have yet been told that in my opinion are more compelling than Dunkirk.

If this is successful they probably will. If it tanks? More Fast and the Furious franchise.

 

[Ulysees E. McGill]

I see your point, but that was not the case. Britain saving their army was militarily significant, as I conceded to earlier, but in the long run I don't believe it was as big of a deal as his continued trust in Goering. This is a point of contention for many history buffs though, that's why I was expecting an actual dialogue. Dunkirk, to me, represents a huge allied propaganda lift in a time they needed it. That's why it rubs me the wrong way that a movie is being made. From my experiences with English people, they don't really recognize Dunkirk as this major event to be memorialized but instead one in which luck came down on their side mainly due to the idiocy of Hitler. Oh, and the fact that Petain was a dumbass and pulled his divisions as mentioned earlier in this thread.

Hey you guys I was just poking at you genius types..I'm sorry for offending you. You guys really do have more knowledge than me in this subject. I am no WW2 historian. I have read a lot of books on it. My Grandfather was a DD+1 Army Corps of Engineers vet. He told me stories that I will never forget. He is my biggest hero even though he died when I was nine. He is the reason I started learning about the War. I do believe the Dunkirk operation was a huge deal. Nothing I've read has changed my mind. Like I said guys I was kidding. Me and my seven brothers argue like that with each other.

 

[Godfatha]

Hey you guys I was just poking at you genius types..I'm sorry for offending you. You guys really do have more knowledge than me in this subject. I am no WW2 historian. I have read a lot of books on it. My Grandfather was a DD+1 Army Corps of Engineers vet. He told me stories that I will never forget. He is my biggest hero even though he died when I was nine. He is the reason I started learning about the War. I do believe the Dunkirk operation was a huge deal. Nothing I've read has changed my mind. Like I said guys I was kidding. Me and my seven brothers argue like that with each other.

No problem with disagreeing. One of the best parts about being a history nerd is playing the what if game.

I think Dunkirk is a big deal because Barbarossa happened. My thoughts are based on it not being a big deal because Barbarossa had not happened yet.

I do think it's something that could be worthy of a movie and to my knowledge hasn't been done yet.

 

[Ulysees E. McGill]

Can we all agree that Barbossa was the greatest military blunder of all time?

 

[Ulysees E. McGill]

Dang autocorrect..Barbarossa.

 

[Godfatha]

Can we all agree that Barbossa was the greatest military blunder of all time?

Yes. I'm not sure there was an inevitable clash between the USSR and the Reich. The indicators on the Russian side was that they had no intention of invading the Reich. Hitler had no strategic foresight or he would have bided his time, built his uboat fleet and surface navy and concentrated his efforts on taking British assets in North Africa and the Middle East, getting the oil he desperately needed. It would have taken probably five years to build a surface navy to counter the British, but in the meantime the Uboats would have been strangling the UK for supplies.

 

[Toujours Pret]

Can we all agree that Barbossa was the greatest military blunder of all time?

Stalingrad. Should've driven on to the oil fields in the Caucuses and bypassed it.

Of course by this time OKW was more or less deferring to whatever fantasy Hitler dreamt up that night.

 

[Godfatha]

Stalingrad. Should've driven on to the oil fields in the Caucuses and bypassed it.

Of course by this time OKW was more or less deferring to whatever fantasy Hitler dreamt up that night.

They actually did go after the oil fields in the Caucuses simultaneously.


They had to push to take the Don bend and reach the Volga to secure the northern flank of the Caucuses. The mistake was placing so much significance on Stalingrad. They could have encircled it on 3 sides, laid it under siege, and stay out of the meatgrinder inside the city. I think it was also a mistake to send two panzer armies into the Caucuses when it is semi-mountainous country. 1st and 4th Panzer army would have been better served securing the flanks of 6th army instead of the Italian, Hungarian, and Romanian armies. They could have used the Italian army, which had some elite mountain divisions, south and paired them up with 11th army.

Sorry for rambling. It's fun talking about this stuff.

 

[mrorange211]

History is about disagreement. That's ok. No offense was taken.

They actually did go after the oil fields in the Caucuses simultaneously.


They had to push to take the Don bend and reach the Volga to secure the northern flank of the Caucuses. The mistake was placing so much significance on Stalingrad. They could have encircled it on 3 sides, laid it under siege, and stay out of the meatgrinder inside the city. I think it was also a mistake to send two panzer armies into the Caucuses when it is semi-mountainous country. 1st and 4th Panzer army would have been better served securing the flanks of 6th army instead of the Italian, Hungarian, and Romanian armies. They could have used the Italian army, which had some elite mountain divisions, south and paired them up with 11th army.

Sorry for rambling. It's fun talking about this stuff.

I've always felt that Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union was an objective for food that transformed into oil once he reached a certain point in the Ukraine.

 

[Toujours Pret]

They actually did go after the oil fields in the Caucuses simultaneously.


They had to push to take the Don bend and reach the Volga to secure the northern flank of the Caucuses. The mistake was placing so much significance on Stalingrad. They could have encircled it on 3 sides, laid it under siege, and stay out of the meatgrinder inside the city. I think it was also a mistake to send two panzer armies into the Caucuses when it is semi-mountainous country. 1st and 4th Panzer army would have been better served securing the flanks of 6th army instead of the Italian, Hungarian, and Romanian armies. They could have used the Italian army, which had some elite mountain divisions, south and paired them up with 11th army.

Sorry for rambling. It's fun talking about this stuff.

Once they destroyed the tractor factory Stalingrad was insignificant.

If nothing else they should have established a solid line across the Don and served as protection for the drive to the Caucuses. But yeah, Hitler, not one step back etc.

 

[Burhead]

Can we all agree that Barbossa was the greatest military blunder of all time?

Perhaps. It may have had a off chance of succeeding had Hitler not involved himself with the affairs of the OKH and OKW. Personally I don't think the Wehrmacht could have completed its objectives even if everything went there way, there was no war in the West, and had the full support of the Axis puppet states, etc. The Germans just did not have the manpower to successfully occupy the Soviets at the time. The Russians would have just retreated and fortified the lines and rebuild and eventually would have pushed the Germans out just the same.

There is nothing extraordinary about an evacuation. As much is admitted by Churchill himself. I point you to Churchill's autobiography set, particularly the "Our Finest Hour" edition. I would much rather have an adventure about the assassination of Reyhnard Heydrich or a biopic of Otto Skorzeny, but I bet you don't know anything about those stories. Careful about calling someone ignorant about something when they have written on it.

Dunkirk is a miracle in that Hitler for the first time listened to Goering and his overestimates regarding the capabilities of the Luftwaffe. That in and of itself is the true value of Dunkirk, not the rescue of ~340,000 men, because it would ultimately doom Hitler in the Soviet Union and at home by 44/45. The value of those 340,000 men later in the war I concede, however, is a point argued by many.

I agree the Heydrich story hopefully will be told on the big screen one day. It is a story I think Hollywood could do well with.

 

[Burhead]

Honestly though I think I would love a movie about World War I to be honest. It sometimes feels like it is the forgotten war so to speak. People make fun of the French fighting spirit should do well to study French actions at Verdun (Vous ne les laisserez pas passer, mes camarades).

 

[Toujours Pret]

I agree the Heydrich story hopefully will be told on the big screen one day. It is a story I think Hollywood could do well with.

Saw some home movie of Heydrich at a family outing, laughing, dancing, playing with children and such. Don't know why but it really creeps me out, one of the worst people to have ever been born being a perfectly normal father and husband.

 

[Burhead]

Saw some home movie of Heydrich at a family outing, laughing, dancing, playing with children and such. Don't know why but it really creeps me out, one of the worst people to have ever been born being a perfectly normal father and husband.

Did you see where the Russians found some of Himmler's diaries in a military archive?

On March 9, 1938 he wrote of a "comradely" meal.

That meal was at the Dachau concentration camp, the first of the Nazi’s camps in Germany where more than 31,000 people were killed.

Read more at Nazi Heinrich Himmler switches between man and monster in newly discovered diary - 9news.com.au

Another entry on February 12, 1943 mentions a trip to German-occupied Poland where Himmler went on a “tour of SS Sonderkommando”.

The simple notation fails to mention the reason for his tour, to inspect the extermination camp’s gas chambers.

A special transport of 400 Jewish women and girls were brought in from the ghetto at nearby Lublin for his visit.

They were put to death in front of Himmler to show the efficiency of his killing chambers.

The tour only warranted a single line in Himmler’s diary.

Himmler’s diaries have a mundane approach to major points in the war, and in world history.

His entry on October 4, 1943 simply stated a “speech to SS officers” at Poznan, in occupied Poland.

That speech was one of his most infamous, where the true extent of his madness was revealed.

I can't wrap my head around the fact these monsters were perfectly "normal" family men at the home and complete madmen away from them.

 

[Toujours Pret]

Did you see where the Russians found some of Himmler's diaries in a military archive?






I can't wrap my head around the fact these monsters were perfectly "normal" family men at the home and complete madmen away from them.

Exactly. If you didn't know the guy in the film you would think you were watching a german version of 'The Wonder Years' intro.

 

[Godfatha]

History is about disagreement. That's ok. No offense was taken.



I've always felt that Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union was an objective for food that transformed into oil once he reached a certain point in the Ukraine.

My thoughts too, Ukraine being the breadbasket of Russia. But I think the massive increase in the army and tank numbers, not to mention all the support/supply vehicles, caused the army to outgrow the supply of oil they were getting from Romania. The Caucuses therefore was a logical objective.