Gmatt, I can definately see where you are coming from so I'll leave it at that!

Ooh, I didn't know this was here!

I'm definitely a history buff, and have been one for as long as I can remember. I go through stages where I find one aspect of history interesting and read all I can about it. However, I have mostly focused on ancient history, and was a classical studies major in undergraduate university.

Of modern history, I like learning about WWII and the War Between the States (that's the war that was misnamed 'the American Civil War', for those of you who don't know).

I'm definitely a history buff, and have been one for as long as I can remember. I go through stages where I find one aspect of history interesting and read all I can about it.

Lol... that sounds very familiar... I'm in a WWII/Polish/Holocaust phase right now...

Of modern history, I like learning about WWII and the War Between the States (that's the war that was misnamed 'the American Civil War', for those of you who don't know).

Haha - you're not the only one around here that thinks that!

Haha - you're not the only one around here that thinks that!

I figured I would have your support from your avi. Jackson's a favorite of mine, though I do have a slight historical crush on Robert E. Lee that exceeds most of my other historical crushes.

The South definitely got the better generals in the Civil War (or "War Between the States" or "The War of Northern Aggression", whichever floats your boat ) and great men. The North just had a whole lot more industrial capacity and the South's defeat was largely inevitable. They sure made a good run of it though.

Was it just me or did anyone else think that Stephen Lang portrayed Stonewall Jackson as kind of being a little out of his mind in Gods and Generals? I liked him better as Pickett in Gettysburg.

Was it just me or did anyone else think that Stephen Lang portrayed Stonewall Jackson as kind of being a little out of his mind in Gods and Generals? I liked him better as Pickett in Gettysburg.

It's been soooo long since I watch Gods and Generals, but I do remember not liking Lang as Jackson nearly as much as Lang as Pickett. It's a bit hard to get used to one actor playing someone else in a sequel/prequel, especially when they did such a good job as their first character (Pickett). Gettysburg was just so much better, overall (minus the language, which TV Guardian helps with!).

Gmatt, I can definately see where you are coming from so I'll leave it at that!

Thanks for the interesting discussion, it certainly has made me think out my views more thoroughly, and that is always a good thing.

Ironically, the British owed their victory in the Battle of Britain to the Poles. The Polish element in the RAF greatly over-performed the rest of the RAF. They had a much lower casualty rate, and more kills in less time. One of the British generals (can't remember his name) basically said that without the Polish pilots, the battle would have had a different result.

They certainly played their part, but I wouldn't say they Battle of Britain was won solely by their efforts. 89 Polish pilots, in four RAF squadrons took part, out of 30 entire squadrons in 10 and 11 Groups in August 1940, (Those being the ones to take the brunt of the fighting being based in South England), 15 in 12 Group and 14 in 13 Group, 59 in total.

The battle was won for a few different reasons.

-The excellent service of the Poles, us Canadians, and the other foreign pilots in the RAF
-The shift of the German targets from the airfields to London
-Fighting over friendly territory where our pilots could often be recovered, while the Germans could not and all the experience was lost
-The output of the British factories to get aircraft to our pilots.

The foreign pilots certainly played their bit with valour, as pilots at that time were disparately needed, but there wasn't really one reason why we triumphed.

Ironically, the British owed their victory in the Battle of Britain to the Poles. The Polish element in the RAF greatly over-performed the rest of the RAF. They had a much lower casualty rate, and more kills in less time. One of the British generals (can't remember his name) basically said that without the Polish pilots, the battle would have had a different result.

I had to grin when I read this. It reminds me of a great scene from the movie "Battle of Britain".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXf1bhEEXd0

Ahh, good movie, I watch it now and again as it is a good one (There isn't a lot of movies on the British out there.)

I apologise for not commenting on the Confederate Generals, it was not intended but I missed them during my last post.
I am not an expert on the Civil War, but Lee certainly was something else, by far one of the better generals of the century between Waterloo and the Great War.

Even worse, the Soviets actually shot down Allied planes on multiple occasions. I also learned that there is a big difference between Russia and the Soviet Union that I had never really considered. Very interesting subject - I'll have to address it at a later date.

Oh, I never read about Soviets shooting down Allied craft! They were stinkers. And anyone have an opinion on the the Lend/Lease Program? My dad gets rather riled about that one. He thinks it was foolishness to give so much valuable design information to the Soviets in the form of our tanks, airplanes, etc.

Do you think it was nessisary for the US to drop A bombs on Japan or not? Was there a way around it? and what would have happened if we hadn't dropped it?

It was definitely a necessary evil. I read that when some of the "Rank-and-file" found out, one of the men said, "Thank God! We'll live."

So much is owed to the RAF in the Battle of Britain...they really held the wolf at bay and allowed time to divert the course of the war, which at that point was going very much Germany's way.

Ironically, the British owed their victory in the Battle of Britain to the Poles. The Polish element in the RAF greatly over-performed the rest of the RAF. They had a much lower casualty rate, and more kills in less time. One of the British generals (can't remember his name) basically said that without the Polish pilots, the battle would have had a different result.

Really? I never heard that before. Neat! I do recall reading about Poles being a big part of decoding the Engima. They sure were a very big part of the Allied war effort.

Oh, I never read about Soviets shooting down Allied craft! They were stinkers. And anyone have an opinion on the the Lend/Lease Program? My dad gets rather riled about that one. He thinks it was foolishness to give so much valuable design information to the Soviets in the form of our tanks, airplanes, etc.

Lend-Lease was vitally important, if not for it, the war most certainly would have been lost before the USSR and the US got engaged, or it would have been a much closer call, and it was close enough in 1940 as it was. Remember, Lend-Lease was originally brought about to help us survive at all, we desperately needed it.

In regards to giving the stuff to Russia, it probably didn't help things, but I understand that at the time we needed all the help we could get.
Where we really were let down was directly after Germany's fall and through Postdam onwards, the Russians were underestimated, pampered and coddled when we should have been showing them a firm front, in my opinion.
They were even given their first jet engine by Atlee as a goodwill gift! (The British Labour Prime Minister who the people elected ousting Churchill in 1945 after Hitler was beaten.)
During the war it was one of those necessary evils, but once Stalin had proven himself untrustworthy (By not letting us observe the Polish elections as we had been promised and other things) we should not have let them off so easy...

Sorry, I am just jumping in here with whatever I can deem as somewhat relevant. I haven't read all the posts only the ones on this page so forgive me for intruding.

You Civil War enthusiasts should take a trip to Lexington Virginia. I went there on vacation over the summer and it was amazing. VMI is one of the most intimidating campuses that I have ever been on. And Washington and Lee College is beautiful. The place is very historic with tours of Jackson's house (which was amazing) and a spectacular cemetery with a statue of Jackson. (I sound like a travel agent)

I am more interested in the early history of the British Isles (where I am currently stationed in lovely Northern Ireland) than any other period but I love discussing the Civil War as well. Being one who hails from a boarder state, I find it hard to side with anyone. I actually had a course last year that covered the Civil War and I found it very difficult to study. I made the mistake of reading Gone with the Wind at the same time, which is full of antebellum propaganda. I watched Gods and Generals too but I have to say that I liked Lang's protrayal of Jackson. Jackson always seemed a bit 'touched' to me anyway. Not that that is a bad thing, everyone loves the eccentric. Or at least I do.

Oh, I never read about Soviets shooting down Allied craft! They were stinkers.

They also refused for weeks to give landing permission to Anglo-American supply drop flights over Warsaw during the Warsaw Rising (August-October of '44). At one point, Churchill wanted to send the planes in anyway, just to see what Stalin would do, but FDR caved.

Really? I never heard that before. Neat! I do recall reading about Poles being a big part of decoding the Engima. They sure were a very big part of the Allied war effort.

Actually, I believe they had decoded previous versions even before the war began. They had working copies of early Enigmas.

Welcome to the forum, Faolchu!

You Civil War enthusiasts should take a trip to Lexington Virginia. I went there on vacation over the summer and it was amazing. VMI is one of the most intimidating campuses that I have ever been on. And Washington and Lee College is beautiful. The place is very historic with tours of Jackson's house (which was amazing) and a spectacular cemetery with a statue of Jackson. (I sound like a travel agent).

LOL! I've been to the Lexington area many times. I know I-81 pretty well. I remember visiting Washington and Lee U a few years ago. But I haven't been to Jackson's house. What is it like?

Being one who hails from a boarder state, I find it hard to side with anyone. I actually had a course last year that covered the Civil War and I found it very difficult to study. I made the mistake of reading Gone with the Wind at the same time, which is full of antebellum propaganda. I watched Gods and Generals too but I have to say that I liked Lang's protrayal of Jackson. Jackson always seemed a bit 'touched' to me anyway. Not that that is a bad thing, everyone loves the eccentric. Or at least I do.

A border state, eh? Which? I've lived in one too for a few years. I haven't covered much of the Civil War beyond high school. My interest is British history and literature. I haven't read Gone with the Wind or read or seen Gods and Generals either. But guess what? I visited Antietam battlefield [2nd time] in Sharpsburg, MD, on Friday. There I bought a special issue of a Civil War magazine for only $1.00. And it had a full-length article on the making of Gods and Generals!

Thanks for the welcome chrisTian. I am glad you have visited Lexington. I've only been there the one time but it is pretty great. I have not been to Antietam but would I would like to go there. You should pick up Gone with the Wind sometime, it is an interesting read.