MILITARY HISTORY ONLINE

User:  
Password:  
 
 General History
Page 14 of 115 (Page:  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13    14    15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115 )
Message
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/9/2022 7:52:01 PM
Quote:
6-8 in history; btw how long after 6-6-1944, did it take the Allies to secure the Normandy beaches? Anyone?


It took until the end of June before the allies had landed everything that they needed to continue the fight and were assured that they had a firm foothold.

Quote:
By June 30th, the Allies had established a firm foothold in Normandy — 850,279 men, 148,803 vehicles and 570,505 tons of supplies had been landed.
. source: eucom.mil

After the initial landing on June 6 and one attempted counterattack by the Germans on that day, there were several days whereby the allies had to turn back counter attacks. There was particularly vicious fighting in the Caen sector.

As well, the temporary harbours had to be towed over from England and they were being installed on June 11. So may we point to that day to say that the beaches were now secure?

This is a map of the situation at the end of June 6, 1944



June 7-12



June 13-18



So I am guessing. When did Germany know that the allies were not going to be pushed into the sea?

Cheers,

George

Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4811
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/9/2022 10:17:55 PM
Quote:
6-8 in history; btw how long after 6-6-1944, did it take the Allies to secure the Normandy beaches? Anyone?

I wish I knew what “secure the Normandy beaches” meant. I also don’t believe that “securing the Normandy beaches” is significant. IIRC, the Normandy beaches were meant to be not just secured but also cleared by about day 4. The German counter-offensives – at least after the initial thrusts of June 7-8 – pretty much stopped Allied advances cold. So I would suggest that while the Allies held and extended the invasion beachheads, they were not truly secure until German forces finally collapsed. In truth, isn’t that date some weeks after June 6?

Cheers
Brian G
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
GaryNJ
Cumberland NJ USA
Posts: 254
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
6/9/2022 11:36:35 PM
Quote:
6-8 in history; btw how long after 6-6-1944, did it take the Allies to secure the Normandy beaches? Anyone?


I would suggest that the Normandy beaches were "secured" by the end of June 6. Once the German defenses at the beaches were defeated and the Allies had moved inland even for just a few miles it became impossible for the Germans to drive the Allies back. Between the air power and naval gun fire the Allies could defeat any German counter attack.

A small example of this occurred late in the morning on June 6 on Omaha beach. US infantry climbed the bluffs between the major exits (draws) to attack the German strong points from the sides, but they had no armored support. The German 352nd tried to counter attack them with 14 Marder III tank destroyers. However, they were observed by navy spotters in their tiny little spotter plane and called in naval gun fire that obliterated the German armor

Of course, the Normandy campaign would go for some time, but Allies were there to stay.

Gary.
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6510
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/10/2022 6:40:41 AM
Here are CWGC data for the first five days of fighting in Normandy. These are for UK and Canadian deaths, Army only

June 6 : 1,390

June 7 : 492

June 8 : 348

June 9 : 295

June 10 : 203

According to Chester Wilmot, Second British Army returned casualties of 5,259 killed and wounded for those five days. No mention of missing in action.

The aggregate number of deaths cited above is 2,728, which is a high figure, representing more than half the total killed and wounded cited by Wilmot, so it's a legitimate assumption that the British Canadian reports as of 10 June 1944 were significantly understated, or that there were many additional MIAs not accounted for in that figure of 5,259.

The figures do, however, clearly indicate that the cost of the fighting in lives diminished a lot in the four days following D day, which suggests that German counterattacks were not on a scale or intensity sufficient to drive the Allies into the sea.

Of course, the much larger US casualties are not arrayed here, except for one figure of 6,603 killed, wounded and missing for D day itself, which I also cite from Wilmot.

I might investigate the CWGC database to find out which other days in the Normandy fighting entailed the greatest loss of lives for the British and Canadians.

Editing : were I to attempt an analysis, would it be better deployed in the WW2 section of the forum, or is it okay to leave here ?
It troubles me a bit, that engaging in This Day in World History opens up the interest, and then leaves me wondering whether it’s better just to allude to it and move on, or to get more involved in details.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/10/2022 7:57:17 AM
It would be better to move the thread to the WWII section, Phil. It would give us an opportunity to flesh this topic out before other topics come to the fore on this section.

Cheers,

George
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6510
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/10/2022 10:19:32 AM
Right you are, George !

I must find another bivy for this analysis in the WW II section.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/10/2022 10:49:10 AM
George, & Phil,

I agree there should be a WWII thread on D-day! I mean it's even more complicated, & extensive as CW battle of Gettysburg! Tons of stuff to analyze & discuss!? Look how popular the Burg was!? Plus D-day is multi national, that makes it even more enticing!? What say you?

Go for it,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
GaryNJ
Cumberland NJ USA
Posts: 254
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
6/10/2022 4:34:14 PM
Probably a good idea to have a thread on D-Day in the WW2 section rather here.

Gary
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4811
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/10/2022 6:55:54 PM
On this day in 1940, Norway finally admitted to defeat at the hands of he Germans, ending a two-month battle against its invaders.

Germany invaded both Denmark and Norway on April 9. The Danes offered no great resistance to the invasion, and capitulated within a few hours. Norway, equally taken by surprise by the German invaders, was struck along its length at key points, from Oslo and Kristiansand in the south to as far north as Narvik.

At the time, Germany claimed it had “documentary proof that England and France had jointly decided, if necessary, to carry out their action through the territory of the Northern Stages against the will of the latter. …Germany has thus preserved the Scandinavian countries and peoples from destruction, and will until the end of the war defend true neutrality in the North.” (Robert Goralski, World War II Almanac: 1931-1945, p 109). In this, while playing fast and loose with their motives, they were probably correct. The RN and French had minded Norway’s coastal waters on April 8 in an attempt to reduce Germany’s abilities to ship war materiel from both Norway and from Sweden. There were, too, preparations underway for an allied landing in northern Norway, ostensibly to create a land bridge to funnel supplies to Finland).

At any rate, in the space of two months and one week, Germany gained control of thousands of kms of Atlantic coast (France would formally surrender on 17 June) from Norway’s border with the USSR to France’s border with Spain. Talk about a game-changer!

Cheers
Brian G
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/11/2022 2:41:32 PM
Moving on, to 6-10 day's history we find.

1692, the 1st Witch is hanged in Salem, Mass.!! How could those people really believe in witches?? Crazy! ?Comments??

1772, Rhode Islanders boarded & sank HMS Gaspee, it had to be an embarrassment to the Brits to have the smallest colony RI,, sink a RN Cutter!? What say you??

1940 At this point Benito Mussolini, declared war on Great Britain, & France! The el Duce was not the sharpest pencil in the box!? What say you??

1977 James Earl Ray, killer of MLK Jr escapes prison in Tennessee!? How could such a fugitive escape?? Anyone know??

2016 Gordie Howe, one of the greatest hockey players of all time, dies in Toledo, Ohio!? What did you think of Gordie?? where did he rank? Anyone??

How about 6-11 in history!?

1509 Henry VIII of England marries Catherine of Aragon! Then divorces her!? Why did Henry think he was so powerful as to defy the church & state!? Who does he think he is!??? Anyone??

1927 Aviator Charles Lindbergh is given the Distinguished Flying Cross by Pres. Calvin Cooledge! How can a civilian receive a military medal? Anyone??

1910 Ocean Explorer Jacques Cousteau was born! His show on National Geographic was awesome, at the time!? Did you watch it?? Anyone?

2001 Timothy McVeigh convicted of bombing a federal building in Oklahoma City! Considered then one of the worst terrorist attacks in US history!? Today would you say it was just a drop in the bucket!?? Sad times??

New topics, comments anyone??
Regards,
MD

----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/11/2022 9:06:57 PM
Quote:
1772, Rhode Islanders boarded & sank HMS Gaspee, it had to be an embarrassment to the Brits to have the smallest colony RI,, sink a RN Cutter!? What say you??


Yes, a bunch of men likely involved in the smuggling business boarded HMS Gaspee when it had run aground. Gaspee had been chasing another vessel sailing out of Rhode Island and suspected of smuggling rum and molasses from the French colonies in the Caribbean. The colonists did not like to pay customs taxes and they didn't like to follow the trade regulations set down by the crown.

These regulations were set down in the British Navigation Acts which forbade the colonists to trade with foreign nations without permission. We must realize that the British had invested a lot of money in these colonies and the mercantile system allowed Britain to profit from the existence of the colonies. If the colonists determined to smuggle, then British profits were reduced.

So the Rhode Islanders decided to engage in illegal trade. They also decided to engage in civil unrest and arson.

Smuggling was rampant in the colonies and nowhere more so than in Rhode Island, called "Rogue" Island by the British. And the smugglers were after rum and tea which were very expensive in the colonies. But if a smuggler could head to the Caribbean, he could take on rum, molasses and tea to smuggle into the colonies to be sold at a tidy profit to traders who would then sell to the colonists.

So this was not the action of militia or rebels. The revolution had not yet begun. Led by John Brown who was a slaver and seller of smuggled rum and molasses, the rabble rowed out to the beached vessel and boarded her. They shot the commander of the vessel and forced the surrender of the rest of the crew. Then they torched the Gaspee. And they got away with it, over one year before the uprising.

Note that John Brown was one of the wealthiest merchants and traders in all of the colonies and he wanted the smuggled goods that he sold to other businesses.

I often wonder whether the British should have rewritten the navigation acts to allow the import of certain highly prized products like tea, from foreign sources. That may have placated the merchant class who were the fomenters of rebellion.


Cheers,

George
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4811
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/11/2022 9:27:15 PM
Quote:
1509 Henry VIII of England marries Catherine of Aragon! Then divorces her!? Why did Henry think he was so powerful as to defy the church & state!? Who does he think he is!??? Anyone?

Think like an early Renaissance person. Henry is a ruler anointed by God to lead his people and to further Christian values. He believes this implicitly; so do his subjects. In Catholic Europe – and at the time there is only Catholicism in Europe – this was a norm.

Henry VIII’s father made the choice to bond England to Spain, seeing this as a means of raising England’s status on the European stage and a sensible alliance against the power of France. To this end, his diplomats negotiated with the court of the Spanish rulers, Isabella I of Castile and her husband Ferdinand II of Aragon for the marriage of their youngest daughter, Catherine of Aragon, to Henry VII’s eldest son and heir, Arthur. This wedding duly took place, on 14 November 1501. Arthur was 15; Catherine was 17. On 2 April 1502 Arthur was dead. The cause of death is still not determined, though cancer, consumption and the sweating sickness are all possibilities.

Enter Henry Tudor, now eldest son and projected king on his father’s death (and not quite 11 at the time of his elder brother’s death), who begins expressing interest in taking Catherine to wife, though she was 7 years his senior. While the union was still deemed satisfactory to the courts of Spain and England, relations between the countries were less cordial than previously. Not only that, there are marital laws of co-sanguinity about a person wedding his brother’s widow. This would take decisions about whether Catherine had ever consummated her marriage with Arthur, which would be placed in argument before the Pope, who could provide dispensation to allow the marriage.

Keep in mind that the Pope was the Vicar of Christ on earth, making his word law. But he was, frankly, also a dispenser of power and a controller of national destinies. He had huge political influence, and typically made his choices on what was good for the Church, sometimes at the expense of what was good for religion. Ultimately the Pope decided the marriage could take place, and Henry VIII (aged 18) marries Catherine of Aragon (aged 24). They would remain married for 24 years. In that time, Catherine will bear six children, including two sons. Catherine was clearly not denying Henry his conjugal rights. Sadly, only one child, Mary, would reach adulthood.

In 1533, Henry is 42. Catherine is older, at 48. And there is still no male heir. Henry searches his soul asking why God has allowed England’s anointed ruler to go heirless for so long that his wife is now probably beyond child-bearing. His conclusion, as a devout believer, is that God had deemed something in his marriage offensive. He wonders whether the dispensation allowing his marriage was incorrect, and that perhaps Catherine and his brother had consummated their marriage. If so, annulment of the marriage would appease God and allow Henry to find a new bride capable of bearing a son and heir. He appealed to the Pope to reverse his dispensation and declare the marriage of Henry and Catherine null and void. The Pope said “no”.

In response, Henry established what was in effect an English schism. He rejected the authority of what he called “the Bishop of Rome”, arguing instead that since Henry was himself appointed by God to rule his people, it should be God’s chosen monarch who is the head of the church, and that his religious appointees would have precedence in interpretations of matters liturgical. In effect, the primacy of the Pope was stripped from the Christian rituals under the ruler of England, based on his anointed status.

That’s how I understand it from an early 16th century perspective. But…but…

Henry was in his early 40s, and Anne Boleyn, at 31, appreciably younger. A king was all but expected to indulge his desires and appetites; Anne – raised at the French Court – was recognized as a woman who knew how to entice men. Even a quick read of Sir Thomas Wyatt’s sonnet, Noli me tangere gives an intriguing sense of Anne’s allure, though recent studies have suggested she was not comely but only seductive. I believe Henry was besotted by her sexuality and wanted to bed her. And in truth, he married Anne in a secret ceremony before his marriage to Catherine had been annulled by (I believe) Archbishop Cramner.

I don’t accept the 21th century vision of Henry VIII, though I have serious problems with supporting his behaviour. I don’t particularly like his behaviour as a monarch, But I suggest that Henry VIII’s story is much richer than is presented by most popular renditions.

Cheers
Brian G




----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/12/2022 1:22:17 PM
Hi George, & Brian,

This is why I love MHO, on yesterdays events, for example, check the, very informative replys on these topics, below!???

George answered in depth just what happened with regards to the HMS Gaspee being sunk by Colonists from Rhode Island! He did kind of paint the Rhode Islanders as bullies, instigators, & other American Colonists later on, as well, but otherwise a very informative response!?

& Brian, A scholarly synopsis, on the implications Henry VIII's marriage & follow up divorce to Catherine of Aragon, had on England & even Europe!?

Thanks guys,
Regards,
MD

BTW any new topics from 6-12, or 6-13???
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/12/2022 9:44:07 PM
Quote:
Moving on, to 6-10 day's history we find.

1692, the 1st Witch is hanged in Salem, Mass.!! How could those people really believe in witches?? Crazy! ?Comments??

1772, Rhode Islanders boarded & sank HMS Gaspee, it had to be an embarrassment to the Brits to have the smallest colony RI,, sink a RN Cutter!? What say you??

1940 At this point Benito Mussolini, declared war on Great Britain, & France! The el Duce was not the sharpest pencil in the box!? What say you??

1977 James Earl Ray, killer of MLK Jr escapes prison in Tennessee!? How could such a fugitive escape?? Anyone know??

2016 Gordie Howe, one of the greatest hockey players of all time, dies in Toledo, Ohio!? What did you think of Gordie?? where did he rank? Anyone??

How about 6-11 in history!?

1509 Henry VIII of England marries Catherine of Aragon! Then divorces her!? Why did Henry think he was so powerful as to defy the church & state!? Who does he think he is!??? Anyone??

1927 Aviator Charles Lindbergh is given the Distinguished Flying Cross by Pres. Calvin Cooledge! How can a civilian receive a military medal? Anyone??

1910 Ocean Explorer Jacques Cousteau was born! His show on National Geographic was awesome, at the time!? Did you watch it?? Anyone?

2001 Timothy McVeigh convicted of bombing a federal building in Oklahoma City! Considered then one of the worst terrorist attacks in US history!? Today would you say it was just a drop in the bucket!?? Sad times??

New topics, comments anyone??
Regards,
MD


1701 Parliament passes the Act of Settlement! What was that all about?? Anyone??

d,

oops, sorry!
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/13/2022 3:57:29 PM
Checking 6-13 for today's history! Comments anyone??

323 BC, Alexander the Great is killed in Babylon, what made him so effective as A commander?? What say you?

1865 William B Yeats is born, was he one of the great poets to come out of Ireland?? What do you think? Comments?

1967 Thurgood Marshall joins the Supreme Court, Is the Court today truly non partisan?? How could it be revised? Who Party wise, has influence over 6 of 9 justices & yet they are the prominent minority? Also the Judges have this position for their lifetimes? Is that fair?? Anyone??

2000 North, & South Korean leaders meet. Are they still enemies? What say you?

& on 6-14 these events occurred! New posts welcome!??

1645 Oliver Cromwell, & his army defeat the Royalists! How did this effect Britain? Anyone??

1777 US Congress adopts the Stars & Stripes as the US flag, today groups put words, & other colors, & things on the flag, is that right?? Comments?

1800 on today in history, Napoleon defeats the Austrians, & then today in 1807 he defeated the Russians, how much of Europe did he conquer? Anyone??

1811 Harriot Beecher Stowe writes Uncle Tom's Cabin, why did it cause such a stir in the Southern US?? What was it about? Do you see the conflict? Anyone??

1940 Hitler enters Paris, what did the French think of this?? Did Hitler rub it in the Frenchmans faces?? What's up with the passenger train car?? What say you??

1982 the Argentines surrender Port Stanley! Leading to Great Britain winning the Falkland Islands War! Was the entire Commonwealth involved in the victory? What say you about the Falklands War?? Comments, & websites welcome??

1940 First prisoners arrive in Auschwitz Concentration camp! How many prisoners were killed by the Nazis! Is this one of the worst episodes Genocide in history!? Comments??

Lots to discuss here? Anyone?
Regards,
MD







----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4811
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/13/2022 8:24:09 PM
On this day in 1381, members of one of two large mobs converging on London in what is known as The Peasants’ Revolt crossed London Bridge and went on a rampage, murdering some merchants and destroying the Savoy Palace, London home to John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster.

The immediate cause of the peasants’ wrath was the recent (1380) imposition of a Poll Tax in order to raise money for the Crown (I believe to fund a planned military campaign in France; the Hundred Years War was sporadically active). But in a larger sense, the Peasants’ Revolt was the result of controls placed on the peasantry after the Black Death gave workers the chance to bargain for their services.

The King at the time of the Peasants’ Revolt was a young Richard II. He was son of Prince Edward, The Black Prince, who died in 1376, leaving Richard as heir apparent to his grandfather, Edward III. Edward III died in 1377, placing the crown on the head of a 10-year-old boy. Being deemed too young to rule unassisted, he was directed by various councils of regents, which included his uncle John of Gaunt. At the time, there were rumours that Gaunt was planning to depose his nephew and claim the crown. There were also rumours that the monies from the Poll Tax would be used to further Gaunt’s dreams of European power. The first is almost certainly untrue; the second may have some validity. These are the reasons normally given for the mob’s targeting of Gaunt’s Savoy Palace.

Gaunt, third son of Edward III, was raised and educated within the Black Prince’s household, a standard procedure for nobility. He learned martial, governance, and diplomatic skills, as was expected. He was, by 1380, perhaps the wealthiest man in England. He had ambitions in Europe, in Castile, but was by best accounts not actively aspiring to the throne of England. The bulk of his English estates were in the north of England, and he had used the skills learned at his brother’s side so well that he became the head of the diplomatic mission to find peaceful relations with the Kingdom of Scotland on a number of occasions. At the time of the Peasants’ Revolt (also known as Wat Tyler’s Rebellion, after the leader of the Kentish horde), Gaunt was once again negotiating a treaty with the Scots – on behalf of his nephew and king, Richard II.

Once the Kentish contingent (and by this point, it included many besides peasants – anyone harmed by by the imposition of the Poll Tax) was rampaging through the City of London, Richard II, now 15 and therefore deemed an adult, rode out to meet the second major horde, from Essex, at Mile End (outside London) on June 14. Many promises were offered to appease the mob, but while the King and his delegation were meeting with the Essex wing’s leaders, Tylers Kentish contingent breached the Tower of London and beheaded two of the King’s senior appointees. These weren’t random deaths: both men had some responsibility for the Poll Tax levy.

Another meeting was arranged between Richard II and Wat Tyler’s group on 15 June, 1381, at Smithfield. IIUC, the mood was ugly, and tensions so high that the Mayor of London killed Tyler in a fit of rage and the sides drew up to charge each other.

Richard, either through wisdom, sheer guts or utter stupidity, rode out alone to face the mob. As their anointed King, he rode out alone to face the mobs. At least, that is the story still being told. A few more promises – none of them acted upon – and the rebellion was effectively over, though the issues which caused the rebellion remained and would resurface from time to time.

Cheers
Brian G

----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/14/2022 3:02:25 PM
Hi Brian,

Nice topic, kind of gives us an idea on how the Middle Ages were going at the end of the 14th Century!? At this time the Black Plague was petering out! It sounds as though unfair taxes by English leadership were an issue even then? Also only in monarchies do we have Regents having to oversee young kings like Richard II, Regent John Gaunt, sounds like a power hungry guy looking out for himself, having designs on the Crown!? A Matt Tyler lead a bloody revolt, even beheading 2 of the Kings representatives? But he got his just reward, killed by the Mayor of London!? Do I have this right?? Gee this sounds like several Hollywood movies I have seen on the Medieval times in England?? Maybe with Errol Flynn?? ☺

What say you??
Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/14/2022 3:06:31 PM
Again check these interesting topics not yet commented on? Anyone??

Quote:
Checking 6-13 for today's history! Comments anyone??

323 BC, Alexander the Great is killed in Babylon, what made him so effective as A commander?? What say you?

1865 William B Yeats is born, was he one of the great poets to come out of Ireland?? What do you think? Comments?

1967 Thurgood Marshall joins the Supreme Court, Is the Court today truly non partisan?? How could it be revised? Who Party wise, has influence over 6 of 9 justices & yet they are the prominent minority? Also the Judges have this position for their lifetimes? Is that fair?? Anyone??

2000 North, & South Korean leaders meet. Are they still enemies? What say you?

& on 6-14 these events occurred! New posts welcome!??

1645 Oliver Cromwell, & his army defeat the Royalists! How did this effect Britain? Anyone??

1777 US Congress adopts the Stars & Stripes as the US flag, today groups put words, & other colors, & things on the flag, is that right?? Comments?

1800 on today in history, Napoleon defeats the Austrians, & then today in 1807 he defeated the Russians, how much of Europe did he conquer? Anyone??

1811 Harriot Beecher Stowe writes Uncle Tom's Cabin, why did it cause such a stir in the Southern US?? What was it about? Do you see the conflict? Anyone??

1940 Hitler enters Paris, what did the French think of this?? Did Hitler rub it in the Frenchmans faces?? What's up with the passenger train car?? What say you??

1982 the Argentines surrender Port Stanley! Leading to Great Britain winning the Falkland Islands War! Was the entire Commonwealth involved in the victory? What say you about the Falklands War?? Comments, & websites welcome??

1940 First prisoners arrive in Auschwitz Concentration camp! How many prisoners were killed by the Nazis! Is this one of the worst episodes Genocide in history!? Comments??

Lots to discuss here? Anyone?
Regards,
MD








----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4811
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/14/2022 10:07:42 PM
Quote:
Nice topic, kind of gives us an idea on how the Middle Ages were going at the end of the 14th Century!? At this time the Black Plague was petering out! It sounds as though unfair taxes by English leadership were an issue even then? Also only in monarchies do we have Regents having to oversee young kings like Richard II, Regent John Gaunt, sounds like a power hungry guy looking out for himself, having designs on the Crown!? A Matt Tyler lead a bloody revolt, even beheading 2 of the Kings representatives? But he got his just reward, killed by the Mayor of London!? Do I have this right?? Gee this sounds like several Hollywood movies I have seen on the Medieval times in England?

That’s certainly the raw outline, but I obviously haven’t been clear enough on some of the details. And I seem destined to be unable to convey how distinct in many way the world of 1381 was from today.

When Richard began to think of needing revenue, he approached Parliament to attain the funds he required. He had some funds available to him, and other support as well, from his appointed followers, peers of the realm who had received huge land grants in exchange for both oaths of personal fealty to the king and promises of support (in provisions, arms, warriors and the like) in time of the King’s need.

The Black Death had run through its huge period of contagion during the 1340s in Europe, but was still present; Richard II’s wife, Anne of Bohemia, would die of plague in 1394. But the economic, social and cultural effects were constantly disruptive. Wealth was based on land: a lord was as wealthy as the land he owned and the crops it yielded. Loss of life from the Plague on the 1340s gave surviving serfs at least the sense of leverage, and they began demanding increased benefits for their labour. Not in the way we think of benefits, perhaps, but benefits such as retaining the crop of a quarter-acre of his lord’s land for his own use. Odd to think of now, but vital to the status of a land serf.

In effect, the Poll Tax of 1380 was simply another means by which England’s King could be financed. I don’t know that the amount of the tax (4d/person) was the issue, though given monetary values of the time the levy would quickly become a burden on a family of serfs. It might also have been the “equality” of the tax that rankled, since the same rate applied to all levels of society.

IIUC, the collection of the Poll Tax was placed in the hands of agents of the various Lords of the land, with support from the Church. This was a typical procedure; Lords knew their estates better than anyone, and had the management in place to know the populations to be taxed. People began avoiding the collectors, while other resentments became linked with the unfairness of the Poll Tax itself.

Finally – I think – it has to be pointed out that one simply didn’t challenge anything the king did. A King – even a 14-year-old boy being directed by regents – was God’s anointed ruler, and could do no wrong. To suggest such a thing was treason. So inevitably the focus of any challenge to authority was directed not at the King but at his advisors or inner circle. In this case, John of Gaunt – uncle to Richard II, wealthiest Lord in England, perhaps hoping to benefit from the Poll Tax through European wars which might advance his desire for Castille – was an obvious target.

My acquaintance with John of Gaunt began in about 1961, when I first studied Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales – Gaunt was seen as the model for Chaucer’s “parfit gentil Knycht”. My most recent reading was Helen Carr’s The Red Prince: John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, (Oneworld Publications, London 2022). And despite flaws, Gaunt stands the test of time. If not quite Chaucer’s “perfect, gentle knight”, his virtues and honour far outweighed his weaknesses. His conduct, both before and during the reign of his nephew Richard II, was exemplary by 14th century standards, and from recent revelations of #45’s family and political crap, could become a model of decency and honour even now.

Take a look some time at the “tree” of the English/British monarchy from the time of William the Conqueror. Note where Gaunt, as Duke of Lancaster, forces the Crown to legitimize his children by his mistress (and, later, wife), Katherine Swynford. The “War of the Princes” – also known as “The Wars of the Roses” is a battle between the houses of Lancaster and York. John of Gaunt was Duke of Lancaster.

I’ll be honest, MD, I hate to see this written down to the level of an Errol Flynn two-reeler. Wat Tyler (and yes, it was Wat, not Matt; it was also probably Tyler as in “Tiler”, or roofer; he could as easily have been called Slater or Thatcher, depending on where he was born). His name suggests a long history in England – Tyler is a name based on a descriptor. Think Fletcher, Mason, Smith, Thatcher, Drover or a host of other name decided by occupation. His name suggests he was not a serf, yet here he is leading a peasants’ rebellion. And he has been granted the right to parlay with his King. That in itself is astounding!

Minor points. Tyler had no hand in the deaths in London. He was simply leader of the Kentish contingent who had been released into the City. And his death (and there are more than one versions of his death) arose over class issues rather than individual deaths at the Tower of London or throughout the City of London. Tyler was mocked for his conduct before the king; insulted, he lashed out and was cut down.

I gotta go. This has been a long post, I know, but we’re dealing with an incredibly complex issue, and face serious issues with sources and interpretation.

Just in case you didn’t know, MD, Richard II would lose his throne by being deposed in 1399. His conduct and reign led to an uprising led by Henry Bolingbroke, a legitimized son of John of Gaunt who was disinherited by Richard after Gaunt’s death.

Richard II died (in prison) in 1400 at age 33. By that time, Henry Bolingbroke was astride the English throne as Henry IV.

Cheers
Brian G

----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/15/2022 11:50:24 AM
Hi Brian,

Thanks for clearing up that fascit of English Medieval History, sorry I guess I'm not an expert on it! So double thanks for your extended reply!!

Here is some more of that era on today 6-15 in history!? Comments from any MHO'ers welcome!??

Today 6-15, in history:

1215 King John seals the Magna Carta! What basically is in it? & How did King John gain such wisdom to issue the Magna Carta?? Anyone?


1775 George Washington in made commander of the Continental Army! He is held in high esteem by most Americans! I do recall earlier Ontario George, had some criticism on him?? Can't recall what?

1844 Charles Goodyear gets a patent on the Vulcanisation of Rubber! How will this effect motored transportation? & the deforestation of the rain forest?? What say you??

1846 the US, & Great Britain sign the Oregon Treaty! Was it a fair treaty for both parties?? Comments?

1864 Arlington National.Cemetery is established! Was this meant to punish Robert E. Lee? How so? Was it fair??
What say you??

1944 the US Marines attack Saipan, how did the battle go? Was it neccessary? Comments anyone?

Again lots to discuss?
It would be nice if more members got involved!??

Cheers,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/15/2022 12:24:00 PM
Quote:
1775 George Washington in made commander of the Continental Army! He is held in high esteem by most Americans! I do recall earlier Ontario George, had some criticism on him?? Can't recall what?


Sorry, I can't speak, MD Too busy crawling from underneath a bus.

Now please remember my frame of reference as a person who lives in a former colony of Great Britain and whose people did not seek to betray the mother country.

So from my perspective Washington was a traitor as he had once worn the uniform of an officer of the Virginia militia.

However, he did win and the winners get to write the history.

But I have always been intrigued by the national mythology surrounding events and people that has emerged in the US and so I think it is worthwhile to examine the careers, personalities and accomplishments and mistakes of those who have been mythologized. And I am not the only one who feels that way with respect to Washington.

Prior to the revolution, Washington may have been involved in the assassination of a French envoy, Jumonville, prior to the French and Indian Wars. As an officer, he wasn't particularly effective in some of the early operations of this war.

Is it not true that during the rebellion, he lost more battles than he won?

There are many articles written about Washington and by Americans which are critical of the man, especially after he became President. The following article explains the good and the bad of Washington's legacy.

[Read More]

Still the man has clearly attained a special status in the minds of many Americans. He was there in a critical period of the development of the nation and became President when others felt that the US needed its own monarch.

Is he deserving of all of the praise and in some cases, hero worship?

Cheers,

George



GaryNJ
Cumberland NJ USA
Posts: 254
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
6/15/2022 4:10:35 PM
Quote:
1775 George Washington in made commander of the Continental Army! He is held in high esteem by most Americans! I do recall earlier Ontario George, had some criticism on him?? Can't recall what?


George Washington was highly respected by most in Britain at the time of the War of Independence. Certainly not by everyone but by most. If I remember correctly that respect became greater after the war.

[Read More]

Gary
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/15/2022 5:41:29 PM
Quote:
1846 the US, & Great Britain sign the Oregon Treaty! Was it a fair treaty for both parties?? Comments?


It was a compromise deal and I am convinced that the British were unwilling to get into another war over this Oregon territory. Britain valued peaceful trade and especially with the US. As well, having concluded a war with the US in 1814, the British realized that to win another one (or at worst, a draw) would not likely be possible.

Both the US and Britain had claims to the Oregon territory and especially to the north of the Columbia I would assess that the British claim was far stronger.

1. British explorers like Vancouver had mapped the Pacific coast and one of Vancouver's men had mapped and sailed up the Columbia River long before any Americans had even come to the area.

2. Britain had secured through the Nootka Conventions that they could establish settlements and effect trade on any land north of California that Spain had claimed.

3. The North-West Company (NWC) had emerged as a rival to the Hudson Bay Co. and were actively expanding the fur trade in Oregon well before the merger with HBC in 1821. NWC's Alexander Mackenzie had already travelled overland to the Pacific, the first European to do so north of Mexico and this was in 1793. This was 12 years prior to the Lewis and Clark expedition.

Mackenzie had drawn up plans to make the Columbia River the centre of the Pacific fur trade and it seems that Jacob Astor followed them.

NWC's David Thompson, perhaps the greatest of the North American explorers/geographers, was the first European to navigate the full length of the Columbia River.

4. Once the NWC and HBC amalgamated, the HBC expanded its forts and trade routes in the Oregon territory. In fact, HBC became the de facto governing body of Oregon and regulated trade in the area for over 20 years. HBC was the law in that territory.

5. With war declared in 1812, all US concerns abandoned the Oregon Territory. They could not hope to compete with the RN lurking at the mouth of the Columbia. I will concede that the treaty that ended the war established that all conditions should be returned to the status ante bellum. That means that the trading post called Astoria and established by Astor would be returned but the British then said that Astoria was sitting on British land and that the Americans were encroaching.

But Americans began to travel to this territory and they resented the control established by HBC. HBC actually assumed that the Oregon lands south of the Columbia would eventually fall to the US. HBC eventually established a store in Oregon City to tend to the needs of the settlers. Business before politics.

Still Britain had hoped that the international border with the 49th parallel established as the line between Lake of the Woods and the Rockies would then jog to the south and follow the centre of the Columbia River. For a period of time, the US and Britain actually shared the Oregon Territory while negotiations continued.

So why did the British give up their claim to a border at the Columbia River which would protect valuable trade lands to the north?

The British did offer the use of ports north of the Columbia so long as the border was still the Columbia River. They were prepared to call all ports in the Strait of Juan de Fuca as free ports meaning both nations would share a port like Vancouver or on Vancouver Island. The US had repeatedly said that if the British owned everything south to the Columbia River that the US would have no deep water ports in that area. But they didn't like the British offer of free ports.

The British also proposed third party arbitration but the Americans rejected this proposal in favour of direct negotiation.

The Americans felt that the 49th parallel had been established as an acceptable boundary on the east side of the Rockies and that should be extended from the Rockies to the Pacific. The British had been fighting for the 45th which would have given them access to the headwaters of the Mississippi and navigation rights.

When President Polk came to power in the US, negotiations took a turn toward the nasty side. Polk had run on an expansionist platform. We have all heard his war cry, " 54'40 or fight" indicating that he wanted all of the coastal territory right up to the southern most part of Alaska on the panhandle.

This less than conciliatory attitude alarmed the British. They had been losing interest in Canada and some British politicians were convinced that the US intended to have most British territory in North America.

And so when the US refused to allow the Columbia River to be the international boundary in that part of North America, the British were perfectly happy to accept a concession that would allow the HBC to operate in the territory and to navigate the Columbia river freely. HBC owned a lot of property in Oregon and the US did not seize it.

Fair? Not really but by the time that the negotiations had reached a critical stage (say 1842), the US was enthralled with the concept of Manifest Destiny. The Oregon Treaty was the first sign that an arrogant concept like Manifest Destiny could be part of a winning formula to annex or negotiate or force lands to be ceded to the US.

Cheers,

George


Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4811
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/15/2022 9:35:55 PM
Quote:
George Washington was highly respected by most in Britain at the time of the War of Independence. Certainly not by everyone but by most. If I remember correctly that respect became greater after the war.

Gary, your link didn’t take me very far into the article. In truth, some of it seems to be blowing smoke.

I studied “ideas” in 18th century Britain at an advanced level, and IIUC there was much more debate over what the 1776 Rebellion meant to parliamentary values in Britain as the Whigs and Tories reinvented themselves than the Rebellion itself, which was a relative minor issue in the face of the larger Andlo-French War. There were major figures in Parliament, largely amongst the Whigs, who supported Colonial rebellion – see, e.g., James Fox.

I would suggest that there were times when a man and his cause could be somewhat separated. Washington was respected because he met certain standards. He could be respected for that, while his cause might be deigned repulsive or incorrect.

I get where George is coming from, but will stress the fact that I was never taught to believe George Washington was a traitor. I assume his caricature is as full of nonsense as the Hollywood creation of Davy Crockett, but that appears to be a US technique when dealing with any socially significant person. I would expect that Washington would be respected in Britain by any who believe a landowner (and therefore powerful person) is honourable.

Cheers,
Brian G
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
GaryNJ
Cumberland NJ USA
Posts: 254
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
6/15/2022 10:25:45 PM
Quote:
Quote:
George Washington was highly respected by most in Britain at the time of the War of Independence. Certainly not by everyone but by most. If I remember correctly that respect became greater after the war.

Gary, your link didn’t take me very far into the article. In truth, some of it seems to be blowing smoke.

I studied “ideas” in 18th century Britain at an advanced level, and IIUC there was much more debate over what the 1776 Rebellion meant to parliamentary values in Britain as the Whigs and Tories reinvented themselves than the Rebellion itself, which was a relative minor issue in the face of the larger Andlo-French War. There were major figures in Parliament, largely amongst the Whigs, who supported Colonial rebellion – see, e.g., James Fox.

I would suggest that there were times when a man and his cause could be somewhat separated. Washington was respected because he met certain standards. He could be respected for that, while his cause might be deigned repulsive or incorrect.

I get where George is coming from, but will stress the fact that I was never taught to believe George Washington was a traitor. I assume his caricature is as full of nonsense as the Hollywood creation of Davy Crockett, but that appears to be a US technique when dealing with any socially significant person. I would expect that Washington would be respected in Britain by any who believe a landowner (and therefore powerful person) is honourable.

Cheers,
Brian G


Brian,

I don't put up links that people cannot freely access. I'm surprised that you did not realize that the article can be freely viewed by just signing up for an account on JSTOR. It does not cost you anything to register an account.

Troy Bickham is a serious scholar with Masters and Ph.D. degrees from Oxford. He has also written a book on the war titled Making Headlines: The American Revolution as Seen through the British Press that was well received by scholars.

This does not mean I believe he is entirely right, but I do believe he is deserving of more respect than someone on an internet message board claiming he is "blowing smoke".

Gary
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/16/2022 7:19:34 AM
JSTOR is a brilliant resource. And I have a free account limited to 100 articles which is fair.

However, lately I have had problems gaining access to certain articles. The site suggests that my browser may be out of date but it is not. Perhaps I should try another browser.

And yet yesterday I was reading a piece about who had legitimate claims to the Oregon Territory and that article came up without logging into the JSTOR site. It just appeared when I clicked on the google list of found relevant articles.

But every time that I do read an article posted on this site, it has been worthwhile.

May I just say that my references to Washington as a "traitor" were somewhat tongue in cheek. I think that the leaders of the rebellion knew quite well that should the rebellion fail that some of them would surely lose their lives as traitors. That the leaders of the rebellious colonies also elected to invade the British colonies that wanted no part of rebellion does cloud my view of such men as noble characters.

Washington also made some enemies who may have been jealous of his fame. Perhaps that is just the nature of politics. Negative comments about the man were made by John Adams, Thomas Paine. Washington was criticized for his over spending on personal needs while in the office of the Presidency. Carping by jealous peers?? I don't know whether their negative comments were valid or not.


All nations have heroes and all tend to mythologize somewhat. I would say that here in Canada we are less prone to creating myths about our founders than say our friends to the south. In fact currently we seem to be in the process of vilification of the man most responsible for creating the conditions for an effective confederacy, Sir John A. Macdonald.

Cheers,


George

Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/16/2022 5:43:07 PM
Quote:


Today 6-15, in history:

1215 King John seals the Magna Carta! What basically is in it? & How did King John gain such wisdom to issue the Magna Carta?? Anyone?


1775 George Washington in made commander of the Continental Army! He is held in high esteem by most Americans! I do recall earlier Ontario George, had some criticism on him?? Can't recall what? Sorry George, for throwing you under the bus??

1844 Charles Goodyear gets a patent on the Vulcanisation of Rubber! How will this effect motored transportation? & the deforestation of the rain forest?? What say you??

1846 the US, & Great Britain sign the Oregon Treaty! Was it a fair treaty for both parties?? Comments? Thanks George for the history of the Oregon Treaty!!

1864 Arlington National.Cemetery is established! Was this meant to punish Robert E. Lee? How so? Was it fair??
What say you??

1944 the US Marines attack Saipan, how did the battle go? Was it neccessary? Comments anyone?

A few of these not commented on?? Again still lots to discuss?

Cheers,
MD


A couple of events from 6-16;

1874 In Canada Arthur Meighen a Conservative Party is the Prime Minister! Would you say this Canadian Conservative is like American Republican?? Comments, anyone? Are they simular??

1903 Henry Ford founds Ford Motor Company! Was Henry pro German in the coming Great War?? What say you??

1933 FDR's New Deal is being effective in stemming the economy!? Should we try something simular with today's threatened recession? Do you think a recession is coming soon?? Anyone??

1963 the USSR sends the 1st women in space! When did the US follow suit?? What say you??

Great responses to yesterdays topics!
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/16/2022 8:16:30 PM
Quote:
1874 In Canada Arthur Meighen a Conservative Party is the Prime Minister! Would you say this Canadian Conservative is like American Republican?? Comments, anyone? Are they simular??


MD, Arthur Meighen was the leader of the Conservative Party and the PM of Canada from 1920-21. He had replaced the retired Robert Borden, our WW1 wartime PM.

I am not sure that many Americans would recognize a member of the Conservative Party of Canada as a conservative politician.

We have several political parties at the federal level and I would say that they all hover around the middle. So I would call our Conservative Party as a centre-right party. However, this party is currently seeking a new leader and there is a leadership campaign ongoing. One of the candidates is Pierre Poilievre who has been a long time member of the party. But he seems to have adopted tactics that would be entirely recognizable in the US.

By that I mean that he is trying to appeal to the anti-vaxxers who think that the COVID mitigations were an attempt by government to control the lives and minds of Canadians, and those who want to drain the swamp, whatever that is. He says that he wants to make Canada, "free". He speaks of freeing Canadians from government overreach and bureaucracy.

He talks endlessly of his love of the oil and gas industry, appealing to disaffected Alberta voters.

None of this appeals to voters who never doubted that we were free in the first place but there are people who will nod their heads and say yes to Poilievre's attacking style.

Poilievre has been the Conservative attack dog through multiple elections and the party would like to unite as it seems to have split into factions. I don't think that Poilievre is the man to do it. Most people see through his rhetoric which seems short on substance.

But as I said, most Canadians are centrists. They believe in doing the right thing for the common good and expect the government to recognize the "right thing to do". They believe in the maintenance of a social safety net and if the Conservatives indicate that they will not support these sorts of things, then I believe that the Conservatives will be a rump party of the disaffected former Progressive Conservative Party of Canada.

Most of the other candidates for leadership of the party are moderate conservatives and I think that the Conservative Party has never been a far right wing force in Canada.

Cheers,

George
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/17/2022 8:14:18 AM
Quote:
Quote:


Thanks George for explaining the Conservative Party in Canada! Probably much more agreeable to be on the moderate side?? Don't you think??

Today 6-15, in history:

1215 King John seals the Magna Carta! What basically is in it? & How did King John gain such wisdom to issue the Magna Carta?? Anyone?


1775 George Washington in made commander of the Continental Army! He is held in high esteem by most Americans! I do recall earlier Ontario George, had some criticism on him?? Can't recall what? Sorry George, for throwing you under the bus??

1844 Charles Goodyear gets a patent on the Vulcanisation of Rubber! How will this effect motored transportation? & the deforestation of the rain forest?? What say you??

1846 the US, & Great Britain sign the Oregon Treaty! Was it a fair treaty for both parties?? Comments? Thanks George for the history of the Oregon Treaty!!

1864 Arlington National.Cemetery is established! Was this meant to punish Robert E. Lee? How so? Was it fair??
What say you??

1944 the US Marines attack Saipan, how did the battle go? Was it neccessary? Comments anyone?

A few of these not commented on?? Again still lots to discuss?

Cheers,
MD


A couple of events from 6-16;

1874 In Canada Arthur Meighen a Conservative Party is the Prime Minister! Would you say this Canadian Conservative is like American Republican?? Comments, anyone? Are they simular?? Again thanks George.

1903 Henry Ford founds Ford Motor Company! Was Henry pro German in the coming Great War?? What say you??

1933 FDR's New Deal is being effective in stemming the economy!? Should we try something simular with today's threatened recession? Do you think a recession is coming soon?? Anyone??

1963 the USSR sends the 1st women in space! When did the US follow suit?? What say you??

Great responses to some of the topics!
But reposted to see if any other responses??
Regards,
MD


6-17 in history, here are a few of the events, I'll be heading up north for the WE, not a good reception area to post!
So hopefully you guys take the bull by the horns!!??

1775 the battle of Bunker Hill in Boston, the hot bed of the Revolution! What say you??

1930 the US imposed a Tariff that hurts an already bad world economy!? Does the US tend to only look after itself? What's the world perspective?? Comments? Anyone??

1940 the USSR invades Latvia! Any similarities to today in the Ukraine?? Do you think the Ukraine can hold out??

1944 Iceland declares itself a Republic? How are they viewed in Europe today?? Anyone??

1972 Watergate is occurring!? It's just a drop in the bucket to what's going on today! What say you??

1994 OJ Simpson is arrested! Why didn't the nurses believe DNA evidence!? Comments??

2012 Race riots ensue after the Rodney King treatment by police?? Do you think it's justified??

Later,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/17/2022 11:13:11 AM
Quote:
1944 Iceland declares itself a Republic? How are they viewed in Europe today?? Anyone??


Perhaps WWII moved the Icelanders more quickly along the road to independence from Denmark. When Denmark fell, the Icelanders were on their own.

Well they did have a number of guests that they had to tolerate including Canadian, British and finally US soldiers who took turns in occupying the island to ensure that Iceland did not fall into the hands of the Germans, given that it is strategically placed in the Atlantic Ocean.

I don't know whether relations were strained between Iceland and Denmark. Iceland was already independent but had a union of sorts. The Icelanders adopted (?) the monarch of Denmark to be the monarch of Iceland. To a Canadian, that relationship doesn't sound odd. After all, the current Queen of Great Britain has a second job as the Queen of Canada.

Anyway in 1944, the Icelanders had a referendum an overwhelmingly voted to become a republic.

I don't know how they are perceived in Europe. I'm pretty sure that Iceland is not an EU member but an affiliate as part of the Schengen Agreement. Iceland is pretty closely connected to Europe and does trade within the EU market.

Cheers,

George
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4811
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/17/2022 7:08:07 PM
MD, I like the question: Quote:
Iceland declares itself a Republic? How are they viewed in Europe today?

George, good information in your answer Thanks.

Of course, on 9 or 10 April 1940 Iceland declared independence from Denmark, but I assume that was simply an effort to fend off German demands once Denmark surrendered. I would assume it also made Iceland less intolerant of the presence of foreign troops than it had been earlier. What I have some trouble with (explanations welcome!) is the use of the term “republic”. I’ve seen the same or a similar list to the MD is drawing from, and it to said “republic”, but MD’s account capitalizes it. I recognize that some US folk are emphatic about the US being a “Republic” rather than a democracy, but have never appreciated the difference. Yet I notice that Iceland is described as a unicameral parliamentary democracy in some descriptions. Is the issue simply that perhaps in 1944 Iceland dropped any governmental links with the Danish crown?

IIUC, Iceland is very much a part of Europe, just as it is considered very much a Scandinavian country. In the post-war period, there was some serious tension between Iceland and GB (the so-called “Fish Wars”), but in general Iceland functions within both the Scandinavian and European markets. It’s not as isolated as most people believe, after all; I believe it is closer to Europe than Alaska is to the Lower 48, or than Hawaii is to the Mainland.

It is also, of course, a founding member of NATO in 1949, and remains a vital component of NATO plans to control the Atlantic.

Cheers,
Brian G
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4811
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/17/2022 7:08:26 PM
dup
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4811
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/17/2022 10:04:12 PM
On this day in 1940, Marshal Petain replaced Paul Reynaud as prime minister of France, and promptly announced he will sign an armistice with Germany. The Armistice would be signed a week later, and would come into effect on 25 June 1940. Vichy France, never more than a puppet of German rule, and increasingly under control of men (e.g., Pierre Laval) sharing many Nazi values, would stumble on under the pretence of representing France in a ew Europe.

How a man of Petain’s stature could fall so low, and betray his country so rapidly and fully, remains beyond my ability to comprehend.

Cheers
Brian G

----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
vpatrick
MA MA USA
Posts: 2522
Joined: 2020
This day in World History! Continued
6/17/2022 10:32:58 PM
Hi Brian,

I wonder in France is Petain's name associated with traitor? Here in the US the name Benedict Arnold is associated with traitor but less as time goes by.


vpatrick
----------------------------------
nuts
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/18/2022 9:12:21 AM
2018 was the centenary celebration of the end of the Great War. France was conflicted about what to do about Pétain and his legacy.

President Macron received angry responses because he referred to Pétain as a "great soldier". The organizing committee had determined to honour eight great wartime leaders including Pétain but after Macron's controversial description of the man, Pétain's name was dropped from the honour role.

Quote:
The marshals whose honour has not been tarnished, and only those, will be honoured by the republic,"
. - government spokesman.

The man was an effective war hero. He may be remembered for his efforts at Verdun alone.

And so France had treated his legacy with kid gloves for a long time but Macron's comment about which he felt compelled to backtrack somewhat brought out the anger of many French people.

French Jews were particularly appalled that Pétain could possibly be honoured along with other Great War heroes of the republic as were the descendants of men and women who had fought as members of the French resistance.

The slogan or motto adopted after the French revolution was "Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité" or Freedom, Equality, Fraternity. Perhaps he was under pressure from the German occupiers but as the head of Vichy France, Pétain changed the slogan to "Work, Family, Country". Does that slogan conform to anything that the Nazi Party would have said?

Pétain had been charged with treason and handed a death sentence after WWII. Because of his age and perhaps his service in WW1, the sentence was commuted to life imprisonment by Charles DeGaulle. The man lived to be 96 years of age but developed dementia and was moved from prison to a private residence until his death in 1951. He had been stripped of all his honours and I believe that his remains could not be interred in a hall of honour ( name of hall escapes me right now).

So I would say that the French were not forgiving. Macron took great pains to explain that while Pétain made disastrous decisions during WWII, he was still a great soldier in the Great War. For many, his WWI service was insufficient to atone for his actions during the second world war.

It would be interesting to find out what Pétain's motivation was when he decided to collaborate with Nazi Germany. After all, wasn't he in some secure diplomatic post when he was called back to serve as the head of the French government? Why not refuse the request to lead?

Cheers,

George
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6510
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/18/2022 6:01:27 PM
George and Brian,

A charitable interpretation of Pétain will allow for his first rate performance in the agony of 1914-18. He is synonymous with Verdun, which might be cited as the Great War in microcosm . But even in that war, he was conspicuously pessimistic in the crisis of March 1918, allegedly stating that the British, and then the French, would be defeated. Not a good portent for 1940 !

One other thing stands out about his style of command : he was deeply upset by the ordeal that his soldiers underwent at Verdun in 1916, writing about how affected he was by this in a manner more redolent of our emotive approach than the conduct we associate with the standards of more than a century ago. Hero to zero qualified by a streak of overt humanity in his regard for the poilus of 1914-18.

Today must not pass without reference to one of history’s most famous battles :,Waterloo.

An interesting study has been published by military archaeologists about the treatment of the dead after that mighty battle. Where are the mass graves ?
According to folklore, the bones of thousands were exhumed and ground down into fertiliser to nourish the soul of British farms !

Regards, Phil



----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4811
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/18/2022 11:28:48 PM
VP, good question. Answer: I honestly don’t know.

George’s post gives one view on how Petain was viewed post-war. But I think about France after the defeat of Germany. Both Marshall Petain and PM Pierre Laval were taken to court at least as collaborators and perhaps as traitors – I’m not sufficiently au fait to know which – and both were found guilty. Both were found guilty, and I believe Laval was hanged. Petain, however, was placed in custody for his life; I believe he died somewhere around 1954, while still incarcerated. I think Phil’s comments about Petain, though challenging for many, suggest his special place in the French military psyche. I kinda get it, but don’t know how readily I could accept his character.

Cheers,
Brian G
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4811
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/18/2022 11:29:32 PM
dup
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6510
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/19/2022 5:03:40 AM
Pétain wanted to save France from another bloodbath.

In so doing he was complicit in a disgrace that haunts France to this day.

Which of the two is more unbearable : the excessive loss of life attendant on fighting to a victorious finish, or the price of collaboration with monstrous evil to save a million of your countrymen ?

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/19/2022 7:39:57 AM
Phil, did the man state in court that his motivation was solely to save lives? I would like to believe that. Earlier, I mentioned that he was given a diplomatic posting prior to the invasion and was called back and asked to take the lead of the Vichy government.

When war broke out, Pétain was French ambassador to Franco's Spain. When Pétain was offered the position of deputy PM in the Reynaud government he accepted. Franco had advised him not to go and to stay in his diplomatic post in Spain. He was over 80 by this time and his government had told him that his presence would strengthen the resolve of the French forces and the people to fight the Germans.

I wonder whether he felt that he was the only man who could save the situation. He was convinced that Great Britain was not a good ally and was not willing to provide sufficient aid. He didn't like DeGaulle.

Did he leave a diary or notes that would explain his motivation to lead a collaborationist government?

Cheers,

George
Page 14 of 115 (Page:  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13    14    15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115 )

© 2024 - MilitaryHistoryOnline.com LLC