# Would like to have met...



## Digit (26 Jul 2008)

There have been many great people throughout history and I imagine that many of us would like to have met some of them, and avoided others perhaps.
My choice may well surprise some as I seem to have a rep as somewhere to the right of Genghis Khan, but top of my list is Kier Hardy, no surprise for the next, Winston Churchill and my last would be Douglas Bader.
What about the rest of you?

Roy.


----------



## RogerS (26 Jul 2008)

Roy

Don't quite follow your post. Are the names your top three that you would like to meet or is poor old Douglas down there at the bottom of the list ?

Roger


----------



## Smudger (26 Jul 2008)

I would have liked to have met Keir Hardy - we named our son after him. I don't know how keen he would have been to meet me, of course.

The main person would be Gandhi, though.


----------



## Digit (26 Jul 2008)

No Rog, Hitler would have been at the bottom of a very long list, not Bader!

Roy.


----------



## Smudger (26 Jul 2008)

Never been keen on Bader. According to people who knew him he wasn't 'very nice', rather opinionated and abrasive. Probably losing your legs has that effect...


----------



## Digit (26 Jul 2008)

That's one of the reasons I would have liked to have met him Dick. As an apprentice I met quite a few ex WW 2 airmen, officers and ORs, and Bader seemed to have been loved and loathed in equal measure.
One ex Erk said that when Bader went down 'there wasn't a damp eye in the mess!'
Without a doubt the treatment he accorded those he saw as his 'inferiors 'was on occasion utterly appalling, and did the the man no credit.
Then on the other hand he raised many many thousands of pounds, mostly anonymously, for crippled children.
So who was Douglas Bader?
That is why I would have like to have met him.
I would add that he was not alone in being a legless fighter pilot at that time either.

Roy.


----------



## wizer (26 Jul 2008)

..


----------



## Tusses (26 Jul 2008)

I would have loved to meed Bill and Ted ! they were 'Excellent Dude'  

Dont think they will be making another one tho


----------



## Digit (26 Jul 2008)

As in 'lies a mouldering in the grave' or the chair maker W?

Roy


----------



## Tusses (26 Jul 2008)

Thats wasnt B & T ! JB maybe...


----------



## wizer (26 Jul 2008)

..


----------



## Tusses (26 Jul 2008)

"Strange things are afoot at the Circle K"


----------



## Smudger (26 Jul 2008)

Why deride a serious question?


----------



## PowerTool (26 Jul 2008)

My historical greats that I would have liked to have met are the two people often debated as to which was the greatest military genius of all time - Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar;would also have liked to have met Alexander the Greats Silver Shields - possibly the greatest fighting unit of all time,and many living into their seventies :shock: 

Andrew


----------



## Gerry (26 Jul 2008)

Douglas Bader presented me with my apprenticeship indentures way back in 1980!

Gerry


----------



## Tusses (26 Jul 2008)

The question is not 'deriden' by me . My reply would be well accepted by many another forum I frequent 

Should I keep out of the 'off topic' threads with my alternative viewpoints ?

There are plenty of mordern day 'hippy' type 'cool dudes' that '* I* ' would rather meet, than the likes of Hardy or Churhill etc.

Are these threads only open to members with similar views to the thread starter ?

I really dont want to fall out with anyone on the forum - so please dont take my posts as provocative , there may be others here too with a light hearted outlook on life 

Rich


----------



## Tusses (26 Jul 2008)

"deride"

good word by the way


----------



## andycktm (26 Jul 2008)

Never mind churchill,i'd like to meet some of them
poor ******** on the beach


----------



## Smudger (26 Jul 2008)

Tusses":30ue1k3o said:


> "deride"
> 
> good word by the way



The past tense is 'derided'. Not 'deriden'.


----------



## Smudger (26 Jul 2008)

andycktm":38yzj9we said:


> Never mind churchill,i'd like to meet some of them
> poor ******** on the beach



Which beach? Normandy or Gallipoli? Or Anzio?

He was very keen on beaches...


----------



## andycktm (26 Jul 2008)

Scarborough


----------



## Tusses (26 Jul 2008)

Smudger":2j3k6ttb said:


> Tusses":2j3k6ttb said:
> 
> 
> > "deride"
> ...



but I was talking present 'is' , not past 'was - I apparently was 'deriding' a question - is deriden not a good choice for the present tense  ?

just having fun with words now !


----------



## Rich (26 Jul 2008)

Tusses":247gily8 said:


> The question is not 'deriden' by me . My reply would be well accepted by many another forum I frequent
> 
> Should I keep out of the 'off topic' threads with my alternative viewpoints ?
> 
> ...



It would seem to me that people who are named RICH are not particularly welcome on this site by some members, I have stopped posting alternative views for this reason, I have found another site that enjoys engaging in a 2 way dialogue and the other parties are not offended, then again they are grown up.

Regards,
Rich.


----------



## andycktm (26 Jul 2008)

Forums are full of people who's willy is bigger then your willy.
Sad really but such is life.
Just post Rich. Enjoy!


----------



## Tusses (26 Jul 2008)

I dont know which Rich (or both) but I will post anyway

I know I have different views to many - but they are still mine 

If I become massively unpopular here then I might take my leave - but until then , I am who I am 

I get on with everyone I meet generally, but I know what forums are like - so I dont fret too much !


----------



## Rich (26 Jul 2008)

I used to, but I kept getting picked on for having a different view, I tried to explain to others that I respected their view, but that was'nt good enough, friends who agreed with me were accused of sticking up for me, I'm big enough to fight my own battles, but not with bigots who only see THEIR side of the argument, so, Andy, THAT is why I don't bother anymore, I'm not despondent, just disappointed, I haven't checked the spelling by the way, I hope it's all okay.  

Rich.


----------



## Digit (26 Jul 2008)

What did he strike you as being like Gerry? He was a man of his time of course, and like all of us, a product of his upbringing.

Roy.


----------



## TrimTheKing (26 Jul 2008)

Rich/Tusses

Seriously guys, as a complete outsider to this post, who has taken no offence from anything either of you have ever posted, nor posted negative comments about you, it seems to me that you are both arguing a point here that doesn't exist!

If smudger thought you were deriding the question then fine, disagree, but there's no need to get into a whole argument about freedom of viewpoints and who does/doesn't have a sense of humour etc. Why can't we all just agree to disagree.

Anyway, rant over  

Mark


----------



## Gerry (26 Jul 2008)

Digit":xoaenogr said:


> What did he strike you as being like Gerry? He was a man of his time of course, and like all of us, a product of his upbringing.
> 
> Roy.



At the age of only 18, meeting a hero like that he seemed much larger than life. Although my time to talk with him was very brief he was very straight to the point and came across in a sort of headmaster attitude.
Still it was a privileged I'll always remember, shaking the hand of a real Hero.

Gerry


----------



## Digit (27 Jul 2008)

He was undoubtedly a man of great courage, but he was also a man of the media. I would recommend the story of Colin 'Hoppy' Hodgkinson, he had his leg removed voluntarily so that he could fly.

Roy.


----------



## Tusses (27 Jul 2008)

TrimTheKing":103rye6w said:


> Rich/Tusses
> 
> Seriously guys, as a complete outsider to this post, who has taken no offence from anything either of you have ever posted, nor posted negative comments about you, it seems to me that you are both arguing a point here that doesn't exist!
> 
> ...



No worries Mark 

on many a forum board, this area (off topic) might be called the pub. All sorts get thrown in and discussed . Sometimes throwing a completely different viewpoint in can get people out of the woodwork (no pun intended)

I am relatively new here and still getting to know folk - in a sense, I have come in and am looking for a place to sit ! Another day, I might sit in the other corner and talk about the meaning of life.

I agree the 'deride' thing carried on a bit - but it was such an interesting word, I wanted to make the most of it, before its slips back and is forgotten again for a while 

anyway ... back on topic.

There appears to be no one in the pub at the moment, that wants to talk about less serious people they would like to meet/have met, so I'll take me pint and packet of crisps and go sit in the beer garden for a bit and feed the ducks in the pond 

your round next BTW 

Rich


----------



## dennis (27 Jul 2008)

The trouble with simply meeting someone is that unless it is done in an undercover situation, you only see who they want you to see, getting to know someone is a completely different kettle of fish.

Dennis


----------



## davegw (27 Jul 2008)

Tusses":1xi9o6wq said:


> this area (off topic) might be called the pub.



And like any really good pub conversation, meanders all over the place and is difficult to follow



Rich":1xi9o6wq said:


> I have stopped posting alternative views



Thats a damn shame Rich - I may not have agreed with your views, may even have taken offence to a couple, but would always defend your right to air them in this topic. One of the things I like about this forum is that there are people with different views. I have tried politics forums (tend to be very polarised one way or the other), general forums (tend to attract a certain other interest), and other woodwork forums (seems a little too sanitised).

Just for my own pedantic mind - The Present and Future Tense of Deride is Deride? the past tense is Derided, the action is Deriding? That being said English as a language evolves constantly so I guess it all counts.

Finally (and possibly to bring the thread back to it's subject) the three people I'd like to meet

1) Oliver Cromwell - What did he think about the fact that he almost founded a new royal dynasty? 

2) Shakespeare - Did he really write all those plays?

3) John Lennon - Just WOW

and finally 

4) Abi Titmuss - Need I say more


----------



## Anonymous (27 Jul 2008)

davegw":13p8bfdh said:


> Finally (and possibly to bring the thread back to it's subject) the* three *people I'd like to meet
> 
> 1) Oliver Cromwell - What did he think about the fact that he almost founded a new royal dynasty?
> 
> ...



Well we've had the spelling thread so.............

:lol:


----------



## mailee (27 Jul 2008)

I did have the pleasure of meeting Robert Ballard of Titanic fame. But I would love to have met Jaques Cousteo, he was my hero along with Hans and Lottie Hass. :wink:


----------



## Smudger (27 Jul 2008)

When I was 7 I used to fancy Lottie Hass. And Michaela Dennis. Not so keen on Armand.

And Shirley Abicaire.


----------



## RogerM (27 Jul 2008)

Gerry":26zrpbvc said:


> Douglas Bader presented me with my apprenticeship indentures way back in 1980!
> 
> Gerry



As an air cadet at White Waltham I had the pleasure of speaking with Douglas Bader in about 1971. He had a lovely old Alvis which I was admiring as it gleamed in the sun. The conversation went like this.

Bader : You leave that alone young man.

me : Yes sir. Sorry sir!

Well - it was a conversation of sorts. We both spoke to each other!

But my most memorable meeting was with the late and great Eric Morecambe. He attended a Lords Taverners Cricket match at RAF Cranwell, and spent the afternoon posing with guests for photographs to raise funds for charity. He was as charming at the end of his 3 hour stint as he was at the outset. Then in the evening he came into the officers mess bar and chatted with us - and he was exactly the same in real life as his on screen persona. A really lovely guy.


----------



## Rich (27 Jul 2008)

davegw":1xmt21cr said:


> Tusses":1xmt21cr said:
> 
> 
> > this area (off topic) might be called the pub.
> ...


----------



## Rich (27 Jul 2008)

I seem to have messed that post up Dave, My apologies, but I think you will get my drift, :lol: 

Rich.


----------



## Gill (27 Jul 2008)

I think I would like to meet people from ancient times who have left no reliable written accounts of their lives, such as Hippolyta of the Amazons, Aristotle and Pythagoras.

Gill


----------



## mailee (27 Jul 2008)

Hey Smudger I thought it was only me who remembered Almond and Michaela Dennis. I did actually meet Hans and Lotte, but not in their prime. :wink:


----------



## Rich (27 Jul 2008)

My 3 would be:

Isembard kingdom brunel; he knew what he was on about,

Thomas chippendale; he knew what he was on about,

Pontius pilate, ?????

Regards, 

Rich.


----------



## Digit (27 Jul 2008)

> Pontius pilate, ?????


 :lol: :lol: 

Roy.


----------



## Rich (27 Jul 2008)

Digit":3qq2i3r1 said:


> > Pontius pilate, ?????
> 
> 
> :lol: :lol:
> ...



Yes, but I'd still want to know why he made that decision.

Rich. :lol: :lol:


----------



## Digit (27 Jul 2008)

If you are a Christian then the answer would be that, He had to die that we might be saved!
Which would mean the PP and the Jewish authorities were carrying out God's will.

Roy.


----------



## dennis (27 Jul 2008)

Rich

People having alternative views is a fact of life that everyone should accept, whether you agree with that view is a different matter.The world would be a poorer place without alternative views and we wouldnt be much father down the line than cavemen without them. So keep posting and add some diversity.

Dennis


----------



## woodbloke (27 Jul 2008)

I think Leonardo da Vinci, the Duke of Wellington and Lord Nelson are the people I'd most like to have met - Rob


----------



## Rich (27 Jul 2008)

dennis":3i0pns3n said:


> Rich
> 
> People having alternative views is a fact of life that everyone should accept, whether you agree with that view is a different matter.The world would be a poorer place without alternative views and we wouldnt be much father down the line than cavemen without them. So keep posting and add some diversity.
> 
> Dennis



Thanks for your comment Dennis, I do intend to keep posting but only replying to specific posters who do not get personal, I enjoy this forum and have learnt a lot from the more experienced members who are kind enough to pass on their knowledge, I do accept that others have differing views from me and don't have a problem with that, unfortunately, with some the feeling is not reciprocated, not to worry though, I'll press on and hope for the best.  

Regards,
Rich.


----------



## Tusses (27 Jul 2008)

ok - I'll pick and old dead dude ...

Lao Tzu

very interesting outlook on life


----------



## Mark68 (27 Jul 2008)

My three would be..

Joy and George Adamson and Elsa, sat in Kenya watching, the sun Go down and having a beer with them,, but not when they were trying to kill each other!!!

Jean-pierre rampal, one of the greatest,,if i could be half has good..

Oliver Reed,, well,,just for the fun of it, boy, what a hangover that would have been..

If i can add one more,,he's not human, but Digit,( sorry, not you Digit on here..lol..), but the one from Gorillas in the mist fame,,before he was butchered by poachers..


----------



## Digit (27 Jul 2008)

I find it fascinating to see who we would have wished to have met. I wonder what our reasons are?

Roy.


----------



## Tusses (28 Jul 2008)

ok - to sum up Loa Tzu's philosophy (about 600BC)

"To regard the fundamental as the essence, to regard things as coarse, to regard accumulation as deficiency, and to dwell quietly alone with the spiritual and the intelligent -- herein lie the techniques of Tao of the ancients."

To me, reading the Tao te Ching, dissolves any stresses and disillusionment I have with the world as it is now.

I read a bit - and then the stuff that annoys me simply doesn't matter as much.

So , I am much more 'Chilled Out' than most other people I know.

To hear 1st hand, without time and translational errors , dilution, changes even, would be an interesting intelectual and spiritual experience.


Bill and Ted are still cool tho


----------



## Anonymous (28 Jul 2008)

Digit":2xfqg27y said:


> I find it fascinating to see who we would have wished to have met. I wonder what our reasons are?
> 
> Roy.



It is also fascinating to see how few posts in this thread actually relate to the question asked!!

For me, the three (difficult to select only 3) would be (today anyway):
1. Sir Issac Newton - to understand how one can think so differently to those around him and understand so much

2. Richard Feynman - one of the greatest scientists and science educators around, and he could play the bongos too :wink: 

3. The current Dalai Lama - though I am not of any faith, but he fascinates me and his spritualism easilysits with his sceintific beliefs
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Universe-Si...r_1_17?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217248273&sr=8-17


----------



## Digit (28 Jul 2008)

And not a single vote for Einstein Tony.

Roy.


----------



## woodbloke (28 Jul 2008)

woodbloke":eqi0ukzu said:


> I think Leonardo da Vinci, the Duke of Wellington and Lord Nelson are the people I'd most like to have met - Rob



Leonardo da Vinci - a man centuries before his time.
LN and the DofW- two men who between them changed the course of history in the 19th century - Rob


----------



## Paul Chapman (28 Jul 2008)

woodbloke":2x6mxoo4 said:


> Leonardo da Vinci - a man centuries before his time.



Agreed. I have several books of his drawings - incredible stuff and so wide-ranging.

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## mailee (29 Jul 2008)

Pontius pilate, ????? 

Wasn't he that flying instructor?? :lol:


----------



## Woodmagnet (29 Jul 2008)

David Stirling. :wink:


----------



## Digit (29 Jul 2008)

> David Stirling.


A man who certainly thought outside the box.

Roy.


----------



## Woodmagnet (29 Jul 2008)

I'd love to hear his thoughts on the S.A.S. of today and other Special Forces. :wink:


----------



## jerryc (29 Jul 2008)

The three I would choose to meet would be 

Hugh Dowding. The man who really won the Battle of Britain. The treatment he received from Churchill, Bader and Leigh Mallory was appalling, yet he was gentleman enough to do a fine job and not complain.

Geoffrey Chaucer. His ambiguous humour and wit would have kept me totally entertained.

Alfred the Great. It might well be he was the greatest king England has ever had. It might be he was the first master of PR. I would just love to find the truth.

I will add that as a child I was once close to Churchill when he visited the working class in London. I still remember an exchange that will never feature in any history of the man. He made the fatuous remark, "London can take it," in the wrong place. An old lady reared up and said bitterly. Who the f**k is taking it ? It ain't you, mate."

Jerry


----------



## Anonymous (29 Jul 2008)

Digit":20s829z7 said:


> And not a single vote for Einstein Tony.
> 
> Roy.



Ahh, now that was a tricky one. 
Given 4 votes, he would have been there, and actually was at #2 at one point, but I replaced him with Feynman as although I have read every book both published (as far as I know), I found Feynman more of an enigma and thus would like to have met him.

After reading Rob's three, I now kick myself that I didn't include Leonardo as I have been reading about him a lot this past year and today, he would be on my list :wink: :roll:


----------



## Digit (29 Jul 2008)

Yes Jerry indeed! The 'Big Wing' concept worked well, when it worked, but the terrible trio had few doubts as to their own fallibility and Dowding was shockingly treated. It's interesting to note that none of the men who served under Dowding supported the use of the 'Big Wing' for a first, or fast, response.
Churchill was a great and inspiring orator, but that lady's response was typical of the east end as they were 'taking it' nightly.
I spent some very cold, wet and frightening times in shelters myself and would willing have stopped 'taking it!'.

Roy.


----------



## jerryc (29 Jul 2008)

Roy,
From such research as I have managed to achieve, the Big Wing never worked. 
Concerning Churchill.
My knowledge of the Second WW was a little unusual. I was in Kent, hop picking with my mother, during the Battle of Britain and so had a very close aquaintence with what was happening. Came back to Bermondsey for the Blitz and was sheltering in London Bridge underground when a land mine got hung up on the signals outside the entrance. As a result we had to walk along the rails from London Bridge to The Borough to get out. Was in London for V1's and V2's. Not trying to bore you with my war but you can see why the old lady's reply to Churchill stuck, even in a kid's mind.

Jerry


----------



## Digit (29 Jul 2008)

I was born in 1940 but well remember the 'mini blitz' and Doodle bugs of course and certainly sympathise with that woman.
The 'Big Wing' worked very well, when they arrived on time, their greatest success was on the 15th Sept 1940 when some 60 aircraft met the German bombers.
But the time taken to marshal some five squadrons would have been useless in an around your neck of the woods, the Luftwaffe would have been on their way home by the time Bader was ready.
If Dowding had one fault, IMO, it was in not removing Leigh-Mallory and extending 11 group to the north of the Thames, which would have given Park much more authority, and manoeuvring space in which to fall back after the damage to his sector stations.
I think he was too much of a gentleman to do that and Mallory got away with at least gross insubordination!
But wisdom after the event is always very easy of course and the players performed their roles as they thought fit.
Also I feel that it probably didn't matter too much who led Fighter Command at the time, most people fail to realise that Dowding's greatest achievement was behind the scenes, without his efforts it is doubtful either that the Chain Home stations or the interlocking command structure they supported would have been in place, and that was the vital part of the battle. 

Roy.


----------



## dunbarhamlin (29 Jul 2008)

Hmm. The first two are easy. My grandfather, who died young, and my uncle, Cyril, who was killed in the war.
For the third, I'd probably go for the anonymous craftsman who first used my Livingston rip saw.
Not into the good and the great - they're seldom the former and frequently far too aware of their standing.
Steve


----------



## jerryc (29 Jul 2008)

Roy,
Should perhaps start another thread on Dowding. because we could be in danger of hi-jacking this one. It mattered very much who controlled Fighter Command both before the war and during the Battle.
It was Dowding who fought against the entrenched RAF powers before the war who wanted to concentrate on bombers because they believed the bomber would always get through and therefore fighters were a luxury. It was Dowding who fought against Churchill in order to conserve the fighters for home defence and not squander them over France during the retreat to Dunkirk. His other contributions you have already mentioned. 

Jerry


----------



## Digit (29 Jul 2008)

Agreed mate, but I meant that I suspect another player would probably have followed much the same course as Dowding as he would have had the same hand to play.
Without the Radar controlled command structure Dowding might well have lost the Battle,and with it Park would probably still have won it, if you follow me.
I wonder also what the old lady who had a go at Churchill would have had to say about the hand wringing over Dresden and the treatment of Harris and Bomber Command.
We, as a people, have a shocking dis-respect for our fighting forces.

Roy.


----------



## Paul Chapman (29 Jul 2008)

Very difficult to choose just three because there have been so many very interesting people throughout history. However, three people who I have long-admired are George Rodger, Robert Capa and Henri Cartier-Bresson, the founder-members of the Magnum photo co-operative in 1947.

They were all very different but equally superb witnesses and recorders of life. They lived through some very interesting times and we are fortunate that their work lives on through their photographs. For anyone who is interested, here are some links to their pictures

http://www.magnumphotos.com/Archive/C.a ... e%20Rodger

http://www.magnumphotos.com/Archive/C.a ... ert%20Capa

http://www.magnumphotos.com/Archive/C.a ... %20Bresson

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Digit (29 Jul 2008)

I wonder how many people today Paul will recognise that pic of Schweitzer, another candidate for this thread.
It's also interesting to me how much this particular thread has revealed about other posters and their interests outside of the workshop.
We are a diverse group aren't we?

Roy.


----------



## Paul Chapman (29 Jul 2008)

Digit":12r9tylo said:


> We are a diverse group aren't we?



We sure are - that's what makes the World go round  

Cheers :wink: 

Paul


----------



## dennis (29 Jul 2008)

I have to agree with Dunbarhamlin.I would much rather meet some unsung hero who seeks nothing in return for their efforts than someone of fame or so called celebrity.

Dennis


----------



## jerryc (30 Jul 2008)

Roy,

One thing even many historians forget is the mood and culture of the people at the time. I know because one of my degrees is in history.Many also want to find a new viewpoint so they can publish their works. A few points of clarification should be made about terror bombing in the Second World War. 
First the Germans experimented in the Spanish Civil War. Guernica.
Second. The Luftwaffe had no capacity for heavy bombing. Their bombers were twin engined, with a small carrying capacity. Even so, as a small boy in London's Blitz, I still have vivid memories of the fire raids. High explosives and a rain of incendiary bombs. Coming out of London Bridge Tube before sun-up yet being aware that it was as light as day.The full capacity of the Luftwaffe was unleashed. Have I mentioned Coventry yet?

It is easy for someone sitting and reading about events to reach a conclusion that few who were contemporary to WW2 would reach. Like anyone who has had first hand experience of it, I hate war. The old lady hated Churchill because she had knowledge of how dismissive the authorities were of the safety of the working classes. The facts are there for anyone to see. As for her attitude to Dresden, it would have been a blunt "Well they started it." It doesn't excuse Dresden, but who cried for Coventry?

Jerry


----------



## woodbloke (30 Jul 2008)

jerryc":3gaqcfe1 said:


> Roy,
> 
> One thing even many historians forget is the mood and culture of the people at the time. I know because one of my degrees is in history.Many also want to find a new viewpoint so they can publish their works. A few points of clarification should be made about terror bombing in the Second World War.
> First the Germans experimented in the Spanish Civil War. Guernica.
> ...



Jerry - interesting observations. I think the role of Bomber Command (and the USAAF in the Pacific theatre) would make a very lively separate thread  - Rob


----------



## Digit (30 Jul 2008)

Very true Jerry. One of the worst aspects of Bomber Command's activities was not what they did, as you point out the Germans kicked it off, but the way Churchill passed the buck after Dresden. The war cabinet issued the directive that Harris acted under then Churchill attempted to distance himself from their actions.
I have no degree in history Jerry, just a life long addiction to the subject, and having met, through my work in the aircraft industry, many vets from the WW2 air force I know that many were very disappointed at the lack of recognition afforded to both Harris and to the force that he commanded.
Politics is a dirty business I fear.
Wars are won by those who make the fewest mistakes and the Luftwaffe's concentration on medium bombers after the death of Wever? put much of Britain's and Russia's military production out of effective range.
Out of curiosity Jerry are you aware that the Junker's Ju88 was designed by an American?
Your comments about the old lady's attitude was the one that I think most people had at that time.
I also enough of the second world war, and its aftermath, to last me a lifetime.
I have railed on this forum about the lack of democracy within the EU, but for all it faults at least my son has never had to face the prospect of military service, and for that I am very grateful. 

Roy.


----------



## motownmartin (30 Jul 2008)

I would have liked to have met my great grandparents, my grandparents were good working class folk but i would have loved to talk to my great grandparents to see how they lived their lives, today I think we take things for granted.


----------



## Digit (30 Jul 2008)

My daughter carried out a search for her grandparents as a school project. She was astounded.

I wrote this as the opening of a book for her...

*It has been said of the early generations of the twentieth century that they saw more change during their lifetime than any generation before or since. The invention of the phonograph and telephone, the development of the motorcar, wireless, and manned flight, all followed each other in quick succession, every day seemed to produce something new and exciting. But for all this, life on the land changed but little. The generation that survived the carnage of the Somme and Ypres returned to a rural life little different from that which they had so cheerfully left.
But not so for the men who fought the battles of the Second World War. The men who stemmed the might of the Nazi war machine and ‘came safe home’ returned to a world that would never be the same again. The drift of men from the land that had begun in their grandfather’s time now became a flood, a torrent of humanity torn from their rural roots by the tide of mechanisation. Cottages which for centuries had echoed to the tramp of hob nailed boots now stood silent and open to the skies, condemned as unfit for human habitation. Everything was now to be new, modern, up to date. ‘Contemporary’ was the in word.
A way of life that reached back to the days of enclosure was to be swept away to make room for a land fit for heroes. 
My children, like others of their generation, may know the history of the Second World War, but of that which followed, and how the working people lived, they know little or nothing. My own children find it difficult to conceive of the world of my childhood, a world of food rationing, a world without sweets, cakes, television, motor cars or central heating, and yet the period of which I write is barely half a century ago. 
The countryside of my childhood was of neat little villages with white walled thatched cottages and small patchwork fields with small brown cows contentedly chewing the cud. Horses still outnumbered tractors and the combine harvester was something that the Americans used.
The period of my childhood encompassed the death throes of this rural economy, and though there is a tendency to view ones childhood through rose tinted spectacles, there is a growing belief that that the industrialisation of farming has gone too far, that the price required to produce mountains of butter and beef and lakes of wine and milk is too high.
But the days of cows standing waist deep in meadows full of wild flowers are gone, probably for ever, but like many of my generation I was privileged to know them.
This is my story.
*

Roy.


----------



## jerryc (30 Jul 2008)

Roy,
There were many reasons why the Luftwaffe opted for medium bombers, but the basic reason was that Germany was a Continental power. They saw everything in terms of land warfare. The light, fast medium bomber was ideal when working in support of ground forces. 
One deep problem is that each nation, and it's historians, see things from their own perspective. 
I learned this in a few ways. One, I was born and raised in UK. When I came to Australia (1962) I found the viewpoint of history was very different. At university I had the chance to talk to a visiting German professor of history and I wanted to know why Hitler stopped at the Channel and then turned on Russia. His answer was that I did not understand the concept Germans had of the Ring of Steel, something I had never heard of. The Thirty Years War had burned deep into Germans that Germany should not be a battleground. On one side they feared France because it's levee en masse could raise an army very quickly and therefore had to be nullified quickly. Russia had massive manpower but was slow to mobilise and could be dealt with once France was dealt with.

My answers are necessarily brief because I don't want to bore others on this thread.

Jerry


----------



## Digit (31 Jul 2008)

I understood the reasoning Jerry, it was unfortunate for them that they ended up fighting a war that their Luftwaffe in particular was not designed for.
As an army co-operation force they were of course very successful, but the attack on Britain and the USSR was not what the Luftwaffe was equipped for.
Fortunately.
If the Versaille treaty had followed Wilson's 14 points it's just possible the whole sorry affair could have been avoided.
I forget who commented that the treaty result was not a peace, just a 20 year truce, he was wrong by just a few days.

Roy.


----------



## jerryc (31 Jul 2008)

Roy,

Personally I go further than most historians on the length of the Great Conflict. My belief is that it started in 1870 and finished in 1945. 
The Franco Prussian War dealt a massive blow to France's belief in it's military prowess. Even though Napoleon had been defeated, the French were still self delusional about their army.(Wonder if any Frenchmen are reading this?). Bismarck unified Germany and that worried France. They were itching for an excuse to put matters right. Again I am forced to over simplify through constraints of space. I know Germany's unification, the Kaiser's naval program the entente cordiale and Uncle Tom Cobley, are all in there too, but national pride is a formidable factor.

Perhaps there is a case to be made for a history forum. Incidently I also have a degree in literature. I thought it appropriate to have, as much of history is fiction. To support this statement I will use The Angel of Mons. There are many soldiers who swore they saw it. I don't call them liars. When everyone says something was so, then memory can play tricks. However I found that the story was a fabrication by a journalist.

Jerry


----------



## Digit (31 Jul 2008)

I would have to go along with that Jerry.
As regards 'history', as far as I'm concerned it started 60secs ago and extends back to the pre-Cambrian Era, if you're any where within that try this site...

http://archaeologica.boardbot.com/

we are a friendly group who discuss not only politics but just about every subject under the sun, and including the sun.

Roy.


----------



## Maia28 (2 Aug 2008)

It's not that easy to come up with three, I keep changing my mind! Nonetheless, today I'll go for:

1. Frederick Banting
2. Frank Zappa
3. Enoch Powell


----------



## Digit (2 Aug 2008)

Banting, a much forgotten gentleman.

Roy.


----------



## Grinding One (3 Aug 2008)

I`d like to go back in time and tell myself all the things I have learned the hard way... 
#2 I think I`d like to go back in time and talk to Jesus...just to scare the # out of me. 
#3 Then I would like to talk to anybody that would listen without getting mad and try to solve problems so we do not have to go to war. 

country to what you may think we Americans like the British ,help them out all of the time,Russians too,heck even the French...I think we helped build the countries we helped to blow up...OK I`m off my soapbox now lets have no more war.


----------



## jerryc (3 Aug 2008)

Maia,

Our choices of who we would talk to tell us much about us. As I said earlier, we are conditioned by our culture and experiences. I knew nothing about Frederick Banting.

I didn't include "Weary" Dunlop, but to any Australian with experience of the Second World War, he would be an obvious choice. A six foot four surgeon who worked tirelessly to save POW's suffering at the hands of the Japanese. His height, as well as his attitude, brought him constantly to their attention. He was often singled out for what the Americans now call "robust treatment". Then to face his captors down when they wanted to send a sick man back to work and threatened him with death if he didn't compy. Dunlop knew what they were capable of, but wouldn't yield an inch. Yet after the war to say that hate was corrosive and there was a need to forgive.

Each culture and time creates it's own heroes. General George Custer is remembered, not for being an absolute silly person, but for making a "Last stand". Does any one remember Major Wilson's "Last Stand?"

On reflection I would modify my own choices made earlier and include any one of the men who were on The "Birkenhead". What were their thoughts and fears in those last moments. They had given the women and children their chance for survival, they had put the horses over the side and could hear the horses screams' as the sharks attacked. They knew they were next to go into the water. If they survived all that there was the Skeleton Coast to look forward to Yet they "stood quite still to the Birkenhead Drill." 





Old Enoch was an interesting choice and I'm intrigued. Why him?


----------



## jerryc (3 Aug 2008)

Thought I'd better quote the Kipling poem I referred to. It doesn't tell the full story.For example it was this incident that gave rise to the call "Women and Children first.

But to stand an' be still to the Birken'ead drill
is a damn tough bullet to chew,
An' they done it, the Jollies -- 'Er Majesty's Jollies --
soldier an' sailor too!
Their work was done when it 'adn't begun; they was younger nor me an' you;
Their choice it was plain between drownin' in 'eaps
an' bein' mopped by the screw,
So they stood an' was still to the Birken'ead drill, soldier an' sailor to.

As was only hinted in the poem, most were young lads, recently enlisted landsmen. 

it's easy to understand people with a mission, those with maturity and those who seek glory, but understand these boys and what motivated them? That's why I would have liked to talk to them.

Jerry


----------



## Digit (3 Aug 2008)

Banting, the Birkenhead?
I'll stick my neck out here and suggest that amongst the members are a goodly number of ex-EAGLE readers!

Roy.


----------



## Losos (3 Aug 2008)

Gerry":3ddxxvht said:


> Still it was a privilege I'll always remember, shaking the hand of a real Hero.
> Gerry



In his generation real live heros seemed to abound. 

In the present age I find it hard to think of an equivalent, we live in different times of course, and there are still some examples in our Police and Military Forces.

There are a handful of civilian people who may qualify, I'll not name them now because it'll take the thread off topic.

And to answer the original question, top 3 for me Churchil, Bader, and Lawrence (of Arabia) the latter if only to find out the truth


----------



## Losos (3 Aug 2008)

Digit":4ew1cqev said:


> I'll stick my neck out here and suggest that amongst the members are a goodly number of ex-EAGLE readers!
> Roy.



The EAGLE oh yes, how many weeks pocket money got spent on that :lol: (Sure wish I'd saved a few copies, now worth a bit I'm told)


----------



## Digit (3 Aug 2008)

If you want to return to the golden years of your childhood Losos I'll PM you some downloads.
It's interesting to note that nobody has selected any anti-heroes, Hitler, Stalin, Napoleon, Pol Pot, Mugabe, Amin, Mladic, El Duce, or further back St Vlad, and Gengis Khan. What made them do what they did? What drove them?
And what happened to Schweitzer, Mandela and 'Mother' Teresa?
And none of us seem to have much time for Mungo Park, David Livingstone, or Richard Burton.

Roy.


----------



## jerryc (3 Aug 2008)

Roy,
Have to confess I was a reader of The Eagle in my long lost boyhood days, but never came across Banting or The Birkenhead in it's adventurous pages.
Now I do remember Dan Dare, though he would obviously be hard to talk to.
Remember the short poetic lines about him?

A cigarette that bears the lipstick's traces,
A pair of space boots and some Dan Dare braces.

But this was the innocent era of Biggles. I devoured all of the books but one. I have never found a copy of Biggles Flies Undone. 

Jerry


----------



## Digit (3 Aug 2008)

I had it from issue one Jerry, if I could get it away from my elder brother that is, to be honest I can't really remember where I learnt a lot of these things from. The EAGLE was certainly an inspiration.
Do you remember the old habit of the loaded shotgun behind the door?
I do, and as a result of one I'm so short sighted I can barely see as far as my lenses and as I played cricket, football, rugby, tennis etc I spent a lot of time reading as I was always breaking my glasses!
Remember those terrible NHS ones?
I was always, 'Prof' or Giglamps!

Roy.


----------



## Maia28 (3 Aug 2008)

Jerry,

we are indeed contioned by our culture and experiences. I had a whole list of people like Newton, Copernicus, Oppenhiemer etc. and they are invoked for different reasons. 

Frederick Banting was thinking about a lecture he would give the following day when it occured to him that diabetes might be caused by a pancreatic dysfunction. He persevered in his studies against the advice of others and identified insulin. When awarded the Nobel prize in 1923 with Macleod, he gave half of his award money to Charles Best. He did not patent his discovery but gave it to mankind and died in 1941 aged 49. Because of him, my daughter is alive and well.

Enoch Powell is a fascinating character although mostly known for his rivers of blood speach. In 1974, he advised people to vote labour despite being a tory MP. He was the youngest professor in the commonwealth and the youngest brigadier, could speak and write many languages and was in the list of top 100 Brittons. Like Banting, he had the courage to stand alone for what he believed. Margaret Thatcher once said that she based her monetary policies on his ideas, he said it was a shame she didn't understand them. However, it isn't for his politics that I'd like to have spoken with him. Rather that he was a polymath who seemed to have tied up all of his understanding in a logical and consistent framework. 

Hope that satisfies your curiosity about why I chose Enoch,
Andy


----------



## Digit (3 Aug 2008)

A story about Enoch. Apparently the barber in the House was known for his ability to talk the hind leg off of a Donkey. When Enoch went in one day he asked, 'how would you like it cut Mister Powell?'
'In silence!'
One of the brick bats thrown at Enoch during his speech was because he suggested that immigrants should be offered financial incentives to go home, an idea condemned at the time as racist, and now part of government policy.
Numerous cars at the time sported stickers in the rear window saying, 'give me the money Enoch and I'll go.'

Roy.


----------



## Maia28 (4 Aug 2008)

Roy,
I'd never thought that Enoch would also make me laugh or I'd have put him first. 
Andy


----------



## Smudger (4 Aug 2008)

That's all very amusing, but he was a bigot. A well-educated bigot, but a bigot none the less. Look where he ended up.


----------



## Rich (4 Aug 2008)

Smudger":3sh816d0 said:


> That's all very amusing, but he was a bigot. A well-educated bigot, but a bigot none the less. Look where he ended up.



Yes, And look where we've ended up.

rich.


----------



## Maia28 (4 Aug 2008)

Smudger":2vjsncn7 said:


> That's all very amusing, but he was a bigot. A well-educated bigot, but a bigot none the less. Look where he ended up.



We are all bigots in our own way, at least he had the courage of his convictions.


----------



## Smudger (4 Aug 2008)

But his convictions were unacceptable to civilised people.


----------



## Digit (4 Aug 2008)

So the 1000 dockers who went out on strike in support were uncivilised, and if we are so civilised why was the power of the law required to force the population to be 'civilised?

Roy.


----------



## Smudger (4 Aug 2008)

Yes, they were. Politically primitive and uncivilised.

And a lot of people are today, as well. Knee-jerk answers are quick, simple and invariably wrong.

Powell's 'rivers of blood' haven't come about. There has been no revolution, or invasion. In fact, his prophecies were never about real life.

And he knew they never would be. He was a cynical and embittered man using the prejudices of people less educated and aware than himself to try to grab some power and influence, to ride on their hatreds to get what he wanted. Just like the BNP today, or Mosley in the 30s.

If you feel any attraction towards him then you have been duped as much as the poor saps who marched in favour of him were.


----------



## Digit (4 Aug 2008)

> Yes, they were. Politically primitive and uncivilised.


And according to a report to the government recently the danger of violence between established immigrant communities and recent incomers is now serious.
And if that is your definition of civilised Dick, and I don't necessarily dispute it, there are billions of uncivilised people in the world.
Just look at how many people are claiming asylum in this country to escape their uncivilised neighbours.

Roy.


----------



## Smudger (4 Aug 2008)

Powell claimed that there would be a bloody revolution in which the 'non-white races' took control of the country from the indigenous population. He claimed that by 1980 more than 50% of the population would be black. He claimed that the 'British Way of Life' would be swamped and extinguished.

That hasn't happened, and was never going to happen. It was scaremongering and hatemongering aimed at some of the least educated people in our society.


----------



## Smudger (4 Aug 2008)

Separate post for a separate point - yes, I do believe that there are many millions of uncivilised people in the world, and that some faith groups operate on lower standards than others - and especially than those of us who do not follow superstitions but try to see the best way for all to survive and thrive.

Dammit, I've been working with the uncivilised for 35 years!


----------



## Maia28 (4 Aug 2008)

Smudger":1lrnc5b3 said:


> He claimed that by 1980 more than 50% of the population would be black. He claimed that the 'British Way of Life' would be swamped and extinguished.



Actually, using the Registrar-General's statistics he said that there would be 5 - 7 million immigrants by 2000, or 10% of the population. Not a bad guess as it happens. Some of us who don't live in London (or France) are begining to feel that the 'British Way of Life' has been extinguished. 

Anyway, I should have known that someone would pick up on this, but I note no reference to Enoch's comments that he fealt that Indians where in many respects superior to Europeans. I'd still have liked to have met him as he appears to be more open minded that most people and now I'd like to judge for myself why he provokes such polarised opinion.

Andy


----------



## Digit (4 Aug 2008)

Goebbels argued that if you told a big enough lie often enough people would accept it.
Those regular readers of any of my posts, (if any) will be familiar with my love of history, and a study of history suggests that today's 'big lies' are that global warming is man made, when history tells us otherwise, and that immigration is good for us.
Without going into the morality of the subject, which is different, below is a list of countries where the indigenous populations have 'benefited' from mass immigration...
North America,
Central America,
The Carribian,
Southern America,
Southern Africa,
Central Africa,
Palestine,
Cyprus,
Macedonia,
Kosovo,
Bosnia,
Armenia,
Andaman Islands,
India,
Sri Lanka,
Tibet,
Malaysia,
Japan,
Australia,
Tasmania,
New Zealand,
Fiji,
Hawaii.
We, all of us, ignore history at our peril.

Roy.


----------



## davegw (4 Aug 2008)

Digit":2kaej8xt said:


> Goebbels argued that if you told a big enough lie often enough people would accept it.
> Those regular readers of any of my posts, (if any) will be familiar with my love of history, and a study of history suggests that today's 'big lies' are that global warming is man made, when history tells us otherwise, and that immigration is good for us.
> Without going into the morality of the subject, which is different, below is a list of countries where the indigenous populations have 'benefited' from mass immigration...
> North America,
> ...



Just so we're clear Roy, you seem to be equating Immigration with Invasation and/or Colonisation?


----------



## Digit (4 Aug 2008)

From the viewpoint of the indigenous people or the incomers Dave?
What did the Aborigines think about British 'Colonists' I wonder, most of whom would now be classified as immigrants seeking a better life?

Roy.


----------



## davegw (4 Aug 2008)

I'd have thought the Aborigines saw the Brits as Invaders, and the Brits saw themselves as Colonists (those that went voluntarily of course). And I'd imagine that this is pretty much true of any mass migration event. 

I'd also say that it was very different from the kind of economic migration that takes place more often today, and is certainly taking place in Britain. I certainly don't look at any immigrant into this country as either an invader or a colonist. In the same way I didn't describe my Aunt who emigrated to the US in the '70s as either of those, she is an economic migrant. 

interestingly she now describes other immigrants who are more obvious than her (mexicans and asians) using the phase "invasion" as diluting HER american culture! And no she doesn't see the irony. 

Personally I live in a town that is very Multicultural, and I come from East London, so I have lived around immigrants all of my life. I do think that they have added to the country, individually and culturally. There are some that don't "integrate", but generally these are 1st Generation, within a couple of generations integration is complete, and the culture is assimilated.


----------



## Digit (4 Aug 2008)

The Ozzy 'Colonists' in today's terms would be 'economic migrants' same to north America.
In other countries, Kosovo, Macedonia, Bosnia Fiji, Malaysia, Japan, etc the indigenous populations have been out bred by immigrants and conflict has resulted.
That is history, not a social standpoint, not a personal one nor one based on any political stance.
All of those conflicts, and the resulting deaths, would have been avoided without colonisation/immigration, and I have to add, the London bombings.

Roy.


----------

