Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,408 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 143,909
Pageviews Today: 185,387Threads Today: 53Posts Today: 905
01:35 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 75235939
United States
07/16/2017 07:18 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
He makes it seem like the evacuation at Dunkirk was some sort of heroic event on the part of the Allies. Bullshit! The only reason the Allies escaped was because Uncle Adolf allowed them to escape. Hitler's infamous "Stop Order" is the reason the allies escaped. It wasn't due to any nail-biting, heroic action on the part of the Allies. Christopher Nolan is a bullshit artist. He should have made a movie about the real heroes of the Battle of France, the Wehrmacht - the greatest fighting force in the history of warfare:

Anonymous Coward
User ID: 75220909
United States
07/16/2017 07:25 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Oh please the krauts, Especially the SS couldnt even eliminate the Polish resistance fighters. They couldn't even defend an entire coastal front when they knew the allies here close to doing something. They couldn't handle fighting against Soviet troops at the eastern front... all they had to do was take Stalingrad...that's it, war would've been over for the soviets.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 17672150
United Kingdom
07/16/2017 07:28 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
i havent seen dunkirk and im not that interested. but Inception was on last night and the acting in that was so bad and the script was so overly convoluted i dont know how those actors said that stuff without laughing.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 75235939
United States
07/16/2017 07:39 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Oh please the krauts, Especially the SS couldnt even eliminate the Polish resistance fighters. They couldn't even defend an entire coastal front when they knew the allies here close to doing something. They couldn't handle fighting against Soviet troops at the eastern front... all they had to do was take Stalingrad...that's it, war would've been over for the soviets.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75220909


Hitler was Germany's worst enemy, there's no mistake about that. But that doesn't change the fact that the Wehrmacht was the greatest fighting force that ever existed, for they took on the Allies and the Russian Bear at the same time, and nearly won had it not been for Hitler's mental illness:

Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 75235939
United States
07/16/2017 07:41 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
i havent seen dunkirk and im not that interested. but Inception was on last night and the acting in that was so bad and the script was so overly convoluted i dont know how those actors said that stuff without laughing.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 17672150


Nolan's movies, like most movies today, are just extended trailers. They aren't really movies in the traditional sense, but rather a collection of scenes. You take away the really slick cinematography, and they really just suck. I miss good movies, especially from the 80's.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 75235939
United States
07/16/2017 08:12 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
[color=red]He makes it seem like the evacuation at Dunkirk was some sort of heroic event on the part of the Allies. Bullshit! The only reason the Allies escaped was because Uncle Adolf allowed them to escape. Hitler's infamous "Stop Order" is the reason the allies escaped. It wasn't due to any nail-biting, heroic action on the part of the Allies. Christopher Nolan is a bullshit artist. He should have made a movie about the real heroes of the Battle of France, the Wehrmacht - the greatest fighting force in the history of warfare:


MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!!

How old are you OP ?
No really you unfortunately like a number of your American bretherin have no idea of what the British went through during two world wars, and that is not your fault, it is a failing of your history teachings at school, however to make comments such as that besmirches the death of every soldier who fought and that includes the Germans Japanese and Italians........


My French teacher at comprehensive school Monsieur Prost
was with the French 1st Army defending the west of Dunkirk, their outer defence were assisted by a Royal Artillery battery detachment of six guns ammunition and a section of Indian Chindits and donkeys transporting artillery rounds that had got separated from its main units.

My Uncle Ivor was with the Green Howard's defending the east of Dunkirk, the bravery of the French armed forces allowed the continuation of the evacuation of Dunkirk, out numbered 8 to 1 they continually counterattacked the German infantry slowing down its progress considerably.

The heroes were the French who threw everything at the vastly superior Germans, large numbers returned to continue their fight against Germany after evacuation to England.

Valuable time was gained from Hitler's (at the time) inexplicable 'halt order', which suspended the panzers' advance for 2-3 crucial days, whilst the German tank forces were replenished.It has since been revealed that Winston Churchill made it known that the British would throw their lot in with Germany if they were to allow the British Belgian and French armies reprieve, also the speed of the German advance had stretched to breaking point supply lines, plus the Royal Air Force was causing severe disruption with the Germans in France. Also Herman Goering wanted to prove his Luftwaffe to Hitler and he wanted to finish evrything with bombers, but they were badly mauled by the RAF. This gave the Allies the opportunity to set up strongpoints in key towns and villages such as Lille, La Bassée, St Venant, Festubert, La Paradis, Steenbecque, Hazebrouck, Cassel, Wormhout, Bergues, Ypres, Noordschote, Dixmuide, Veurne and Nieuwpoort. These strongpoints were manned by experienced troops of the British 2nd division and a variety of scratch units. For the most part, their orders were simple: 'Fight to the last man and the last round'. The heroic sacrifice of these rearguard units and of the French 1st Army at Lille, allowed the bulk of the BEF and two French divisions to escape up the rapidly-shrinking corridor to Dunkirk. Many of those men retreating up the corridor received the simple instruction:

'Every man for himself, make for Dunkirk'.


At places like La Bassée, the 1st Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders held out for two days, hurling back all German attempts to cross the canal. However, the cost was high; after one counter-attack, A Company had only six men left. On the morning of the 27th May, the defenders were finally overrun with the regiment being effectively wiped out. Only 79 members of the regiment made it back to England. That same morning at Festubert, the 2nd Dorsets were attacked by German panzers. However, clever use of the buildings in the town meant that they held out until nightfall before being ordered to retreat northwards to Estaires, some eight miles away. A fighting cross-country retreat to Estaires, which was being held by French troops, was successfully accomplished by day-break.



The 2nd Glosters and 4th Oxford and Bucks Light infantry turned the French town of Cassel into something resembling a fortress. They also had sufficient time to cleverly site and dig-in their anti-tank guns. This town, on a hill, had a commanding view of the Flanders plain and it was vital that it was held to buy time to establish defences around the Dunkirk beachhead itself. The town was surrounded and subjected to fierce and prolonged tank and infantry attack, but held out for three crucial days between the 27th and 29th May. Running low on food and ammunition, a breakout by the British troops was attempted on the night of the 29th May. However, few managed to evade the besieging German forces and the bulk of the force was captured and taken prisoner.



In the case of the defenders of the villages of Le Paradis (2nd Norfolks) and Wormhoudt (2nd Royal Warwicks), they had the misfortune to encounter SS troops of the SS Totenkopf and SS Liebstandarte. In each case, after surrendering, the survivors were shot by their captors, infuriated at the stiff resistance which they had encountered and their heavy losses.



On the 27th May, British and French Commanders met to establish a strategy for the defence of the Dunkirk beachhead itself. It was quickly agreed that the French would be responsible for the line west of Dunkirk and the British, everything east of the town. Referred to as the outer perimeter, it was 25miles long and approximately eight miles deep and it made the best use of the canal and waterways around Dunkirk to aid defence. In addition, low-lying areas such as Les Moeres on the eastern side of the perimeter were deliberately flooded to help impede the German advance. The French-held line ran from Mardyck – Spycker – Bergues. The British sector ran through the axis Bergues – Bulscamp – Furnes – Nieuport. The troops (British and French) allocated to provide the final rearguard must have realised, that in many cases, they were forfeiting their own chances of escape so that the greater part of the Allied armies could be saved. However, contemporary accounts record that the men involved accepted their fate stoically as they grimly set about establishing their defensive positions. As retreating units came into the perimeter, they were instructed to destroy vehicles and heavy equipment and in many cases, they were relieved of ammunition and automatic weapons by the rearguard soldiers to bolster the defender's armoury.



British units defending the perimeter included, among others, elements of the following regiments: the Loyals, Leicesters, Sherwood Foresters, Warwickshires, East Lancashires, Borders, Coldstream Guards, Duke of Wellington's, Green Howards, Durham Light Infantry, King's Own Scottish Borderers, Royal Ulster Rifles, Grenadier Guards, Berkshires, Suffolks, Bedfordshire and Herts, Duke of Cornwall's Light Infantry, East Surreys, Royal Fusiliers, South Lancashires and the Black Watch. From the 29th May, these units fiercely resisted strong attacks from German artillery and the several infantry divisions which had been assembled to take Dunkirk. Many of the books written over the past 70 years tend to dwell on two or three individual acts of heroism on the 'canal line' and the mens' respective units. It is however, perhaps, more fitting to remember the rearguard as a whole. The fact that each group of defenders was entirely dependent upon the units to its left and right holding their ground and that a major breakthrough at any point of the line would have brought the whole evacuation operation to a rapid halt. It was this team-work, resolve and self-sacrifice which was the real story of Dunkirk.



During the night of the 1st-2nd June, the survivors of the rearguard were withdrawn to an inner perimeter, utilising the Canal des Moeres and the Canal des Chats as its principal defence lines to the south and east. It was these defences which were taken over by elements of the French 8th Zouaves, 137th and 150th Infantry Regiments and the 92nd GRDI. This allowed the bulk of the British rearguard to be successfully evacuated on the night of the 2nd and 3rd of June.
 Quoting: Grumpyarse


Thanks for agreeing with me, you grumpy bastard.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 75235939
United States
07/16/2017 08:27 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Hitler let the Allies go at Dunkirk because he actually admired the British. Explains Pat Buchanan in his excellent book Churchill, Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War" :

"To Hitler, Great Britain was Germany’s natural ally and the nation and empire he most admired. He did not covet British colonies. He did not want or seek a fleet to rival the Royal Navy. He did not wish to bring down the British Empire. He was prepared to appease Britain to make her a friend of Germany. Where the Kaiser had grudgingly agreed in 1913 to restrict the High Seas Fleet to 60 percent of the Royal Navy, Hitler in 1935 readily agreed to restrict his navy to 35 percent. What Hitler ever sought was an allied, friendly, or at least neutral Britain.

Conversing in 1922 with a publisher friendly to the Nazi party, Hitler “ruled out the colonial rivalry with Britain that had caused conflict before the First World War.” Said Hitler, “Germany would have to adapt herself to a purely continental policy, avoiding harm to English interests.”

“By late 1922,” Kershaw writes, “an alliance with Britain, whose world empire he admired, was in [Hitler’s] mind. This idea had sharpened in 1923 when the disagreements of the British and French over the Ruhr occupation became clear.”

Having fought the “Tommies” on the Western Front, he admired their martial qualities. Nor was Churchill unaware of “Hitler’s notorious Anglomania and his almost servile admiration of British imperialism….”

Sir Roy Denman came to the same conclusion:

"Hitler…had no basic quarrel with Britain. Unlike William II, he had no wish from the outset to rival the British navy, nor covet the British Empire. His territorial aims were in Central and Eastern Europe and further east. He could never understand why the British constantly sought to interfere."


After the British escape at Dunkirk, because of his own “stop order” to his armored units not to advance into the undefended city, Hitler told Martin Bormann he had purposely spared the British army so as not to create “an irreparable breach between the British and ourselves.”

“The blood of every single Englishman is too valuable to be shed,” Hitler told his friend Frau Troost. “Our two people belong together racially and traditionally—this is and always has been my aim even if our generals can’t grasp it.”

On June 25, 1940, after the fall of France, Hitler telephoned Goebbels to lay out the terms of a deal with England. Britain’s empire was to be preserved, but Britain would return to Lord Salisbury’s policy of “splendid isolation” from the power politics of Europe.

What Hitler was demanding after his triumph in the west in 1940 was restoration of what had been taken from Germany at Versailles.

In his postwar book The Other Side of the Hill, Liddell Hart relates a conversation Hitler had at Charleville, after Dunkirk, with General von Rundstedt and two of his staff, Sodenstern and Blumentritt. The latter told Liddell Hart the conversation had come around to Great Britain:

"He [Hitler] then astonished us by speaking with admiration of the British Empire, of the necessity for its existence and of the civilisation that Britain had brought into the world…. He compared the British Empire with the Catholic Church—saying they were both essential elements of stability in the world. He said that all he wanted from Britain was that she should acknowledge Germany’s position on the Continent. The return of Germany’s lost colonies would be desirable but not essential, and he would even offer to support Britain with troops if she should be involved in any difficulties anywhere…. He concluded by saying that his aim was to make peace with Britain, on a basis that she would regard compatible with her honour to accept."
Grumpyarse

User ID: 75052286
United Kingdom
07/16/2017 09:08 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Hitler let the Allies go at Dunkirk because he actually admired the British. Explains Pat Buchanan in his excellent book Churchill, Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War" :

"To Hitler, Great Britain was Germany’s natural ally and the nation and empire he most admired. He did not covet British colonies. He did not want or seek a fleet to rival the Royal Navy. He did not wish to bring down the British Empire. He was prepared to appease Britain to make her a friend of Germany. Where the Kaiser had grudgingly agreed in 1913 to restrict the High Seas Fleet to 60 percent of the Royal Navy, Hitler in 1935 readily agreed to restrict his navy to 35 percent. What Hitler ever sought was an allied, friendly, or at least neutral Britain.

Conversing in 1922 with a publisher friendly to the Nazi party, Hitler “ruled out the colonial rivalry with Britain that had caused conflict before the First World War.” Said Hitler, “Germany would have to adapt herself to a purely continental policy, avoiding harm to English interests.”

“By late 1922,” Kershaw writes, “an alliance with Britain, whose world empire he admired, was in [Hitler’s] mind. This idea had sharpened in 1923 when the disagreements of the British and French over the Ruhr occupation became clear.”

Having fought the “Tommies” on the Western Front, he admired their martial qualities. Nor was Churchill unaware of “Hitler’s notorious Anglomania and his almost servile admiration of British imperialism….”

Sir Roy Denman came to the same conclusion:

"Hitler…had no basic quarrel with Britain. Unlike William II, he had no wish from the outset to rival the British navy, nor covet the British Empire. His territorial aims were in Central and Eastern Europe and further east. He could never understand why the British constantly sought to interfere."


After the British escape at Dunkirk, because of his own “stop order” to his armored units not to advance into the undefended city, Hitler told Martin Bormann he had purposely spared the British army so as not to create “an irreparable breach between the British and ourselves.”

“The blood of every single Englishman is too valuable to be shed,” Hitler told his friend Frau Troost. “Our two people belong together racially and traditionally—this is and always has been my aim even if our generals can’t grasp it.”

On June 25, 1940, after the fall of France, Hitler telephoned Goebbels to lay out the terms of a deal with England. Britain’s empire was to be preserved, but Britain would return to Lord Salisbury’s policy of “splendid isolation” from the power politics of Europe.

What Hitler was demanding after his triumph in the west in 1940 was restoration of what had been taken from Germany at Versailles.

In his postwar book The Other Side of the Hill, Liddell Hart relates a conversation Hitler had at Charleville, after Dunkirk, with General von Rundstedt and two of his staff, Sodenstern and Blumentritt. The latter told Liddell Hart the conversation had come around to Great Britain:

"He [Hitler] then astonished us by speaking with admiration of the British Empire, of the necessity for its existence and of the civilisation that Britain had brought into the world…. He compared the British Empire with the Catholic Church—saying they were both essential elements of stability in the world. He said that all he wanted from Britain was that she should acknowledge Germany’s position on the Continent. The return of Germany’s lost colonies would be desirable but not essential, and he would even offer to support Britain with troops if she should be involved in any difficulties anywhere…. He concluded by saying that his aim was to make peace with Britain, on a basis that she would regard compatible with her honour to accept."

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75235939


Spot on OP
yessirbump
Grumpyarse
Mike_Grimmel
Trump 2020

User ID: 75045252
United States
07/16/2017 09:12 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Hitler let the Allies go at Dunkirk because he actually admired the British. Explains Pat Buchanan in his excellent book Churchill, Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War" :

"To Hitler, Great Britain was Germany’s natural ally and the nation and empire he most admired. He did not covet British colonies. He did not want or seek a fleet to rival the Royal Navy. He did not wish to bring down the British Empire. He was prepared to appease Britain to make her a friend of Germany. Where the Kaiser had grudgingly agreed in 1913 to restrict the High Seas Fleet to 60 percent of the Royal Navy, Hitler in 1935 readily agreed to restrict his navy to 35 percent. What Hitler ever sought was an allied, friendly, or at least neutral Britain.

Conversing in 1922 with a publisher friendly to the Nazi party, Hitler “ruled out the colonial rivalry with Britain that had caused conflict before the First World War.” Said Hitler, “Germany would have to adapt herself to a purely continental policy, avoiding harm to English interests.”

“By late 1922,” Kershaw writes, “an alliance with Britain, whose world empire he admired, was in [Hitler’s] mind. This idea had sharpened in 1923 when the disagreements of the British and French over the Ruhr occupation became clear.”

Having fought the “Tommies” on the Western Front, he admired their martial qualities. Nor was Churchill unaware of “Hitler’s notorious Anglomania and his almost servile admiration of British imperialism….”

Sir Roy Denman came to the same conclusion:

"Hitler…had no basic quarrel with Britain. Unlike William II, he had no wish from the outset to rival the British navy, nor covet the British Empire. His territorial aims were in Central and Eastern Europe and further east. He could never understand why the British constantly sought to interfere."


After the British escape at Dunkirk, because of his own “stop order” to his armored units not to advance into the undefended city, Hitler told Martin Bormann he had purposely spared the British army so as not to create “an irreparable breach between the British and ourselves.”

“The blood of every single Englishman is too valuable to be shed,” Hitler told his friend Frau Troost. “Our two people belong together racially and traditionally—this is and always has been my aim even if our generals can’t grasp it.”

On June 25, 1940, after the fall of France, Hitler telephoned Goebbels to lay out the terms of a deal with England. Britain’s empire was to be preserved, but Britain would return to Lord Salisbury’s policy of “splendid isolation” from the power politics of Europe.

What Hitler was demanding after his triumph in the west in 1940 was restoration of what had been taken from Germany at Versailles.

In his postwar book The Other Side of the Hill, Liddell Hart relates a conversation Hitler had at Charleville, after Dunkirk, with General von Rundstedt and two of his staff, Sodenstern and Blumentritt. The latter told Liddell Hart the conversation had come around to Great Britain:

"He [Hitler] then astonished us by speaking with admiration of the British Empire, of the necessity for its existence and of the civilisation that Britain had brought into the world…. He compared the British Empire with the Catholic Church—saying they were both essential elements of stability in the world. He said that all he wanted from Britain was that she should acknowledge Germany’s position on the Continent. The return of Germany’s lost colonies would be desirable but not essential, and he would even offer to support Britain with troops if she should be involved in any difficulties anywhere…. He concluded by saying that his aim was to make peace with Britain, on a basis that she would regard compatible with her honour to accept."

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75235939


Correct!
ALL HAIL HIS GRACE, DONALD OF HOUSE TRUMP, Keeper of the Borders, Father of the Walls, Deporter of illegals, Usurper of Prime Real Estate, Master of the Deal, Haver of the Best Words, Defiler of Miss Universes, Slayer of Cucks, Overlord of the Kingdoms of North America and Europe, God of Gods, King of Kings, Leader of the Human Species, Lord of the European Race and President of the Realm.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 75228503
Switzerland
07/16/2017 09:17 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
the germans let 300 thousand brits escape at dunkirk. as a thank you the brits firebombed 300 thousand german civillians to death in dresden.

but guys, stop worrying about it now, you won, now we live in a perfect world like you so bravely fought for... pff
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 73204867
United States
07/16/2017 09:18 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Hitler let the Allies go at Dunkirk because he actually admired the British. Explains Pat Buchanan in his excellent book Churchill, Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War" :

"To Hitler, Great Britain was Germany’s natural ally and the nation and empire he most admired. He did not covet British colonies. He did not want or seek a fleet to rival the Royal Navy. He did not wish to bring down the British Empire. He was prepared to appease Britain to make her a friend of Germany. Where the Kaiser had grudgingly agreed in 1913 to restrict the High Seas Fleet to 60 percent of the Royal Navy, Hitler in 1935 readily agreed to restrict his navy to 35 percent. What Hitler ever sought was an allied, friendly, or at least neutral Britain.

Conversing in 1922 with a publisher friendly to the Nazi party, Hitler “ruled out the colonial rivalry with Britain that had caused conflict before the First World War.” Said Hitler, “Germany would have to adapt herself to a purely continental policy, avoiding harm to English interests.”

“By late 1922,” Kershaw writes, “an alliance with Britain, whose world empire he admired, was in [Hitler’s] mind. This idea had sharpened in 1923 when the disagreements of the British and French over the Ruhr occupation became clear.”

Having fought the “Tommies” on the Western Front, he admired their martial qualities. Nor was Churchill unaware of “Hitler’s notorious Anglomania and his almost servile admiration of British imperialism….”

Sir Roy Denman came to the same conclusion:

"Hitler…had no basic quarrel with Britain. Unlike William II, he had no wish from the outset to rival the British navy, nor covet the British Empire. His territorial aims were in Central and Eastern Europe and further east. He could never understand why the British constantly sought to interfere."


After the British escape at Dunkirk, because of his own “stop order” to his armored units not to advance into the undefended city, Hitler told Martin Bormann he had purposely spared the British army so as not to create “an irreparable breach between the British and ourselves.”

“The blood of every single Englishman is too valuable to be shed,” Hitler told his friend Frau Troost. “Our two people belong together racially and traditionally—this is and always has been my aim even if our generals can’t grasp it.”

On June 25, 1940, after the fall of France, Hitler telephoned Goebbels to lay out the terms of a deal with England. Britain’s empire was to be preserved, but Britain would return to Lord Salisbury’s policy of “splendid isolation” from the power politics of Europe.

What Hitler was demanding after his triumph in the west in 1940 was restoration of what had been taken from Germany at Versailles.

In his postwar book The Other Side of the Hill, Liddell Hart relates a conversation Hitler had at Charleville, after Dunkirk, with General von Rundstedt and two of his staff, Sodenstern and Blumentritt. The latter told Liddell Hart the conversation had come around to Great Britain:

"He [Hitler] then astonished us by speaking with admiration of the British Empire, of the necessity for its existence and of the civilisation that Britain had brought into the world…. He compared the British Empire with the Catholic Church—saying they were both essential elements of stability in the world. He said that all he wanted from Britain was that she should acknowledge Germany’s position on the Continent. The return of Germany’s lost colonies would be desirable but not essential, and he would even offer to support Britain with troops if she should be involved in any difficulties anywhere…. He concluded by saying that his aim was to make peace with Britain, on a basis that she would regard compatible with her honour to accept."

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75235939


And Putin is no different with the same aspirations and intentions. History is repeating itself and President Trump is only trying to create hegemony through respect recognizing the MUTUALLY ASSURED DESTRUCTION was mutually shared respect for each country's nuclear capability and military might.

Obama calling Russia a regional power was an international provocation directed towards an INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR SUPERPOWER only trying to remind the GLOBALISTS that the "I" in ICBM stands for INTER-CONTINENTAL, not REGIONAL.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 75235939
United States
07/16/2017 09:23 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
the germans let 300 thousand brits escape at dunkirk. as a thank you the brits firebombed 300 thousand german civillians to death in dresden.

but guys, stop worrying about it now, you won, now we live in a perfect world like you so bravely fought for... pff
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75228503


100% correct. The only real Holocaust worth speaking of during WWII was the German holocaust. An entire race was literally wiped off the map. If I recall, during the documentary The Fog of War, McNamara related a conversation he had with Curtis LeMay after the war. LeMay told him that had the outcome been different and the Germans had won, he and the rest of the Allied High Command would have been tried and executed as war criminals, and it would have been a just punishment. But, as the saying goes: history is written by the victors.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 75235939
United States
07/16/2017 09:29 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Hitler let the Allies go at Dunkirk because he actually admired the British. Explains Pat Buchanan in his excellent book Churchill, Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War" :

"To Hitler, Great Britain was Germany’s natural ally and the nation and empire he most admired. He did not covet British colonies. He did not want or seek a fleet to rival the Royal Navy. He did not wish to bring down the British Empire. He was prepared to appease Britain to make her a friend of Germany. Where the Kaiser had grudgingly agreed in 1913 to restrict the High Seas Fleet to 60 percent of the Royal Navy, Hitler in 1935 readily agreed to restrict his navy to 35 percent. What Hitler ever sought was an allied, friendly, or at least neutral Britain.

Conversing in 1922 with a publisher friendly to the Nazi party, Hitler “ruled out the colonial rivalry with Britain that had caused conflict before the First World War.” Said Hitler, “Germany would have to adapt herself to a purely continental policy, avoiding harm to English interests.”

“By late 1922,” Kershaw writes, “an alliance with Britain, whose world empire he admired, was in [Hitler’s] mind. This idea had sharpened in 1923 when the disagreements of the British and French over the Ruhr occupation became clear.”

Having fought the “Tommies” on the Western Front, he admired their martial qualities. Nor was Churchill unaware of “Hitler’s notorious Anglomania and his almost servile admiration of British imperialism….”

Sir Roy Denman came to the same conclusion:

"Hitler…had no basic quarrel with Britain. Unlike William II, he had no wish from the outset to rival the British navy, nor covet the British Empire. His territorial aims were in Central and Eastern Europe and further east. He could never understand why the British constantly sought to interfere."


After the British escape at Dunkirk, because of his own “stop order” to his armored units not to advance into the undefended city, Hitler told Martin Bormann he had purposely spared the British army so as not to create “an irreparable breach between the British and ourselves.”

“The blood of every single Englishman is too valuable to be shed,” Hitler told his friend Frau Troost. “Our two people belong together racially and traditionally—this is and always has been my aim even if our generals can’t grasp it.”

On June 25, 1940, after the fall of France, Hitler telephoned Goebbels to lay out the terms of a deal with England. Britain’s empire was to be preserved, but Britain would return to Lord Salisbury’s policy of “splendid isolation” from the power politics of Europe.

What Hitler was demanding after his triumph in the west in 1940 was restoration of what had been taken from Germany at Versailles.

In his postwar book The Other Side of the Hill, Liddell Hart relates a conversation Hitler had at Charleville, after Dunkirk, with General von Rundstedt and two of his staff, Sodenstern and Blumentritt. The latter told Liddell Hart the conversation had come around to Great Britain:

"He [Hitler] then astonished us by speaking with admiration of the British Empire, of the necessity for its existence and of the civilisation that Britain had brought into the world…. He compared the British Empire with the Catholic Church—saying they were both essential elements of stability in the world. He said that all he wanted from Britain was that she should acknowledge Germany’s position on the Continent. The return of Germany’s lost colonies would be desirable but not essential, and he would even offer to support Britain with troops if she should be involved in any difficulties anywhere…. He concluded by saying that his aim was to make peace with Britain, on a basis that she would regard compatible with her honour to accept."

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75235939


And Putin is no different with the same aspirations and intentions. History is repeating itself and President Trump is only trying to create hegemony through respect recognizing the MUTUALLY ASSURED DESTRUCTION was mutually shared respect for each country's nuclear capability and military might.

Obama calling Russia a regional power was an international provocation directed towards an INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR SUPERPOWER only trying to remind the GLOBALISTS that the "I" in ICBM stands for INTER-CONTINENTAL, not REGIONAL.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 73204867


Russia has neither the intention nor the capacity to invade and occupy Europe. NATO is far superior to Russia on conventional terms. Russia has every resource they need on their own land. No need to invade anyone. What Russia will do, and do very well, is defend her interests at home and abroad. As for any conflict between NATO and Russia, Russia 's stated military doctrine is to use nuclear weapons when faced with the far superior NATO conventional forces. Russia is currently surrounded by offensive NATO missile bases and naval assets. And the Neocons are expanding NATO ever closer to Russia's borders. Mutually Assured Destruction has been dismantled via the Polish-Romanian Missile "Shield." We are in a more dangerous situation now than we were during the Cold War, and it's all thanks to the shitty Neocons - the descendants of the same vermin who overthrew Orthodox Russia in 1917.
Grumpyarse

User ID: 75052286
United Kingdom
07/16/2017 09:31 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Hitler let the Allies go at Dunkirk because he actually admired the British. Explains Pat Buchanan in his excellent book Churchill, Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War" :

"To Hitler, Great Britain was Germany’s natural ally and the nation and empire he most admired. He did not covet British colonies. He did not want or seek a fleet to rival the Royal Navy. He did not wish to bring down the British Empire. He was prepared to appease Britain to make her a friend of Germany. Where the Kaiser had grudgingly agreed in 1913 to restrict the High Seas Fleet to 60 percent of the Royal Navy, Hitler in 1935 readily agreed to restrict his navy to 35 percent. What Hitler ever sought was an allied, friendly, or at least neutral Britain.

Conversing in 1922 with a publisher friendly to the Nazi party, Hitler “ruled out the colonial rivalry with Britain that had caused conflict before the First World War.” Said Hitler, “Germany would have to adapt herself to a purely continental policy, avoiding harm to English interests.”

“By late 1922,” Kershaw writes, “an alliance with Britain, whose world empire he admired, was in [Hitler’s] mind. This idea had sharpened in 1923 when the disagreements of the British and French over the Ruhr occupation became clear.”

Having fought the “Tommies” on the Western Front, he admired their martial qualities. Nor was Churchill unaware of “Hitler’s notorious Anglomania and his almost servile admiration of British imperialism….”

Sir Roy Denman came to the same conclusion:

"Hitler…had no basic quarrel with Britain. Unlike William II, he had no wish from the outset to rival the British navy, nor covet the British Empire. His territorial aims were in Central and Eastern Europe and further east. He could never understand why the British constantly sought to interfere."


After the British escape at Dunkirk, because of his own “stop order” to his armored units not to advance into the undefended city, Hitler told Martin Bormann he had purposely spared the British army so as not to create “an irreparable breach between the British and ourselves.”

“The blood of every single Englishman is too valuable to be shed,” Hitler told his friend Frau Troost. “Our two people belong together racially and traditionally—this is and always has been my aim even if our generals can’t grasp it.”

On June 25, 1940, after the fall of France, Hitler telephoned Goebbels to lay out the terms of a deal with England. Britain’s empire was to be preserved, but Britain would return to Lord Salisbury’s policy of “splendid isolation” from the power politics of Europe.

What Hitler was demanding after his triumph in the west in 1940 was restoration of what had been taken from Germany at Versailles.

In his postwar book The Other Side of the Hill, Liddell Hart relates a conversation Hitler had at Charleville, after Dunkirk, with General von Rundstedt and two of his staff, Sodenstern and Blumentritt. The latter told Liddell Hart the conversation had come around to Great Britain:

"He [Hitler] then astonished us by speaking with admiration of the British Empire, of the necessity for its existence and of the civilisation that Britain had brought into the world…. He compared the British Empire with the Catholic Church—saying they were both essential elements of stability in the world. He said that all he wanted from Britain was that she should acknowledge Germany’s position on the Continent. The return of Germany’s lost colonies would be desirable but not essential, and he would even offer to support Britain with troops if she should be involved in any difficulties anywhere…. He concluded by saying that his aim was to make peace with Britain, on a basis that she would regard compatible with her honour to accept."

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75235939


And Putin is no different with the same aspirations and intentions. History is repeating itself and President Trump is only trying to create hegemony through respect recognizing the MUTUALLY ASSURED DESTRUCTION was mutually shared respect for each country's nuclear capability and military might.

Obama calling Russia a regional power was an international provocation directed towards an INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR SUPERPOWER only trying to remind the GLOBALISTS that the "I" in ICBM stands for INTER-CONTINENTAL, not REGIONAL.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 73204867


COULD NOT AGREE MORE AC sorry caps I wasn't shouting !
a brilliant observation AC

OP you too have a very valid point too, there is nothing that I can add to that, other than Putin is a very very underestimated Global leader by the media and the general sheeple too both east and west.
The man has my utter respect

Last Edited by Grumpyarse on 07/16/2017 09:36 AM
Grumpyarse
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 60244656
United States
07/16/2017 09:37 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
He makes it seem like the evacuation at Dunkirk was some sort of heroic event on the part of the Allies. Bullshit! The only reason the Allies escaped was because Uncle Adolf allowed them to escape. Hitler's infamous "Stop Order" is the reason the allies escaped. It wasn't due to any nail-biting, heroic action on the part of the Allies. Christopher Nolan is a bullshit artist. He should have made a movie about the real heroes of the Battle of France, the Wehrmacht - the greatest fighting force in the history of warfare:


 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75235939


^THIS x 100!!! Absolutely correct. Hitler didn't seek to destroy Britain. If he had his druthers, Britain and France would've joined Germany in repelling thh spread of communism from the east via Stalin's Red Army. But since Britain and France started WWII on Sept 3, 1939 by declaring war on Germany (not the German incursion into western Poland -- which had been part of Germany before the ridiculously draconian Treaty of Versailles, stripped Germany of much of its territory -- on Sept 1, 1939), Hitler had no choice but to turned west (which was never his intent. It was always to the EAST that he rightfully saw the threat to Germany and Europe) and try to quickly knock Britain and France out of the war before turning his attention back to the REAL threat -- Stalin's Soviet Union juggernaut intent on spreading the humanity-sapping scourge of communism which inevitably leaves a swath of death and destruction and subjugation in its path. Hitler was not at odds -- originally -- with Britain and France, until they brought war to him. The buildup to WWII was always about the inevitability of the two great powers of Europe at the time -- Germany and the USSR -- confronting each other which, of course, they did, in what was to be the most deadly, destructive war (on the eastern front) ever in human history. Why the U.S., Britain, and France sided with Stalin is mind boggling. At Dunkirk, Hitler indeed allowed the trapped and surrounded British troops to be rescued and escape back across the English Channel. He believe the absolute German route of the British (and French) then would be enough to keep the Brits from coming back to continental Europe in the foreseeable future. A gesture of goodwill, as well.

I don't know if I could sit through this movie without walking out. But I'll try. Brought to Americans by the same people who brought us Holohoax, Inc.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 60244656
United States
07/16/2017 09:40 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Great thread!...by the OP and posters. 5
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 60244656
United States
07/16/2017 09:43 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
I'm going to bring some rotten tomatoes to throw at the screen.
Master of Nothing

User ID: 48078474
United States
07/16/2017 09:44 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Makes for some good military entertainment propaganda though.

They are trying to sub consciously get us to accept history for something it wasn't.
The Soul Ambassador

I am not beautiful, I am an elegant beast, a well-mannered monster, a charming barbarian. I will pillage your heart with language so lavishly violent, you will curse me for coming and curse me for going. I wear my heart on my open palm, as i kick my feet towards redemption.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 60244656
United States
07/16/2017 09:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
It's quite incredible that you can read more truth about WWII on a GLP thread than you can in a state-sanctioned history class.

Which only goes to reinforce the old adage: The victors write the history.

And: History is fascinating. If only it were true.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 60244656
United States
07/16/2017 09:46 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Dumpkirk
X1811

User ID: 74892059
United States
07/16/2017 09:49 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Oh please the krauts, Especially the SS couldnt even eliminate the Polish resistance fighters. They couldn't even defend an entire coastal front when they knew the allies here close to doing something. They couldn't handle fighting against Soviet troops at the eastern front... all they had to do was take Stalingrad...that's it, war would've been over for the soviets.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75220909


Hitler was Germany's worst enemy, there's no mistake about that. But that doesn't change the fact that the Wehrmacht was the greatest fighting force that ever existed, for they took on the Allies and the Russian Bear at the same time, and nearly won had it not been for Hitler's mental illness:


 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75235939


He drove the general staff insane and as he was doing that and fucking up their plans he would brag about how he, the only one not to go to a military academy, had to show them how it's done. I love the story of the Sturmgeweher, they had to change the project name and make it in secret because he was being stubborn.
All characters and events in this forum --even those based on real people-- are entirely fictional. All celebrity comments are impersonated...poorly. The above post contains coarse language and due to the content it should not be viewed by anyone.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 60244656
United States
07/16/2017 09:51 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
A neutral observer might ask: "Well why doesn't someone make a movie about WWII that is more truthful?"

Answer: Who is going to produce it? You've got the (you-know-who's) as gate-keepers of Hollywood our mass overall media -- whether it's movies, tv, print media, tv media. Just ask Mel Gibson how difficult it is, AND the repercussions for skirting the system and producing (funding) it yourself.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 60244656
United States
07/16/2017 09:57 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Oh please the krauts, Especially the SS couldnt even eliminate the Polish resistance fighters. They couldn't even defend an entire coastal front when they knew the allies here close to doing something. They couldn't handle fighting against Soviet troops at the eastern front... all they had to do was take Stalingrad...that's it, war would've been over for the soviets.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75220909


Hitler was Germany's worst enemy, there's no mistake about that. But that doesn't change the fact that the Wehrmacht was the greatest fighting force that ever existed, for they took on the Allies and the Russian Bear at the same time, and nearly won had it not been for Hitler's mental illness:
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75235939


Ha! 3.50 for you. But not dollars. Shekels. Hitler and Hitler alone was responsible for turning the German economy and standard of living around into the economic engine of the world...IN TWO YEARS!...while the rest of the world -- including the U.S. -- continued to falter in the mire of economic recession throughout the 1930s. The standard of living in Germany was the highest in the world. Innovation. Technology. Transportation. Healthcare.

Just one problem: Like Jesus, he kicked out the money lenders. Oops!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 60244656
United States
07/16/2017 10:02 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Hitler let the Allies go at Dunkirk because he actually admired the British. Explains Pat Buchanan in his excellent book Churchill, Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War" :

"To Hitler, Great Britain was Germany’s natural ally and the nation and empire he most admired. He did not covet British colonies. He did not want or seek a fleet to rival the Royal Navy. He did not wish to bring down the British Empire. He was prepared to appease Britain to make her a friend of Germany. Where the Kaiser had grudgingly agreed in 1913 to restrict the High Seas Fleet to 60 percent of the Royal Navy, Hitler in 1935 readily agreed to restrict his navy to 35 percent. What Hitler ever sought was an allied, friendly, or at least neutral Britain.

Conversing in 1922 with a publisher friendly to the Nazi party, Hitler “ruled out the colonial rivalry with Britain that had caused conflict before the First World War.” Said Hitler, “Germany would have to adapt herself to a purely continental policy, avoiding harm to English interests.”

“By late 1922,” Kershaw writes, “an alliance with Britain, whose world empire he admired, was in [Hitler’s] mind. This idea had sharpened in 1923 when the disagreements of the British and French over the Ruhr occupation became clear.”

Having fought the “Tommies” on the Western Front, he admired their martial qualities. Nor was Churchill unaware of “Hitler’s notorious Anglomania and his almost servile admiration of British imperialism….”

Sir Roy Denman came to the same conclusion:

"Hitler…had no basic quarrel with Britain. Unlike William II, he had no wish from the outset to rival the British navy, nor covet the British Empire. His territorial aims were in Central and Eastern Europe and further east. He could never understand why the British constantly sought to interfere."


After the British escape at Dunkirk, because of his own “stop order” to his armored units not to advance into the undefended city, Hitler told Martin Bormann he had purposely spared the British army so as not to create “an irreparable breach between the British and ourselves.”

“The blood of every single Englishman is too valuable to be shed,” Hitler told his friend Frau Troost. “Our two people belong together racially and traditionally—this is and always has been my aim even if our generals can’t grasp it.”

On June 25, 1940, after the fall of France, Hitler telephoned Goebbels to lay out the terms of a deal with England. Britain’s empire was to be preserved, but Britain would return to Lord Salisbury’s policy of “splendid isolation” from the power politics of Europe.

What Hitler was demanding after his triumph in the west in 1940 was restoration of what had been taken from Germany at Versailles.

In his postwar book The Other Side of the Hill, Liddell Hart relates a conversation Hitler had at Charleville, after Dunkirk, with General von Rundstedt and two of his staff, Sodenstern and Blumentritt. The latter told Liddell Hart the conversation had come around to Great Britain:

"He [Hitler] then astonished us by speaking with admiration of the British Empire, of the necessity for its existence and of the civilisation that Britain had brought into the world…. He compared the British Empire with the Catholic Church—saying they were both essential elements of stability in the world. He said that all he wanted from Britain was that she should acknowledge Germany’s position on the Continent. The return of Germany’s lost colonies would be desirable but not essential, and he would even offer to support Britain with troops if she should be involved in any difficulties anywhere…. He concluded by saying that his aim was to make peace with Britain, on a basis that she would regard compatible with her honour to accept."

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75235939


And Putin is no different with the same aspirations and intentions. History is repeating itself and President Trump is only trying to create hegemony through respect recognizing the MUTUALLY ASSURED DESTRUCTION was mutually shared respect for each country's nuclear capability and military might.

Obama calling Russia a regional power was an international provocation directed towards an INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR SUPERPOWER only trying to remind the GLOBALISTS that the "I" in ICBM stands for INTER-CONTINENTAL, not REGIONAL.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 73204867


Russia has neither the intention nor the capacity to invade and occupy Europe. NATO is far superior to Russia on conventional terms. Russia has every resource they need on their own land. No need to invade anyone. What Russia will do, and do very well, is defend her interests at home and abroad. As for any conflict between NATO and Russia, Russia 's stated military doctrine is to use nuclear weapons when faced with the far superior NATO conventional forces. Russia is currently surrounded by offensive NATO missile bases and naval assets. And the Neocons are expanding NATO ever closer to Russia's borders. Mutually Assured Destruction has been dismantled via the Polish-Romanian Missile "Shield." We are in a more dangerous situation now than we were during the Cold War, and it's all thanks to the shitty Neocons - the descendants of the same vermin who overthrew Orthodox Russia in 1917.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75235939

^THIS. OP, you're dropping the MOAB of truth-bombs today! Absolutely correct. People would be wise to read and remember the truth in this thread.
FlashBuzzkill

User ID: 68754170
United States
07/16/2017 10:10 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Churchill effectively started both world wars. In July 1914 as Lord of the Admiralty he sent the entire fleet North to Scapa flow putting the fleet on war footing with Germany. At the same England's war ministry was gearing up for war and asked Belgium to break their neutrality by allowing in English troops. When the Germans politely asked the same when Invading France they were refused and thus Belgium was ruined unnecessarily.

Before WW 2 countless peace offers were made by Hitler to England all of which were denied or ignored. By signing an alliance with Poland it gave Poland the boldness to begin attacking German civilians in the Danzig corridor. Hitler tried to resolve it peacefully but the Poles were brash and actually thought they could beat the Germans.

The Wehrmacht and their panzers could have destroyed Dunkirk and taken the last remnants of the British Army but Hitler saw the Anglo-Saxons as natural allies, one people as it were. Churchill repaid this mercy by bombing German cities at night beginning in May 1940. It wasn't until September that Hitler allowed the Luftwaffe to bomb London. This was Churchill's war to destroy the German people though history has rewritten him as the savior of England. It was Churchill that forced the development of the Lancaster bomber with the intention of bombing Germany with them. Why else build 4 engine bombers in 1936? Germany didn't build any because they never intended on bombing England.

Winners write the history and the world was deprived of the greatness of the German nation, the christian heart of Europe. One people divided for hundreds of years find solidarity in the 1800's which threatened the old balance of powers between England, France and Russia. All 3 would collude to destroy Germany which they did in WW2. Now a mere 70 years later Germany is once again being destroyed by invaders.
early to bed, early to rise, makes one a day laborer
Jumbo
User ID: 75200465
United Kingdom
07/16/2017 10:35 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
He should have just made another movie about th USA winning the vietnamese war or Korea or Canada
Master of Nothing

User ID: 48078474
United States
07/16/2017 10:50 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
He should have just made another movie about th USA winning the vietnamese war or Korea or Canada
 Quoting: Jumbo 75200465


In due time.
The Soul Ambassador

I am not beautiful, I am an elegant beast, a well-mannered monster, a charming barbarian. I will pillage your heart with language so lavishly violent, you will curse me for coming and curse me for going. I wear my heart on my open palm, as i kick my feet towards redemption.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1623061
United States
07/16/2017 10:59 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Churchill effectively started both world wars. In July 1914 as Lord of the Admiralty he sent the entire fleet North to Scapa flow putting the fleet on war footing with Germany. At the same England's war ministry was gearing up for war and asked Belgium to break their neutrality by allowing in English troops. When the Germans politely asked the same when Invading France they were refused and thus Belgium was ruined unnecessarily.

Before WW 2 countless peace offers were made by Hitler to England all of which were denied or ignored. By signing an alliance with Poland it gave Poland the boldness to begin attacking German civilians in the Danzig corridor. Hitler tried to resolve it peacefully but the Poles were brash and actually thought they could beat the Germans.

The Wehrmacht and their panzers could have destroyed Dunkirk and taken the last remnants of the British Army but Hitler saw the Anglo-Saxons as natural allies, one people as it were. Churchill repaid this mercy by bombing German cities at night beginning in May 1940. It wasn't until September that Hitler allowed the Luftwaffe to bomb London. This was Churchill's war to destroy the German people though history has rewritten him as the savior of England. It was Churchill that forced the development of the Lancaster bomber with the intention of bombing Germany with them. Why else build 4 engine bombers in 1936? Germany didn't build any because they never intended on bombing England.

Winners write the history and the world was deprived of the greatness of the German nation, the christian heart of Europe. One people divided for hundreds of years find solidarity in the 1800's which threatened the old balance of powers between England, France and Russia. All 3 would collude to destroy Germany which they did in WW2. Now a mere 70 years later Germany is once again being destroyed by invaders.
 Quoting: FlashBuzzkill

^This. I'm impressed by the vast knowledge of the posters on this thread. 100% correct! It's amazing how the conventional story of history can be altered merely by omitting things here & there, while simultaneously weaving a legend about certain personalities (Churchill in this case, as FBK pointed out so poignantly).
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1623061
United States
07/16/2017 11:18 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
It's interesting that what Hitler wanted for Britain in 1940 -- "splendid isolation" -- is what the British themselves voted for with Brexit last year.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1623061
United States
07/16/2017 11:23 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
Quite to the contrary of what his critics said, Obama knew what Churchill represented when he gave back the gift of the aforementioned British prime minister's bust; although I believe Obama's reasoning had more to do with British colonialism in Africa, of which Churchill did indeed partake. But still.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2017536
Canada
07/16/2017 11:26 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a load of shite
The Bris have to put a good face/spin on a military disaster...just like you give a medal to someone when he fucks up.


News