MILITARY HISTORY ONLINE

User:  
Password:  
 
 General History
Page 15 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
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6508
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/19/2022 1:01:12 PM
Good questions, George.


I don’t know what defence he mounted.

It’s something I’d like to investigate.

My guess is that he felt resignation to his fate : he was in extreme old age and he probably didn’t care.

He might have trusted in his track record to speak for itself. He had good reason to repose some confidence in his credentials as a patriot : survivors of Verdun 1916 were bound to show some veneration for him.

On 20 February 2016 I saw a play staged in London : Patriotic Traitors. The story was the relationship between Pétain and De Gaulle. I mentioned to one of the actors after the play that the following day would mark the centennial of the start of the Battle of Verdun.

We discussed the character of Pétain, and we both agreed that if he was a traitor, he was a damned patriotic one.

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
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6508
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/20/2022 3:38:25 AM
This thread has a topical ring at the moment.

The French National Assembly Elections have revealed a resurgent Left and Right which leaves Macron in a rather precarious position.

Amongst the French Right there is, I suspect, a significant cohort that would express admiration for Petain, and would cherish his memory on account of his leadership in the Great War ; especially regarding his defence at Verdun and his nurturing the French Army back to health after the mutinies of early summer 1917.

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
scoucer
Berlin  Germany
Posts: 3270
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
6/20/2022 5:36:59 AM
Quote:
This thread has a topical ring at the moment.

The French National Assembly Elections have revealed a resurgent Left and Right which leaves Macron in a rather precarious position.

Amongst the French Right there is, I suspect, a significant cohort that would express admiration for Petain, and would cherish his memory on account of his leadership in the Great War ; especially regarding his defence at Verdun and his nurturing the French Army back to health after the mutinies of early summer 1917.

Regards, Phil


Amongst the French Right there is a significant proportion who would welcome Vichy France back.

Trevor
----------------------------------
`Hey don´t the wars come easy and don´t the peace come hard`- Buffy Sainte-Marie Some swim with the stream. Some swim against the stream. Me - I´m stuck somewhere in the woods and can´t even find the stupid stream.
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6508
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/20/2022 8:51:22 AM
Quote:
Quote:
This thread has a topical ring at the moment.

The French National Assembly Elections have revealed a resurgent Left and Right which leaves Macron in a rather precarious position.

Amongst the French Right there is, I suspect, a significant cohort that would express admiration for Petain, and would cherish his memory on account of his leadership in the Great War ; especially regarding his defence at Verdun and his nurturing the French Army back to health after the mutinies of early summer 1917.

Regards, Phil


Amongst the French Right there is a significant proportion who would welcome Vichy France back.

Trevor


And yet one of the proponents of rehabilitating Pétain is of Sephardi Jewish descent.

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
6/20/2022 3:08:08 PM
Hi guys,

It's definitely OK to dive in & make this thread topical, great posts on Petain learned a bit about him, so thanks!

Checking 6-19 & 6--20 in history, the following occurred: 1st 6-19.

1846, Alex Cartwright arranges a game very similar to baseball, when do you think the 1st base ball game occurred?

BTW I visited the Bseball.Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, NY. It was really cool! Anyone else e ever go??

1865 African Americans in Galveston hear of the Emancipation Proclamation, realizing they are finally free, thats what brought on Juneteenth as A holiday!? Comments anyone??

1910 the 1st Fathers Day is celebrated! Hope ya all had a great Father's Day! Fell free to tell about it??

1944 the Naval Battle of the Philippines Sea, A USN victory! Comments on how this happened? Anyone??

1961 Kuwait breaks from Great Britain! The Commonwealth lost a lot of fuel! What say you??

6-20 in history, besides my wife's birthday!!???

1837 Victoria becomes Queen of Great Britain, & its empire!? Can you say Victorian Era! What say you about Queen Victoria? Many say she was the most influential monarch!? What say you? Best Queen or what??

1861 England's Frederick G Hopkins formulates the 1st vitamins! How did this come about? Anyone? BTW how many do you take?? With me It's @ 10-12! Trying to be a health nut, I guess??

1975 Steven Spielberg releases the movie Jaws! Don't go near the water!?? Did the movie scare you out?? Anyone??

1567 the Casket Letters found how did they effect the Monarchy of the British Isles??

Stay safe, please comment!
Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
scoucer
Berlin  Germany
Posts: 3270
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
6/20/2022 5:56:15 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
This thread has a topical ring at the moment.

The French National Assembly Elections have revealed a resurgent Left and Right which leaves Macron in a rather precarious position.

Amongst the French Right there is, I suspect, a significant cohort that would express admiration for Petain, and would cherish his memory on account of his leadership in the Great War ; especially regarding his defence at Verdun and his nurturing the French Army back to health after the mutinies of early summer 1917.

Regards, Phil


Amongst the French Right there is a significant proportion who would welcome Vichy France back.

Trevor


And yet one of the proponents of rehabilitating Pétain is of Sephardi Jewish descent.

Regards, Phil


Phil,

My personal take on Petain is that he was very much a dupe. In 1940 he was 84 years old and there were many signs that dementia had started. Franco, who had been his pupil at the War Academy, tried to persuade him to remain in Spain. If anything, much like Franco, he was a reactionary rather than a fascist and I suspect he lacked the imagination to understand what the Nazis were up to.

Trevor
----------------------------------
`Hey don´t the wars come easy and don´t the peace come hard`- Buffy Sainte-Marie Some swim with the stream. Some swim against the stream. Me - I´m stuck somewhere in the woods and can´t even find the stupid stream.
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6508
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/21/2022 1:50:33 AM
Thanks Trevor.

Pétain another “ Useful Idiot “ ?

I find your interpretation convincing.

It’s rather easy to be seduced by the appeal of his record as an outstanding soldier in the Great War.

Your closing words ...the imagination to understand what the Nazis were up to. carry immense weight.

Very appropriate for this section of the forum and to this thread in particular : tomorrow, 22 June, in 1940, the Armistice was signed - in the same railway carriage that had witnessed Imperial Germany's humiliation 11 November 1918 - and France surrendered. It had taken the Germans six weeks to do the job. About the same number of German soldiers had been killed in achieving that staggering victory as the number of French soldiers who died in a single day on 22 August 1914. Small wonder that Petain was determined to shield French manhood from another massacre.

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
6/21/2022 9:54:52 AM
The Vichy government put a number of members of the French government on trial after capitulation. Pétain somehow determined that certain members of the government of the 3rd Republic were guilty of poor preparation of the nation for war. Pétain may have amended the charges to make them less damning than those proffered by other members of the Vichy government but he was still involved.

Once the decision was taken to put these men on trial, the Germans recognized an opportunity to use the trial to put blame on France as the instigators of the war.

And so, Deladier, Blum, General Gamelin, Cote, Jacomet and La Chambre stood trial. Much to the chagrin of the Germans, the trial headed in a different direction than they had hoped and did not assess whether any of the men had anything to do with starting a war.

In fact, the defendants managed to turn the trial as an assessment of Pétain's complicity in the failure of the French to withstand the Nazi attack. Pétain had hoped that this trial would affirm Vichy as a legitimate government and to lend support to the new National Revolution.

Instead, Pétain was portrayed by the defendants as a man who had not advocated for the improvement of French arms including tanks and aircraft. The defendants defended themselves very well.

According the author of the thesis linked below, the trial of Deladier et al was not at the behest of the German occupiers. It was an idea developed by the Vichy government and Pétain.

And so one wonders whether the post war trial of Pétain was an opportunity for retributive justice. The trial of 1940 evolved as a trial of Pétain as much as the former 3rd Republic government members and it was finished after 1945.

[Read More]

Cheers,

George
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/21/2022 10:51:17 AM
Quote:

Hi guys,

A great discussion on Petain, WWI hero, WWII traitor!? Do I have that right??? BTW please continue the discussion on him! It's a very good version!? Anyone have a good website on the Vichy Government??

6-20 in history, but if you want comment on new events as well!??

1837 Victoria becomes Queen of Great Britain, & its empire!? Can you say Victorian Era! What say you about Queen Victoria? Many say she was the most influential monarch!? What say you? Best Queen or what??

1861 England's Frederick G Hopkins formulates the 1st vitamins! How did this come about? Anyone? BTW how many do you take?? With me It's @ 10-12! Trying to be a health nut, I guess??

1975 Steven Spielberg releases the movie Jaws! Don't go near the water!?? Did the movie scare you out? Or effect your kids or anyone else?? Anyone??

1567 the Casket Letters found how did they effect the Monarchy of the British Isles??

6-21, in history, the following occured! Comments??

1813 Napoleon is defeated in Spain! The battle of Vitoria, this is little discussed? Anyone have anything on it?? Was Napoleon addicted to war, & invading? Power hungry dude??

1834 Cyrus McCormick patents his Reaper, what effect did it have on farming!? What say you??

1982 Prince William of Wales is born! Was his life tragic in any way? Comments on it? Anyone??

2009 Greenland becomes independent, A small population but a huge area! Comments on this fascinating place? Did Canada or the US ever have designs on it?? What say you??

1945, US defeats Japan on Okinawa! How necessary, important & also costly was it? Did the Commonwealth help out?
Anyone??

168 bce, Romans defeat Macedonians and gain control of that Greek Country! It helped in building their Empire! Anyone have a good site or a comment on the battle, or Roman Empire??

& 6-22 in history, as Phil points out Hitler has France surrender in the same RR car in Paris! Is he ironic, & cruel or what??

1611 the mutiny against Henry Hudson in his bay occurs! How depressing to be set free in this desolate region! What evidence is there on what happened to him? Anyone??

1633 Galileo is called a heritic, by the Pope for saying the Earth goes around the Sun! What an idiot the Pope was in retrospect!? But Galileo could have been put to death!? What say you about these heretic acquisations from back then? Catholic Church to powerful? Anyone??

1941 Hitler breaks the non aggression pact, with the USSR, & invades! How foolish was this?? And was it the beginning of the downfall of the Nazis?? What say you??

1969 the Cuyahoga River catches on fire! Talk about polluted?! What river around you is the most polluted? Anyone??

Please comment on any of them, or other recent topics!?

Stay safe, please comment!
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
6/21/2022 1:37:48 PM
Quote:
2009 Greenland becomes independent, A small population but a huge area! Comments on this fascinating place? Did Canada or the US ever have designs on it?? What say you??


Well, we know that President Trump wanted to own Greenland and was shocked when Denmark said no.

That proposal did concern me because the transfer of this large island to the United States would effectively bookend Canada between US territory in Alaska and Greenland. And that would alter the political balance among the Arctic nations and give the US an extraordinary influence on decision making. Most of the US is clearly not an Arctic nation but owning Alaska makes it one.

Denmark is an autonomous region of the Kingdom of Denmark and there are Inuit people who live on that island.

Now we may laugh at the temerity of Trump to think that he could treat part of a sovereign nation as available land as part of a real estate deal. But I must confess that Canada made a similar proposal long ago.

During WW1, in 1917, the representatives of the Commonwealth met in Great Britain at the Imperial War Council. The Dominions were all represented and that included Canada, NZ, Australia, South Africa and Newfoundland. These were the dying days of Empire but that did not mean that the Empire did not wish to discuss how to divvy up the world once the war was over.

And so the council debated the fate of German colonies in Africa and the Pacific. These colonies had already been taken over by Australians, New Zealanders and South Africans and they wanted to keep these properties.

So British PM David Lloyd-George set up a committee to discuss how to realign the world post war. This was even before negotiations for the Treaty of Versailles of course, so it didn't hurt for the Empire to discuss possible realignments.

PM Robert Borden of Canada was a Canadian nationalist but also an imperialist which were not conflicting ideologies at the time and for some time after. Borden hoped to make Canada an economic powerhouse that would rival the mother country and securing new lands were part of that.

But Canada hadn't taken possession of any of the lands of an enemy so PM Borden told his committee members to explore the purchase of lands owned by allies in the western hemisphere. One of the Canadian proposals was that the British should give up some part of their African colonies to France in a swap. And the French would trade their two islands off Newfoundland called St. Pierre et Miquelon which had been a sore spot in the minds of Newfoundlanders and Canadians.

The Canadians came up with the idea of purchasing parts of Alaska from the Americans but I don't know which parts. Canada had long wanted access to the sea from northern BC and the Yukon which was not possible because the Americans owned the panhandle.

So the Canadians set their sites on Greenland. Greenland proved to be a repository of minerals but it was also strategically well placed. There were concerns that it could have served as a naval base for Germany. And it was necessary to beat the Americans to the punch. The US had already purchased Danish territory in the Virgin Islands and there were fears, decades if not a century old, that the US wished to acquire as much territory in NA as it could.

Anyway, the Canadians proposed the purchase of Greenland for the Empire and Canada was to assume control of it. All good, right? The Danes were bankrupt but they must have sensed that the sale of Greenland would be unwise and they turned it down.

Of note, Canada and Denmark recently cancelled a war with one another with the signing of an agreement to share in the ownership of Hans Island which is a tiny chunk of rock in the channel midway between Greenland (Denmark) and Ellesmere Island (Canada).

The battle for ownership of Hans Island has been called the Whiskey Wars. For decades now the Danes and the Canadians have taken turns in landing on the island to raise a national flag and to leave a bottle of booze for the military of the other nation who were sure to return to replace the flag.

This is the disputed Hans Island:



Certainly a lovely vacation destination, isn't it?

And here is where it is:





The Whiskey War began in 1984 when the Canadians landed on the island and hoisted the Maple Leaf and buried a bottle of Canadian whiskey Shortly after, the Danes showed up and took down the Canadian flag, raised their own and left a sign that said, "Welcome to a Danish Island". And they left a bottle of schnapps. For the last 49 years, Canadians and Danes and not just military types have landed on the island and left their flag and whiskey.

Mineral and oil rights are very important in this part of the world whether on land or under the sea and so this settlement establishes that the border between Denmark and Canada runs down the middle of Hans Island. And a fifty year old dispute has been settled.

A border down the middle of the strait had already been agree upon in 1973 but when the line bumped into Hans Island, the two nations both claimed it. I suppose that each country is now about .6 of a sq. km larger.

Now that's how you fight a war. Ply the enemy with booze.

Cheers,

George

EDIT: I should add that the Inuit inhabitants of Greenland have indicated that they would prefer independence. Note as well that the US occupied Greenland during WW2 and built two large airports on the island.



Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6508
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/21/2022 3:17:09 PM
Quote:
The Vichy government put a number of members of the French government on trial after capitulation. Pétain somehow determined that certain members of the government of the 3rd Republic were guilty of poor preparation of the nation for war. Pétain may have amended the charges to make them less damning than those proffered by other members of the Vichy government but he was still involved.

Once the decision was taken to put these men on trial, the Germans recognized an opportunity to use the trial to put blame on France as the instigators of the war.

And so, Deladier, Blum, General Gamelin, Cote, Jacomet and La Chambre stood trial. Much to the chagrin of the Germans, the trial headed in a different direction than they had hoped and did not assess whether any of the men had anything to do with starting a war.

In fact, the defendants managed to turn the trial as an assessment of Pétain's complicity in the failure of the French to withstand the Nazi attack. Pétain had hoped that this trial would affirm Vichy as a legitimate government and to lend support to the new National Revolution.

Instead, Pétain was portrayed by the defendants as a man who had not advocated for the improvement of French arms including tanks and aircraft. The defendants defended themselves very well.

According the author of the thesis linked below, the trial of Deladier et al was not at the behest of the German occupiers. It was an idea developed by the Vichy government and Pétain.

And so one wonders whether the post war trial of Pétain was an opportunity for retributive justice. The trial of 1940 evolved as a trial of Pétain as much as the former 3rd Republic government members and it was finished after 1945.

[Read More]

Cheers,

George


That thesis is going to demand some more reading, George : I’m afraid my efforts are confined to quick forays to my bookshelves, a glance at the index of a book, and a few choice quotes that I might post ! Your research puts mine to shame !

Do you get the impression that there’s a whiff of Hindenburg about Petain ?

Both very aged martial figures, both “ Useful Idiots” manipulated by the Nazis.

Their imposing physical presence lent them that extra something : each carried the mystique of his Great War record, which - in the eyes of “ simple folk” - was a reassuring attribute for the crises they faced. Of the two, I imagine that Petain was intellectually the superior, because from what I’ve seen Trevor write about the folklore of Tannenberg, Hindenburg was a bit of a dullard who gained more than his fair share of credit. Petain immediately brings Verdun to mind, but even there he was running the show for a couple of months only. He too, I suspect, was not all he was cracked up to be. Both men, were, in my opinion, quite sly and essentially ruthless . If I’m right, Hindenburg enjoyed the status of aristocratic provenance, while Petain was from relatively humble origins.

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
6/21/2022 8:25:05 PM
Quote:
1633 Galileo is called a heritic, by the Pope for saying the Earth goes around the Sun! What an idiot the Pope was in retrospect!? But Galileo could have been put to death!? What say you about these heretic acquisations from back then? Catholic Church to powerful? Anyone??

I’m a little fuzzy on this one, but believe that Galileo was charged with supporting heretical beliefs. And I believe the charges were levelled by the Inquisition, a body created to seek out and eradicate heresy. While they were an increasingly frightening arm of the Roman church, I believe an accusation by the Inquisition was not equivalent to a Papal accusation.

Retrospect is a two-edged sword. If we can see the Pope as an idiot (which is unfair; he is merely the infallible leader of God’s Church), we should also see Galileo as an idiot for thinking he could defy divine belief through mere natural observation and mere human numbers.

Yep. Galileo could have been put to death. More, he could have lost his immortal soul. IIUC, Galileo didn’t see his studies as being in conflict with his faith or the doctrines of Catholicism.

What was Galileo’s heresy? Well it was agreeing with the findings of Copernicus, which suggested (also erroneously) that the sun rather than the earth was the centre of the universe. That flew in the face of official scholarly teachings which, as proof of God’s focus on and intention for man, demonstrated God’s six days of creation creating a universe that literally, astronomically and religiously rested at the centre of God’s creation.

In the end, Galileo recanted. He denied his support for Copernicus’s theory. Increasingly, I believe he did so honestly and truthfully. Yep, there was that purported aside after his recantation: “It moves, nonetheless”, which many feel as s “cocked snoot” to the Church. I used to agree with that concept, but not any longer. I think his meaning is much more complex, something like: “My faith is more important than my findings, and I recant values which undermine God’s Church. But. But. By everything I see and can calculate, “the earth moves despite Church teachings”.

Boy, I’d love some other MHOers to offer some comment on this.

Cheers
Brian G

----------------------------------
"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: 6508
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/22/2022 3:57:37 AM
June 22nd : three massively important dates during WWII :

1940 : France capitulates and enters a dark era of defeat, humiliation and collaboration which scars her yet.

1941 : Operation Barbarossa commences, inaugurating the mightiest and deadliest struggle that has ever afflicted humanity.

1944 : Operation Bagration : The Soviet Union marks the third anniversary of Barbarossa by launching its colossal offensive that will carry the Red Army to Berlin.


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
6/22/2022 10:39:07 PM
On Barbarossa, and specifically in response to MD’s Quote:
Hitler breaks the non aggression pact, with the USSR, & invades! How foolish was this?? And was it the beginning of the downfall of the Nazis?
]Lost my first reply; will try again.

Pretty easy to say in hindsight that it was an error, IMHO. But foolish? I’m not sure Hitler was ever totally rational, and I certainly believe he slipped into delirium as the war progressed, but the question of the relationship between Hitler’s Reich and Stalin’s USSR was one that needed a resolution.

The non-aggression pact signed in August 1939 was, let’s face it, a phoney pact in which neither nation believed (though both nations adhered to the agreement, for the most part, until the moment Barbarossa was initiated. In reality, the USSR had been pegged as anathema to Nazism and the germanic Volk on two counts: political belief, and predominant culture (Slavic). On the other hand, Germany had flirted with communism and socialism in the years immediately after WW1, and had a large voter base until 1933. The bolsheviks who wished to expand communist power saw Germany as fertile soil; those who wished to consolidate communist control of Soviet Russia were content to know they had a large base of support. The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact didn’t change these realities.

Mein Kampf, written while Hitler was in jail for treason after the 1923 Munich “Putch”, makes Nazi beliefs, values and intentions as clear as any document could make such a puddle of values. It lauded Aryan/germanic culture, values and abilities over others, noting in particular the inferiority of Slavs, Jews and other racial/cultural groups. It talked about the need to expand the space needed for the Aryan/germanic culture to flourish. And it explained with vague but dangerous details that Lebensraum would come at the expense of the Slavs currently on the land the Aryans must take for their own.

Where I find the plot gets interesting is in the incredible success Hitler’s army had in the 21 months before Barbarossa. They had taken Poland, Denmark, Norway, France, Belgium, The Netherlands. That’s a lot of territory, and the Reich began exploiting it (to various extents) as Reich law descended. Poland in particular saw its territory divided and a germanic transformation begun; Poles in the way were either moved or murdered. Western conquered nations were simply raped economically, with artificially high exchange rates and portions of industrial and agricultural shipments diverted to Germany.

I don’t believe Josef Stalin was fluent in German. But he probably knew Mein Kamf intimately in translation: Stalin was also not a stupid man. So from the moment the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was signed, he began to plan against the day Germany would turn its attention east. The Baltic states were swallowed up, as was eastern Poland. Stalin even went to war with Finland to gain military positions in the naval approaches to Leningrad, learning from the experience how to improve Soviet forces. All these were sensible if costly actions, and made Germany’s assault on Russia somewhat less probable to succeed. In fact, the only major error by Stalin I can think of is his refusal to believe reports from various sources that Hitler was about to violate the terms of the agreement of August 1939.

In the minds of Germany’s Nazi overlords, the phenomenal success of its military in 1939 and 1940 was only a preliminary battle. The focus was always meant to be on the rich lands to the east, where germanic folk could live well off the backs of Slavic Üntermenschen. This was the destiny of the germanic culture: take this land, or fail as a superior tribe.

They failed.

Cheers,
Brian G

Sorry, this could go on and on. But let is stand for now.
----------------------------------
"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: 6508
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/23/2022 3:19:14 PM
Lest we forget : in 1918 Germany had triumphed over Russia, despite being hard pressed by a titanic struggle in France and Flanders.

In hindsight, we marvel at Hitler’s folly in invading Russia.

At the time , reflecting on the crushing victory that Germany had achieved over its Eastern foe in WWI, and bolstered by astonishing victories in 1939 and 1940 - especially over the vaunted French army - the German onslaught against the Soviet Union was understandable.

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
6/23/2022 9:22:41 PM
Phil, thanks for posting those comments. Hope you don’t mind if I ramble with some additions to your comments. You can probably help me with some stuff here.

You note:Quote:
in 1918 Germany had triumphed over Russia, despite being hard pressed by a titanic struggle in France and Flanders.

Two points:
1. I am shamefully ignorant of the Eastern Front. My assumption has always been that Germany was prevailing, but that the cease-fire and subsequent Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was much more a political than a military decision. Germany set harsh terms at Brest-Litovsk, which might be seen as a triumph (unless you’re Russian), but was it a military triumph?
2. While I agree that Germany survived for three years in a two-front war, and despite the intensity of the Western Front’s battles, and in the face of exactly how close Germany came to overrunning the Allies in the Spring Offensive, they did in fact lose the war.
They gained territory in the east by the collapse of the Tsarist army and the disengagement policies of the Bolsheviks. And – although we’ve had this discussion in depth elsewhere – they were able to march their troops back into Germany in regimental order. Is it possible that, from a German perspective, these events were of some significance in the Barbarossa decision?

I’m musing about the near success of the German Spring offensive as being misread as the ability of the Allies to execute the “backs to the wall” exhortation of Haig, rather than the Germans being unable to sustain their battle-changing techniques.

Seems to me that the German concept of “Blitzkrieg” was born out of the Spring Offensive. This might have been debunked as a theory decades ago, but the argument has some appeal nonetheless. IIUC, Blitzkrieg was simply a more sophisticated approach to the “thrust and encircle” concept used in the Spring Offensive. It was not quite “lightning-fast”, and it was not nearly as mechanized as many continue to think, but it was a brilliant (if dangerous, IMHO) technique which worked in Poland, Holland and Belgium. It had no major part in the Scandinavian invasions of Denmark and Norway. And in France it may have demonstrated its limitations, though those may have been lost in the reality of the Petain decision to end hostilities.

“Blitzkrieg” demands a sophisticated interlinking of ground and air assets, linked with a sophisticated balance of mechanized offensive power and traditional infantry. In 1940, nobody had a coherent countermeasure when such an attack technique was used. I would argue that is why Germany executed such a successful campaign in Western Europe, where France, the last of the western European nations to fall, lasted only from May 10 to June 22.

But I would at least raise as a possibility that the German halt of their advance in late May, 1940, was an indication of the limitations of ‘Blitzkrieg’. “Blitzkrieg” tactics demand mechanized equipment to thrust forward, seeking and using weaknesses of the enemy. This is combined with air assault primarily designed to disrupt communications capabilities and civilian support. But equipment wears out, and tanks need new treads, and it is possible to advance so quickly that your panzer (motorized) troops can themselves become isolated.

I’m just skyballing here, but did the German military miss the significance of the halt before Dunkirk? Did they consider what would happen if their attack on the Soviet Union did not happen quickly – if their equipment ground to a halt from fatigue before it had met its goals?

There were few pundits who assumed Stalin’s forces could function for more than a time-span of six weeks to six months. Book was probably being made on this in Vegas. But – through horrendous decisions and measure – Russia drained the initial thrust of the Wehrmacht and changed the war from one of movement and assault (the kind of war Germany was equipped to win) to a war of potential stasis. This was not the kind of war at which German forces excelled.

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
6/24/2022 2:41:27 PM
Quote:
June 22nd : three massively important dates during WWII :

1940 : France capitulates and enters a dark era of defeat, humiliation and collaboration which scars her yet.

1941 : Operation Barbarossa commences, inaugurating the mightiest and deadliest struggle that has ever afflicted humanity.

1944 : Operation Bagration : The Soviet Union marks the third anniversary of Barbarossa by launching its colossal offensive that will carry the Red Army to Berlin.

1948 the Soviets tighten the Berlin Blockade! How many countries were involved in breaking this blockade through the air?? Comments??



Regards, Phil


Thanks Phil,

3 really significant events on 6-22, & all of you are right, it's always easy to criticize after the fact, with regards to Barbarossa!?

& George great post on Greenland, I agree it should be a part of Canada! Anyone else agree??

Checking 6-23 in history we see,

1314 the battle of Bannockburn, It was great for the underdog Scots to defeat the English! How was this accomplished?? What say you??

1812 Napoleon invaded Russia what went wrong??? Anyone?


1865 Cherokees surrender to the Union! Was it wrong for both sides to bring Native Americans into the war?? Comments? Anyone??

1925 two Canadians scale Mt. Logan, Canada's largest mountain, 2nd highest in N. America! Anyone have the story on this incredible feat??

1961 the Antarctic Treaty goes into effect, making this continent unpolitical, Did it work or is it really full of every countries bases? Does Canada even have some??

2016 Brexit goes into effect! Is it working for the UK? What say you?? Anyone?

On 6-24, check this out??

1497 John Cabot is the 1st European since the Vikings to set foot in America! Does this effect the future of N. America & even Canada?? Anyone?

Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
scoucer
Berlin  Germany
Posts: 3270
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
6/24/2022 7:16:11 PM
Quote:
2016 Brexit goes into effect! Is it working for the UK? What say you?? Anyone?


Regards,MD


It´s like watching a clown run through a minefield as your favourite liberary is being burnt down by a mob who can´t read.

Trevor
----------------------------------
`Hey don´t the wars come easy and don´t the peace come hard`- Buffy Sainte-Marie Some swim with the stream. Some swim against the stream. Me - I´m stuck somewhere in the woods and can´t even find the stupid stream.
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/24/2022 7:49:36 PM
Quote:
& George great post on Greenland, I agree it should be a part of Canada! Anyone else agree??


I suggest that it should be up to the Greenlanders. They have been granted a measure of autonomy by Denmark but they are still a Danish territory and Canada respects that.

If the Greenlanders themselves vote to be independent and Denmark grants that status, then the Greenlanders would have to decide to be an independent country or link with another.

Canada and Greenland are close geographically and young Greenlanders relate well to the indigenous people in Canada's north. It is part of the Canadian archipelago.

However, many countries are showing interest in Greenland. Many have opened consulates in the capital, Nuuk but Canada is not one of them. The US opened a consulate in 2019 and has long prized Greenland as a military base.

George

Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4811
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/24/2022 8:08:02 PM
24 June 1948 brought the beginning of the Soviet blockade of Berlin. The blockade would hold for 323 days, until 12 May 1949. Whatever the ostensible reason for the blockade (one argument claims it was over use of West German currency as legal tender in the Allied sectors of Berlin), I sense this was a major Soviet test of western resolve that didn’t go the Soviet’s way.

Response to the blockade was swift; 26 June 1948 would see the implementation of the Berlin Airlift, a joint Allied effort to feed and otherwise supply West Berlin by air. The daily tonnage needed to be delivered was approx. 3500 tons/day, no mean feat given the relatively low tonnage each of the major a/c deployed (C-54s and -57s for the US; Handley Page Haltons and Short Sunderlands for GB/Commonwealth) could carry. But the minimum was mostly maintained and was often doubled. The peak day saw almost 13,000 tons delivered. And although this was a joint effort by major Allied nations, I should be noted that the USAF delivered 75% of the supplies, with GB and her Commonwealth responsible for some 23%. France was also assisting as fully as possible, but undertook to feed an supply no more than the French garrison in Berlin.

At the height of the Airlift, a/c were landing in Berlin every 30 seconds. IMHO, that’s a good definition of congestion. Yet only 25 a/c were lost (17 US; 8 UK) were lost. A total of 101 people lost their lives, an incredibly small number.

When the Soviets called of the blockade on 12 May 1949, the Allies, sensing trickery, continued the airlift until 30 September 1949.

At any rate, I consider this an event of historic importance. It deserves being brought to mind.

Cheer
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
6/24/2022 8:08:20 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
6/24/2022 8:09:45 PM
dup
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/24/2022 8:14:11 PM
Quote:
1497 John Cabot is the 1st European since the Vikings to set foot in America! Does this effect the future of N. America & even Canada?? Anyone?


Giovanni Caboto was from Venice but he sailed on a voyage of discovery under the English flag. He undertook three voyages and the 1497 one was probably the most successful. He had had some financial problems in his home town of Venice and other problems when he migrated to Spain. And so he made his way to England.

There have been suggestions that Cabot may have been a marine engineer on one of Columbus' voyages before heading to England.

Anyway, King Henry granted Cabot the right to sail to “all parts of the eastern, western and northern sea, under our banners, flags and ensigns". His task was to “find, discover and investigate whatsoever islands, countries, regions or provinces of heathens and infidels, in whatsoever part of the world placed, which before this time were unknown to all Christians.” With this letter from the King, Cabot was able to secure financing as it was his job to raise the funds for the voyage.

His first voyage was in 1496. There are few record of it but it was known to be a failure.

Voyage number two was in 1497.

He probably bumped into Newfoundland and Labrador even though he thought that he had found a route to Asia which was his goal anyway. North America happened to be in the way.

Cabot probably landed in Labrador and the north shore of Newfoundland and then he worked his way along the eastern coast of the island. He and his crew spotted people running through the woods and these were likely Beothuk, a tribe which was exterminated by European settlers over the years.

And they also discovered cod. Cabot noted that the sea was, “swarming with fish, which can be taken not only with the net, but in baskets let down with a stone.”

And so he claimed these lands for England, giving that country a leg up in establishing a fishery but that would come later.

He is one of the European explorers to whom we were introduced in history classes in Canada. It seems to me that it was sometime during elementary school.

[Read More]

cheers,

George
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6508
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/25/2022 5:31:20 AM
Brian,

Was Brest Litovsk a political or military triumph for Germany ?

My interpretation of the history is that the military situation was the prerequisite for the political conditions that placed Germany in such an advantage.

It’s such a huge question - and one that can be applied to so many wars - that I feel I’m letting you down by not pursuing with more detail.

We’ve a house full of guests right now, and I want to do justice to your post, so forgive me if I wait for a day or two before picking this up properly.

If there’s still an appetite for discussion on this, then let’s get stuck in !

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
6/25/2022 9:19:37 PM
Phil, I agree. The only WW1 Treaty which receives major attention is Versailles. There were at least four others, including Brest-Litovsk, but few are cited. No wonder there are questions! Whether the topic could have legs on MHO I honestly don’t know.

I wrote:Quote:
I am shamefully ignorant of the Eastern Front. My assumption has always been that Germany was prevailing, but that the cease-fire and subsequent Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was much more a political than a military decision. Germany set harsh terms at Brest-Litovsk, which might be seen as a triumph (unless you’re Russian), but was it a military triumph?

You replied:Quote:
My interpretation of the history is that the military situation was the prerequisite for the political conditions that placed Germany in such an advantage.

And in truth, who knows? I had thought that Russian troops’ morale was a result of incompetent leadership by incapable aristocrats appointed by Nicholas, combined with lack of pay and food at the front and pending starvation conditions amongst civilians. And indeed that appears to be the case, but only part of the story. While the Tsar abdicated in the face of the February Revolution, the war continued, but with rising resentment as conditions at home and on the line did not improve. At the same time, the “Petrograd Soviet”, powerful but not yet in power, was both calling for elected groups to run military units and at the same time indicating that they would abandon treaties with Russia’s allies and cease to conduct military operations against the Central Powers. This appealed sufficiently to the Central Powers that the famed Bolshevik express, carrying Lenin from Switzerland to his destiny, was given the green light by Germany. Using N.S. dating, on 7 Nov the Red Guard arrested the Provisional Government of Russia at the Winter Palace in the “October Revolution”, and the Bolsheviks declared a soviet-style government. By 15 Dec an armistice was agreed to, and by 22 Dec peace negotiations began in Brest-Litovsk. (Summarized from Wiki, “Treaty of Brest-Litovsk”.)

A fair serial question might be, “Why?”. Why any consideration by Central Powers of Bolshevik declarations? Why provide travel arrangements for Lenin? Why such a rush to sign an Armistice or conclude a Treaty?

My understanding is that much of the war in the East was stalemated in a way similar to in the West. And in reading some of the shifts and arguments that were debated by Central Power members at Brest-Litovsk, I sense that both Germany and to a greater extent Austria-Hungary were also in danger of famine if not starvation. There are clear indications that Austria-Hungary was prepared to swap almost anything for a chance to get grain; Winter 1917/18 must have been vicious indeed for the major Central Powers.

The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, as is abundantly clear by looking at a couple of maps showing the amount of territory the Bolsheviks ceded to the Central Powers, was a grain and resource grab of sorts, covering the three Baltic states, parts of what is now known as Belarus, most of what is now Ukraine, plus other bits and pieces. Note: these states weren’t necessarily taken by Germany or Austria-Hungary; some of the larger cessions leaned towards various levels of independence (particularly with Ukraine).

How about the Bolsheviks? What were they looking to gain? What were their goals? This is very hard to answer, IMHO, without allowing some professed Bolshevik values to be sincerely held. They would, for instance, get themselves out of a war not relevant to their political values in the first place. They would rid themselves of external pressures while attempting to suppress dissident factions such as the Whites. They could bring home and redirect ex-Tsarist troops who had created military soviet counsels to strengthen the Red Army.

How about the land they were – seemingly – fully prepared to cede? I haven’t seen anything on that, but toss out for thought the idea that this was land gained without the consent of the peasants as part of an Imperial doctrine which had been rejected by both the February and October Revolutions.

That’s my understanding as of 25 June 2022:
• Germany (and A-H) was punishing a military foe, and demanding Bolshevik Russia was liable to the amount of 6 B Marks (= 3 M rubles) against Germany. It was also gaining the capability of engaging (after three long years) in a one-front war. Those I see as military gains. Other gains seem to be focused on issues more political and practical issues. Let’s face it: the RN blockade was having an growingly acute impact. Any foods coming out of the ceded territory would be a potential morale-booster.
• While the losses in primary industry, land and population seem extreme, many of these losses/demands were in principle acceptable to Russia. I’’m tempted to suggest that the Bolsheviks were prepared to barter any terrritory they deemed Tsarist/Imperial land stolen from peasants in order to further Imperial expansion.

For another post, if anyone cares (as you note, Phil!) is the impact of Brest/Litovsk on growth and quality of Bolshevik/Communist activity in Germany during the last dark months of WW1. Without a shed of evidence, I sense that the harshness of Germany/Central Powers demands may have been seen as a reason to bring the Communist creed to a suffering, collapsing German state.

Wow! That started out as a short post. I’m heading off for something cool and soothing for dinner. In this year of weather extremes, today is the first day Victoria has past 19°C. At 18:17, temp at my home is 28.2°C.

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
6/25/2022 9:26:36 PM
Today in 1876 was the date of Custer's Last Stand! Gen. George Armstrong Custer & the 7th Cavalry were killed basically to the last man, at the Little Bighorn River by the Souix Lakota Nation & their allies! Comments & websites welcome! Anyone on Custer's mistakes & the aftermath of this famous battle! Any other battles you know of very simular?? Anyone?

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
6/26/2022 7:14:39 AM
I remember it was pointed out in the past that Little Big horn was very simular to Islawanda in many regards!!!

What say you?
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
OpanaPointer
St. Louis MO USA
Posts: 1973
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
6/26/2022 7:09:28 PM
"Want to take the Gatling guns?"

"No, we're not fighting Europeans."

Custer was weak on history.
Lightning
Glasgow  UK
Posts: 1070
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
6/27/2022 8:36:32 AM
Quote:
"Want to take the Gatling guns?"

"No, we're not fighting Europeans."

Custer was weak on history.


Hi OP,

There's not much evidence the Gatling Guns would have been any use to him anyway, given the undulating terrain around LBH. Custer's great error was to split his command in the attack, depriving himself of fire power of seven companies of Springfield carbines, which had superior range and stopping power to the weapons to the Native Americans could deploy (supposed jamming issues aside). There's also evidence Custer further divided his remaining five companies during his attempt to flank the village (which he hit square in the middle). This left his command open to destruction in detail, which is ultimately what happened.

The GGs were also mounted on raised carriages, which were not able to keep up with the pace of the cavalry, who could rarely keep up with the Native Americans when they were on the move. Custer may never have located the Native village had he been encumbered by the GGs. The GGs were also prone to jamming. Without a clear field of fire, a defensible fixed position (this was a moving battle) and access to the pack train (which was miles away), I'm inclined to believe the GGs would have been more trouble than they were worth. In any case, the raised carriages the GGs were mounted upon would have proved inviting targets to any aspiring Native marksmen.

The 7th cavalry held their own on the ridge defended by Benteen and Reno's companies; it was touch and go at times, but they held off a sustained offensive for the best part of 24 hours whilst the bodies of Custer's command were picked clean and mutilated. It is also clear from the Native accounts that where the cavalry were able to deploy into their skirmish lines, they could blunt the assaults of the combined Sioux and Cheyenne warriors. This was not unlike the firing lines at Isandhlwana where the British regular infantry held off the Zulus until their flanks were turned as the perimeter was too wide to hold. Whether by design or accident, the Native Americans worked hard to prevent Custer's scattered five companies from reuniting. One Native account mentions a sustained fire fight on an unidentified ridge, where he stated after the initial repulse some of Custer's forces regrouped; '

...the soldiers were not ready to die and here they gave a good fight'.

Another account offered a contrary view, stating that:

'...the battle lasted as long as a hungry man takes to eat a meal'.

It's clear Custer's battle was both bloody and brief.

Near the end, his command structure seemingly completely collapsed, with some of the soldiers resorting to shooting themselves and/or each other. Some also threw down their weapons to beg for mercy. As at Isandhlwana, no quarter was given and the slaughter and bloodletting continued even when the firing had stopped.

Cheers,

Colin
----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6508
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/28/2022 4:22:22 AM
How can we ever assess the impact of this day in 1914 ?

Two shots in Sarajevo with consequences so catastrophic that we’re still struggling with them 108 years on.

That missile that struck a crowded shopping mall in Ukraine yesterday might be attributable to the echoes of those two shots .

Every year I post to mark this anniversary, so please forgive me for banging on .

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
Lightning
Glasgow  UK
Posts: 1070
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
6/28/2022 4:45:11 AM
Hi Phil,

I wonder how many commentators on 28 June 1914 could have predicted the carnage that would unfold from the Serbian independence struggle. My view has always been that war was inevitable, and it was merely how it would start that was up for debate. Princip's bullets started the contest, but in truth the seeds of war were sown a generation earlier in the humiliating defeat of France at the hands of the Prussian-led Germans. A repeat showdown of some sort was always going to happen, and once Germany began its naval build up it pulled the UK into the wider picture.

Cheers,

Colin
----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8313
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/29/2022 12:52:48 PM
Hey guys,

Sorry I've gotten behind in posting daily history, been busy being busy!!

So here is 6-27 in history,

1787 Englishmen Edward Gibbon finishes, The rise & fall of the Roman Empire! Has anyone actually read it?? Big text, kind of put me off?? How about you??

1844 Joseph Smith of the Mormons is murdered by a mob in Carthage, Illinois! Was this religiously motivated??
Geeze even then people were racially, religiously, & sexual preference oriented & bias?? Why can't we be tollerant, moderate, & just live & let live!? We are so angry & polarized?? What say you??

1917 Greece declares war on the Central Powers! Why so late?.& were they a serious player in WWI!? Comments?

6-28 These events happened! Comment on any!??

1712 Jean Rousseau, the man who inspired the French Revolution was born! What did he do to stir every one up.?? What say you??

1838 Victoria is crowned Queen of the then British Commonwealth!? Would you say she was their most influential monarch??

1880 Ned Kelly Bush Ranger was killed in a shootout with police! I thought Rangers were good blokes!? Why would the Police gun him down!?? Anyone? Perhaps Ozers??

1894 the US Congress declares Labor day a holiday!? What say you? End of summer, A good time for a holiday!??

1914 the Assassination of the Arch Duke Franz Ferdinand, starts WWI! How was this purely bad luck for the poor Arch Duke!? & how can 1 guys death cause a world war??? Anyone??

1919 the Treaty of Versailles is signed! Didn't they lay the blame on Germany!? & this was a major factor leading to WWII!?? What say you??.comments anyone??

2007 the Bald Eagle is removed from the list of endangered species! What say you? Are there many in your neck of the woods?.Anyone??

& finally today 6-29, these occurred!?

1534 Jacques Cartier land on Prince Edward Island! Is this the beginning of New France??

1767 the Townsand Acts piss of the Colonists again! is this justified!? Crown beware!!?? Comments??

On this day, in 2003 & later 2020, Rich actors like Katherine Hepburn, & then Rob Riener, die at 96, & 98 respectively! Do you think wealthy people live longer?? Bob Hope was 100!?? Anyone??

lots to discuss!
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
6/29/2022 3:20:02 PM
Quote:
1534 Jacques Cartier land on Prince Edward Island! Is this the beginning of New France??

Cartier made three voyages but it was in 1535 that he headed up the St. Lawrence River to what would become Québec City and Montréal.

The 1534 voyage saw Cartier land on the Gaspé peninsula to raise a great cross to claim the land for the King of France. The First Nations people that were present were unimpressed and fully aware that this guy was trying to claim their land.

EDIT: And yes on June 29, 1534 he did land on what would later become Prince Edward Island. But based on Cartier's comments, it is likely that he did not know that PEI was and island. He did not circumnavigate the land mass but rather stayed on the north side.

The King sought a passage to the east, a north-west passage but Cartier did not find it. In Cartier's last voyage, he thought that he had found diamonds and gold but what he found or was shown by the indigenous people was iron ore and quartz. With that, the French seemed to lose a bit of interest in North American explorations until the end of the century.

The founder of New France is actually considered to be Samuel de Champlain who established a colony at Québec in 1608.


The French were remarkably successful in their colonization efforts. By 1712, New France consisted of five individual North American colonies.

We know of course about Canada (3 sub colonies including Québec and Montréal and also Trois Rivière). But there was also the Hudson Bay colony, Acadia, a small colony on the island of Newfoundland, and finally, Louisiana.

So New France encompassed much more land than did the New England colonies. It extended from Hudson Bay to the Gulf of Mexico. Take a look at the number of forts established by the French in their colonies on the map before.

And they travelled well into these territories as they traded with the First Nations. I have noted before that when Lewis and Clark went on their famous trek, they had French Canadians in their crew and picked up more along the way who were already out there.



Cheers,

George
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/29/2022 3:30:19 PM
Quote:
2007 the Bald Eagle is removed from the list of endangered species! What say you? Are there many in your neck of the woods?.Anyone??


They range from coast to coast in Canada. I have personally seen them a few times here in Ontario.

And many years ago while on a canoe trip to Saskatchewan (Churchill River), we saw bald eagles regularly and their massive nests at the tops of trees.

But I am pretty sure that the greatest concentration of bald eagles is in Alaska and British Columbia. The birds like salmon.

Now that I think of it, there were pelicans in Saskatchewan too which surprised me more than the sight of bald eagles.

Cheers,

George
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4811
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/29/2022 8:08:38 PM
Bald eagles are indeed rather common in BC, at least on the coast and in spawning river estuaries. I once sat through a cold, rainy November morning at the mouth of the Little Qualicum River, watching some 150-200 Bald Eagles pull salmon after salmon from the spawning channels. I cranked three or four rolls of 24 through my Canon F-1, getting some good shots together with a frozen butt!

My father, towards the end of his life, was in the habit of feeding a Bald Eagle. He had a freezer full of fresh frozen herring (he raked them himself for salmon bait, and froze them in lots of six), and would hold out a lot, which the eagle would snatch in its beak. (?Too small to grasp in the talons? Dunno!) He and I had words about this: I felt it was a bad activity then, and I think so now. I’ll admit that Bald Eagles are not my favourite bird by any means.Nevertheless, seeing them often or regularly takes not one whit away from their magnificence.

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
6/29/2022 10:39:55 PM
On this day in 1613 The Globe theatre – Shakespeare’s theatre – burned down on the South Bank of London.

The obvious question is: “So what; who cares?” And in most ways it is a minor issue, of little interest to anyone except theatre-goers then and students of English literature now. But …

There is something almost theatric about the event. There is no talk of lives lost (I believe there were none); no talk about panic over fire to a large building on the South Bank. There is a hint of dramatic irony, since the play was Henry VIII, the last in a sequence of historical dramas demonstrating the legitimacy of the Tudors, and the fire was triggered by the entrance of the troupe’s Henry VIII to the stage. Amongst stricter Protestant sects (including Puritans) there is talk of God’s warning against the obscenity of staged performances.

The monarch at the time was James I (also known as James VI of Scotland), a blood relative chosen to reign at the death of Elizabeth (the Virgin Queen). At the time of his acceptance as King, he was a popular choice who was prepared to support protestant religious values. By 1613, his faith (staunchly Church of England), combined with his personal beliefs in kingship, were increasingly at odds with the more fundamental beliefs of an increasing number of his citizens. He was being questioned for his increasingly strict demands for religious conformism, and his popularity was dropping.

So, when a purpose-built pit of bawdiness and obscenity burns down while performing an enactment of the author of the Church of England, it must at least be seen as some kind of omen.

Yes, I’m pushing the importance of this destruction of The Globe, and I’m probably linking much too directly the fire and the growing disillusion with the first of the Stuart kings. But I’m certain many religious Englishmen saw the burning of the Globe as much more than coincidental.

Yes, this is a playful post. But my conjectures reflect the attitudes of the 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
6/30/2022 9:16:28 AM
Quote:
Hey guys,

Sorry I've gotten behind in posting daily history, been busy being busy!!

Reposted these history events, see if you want to comment, on any more!?? Anyone?

So here is 6-27 in history,

1787 Englishmen Edward Gibbon finishes, The rise & fall of the Roman Empire! Has anyone actually read it?? Big text, kind of put me off?? How about you??

1844 Joseph Smith of the Mormons is murdered by a mob in Carthage, Illinois! Was this religiously motivated??
Geeze even then people were racially, religiously, & sexual preference oriented & bias?? Why can't we be tollerant, moderate, & just live & let live!? We are so angry & polarized?? What say you??

1917 Greece declares war on the Central Powers! Why so late?.& were they a serious player in WWI!? Comments?

6-28 These events happened! Comment on any!??

1712 Jean Rousseau, the man who inspired the French Revolution was born! What did he do to stir every one up.?? What say you??

1838 Victoria is crowned Queen of the then British Commonwealth!? Would you say she was their most influential monarch??

1880 Ned Kelly Bush Ranger was killed in a shootout with police! I thought Rangers were good blokes!? Why would the Police gun him down!?? Anyone? Perhaps Ozers??

1894 the US Congress declares Labor day a holiday!? What say you? End of summer, A good time for a holiday!??

1914 the Assassination of the Arch Duke Franz Ferdinand, starts WWI! How was this purely bad luck for the poor Arch Duke!? & how can 1 guys death cause a world war??? Anyone??

1919 the Treaty of Versailles is signed! Didn't they lay the blame on Germany!? & this was a major factor leading to WWII!?? What say you??.comments anyone??

2007 the Bald Eagle is removed from the list of endangered species! What say you? Are there many in your neck of the woods?.Anyone??

& finally today 6-29, these occurred!?

1534 Jacques Cartier land on Prince Edward Island! Is this the beginning of New France??

1767 the Townsand Acts piss of the Colonists again! is this justified!? Crown beware!!?? Comments??

On this day, in 2003 & later 2020, Rich actors like Katherine Hepburn, & then Rob Riener, die at 96, & 98 respectively! Do you think wealthy people live longer?? Bob Hope was 100!?? Anyone??

lots to discuss!
Regards,
MD

Hi Brian, & George,

Nice posts on the Bald Eagles, I believe that every time you see 1 you add a day to your life! At our ages its good to go Eagle watching!!?

6-30 in history! Comments, anyone??

1859 A guy known as Blondin crosses Niagara Falls on a tight rope! I bet quite a few Canadians, & Americans have since tried!? What say you??

1936 Author Margaret Mitchell published "Gone with the wind"! What say you about this novel on the Civil War in the South!? Stereo typed, or somewhat accurate!?? Anyone? I kinda liked the movie. How bout you??

1960 Zaire declares independence from Belgium! Why was this country, & territory such a horrific powder keg!? Anyone? & how did a little country like Belgium get it in the 1st place?? Comments??

1966 National Organization for Women (NOW), is founded! Many wouldn't like what's going on with their rights now?

1986 Gay rights are questioned by the Supreme Court, something that's bound to come up again soon??

1934, the night of the long knives, where Hitler, & the SS kill many opposing Germans! What say you? Didn't this show how horrific the Nazis would become?? Anyone??

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."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13550
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/30/2022 3:53:51 PM
Quote:
1986 Gay rights are questioned by the Supreme Court, something that's bound to come up again soon??


I presume that this is a reference to the US Supreme Court. I believe that they found that the constitution provided no specific protection for gays in states whereby laws banned homosexual sex. That was 1986. A police officer had observed two men engaged in homosexual sexual activities in a bedroom. This was in Georgia. I mean, what the hell. How does anyone just happen to see two people having sex in a bedroom?

But in 2015, the SCOTUS determined that all states in the US must provide marriage licences to same sex couples.

Court rulings in the US have been all over the place. I think that the constitutional amendments describing freedoms are a bit of a problem in that people have to defend themselves by saying that their rights under amendment "X" have been violated and hope that the court concurs.

So in 2000, the Boy Scouts of America bounced a scoutmaster from his position because they found out that he was gay. The gay man sued BSA and the SCOTUS found that the Scouts were within their rights to dismiss him under the First Amendment right of "expressive association".

So yes, SCOTUS could flip the freedom to marry legislation granted to gays.

Perhaps the constitution needs to be revamped to include more specific positive rights along with the negative rights that limit what the government can do.

There is a lot of talk right now that the US Congress must codify abortion rights. My question is, once codified and perhaps surviving a challenge at the Supreme Court, is that it? Is a federal law applicable everywhere in the US?


Many countries across the world have enacted legislation to protect the rights and freedoms of LGBTQ2S people.

I know that in Canada in 1996, the Canadian Human Rights Act was amended to add sexual orientation to the list of prohibited discriminatory behaviours. (sounds awkward, we can't discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation)

The Canadian Constitution does not refer to gay and lesbian rights in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 15. It does state that, "every individual is to be considered equal regardless of religion, race, national or ethnic origin, colour, sex, age or physical or mental disability."

When a gay couple who had been living together for decades challenged a provincial rule that denied them tax and subsidy rights because they were not married as husband and wife, they took it to the Supreme Court of Canada and the court determined that indeed, their charter rights under section 15 had been violated. That was 1998.

So that forced Parliament to draft legislation in 2000 which gives same-sex couple the same social and tax benefits as heterosexuals in common-law relationships. By 2005, another piece of legislation determined that same sex couples could be married legally anywhere in Canada. Canada was the first country outside of Europe to enact legislation like this and the fourth in the world.

So we have made some progress. In 1965 an auto mechanic in Northwest Territories was given a prison sentence as a "dangerous sex offender" because he had admitted that he had had consensual sex with other men and was unlikely to change. Draconian. Thank goodness that we are past that stage.

It was in 1967 that the Parliament passed legislation to decriminalize homosexual behaviour. Then Justice Minister and future PM Pierre Elliott Trudeau made a statement in a press scrum that is often quoted. He said that, "there is no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation."

Like Pierre or not, I think that he made the right call.

[Read More]

But the US and Canada aren't the whole world. There are many places with equally or more progressive legislation and some that still discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.

I hope that others will weigh in to tell us about the legislation in their part of the world.

Cheers,

George





Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4811
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/30/2022 7:47:40 PM
Quote:
1934, the night of the long knives, where Hitler, & the SS kill many opposing Germans! What say you? Didn't this show how horrific the Nazis would become??

It was ugly indeed. I believe Hitler also realized it was necessary for the good of the Party and the legitimacy of Nazi power.

IIUC, the SA ([bS[/ib]turmabteilung, or “Assault Division) were, in one form or another, the ideological children of the Freikorps, which were largely ex-soldiers who banded together to fight against the rise of Bolshevism and socialism after Germany’s 1918 collapse. They broke up left-wing meetings. Often, they were met with violence; often they meted it out. With the establishment of Hitler’s Nazi Party – note, that was in 1923! – the SA began to see itself as the uniformed wing of the party, acting as enforcers and protectors of Nazi values as embodied in the growing body of politically active members. Personal note: when I saw footage of Proud Boys “escorting” Roger Stone on 5 Jan 2021, I saw what I thought was a replica of SA troops surrounding the likes of Hitler and Ludendorf.

Like the rest of the party, they started small and grew in somewhat disorganized manner. Some undoubtedly viewed themselves as patriots; some were, I assume, true patriots. But increasingly, the bonds that united various SA groups became negative, moving from positive actions (marches, rallies, meetings) to negative (attacking, fighting, torching). And as the Nazi party outgrew its Bavarian roots, more and more Freikorp-type groups connected with the SA. Some were more violent than others; increasingly, violence became a mark of commitment.

By 1932, when the Nazi party was at it’s elected peak (the largest but still not majority party), there were some 400,000 SA members. IIRC, the German Army at the time was limited to 10,000 by Versailles. Officially, they were not armed, except for clubs, coshes and torches. But when they marched, they were prepared to lash out at anything in their way they didn’t like. This was great for subduing socialists and Communists, but it did a pretty good job of terrifying everybody else as well. Including, perhaps, Hitler and his closest supporters (Himmler, Göbells, Göring and some three or four others). They had helped take the Nazis to power (30 Jan 1933) through intimidation. It is possible that their size, propensity for violence and mob behaviour also intimidated the Nazi elite.

Without too much background, remember that the Nazi Party was committed to germanic culture as much as racial integrity. Think the burning of (largely Jewish) books which were tainted; think the shutting down of the Bauhaus, one of the great 20th century schools of design. Think the attacks on the multi-cultured, multi-sexual artistic brilliance in Berlin, Hamburg and the like. All shut down because they were decadent. Decadent meant modernist; decadent meant Jewish; decadent meant homosexual.

Nazis had a fascination with homosexuals, and were exceptionally skilled at sniffing them out. They found homosexuals amongst the military, and cleaned them out as non-representative of Nazi values. And, of course, they found homosexuals amongst the leaders of the SA. IIRC, this was the ostensible reason for “The Night of the Long Knives”; to cleanse the Reich of decadents no matter how near the Nazi pure-of-heart. But we all know that was nonsense.

In point of fact, SA leaders were beginning to realize their power, just because of their size. And Hitler, now in power, needed to distance himself from SA street thuggery, to redirect the energies of those 400,000 SA members to more productive efforts, and to disavow the bases of the SA by soiling the leaders sexually. Hitler already had one fanatically loyal SS division (the LAH, or Liebstandarte Adolph Hitler) as a personal bodyguard; the SA was no longer needed or wanted.

The Night of the Long Knives was vile. It was a text-book case of treachery. It made mockery of any pretences to culture the Nazis claimed. But it was nonetheless an indication that legitimacy in government cannot be maintained by goons. While I can’t come up with one positive result, the Night of the Long Knives probably made it possible for the Nazis to hold power. I could only speculate about how Nazi rule may have continued had the SA decided to enforce their values on the Nazi political core.

Just some thoughts.
Cheers
Brian G
----------------------------------
"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: 6508
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
7/1/2022 1:56:25 AM
Brian,

Was Hitler under pressure to purge his party of some of the most conspicuously plebeian elements in order to secure support from the Officer Corps, which retained its aristocratic character ? I’ve read that Hitler never forgave this, and nurtured a profound grudge which might account to a degree for some of his actions in the war.


Talking of wars, today in 1863 and 1916 marked the opening of two huge battles ; Gettysburg and the Somme.


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
Page 15 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