another word 4 englishman
us aussies call them pommies
hitler did it himself
why dont u put ur self as bein german
i dont hate germans
Just to toss my two pennies in, I thought I’d offer a different view on a couple of the mistakes previously mentioned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tankgeezer View Post
sunday morning golf outings for Fleet officers in Hawii.
And the other mistakes that day, as distinct from things that just went wrong, were?
The idiotic fear of saboteurs over the threat of the IJN fleet air arm. And the hubris and arrogance that thought the Japanese incapable and unwilling to launch such a daring and skilled attack…
Hi Nickdfresh, I’m not sure everyone knew what you were talking about when you said this, way back on page 1. You are referring to the way almost all the aircraft were parked in close together, yes? That made it easier for sentries to guard the planes from saboteurs, but presented lovely targets for an air strike. I am not sure your comment about “hubris and arrogance” is as dead-on, however. IIRC, Pearl Harbor was seen as one of the highly-likely targets for a Japanese surprise attack. One issue was the shallow depth of Pearl Harbor: the US did not believe Japanese torpedoes could be dropped by air and not “sink” to the bottom. The debacle at Taranto had raised awareness of the possibility in planners minds. But Pearl was shallower than Taranto, so they concluded they were more-or-less safe. But the Japanese had adapted the technology – I believe the key change was use of wooden running fins on the torpedoes, reducing weight, and maybe (the fins) had some design improvements as well. You can make a case for hubris, etc, in the USA thinking the Japanese couldn’t solve a problem the US couldn’t – but historically, that’s a pretty common failing among military planners. But I don’t think it’s fair to say they were dismissive of Japan being able to make an attack. They expected maybe some bombers and strafing, but not the torpedoes, which I believe were responsible for most of the ship sinkings at Pearl. Of course, given the actual preparedness of the defenses when the Japanese came, bombing a strafing, especially with subsequent waves, may have done just as good a job.
So far as other blunders that day, the list could go on for quite a while. The two that spring foremost to my mind was the lack of response to reported detection (and sinking) of the Japanese midget submarine, and worst all, the failure of intelligence: IIRC, the US had broken the Japanese codes, AND had picked up the “climb Mt Suribachi” message – the US knew what that meant, but the message got lost in paper piles before it got to the people who knew. Thank God the carriers were out to sea…
Quote:
the Bridge on the River Kawi,
It’s fiction. The bridge never existed.
I believe you are mistaken, Rising Sun. There was a real bridge (in fact there were TWO of them - one wood, and wood steel – the steel one may be in use even today; it was certainly used post-war, after being repaired of damage done by airstrikes), built by POWs, and some of the characters are also real. In most cases, their personalities are fictionalized, as well as some of the events, but there is a basis in truth. I believe there was also a SAS attempt to blow the bridge - I may be mixing fact and myth on this point – but it did happen, the operation failed: the bridge was not blown up, as shown in the film. The British commander of the camp building the bridge was also quite different than portrayed in the novel/film: he encouraged his men to do sabotage to the bridge, etc. Somewhere I read the author of the novel had actually based the character of the commander on some of the French officers he saw collaborating with the Japanese. As an interesting bit of trivia, the man who wrote the novel about the bridge also wrote another book made into a film – The Planet of the Apes. That’s quite a range of subject matter!
And if we’re talking about Polish screw-ups, not allowing their soldiers to deploy their key, secret anti-tank rifle has to rank as one of the biggest, and unknown, blunders of WWII.
I believe this is also incorrect, Nickdfresh. IIRC, the ATR was fully issued to the troops, and actually accounted for quite a few panzers. the big problem was, because it was a secret weapon, few Polish troops had received any training with it, so it potential effectiveness was sharply reduced.
Somebody had also listed not capitalizing on the Anzio Beachhead as a blunder. I’ve forgotten his name, but the General “on the ground” for that operation was indeed blamed at the time for relative inaction. But as I understand it, opinion has since changed, and he is given credit for “doing the best anyone could do” under those circumstances. Manpower, logistics, resources being drawn away (e.g., the US or Royal Navies, or both, withdrew many of the ships from the battlezone because of fears of Luftwaffe strikes. I believe some of the ships left without even unloading the supplies they had stored to support the landings, but I’m not 100% sure. Certainly, their departure made other ships left behind even more vulnerable to air attack, as well as depriving the beachhead of “bases” from which supply/landing boats could operate.
Somebody also mentioned the Diepee (sp?) Raid. I read at least one book that claimed the Raid actually mounted as an example for the Yanks. Quite a few American planners were supremely confident of green US troop performance vs. the Germans, and they argued for an immediate cross-Channel invasion in 1942. The British thought such a move would be a disaster. The theory went that the Raid was something of a deliberate sacrifice to show the realities of what a cross-channel attack would mean. Whether that’s true or not, the Raid did help change American thinking, resulting in the African Campaign (Operation Torch) instead. So Diepee may actually have success of sorts. I’m sure conspiracy theorists can also make hay out the fact that so many of the units “sacrificed” were Canadian, rather than British…
So, since I’ve taken pot shots at some other people’s comments, I guess It’s only fair to give you a comment of my own to tear apart! There are so many possibilities ranging from the entire Italian campaign, to ignorance about hedgerows, to the Ardennes, the “Black Thursday” raid on Schweinfurt, which virtually crippled the USAAF, Kazzarine…it also depends on whether you are talking about purely military blunders, or throwing in strategic/political mistakes, etc. Some things like the Italian Campaign were a tactical waste, in the sense of cost-per-inch of ground, but it did have political pluses, as well as tying down a lot of Germans.
So, my nomination for the worst mistake, as seen with 20/20 hindsight, made by the US is…Hurtgen Forest. God-awful terrain, little strategic value, and a black hole for eating up men’s lives and resources. It’s not something I know a whole lot about, so somebody is free to educate me, but what information I have come across suggests it was all for naught, the reason for the campaign a misunderstanding of what the Germans could actually do (I think it was something to do with the German’s using a reservoir to cause flooding downstream should Allies try to cross “further downstream”?!?)…it all seems to have been an entire waste.
Ardee!..You don’t know what you have done. You said that Nick was wrong and you said " believe you are mistaken, Rising Sun"…As a Staff Sergeant, I have to tell you from experience that an officer should never be told their wrong. Trust me. From my experience, the officer is never wrong, and if they hear you saying or talking like that, youll see what haqppens. They will pounce on you and not let go. They will chew you up and spit you out for breakfast. these guys, especially RS, live for this environment. I don’t even think these guys sleep!. They are the encyclopeida of war. They are never wrong. You may choose to hold a different opinion, but watch out, they’ll poke your eye out I tell you!:shock:
Haha, herman2, you should stick to “bump”.:mrgreen:
you are a riot:p:lol:!
Bump!
There you go! 
Pierre Boulle’s book was fiction.
Colonel Nicholson was fiction.
The bridge was fiction.
The River Kwai was fiction. It didn’t even exist during the war or in the 1950s when the book and film were released.
The bridges you mention were over the Mae Klong river during the war and in the 1950s, although the relevant part of it was renamed the Kwai in the 1960s, presumably being a spectacular example of life following art.
As the river didn’t exist during the war, then a bridge to cross it couldn’t exist either.
As for the wooden bridge depicted in the film http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kitulgala-bridge.jpg , it’s nothing like the real wooden bridge which spanned the Mae Klong. http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-battles/ww2/kwai.htm
The film is a great film, but it has no historical accuracy.
Also, there was no SAS Mission, I think the bridge was hit by an American air strike. The romantic notion of commandos blowing a bridge is a bit silly when you have lots of air power available…
Stand by for smug post by Herman of the “I told you so.” variety. 
Did the SAS even have anyone in the Burma theatre at any stage of the war, let alone around 1943 when the film appears to be set?
I thought the SAS was LRDG in North Africa and then moved into the campaigns in Europe.
Correct, although the SAS were by no means the only “irregular” troops in British service - something in the national character seems to breed them in wartime. There were about 5 distinct groups of them in North Africa alone…
But it was “Force 10” that blew the bridge!
They didn’t blow up a bridge, they blew up a dam. Get it right! Call yourself a moderator? You should be ashamed of that level of knowledge 
Leave my friend Nick alone. Everyone is entitled to a temporary memory lapse!..I swear, sometimes I wonder if they were to throw you 2 in the ring with a fleet of battleships, air planes and tanks, who would be the victor!..You guys are TOPS!
Damn it, I hate when you’re right! But of course they did. The amazing thing is that they originally blew up German guns in Greece, then the guy with the American accent and David Niven morphed into two entirely different, lessor actors who previously were New England giant shark hunters and and they helped Han Solo and Apollo Creed take on the Nazi stormtroopers! And the “other Jaws,” ironically…
The world would fear us!
And breeds irregulars in peace time.
I well remember a training film (British and made about 1950, or possibly 1850 :D) about the importance of not being irregular.
It showed the squaddie who evacuated his bowels irregularly and another who was regular. The former, somewhat paradoxically, was a sloppy soldier and the latter wasn’t.