Ok, not football at all, but it matters, eventually.

[Oranje White]

Trump Derangement Syndrome is a thing!
Trump is selecting what appears to be good people to drag the swamp of the corrupt, incompetent, free-spending slimey creatures that live there. RFK wants Americans to be healthy again. He wants a full investigation into the experimental poison covid injections that the FDA wanted to hide from the public for 75 years!! Why would that be? The corruption between Fauci and his wife. The lies to congress about gain-of-function that has a money and paper trail. DEI and associated incompetence has been rampant in the current administration. The weaponised DOJ, FBI and CIA. Let's see what comes out....if the lying corrupt media allow. It will come out, and there corruption exposed you never imagined. That, I 100% guarantee!!

[Oranje White]

Yes, seriously. I don't hate Trump, I'm afraid of.him and what he can do with both Senate and House in his pocket and appointing Kennedy to a position for which he.is totally unqualified is a sign of things to come. Kennedy may or may not make.good on his threats to make wholesale withdrawals of vaccines, but if he does and.that includes tetanus then he'll be.killing Americans immediately, if it includes (for example), measles and.polio then maiming will take a little longer but it will happen. Over 100 million adults in the USA and you get these kind of folks las your leaders.😣

You're worried RFK isn't qualified.
Seen the cross dressing, trans, bald, airport baggage thief, who was in charge of nuclear waste disposal under current administration? Or the men dressed as women in charge of some military roles? Ir the border czar who never went to the border? Or the unqualified black lying lesbian press secretary? There's more!

[whitestomper45]

Agreed on the observation regarding how new conflicts might be fought and won, but that statement regarding Nazi Germany having "the best Air Force, Navy and weaponry"???????? Who there fella!!!

A few tidbits regarding what naval assets they had available to them, how "effective" they were at fighting and also "who had what" when it came to air power;

Firstly, I agree with the comment regarding commanders etc. A large part of the allied armies problems at the outbreak of WWII stemmed from the inability to find commanding officers capable of dealing with modern warfare and the development of tactics that were appropriate to that new way of waging war.

Observations on the Naval front;

Graf Spee was scuttled just off Montevideo on evening of Sunday, December 17, 1939 (about 14 weeks after war was declared), in the face of overwhelming British naval forces.

Bismark, the largest and most powerful capital ship in the Kriegsmarine, only sailed once. In May 1941, Bismark took part in an offensive operation codenamed Rheinübung, which resulted in the sinking of HMS Hood (the only vessel to be sunk by Bismark). Bismarcks single major operation lasted just over a week and ended in its destruction by the Royal Navy in the North Atlantic on May 27, 1941.

Tirpitz hid in Norwegian Fjords for almost the whole of its operational life, damaged in an attack by British mini-submarines and large-scale air raids. On 12 November 1944, RAF Lancaster bombers from 617 and 9 squadrons, equipped with 12,000-pound "Tallboy" bombs scored two direct hits and a near miss which caused the ship to capsize rapidly. It never sailed on offensive operations and fired its main armament just once when bombarding Spitzbergen island.

All these ships were in service with that "best navy" at the start of hostilities, but there's not much point having nice shiny toys with big guns if you're too afraid of your opponents to use them?

Where the Kreigsmarine was considerably better off was in the submarine fleet, which very nearly led to the British starving, that I'll give you!

And the air forces?

As the Battle of Britain began in July 1940, RAF Fighter Command had approximately 768 aircraft after the squandering of many during the failed attempt to help the French during the battle for France. Of that number, only 520 were still considered battleworthy. Due to aircraft manufacturers plans for increased production however, particularly distributed production centres making interdiction by German bombers less damaging, this situation improved radically over the next few weeks. By the time the Germans offensive reached its peak in early August, the number of RAF fighters available almost doubled to just over 1,000. British aircraft manufacturers were producing around 500 fighters per month (double the number estimated by German intelligence).

Equipment was not the main concern for Fighter Command, the availability of trained pilots was. The German airforce had had substantial operational experience during the Spanish Civil war, when Hitler assisted the forces under Franco. The experience for both fighter and bomber crews was of great value to the Luftwaffe during the Blitzkreig operations and during the early part of the Battle of Britain (less so as more RAF pilots gained the requisite battle experience and attrition rates fell).

At this time of the war, monthly Luftwaffe fighter production was approximately 300 airframes. However, German production capacity wasn't fully mobilized and failed to produce enough 109s required to overwhelm Fighter Command. By September 7, the Luftwaffe was down to just 533 fighters and temporarily dipped as low as 275. Given these comparative numbers early on the "real war (the "phony war having lasted from September 1939, until May of 1940), the RAF held a significant numerical advantage in both planes available and production capacity.[/B]

The RAF had aircraft broadly equal to those frontline fighters in the Luftwaffe, (Spitfire and Hurricane vs Messerchmitt BF109). The Spitfire had superior climbing speed and turn rates, was slightly slower in level flight and unlike the Bf109 employed a normally aspirated fuel system, meaning inverted flight was very limited. The Hurricane was slower still, and was used during the Battle of Britain as the major bomber attacking force given its superior gun platform performance. The Messerschmitt 110 and Junkers 87 were considerably less of a threat to the RAF, to such an extent that the Ju87 (Stuka) was withdrawn from combat operations after suffering catastrophic losses during attempts to bomb RAF coastal radar stations.

The Luftwaffe was never really that superior, only in numerical terms at the outset of the war and only then for a brief period. What's also worth noting is that the RAF had one crucial technical advantage over the Luftwaffe, radar. Without radar and the associated plotting and fighter control room network, the RAF is unlikely to have been able to maintain a constant airborne presence which would have been required to identify Luftwaffe raids. Without it it's equally unlikely that the RAF would have succeeded in winning the battle.

So yes, the German armed forces had some advantages at the outset of WWII, but the best? Nope.

Just read thru this, as have avoided getting into politics of war on here. I?m sure Spaldy can speak for himself? he never said the Germans were the best
They must have been fairly useful which made their defeat such a great feat!

[spaldy]

WS,

you are correct. However, I should have been clearer. The reality was that Nazi Germany was the best prepared, best generals and troops and the most motivated populace in the world at the start of WWII. Only the briliance of Churchhill, will of the UK people and the fact the Yanks broke the blockade (preventing the collapse of the UK) prevented all of Europe from falling. Russia, or for that matter, china have none of those factors.

[spaldy]

And this is what his decisions on appointment has and will do to the shares of companies that form the backbone of pension funds the world over. As a pensioner, I'd just like to say "thanks a lot Ronald MacDonald".

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/11/14/stoc...e-updates.html

Your pension fund would be wise to keep your money in the US. Just sayin. As bad as we are I'd be hard pressed to think of anywhere I'd trust my retirement money more. It's a sad state of affairs. It's also why, even if you don't like the US you should not root against us. It's hard to fathom putting your life savings in China, Russia, Japan or even many of the European countries right now. What's much sadder is the loss of a place to go to when you want more freedoms. The US is not everyone's cup of tea but it was always there when you wanted to go someplace with more freedoms (warts and all). That is now largely gone. Our media are propagandists, our government is corrrupt to the core and largely has total control of schools, healthcare and the economy. Once they get digital currency, electric vehicles, control of the health system and education we'll be little different than china

[hopelesslyoptimistic]

Their tanks were superior and until we developed the spitfire that had air superiority too. Their boats were devastating.

They had about a7 year head start in gearing up for the war too. If the US hadn?t joined the war or if the Germans hadn?t attacked Russia prematurely we would most likely now be speaking a different language - if buts and maybes!

[WTF11]

Your pension fund would be wise to keep your money in the US. Just sayin. As bad as we are I'd be hard pressed to think of anywhere I'd trust my retirement money more. It's a sad state of affairs. It's also why, even if you don't like the US you should not root against us. It's hard to fathom putting your life savings in China, Russia, Japan or even many of the European countries right now. What's much sadder is the loss of a place to go to when you want more freedoms. The US is not everyone's cup of tea but it was always there when you wanted to go someplace with more freedoms (warts and all). That is now largely gone. Our media are propagandists, our government is corrrupt to the core and largely has total control of schools, healthcare and the economy. Once they get digital currency, electric vehicles, control of the health system and education we'll be little different than china

Pension fund investments have, for decades, been made on a global basis, as that how corporations work nowadays. Whether a stock listing starts in New York or London, the investments will go wherever the investment managers deem "best".

Read back on my posts and you'll not find a single sentiment that could be seen as rooting against America, quite the contrary. It's my concern for a country I have lived in, albeit for only a few months at a time, and the respect for the role her people's have played, that prompts my comments.

You say it yourself;

"Once they get digital currency, electric vehicles, control of the health system and education we'll be little different than china"

"They" will be whoever Trump appoints as Treasury Secretary, Elon Musk, RFK, coupled with the likes of Gabbard and Gaetz as the controllers of the likes of the judicial system and intelligence services.

[WTF11]

Their tanks were superior and until we developed the spitfire that had air superiority too. Their boats were devastating.

They had about a7 year head start in gearing up for the war too. If the US hadn?t joined the war or if the Germans hadn?t attacked Russia prematurely we would most likely now be speaking a different language - if buts and maybes!

There was no debate about the superiority of the german ground force superiority, it was clear and the most significant factor in the success of the blitzkreig operations.

We were discussing air force and naval comparisons.

First, "their boats were devastating".....Err which ones? Those I referred to in my earlier post that collectively sank around 12 allied ships (albeit that one was HMS Hood)? Hardly devastating. U-boats on the other hand were almost successful in cutting the transAtlantic bridge, something I referred to earlier.

Second, the reference to "air superiority" and "until we developed the Spitfire".............

Spitfire first flight

The Supermarine Spitfire took to the skies for the first time on March 5, 1936, some 3 and half years before the outbreak of WWII. (The aircraft first took to the skies at Eastleigh Aerodrome)

First Spitfire operational service

The first Spitfire I to enter operational service with the RAF arrived at 19 Squadron, Duxford, on 4 August 1938, (a year before the outbreak of WWII) and over the next few weeks aircraft were delivered at the rate of one a week to 19 and 66 Squadrons (also based at Duxford). The next to be equipped with Spitfires was 41 Squadron at Catterick, followed by a succession of squadrons stationed at Hornchurch in Es***.

Operational numbers

By the outbreak of the Second World War, there were 306 Spitfires in service with the RAF, 71 in reserve. In addition, when war was declared, on the 3 September 1939, about five-hundred Hurricanes were in service and several squadrons were sent to France. During the 1940 German Blitzkrieg through the Low Countries and France they fought a punishing rearguard action in which over 25% of all Fighter Command?s aircraft were destroyed, including 67 Spitfires lost over France in the attempt to prevent the Luftwaffe from bombing the evacuation beaches at Dunkirk.

So, had the RAF simply abandoned their forces on the ground in and around Dunkirk, their losses in the air are likely to have been fewer. Sacrifices were necessary. Not the same as the Luftwaffe having air superiority, something they NEVER achieved, before, during or after the Battle of Britain.

Luftwaffe fighter aircraft strength at the outbreak of WWII was 788 fighters (primarily Bf109), 431 heavy fighters (Me110).

First operation of WWII

The first Spitfire operation over Western Europe took place on 13 May 1940, during the Battle of the Netherlands. German airborne forces had been pinned down in the Battle of the Hague by the Dutch Army. RAF Fighter Command sent 66 Squadron Spitfires to escort Defiants from 264 Squadron to support the Dutch. They encountered Junkers Ju 87s from IV(St)./Lehrgeschwader 1 (LG 1), and shot down four of them. They were soon intercepted by Bf 109s from 5 Staffel Jagdgeschwader 26 (JG 26) that shot down five Defiants and one Spitfire for the loss of one Bf 109.[13]

On 23 May 1940, Spitfires of 54 Squadron were the first to shoot down Bf 109s, over Calais Marck airfield, on the coast of northern France; the first of these is usually credited to either Flying Officer Alan Deere who shot down two (according to other sources, one destroyed plus one probable), or Flg. Off. "Johnny" Allen who shot down one.[14][15]

At the time, the Luftwaffe's main single-engine, single-seat fighter was the Messerschmitt Bf 109. Some advantages I mentioned in my previous post helped the Spitfires win dogfights, most notably manoeuvrability: the Spitfire had a higher rate of turn and a smaller turning circle than the Messerschmitt. There are several accounts of Bf 109 pilots being able to outturn Spitfires, mainly because inexperienced pilots did not turn as tightly as was possible through fear of getting into a high-speed stall. Overall, the aircraft were closely matched in performance and the outcome of combat was largely decided by tactics, position and the skill of the opposing pilots (the latter being greatly influenced by the experience gained by the German pilots in the Spanish Civil war)

Tactics

One major advantage enjoyed by the German Jagdgeschwadern was the use of better tactics. In the late 1930s Fighter Command were not expecting to be facing single-engine fighters over Britain, only bombers. With this in mind a series of "Fighting Area Tactics" were formulated, involving manoeuvres designed to concentrate a squadron's firepower to bring down bombers: with no apparent prospect of escorting fighters to worry about

Luftwaffe fighter pilots, flying combat formations perfected in the Spanish Civil War, and utilizing proved principles of the First World War, entered the Second using the basic unit of a pair (Rotte) of widely spaced fighters. They were separated by about two hundred yards.[39] The leader was followed to starboard and to the rear by his wingman, who was trained to stay with his leader at all times. While the leader was free to search for enemy aircraft, and could cover his wingman's blind spots, his wingman was able to concentrate on searching the airspace in the leader's blind spots, behind and below. The RAF were relatively slow to adapt and switch to this more effective style of air-to-air combat.

As pointed out above, the front-line aircraft were closely matched. Tactics, perfected by the Luftwaffe during their operations in the Spanish Civil war, not technological superiority, giving the Luftwaffe a brief period of success (which came to a shuddering halt in September 1940)

The german war machine certainly had a head start, and support from the Nazi heirarchy, something those warning against Nazi aggression in the UK and elsewhere found much harder to obtain.

In addition to agreeing with you on the superiority of the german ground forces, I'd also agree with the comments regarding USA entry into the war, and the baffling decision on Hitlers part to decide to invade Russia.

[WTF11]

Your pension fund would be wise to keep your money in the US. Just sayin. As bad as we are I'd be hard pressed to think of anywhere I'd trust my retirement money more. It's a sad state of affairs. It's also why, even if you don't like the US you should not root against us. It's hard to fathom putting your life savings in China, Russia, Japan or even many of the European countries right now. What's much sadder is the loss of a place to go to when you want more freedoms. The US is not everyone's cup of tea but it was always there when you wanted to go someplace with more freedoms (warts and all). That is now largely gone. Our media are propagandists, our government is corrrupt to the core and largely has total control of schools, healthcare and the economy. Once they get digital currency, electric vehicles, control of the health system and education we'll be little different than china

Slippery slope, already started on......

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world...123bf287&ei=55

Tom Emmer didn't even know that measles vaccinations in Minnesota were capable of being opted out of, and how they have!

[ozleeds]

The only reason why the German's were so strong was because the rest of the world was asleep as it was still recovering from WW1 and didn't think it would happen again so early. They had Europe but wanted the world which was there undoing as the allies launched there assaults by destroying them in Africa and controlled the war after that. The rest of the world never had the fire power that they created but they had the smarts which saved the day like the fake drowned soldier with top secret info of the allies attacking then in Greece rather the intend of Sicily where they wiped them out quickly and was the beginning of the end. My only grudge is how did the World after defeating them allow them to once again become a powerhouse so quickly likewise Japan.