The Untold Battle of Britain

Thanks for your kind words.

Have always wondered this, as you have been at Northolt, is/was there any photos or anything of the 303 left at the airbase?

Regards,
Marek

Indeed there is! All of this is held in the Officers Mess! RAF Norhtholt is also famous for having the oldest Officers Mess in the RAF, dating back to WW 1

Awesome!

I guess they don't allow visitors!

Dunno, I was there between 78 - 81. Sorry :(

Might be able to visit,

raf.mod.uk/events/index.cfm?type=0&category=all&restriction=1&month=6&postcode=ub3&pageno=1&eventid=835

Definitely worth a visit. Did a couple of those events during my time at Norhtholt. :)

er? How can you call me a hypocrite when you are the one bringing up the said hypocritical nessness.... Have I ever said dresden was a good thing? Nope,in fact even on this board I have stated that IMHO Dresden was a war crime and Harris should have been jailed.

But,btw,dresden 1945...Battle of Britain 1940,so your point please?(actually,dont bother.)
Shooting dangling germans(maybe,who could tell at 300+ mph,could have been other allied pilots for all the bloodthursty barstewerds knew) who would have landed in England was just murder full stop. Shooting Poles over Poland who could have got back in a plane later that day,well,if it happened(show me real proof) would have been sound military practice.

War is murder, full stop. Someone starts murdering your people, so you murder them right back. You cannot call it "sound military practice" when it suits you. The goal in any war is always physical extermination of the enemy.

The goal in war is to achieve a set of stated objectives. Sometimes exterminating the enemy is the objective, sometimes it's bankrupting them by buying their treasuries...

I meant "war" literally, as in soldiers fighting each other with guns and stuff.

Sometimes it is, sometimes its not, there's quite a lot of examples where war was fought by armies with civilian populations largely left alone.

War is always about killing, not always about murder.

And for the person being killed, the difference is...?

The concentration camps were set up to murder people - this was part of the war effort on behalf of the Germans, women and children were not exactly a threat, yet they were slaughtered in the 100s of 1,000s.

As for Bomber Harris, there's a statue of him and the majority of people dont believe he did anything worse than the Luftwaffe did to cities in the UK - as already stated, it was war time and **** happened.

• 
  Sir Arthur Harris
  

No the goal is to win.

...and you typically win a war by...?

. . . . by attrition. Killing is a by-product of that process.

Has it suddenly become un-PC to openly admit war is all about *killing people*?

Only the baddies kill and murder people, the goodies have "collateral damage" for a good cause...

OK, I get your drift... Quite depressing overall.

War IS depressing :(

Indeed . . . you should try it sometime . . . I can assure you, it's more than, "quite depresssing"

I have no way of knowing it....


well I wont bother if you don't understand you wouldn't understood either ...


that ********, murder is when you kill civilians, unarmed civilians, killing combatants is a way to do it, specially ones like Luftwaffe pilots, who were waging war against civilians population in Poland and in England (by the way in England they were provoked into such action by British government).

There are plenty good videos on Youtube on this topic. The Spitfire ones are the best :) :) Highly informative and told by the pilots, mostly English. I have the utmost respect for those men. They whooped the Luftwaffe's butt against the odds but they are first to admit that timing was on their side. Oh, even the strength of the wind played a role and I'm not talking about the aftermath of curries either.

Well done to those British and Polish pilots that gave the Luftwaffe a tanning.

can you understand it Sean?
..

What's depressing is the fact that I spent quite a lot of time yesterday trying to make people on PF admit that war = murder, and they wouldn't. It's all water under the bridge now, anyway.

because is not ......
murder is something different - why you PC fellows are bent on changing the meaning of words, do you naively hope you will change the world ?

I am totally not PC.


No, I want people to admit the truth instead of varnishing it with euphemisms like "sound military practice", "collateral damage" etc.

What's wrong with agreeing that yes, actually war is killing people and killing people is murder, whether ideologically justified or not. I know some wars are inevitable and self-defence is justified, and rightly so, but even when you kill in self-defence, you actually do murder someone's son, daughter, wife, husband, whatever, a human being anyway. I would still kill in self-defence if I had to, though.

no, murder is the unlawful killing of another human being with intent

Its legal as well as cultural term (criterion) to distinguish between certain acts of human beings. If someone killed in self defence you wouldn't called murder for number of reasons - for one - legislative.

The same goes for a war, to kill enemy soldiers is OK, but to kill civilians is not.
You well-meaning humanitarian attitude would only confuse the issue and at the end of the day would not help to protect non-combatants.
and here goes definition -

Killing of enemy combatants by lawful combatants in accordance with lawful orders in war, although illicit killings within a war may constitute murder or homicidal war crimes

I-S (OK?)

War is murder as there is malice aforethought and the requisite mens rea to kill. It isn't caused by reckless endangerment like is the case with manslaughter/homicide.

Ironside, I'll check out that video and see what I understand by it.

Yeah, I got the gist of it. Nice wartime song. Far afield soldiers. Still, war, whilst being a 'necessity' for some, is a living hell for many.

nope as war is one of the exclusions and is govern by different rules - Law of war !


good :)