Was our neutrality during WWII a folly?

Micky Dolenz

Ireland were only neutral on paper though. Downed British airmen were sent home while German airmen were sent to a POW camp.

Dyr

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Ireland were only neutral on paper though. Downed British airmen were sent home while German airmen were sent to a POW camp.

Not necessarily, allied airmen were also interned. Including one aristocratic pole who was meant to be a right scaldy bollix to deal with

kentreaper

Bambi wrote: »

yes matey there is, he was shooting up a plane that was downed on neutral territory

If he thought the crashed crew could down him, he was correct to fire - no matter where he was!

Was the Pole supposed to know if he was in Northern or Southern Ireland?

Dyr

kentreaper wrote: »

If he thought the crashed crew could down him, he was correct to fire - no matter where he was!

Was the Pole supposed to know if he was in Northern or Southern Ireland?

Are you suggesting a downed plane was a threat to an airborne fighter, were they were going knock him out with 7.9 mm fire as he pissed past at 180 mph?

kentreaper

Bambi wrote: »

were they were going knock him out with 7.9 mm fire as he pissed past at 180 mph?

And you got these new facts/figures, where?

ejmaztec

kentreaper wrote: »

And you got these new facts/figures, where?

Probably from "The Book of the Blindingly Obvious".

The only usable weapons that the aircrew had would have been handguns, and they would probably have been too busy looking for the first aid box or someone's missing limb.

indioblack

Bambi wrote: »

Except Britain didn't really go to war for Poland back in 39 did they? Dropped a few leaflets on the Germans telling them what swine they were and called it a day. With allies like that you're better off neutral :P

Yeah, imagine Britain declaring war and them doing nothing. They might as well have taken a back seat, declared neutrality and pontificated from the sidelines.

indioblack

dpe wrote: »

The RAF considered it bad form to shoot Luftwaffe pilots who'd bailed out and told the Poles to pack it in, so they took to flying over the top of their parachute to knock the air out instead. Those guys were playing for keeps...

And as regards the leaflet raids, some aircrew were simply chucking the tied bundles out of the aircraft - this had to stop as it might hit someone on the head.
They were also ordered not to empty the contents of the Elsan chemical toilets over Germany as this might be construed as chemical warfare.

Wibbs

kentreaper wrote: »

Wibbs, most saw I was typing about Churchill.

Its clear you're not a Mod for history - which you are quick to make up.

Might I respectfully suggest you re read your own post on the matter

You said wrote:

At the Boer War, he later saw what Hitler was going to do - and was right

The Boer war. Over by the turn of the 20th century. When Hitler was in knee pants. How in gods name did Winston see what an Austrian schoolboy was going to do 30 years later? Hey maybe Winnie was channeling the spirit world as was mighty popular at the time? And you accuse me of making up history? Try again I'm afraid.

kentreaper wrote: »

Nothing wrong with that m8 - the crashed crew could have shot the Pole down.....

Well ejmaztec points out the obvious flaw in your argument. I shoot you down, you crash land. For you zee war iz over. Any practical tactical threat is gone. How do I avoid being shot down by you? By flying away, or by going in for the kill with a strafing run? Answers on a postcard please...

"The Book of the Blindingly Obvious" indeed. Even going for a strafing run at 150 mph it would be one helluva lucky shot from a handgun to shoot me down. Even if and it's a big if, they were in a position and had enough time to extricate one of the MG's from the wreckage, try holding and aiming and shooting one singlehanded at a fast moving monoplane bearing down on you. Even properly mounted MG emplacements had a hard time and needed skill and luck and not a little bravery to shoot down a strafing fighter. I've been reading Heinz Knoke "I flew for the Fuhrer" recently and he mentions successfully strafing MG AA emplacements on the eastern front with no loss to himself. The Polish pilot was simply going for the kill end of. The morality of that is an entirely different question.

Though for me personally shooting men who are out of the action, either on the ground or hanging in parachutes is pretty scumbaggy behavior. All sides were accused of it and wild rumours and propaganda was bandied about again on all sides. Actually in the same book mentioned above Knoke saw a fellow flyer being machine gunned in his parachute by an American pilot and he was nearly fired on himself. Of the personal accounts over the years I've read a parachuting pilot was generally safer if his opponents were Germans or British, both seemed to keep the notion of "fair play", a pilot was in more peril if Japanese or Soviet(and other eastern Europeans) and occasionally Americans were involved.

A similar situation was in play in the case of the treatment of pilot POW's. Allied pilots caught by the Germans could generally expect fair treatment(unless they were Russian). Watched a good programme recently on the last of the British bomber pilots and one gentleman who was Jewish with an obvious Jewish sounding name was captured as a POW and even he survived the experience. Also look at the investigations after the war. The allies hunted down those responsible for the massacre of POW's following the "Great escape" as shown in the movie. It was a rare enough event that required a follow up. It went the other way too. Germans almost to a man recount the fair treatment of German POW's by the Brits. This continued after the war too. Germans were better treated in British zones than the others. The Russians were unreal, the French were right bastards overall, the Americans were a step above both, but not as much as the Brits. On the other hand being captured by the Japanese was not so good and being captured by the Russians in the majority of cases meant being summarily shot.

Dyr

ejmaztec wrote: »

Probably from "The Book of the Blindingly Obvious".

The only usable weapons that the aircrew had would have been handguns, and they would probably have been too busy looking for the first aid box or someone's missing limb.

Technically you might be able to swing a dorsal gun skywards after crash landing, sweet FA chance of hitting anything (If the other guy obliged by strafing you I suppose your chances might improve slightly :pac:)

Interestingly, luftwaffe crews were known to carry proper firearms or detach the on board machine guns after being downed. The last foreign army action on British soil was the crew of a JU 88 getting into a firefight with local troops sent to secure the downed plane.

Dyr

Wibbs wrote: »

Though for me personally shooting men who are out of the action, either on the ground or hanging in parachutes is pretty scumbaggy behavior. All sides were accused of it and wild rumours and propaganda was bandied about again on all sides. Actually in the same book mentioned above Knoke saw a fellow flyer being machine gunned in his parachute by an American pilot and he was nearly fired on himself. Of the personal accounts over the years I've read a parachuting pilot was generally safer if his opponents were Germans or British, both seemed to keep the notion of "fair play", a pilot was in more peril if Japanese or Soviet(and other eastern Europeans) and occasionally Americans were involved.

Some american airmen were fairly unabashed about taking out parachutes, as far as they were concerned a german pilot bailing over the fatherland is a pilot who's going to live to fly another day and needed shooting. Germans did the same to the poles in '39 allegedly. On the eastern front Germans used to try bail below the cloud cover if they could because the russians shot them as a matter of course, doubtless the favour was returned

Spike Milligan has a great story about ground fire on planes in one of his books

bluecode

Bambi wrote: »

Granted the poles were sore about losing. There was an incident where a polish flyer shot up a german plane/crew after it had crash landed in Ireland which caused some complaining.

Do you have a reference for this? I've never come across any suggestion this ever happened.

Maybe you are confusing it with incident where an RAF Spitfire flown by a Pole attacked a German bomber over County Meath. He was hit by return fire and crashed, later dying. The bomber carried on but crashed landed but all the crew survived to be interned.

the_syco

Until the concentration camps in Germany, I'd say a lot of people regarded Britain as the devil himself.

Wibbs wrote: »

PLus even if they had taken southern England the British as a whole would likely have just gone further north and kept harrying them.

Well, someone actually made a satirical alternative history of World War II film... :pac: watch it for nothing else but the ending :P

pauldla wrote: »

The IRA were certainly prepared for it: Tim Pat Coogan tells of how an IRA raid on the Free State Arsenal in 1939/early 1940 (not sure of the date, I don't have the book to hand) had secured for the IRA over one million rounds of ammunition, among other goodies.

The raid on the magazine fort? The state got it all back in a couple of days; the IRA didn't know where to hide it when they got it.

kentreaper wrote: »

It just didn't matter that 6m Jews were being killed?

Did Ireland let any of them in during the war?

=-=

This thread was 5 pages when i started reading, and is now 7 pages. Replying now whilst I can :P

An Coilean

dpe wrote: »

By Yalta, you're pretty much describing the exact state of affairs. Churchill was increasingly marginalised as Roosevelt and Stalin carved up the post-war world. There was very little Britain could do about Poland when there were a couple of million Soviet soldiers occupying the place in 1945. There was also the politically delicate issue that Britain's Soviet allies had already invaded Poland in 1939 as part of shameful Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Made it quite difficult to bring the subject up in polite conversion with Stalin...

Of course agreeing that the Soviets would have a Sphere of influence in Eastern Europe is one thing, not telling the Polish government in exile, and actually leading them to believe there was room for manouver on the issue of a post war poland and that Britain would support Polish interests was quite another and a shameful act in my opinion.

Micky Dolenz

I for one would have no problems with shooting an enemy pilot who had ejected, same as I'd have no problem shooting a tank crew who had abandoned a damaged tank. War ain't pretty and every dead enemy soldier is one who can't pick up arms and shot at me and mine.

karma_

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I for one would have no problems with shooting an enemy pilot who had ejected, same as I'd have no problem shooting a tank crew who had abandoned a damaged tank. War ain't pretty and every dead enemy soldier is one who can't pick up arms and shot at me and mine.

That's very easy to spell out on an online forum. Had you had the misfortune to be one of the few soldiers to face the enemy during WW2 you may well have found yourself in the 80% camp who could not even bring themselves to fire upon an enemy even given opportunity.

Micky Dolenz

karma_ wrote: »

That's very easy to spell out on an online forum. Had you had the misfortune to be one of the few soldiers to face the enemy during WW2 you may well have found yourself in the 80% camp who could not even bring themselves to fire upon an enemy even given opportunity.

I'm glad you asked. Cos yes, yes I have. Just like I've done all the other things I have an opinion on.

Now where are my slippers.

karma_

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I'm glad you asked. Cos yes, yes I have. Just like I've done all the other things I have an opinion on.

Now where are my slippers.

You fought in WW2?

Dyr

karma_ wrote: »

you may well have found yourself in the 80% camp who could not even bring themselves to fire upon an enemy even given opportunity.

I'm pretty sure the methodology (or lack of) used by the officer who did that research was heavily discredited in later years.

Wibbs

karma_ wrote: »

You fought in WW2?

I believe so. Russian front. Wrong side. All mods are Nazis. Have our own Nuremberg style rallies. Well more like bierkeller meetings, beir being the important bit, with speeches from the party leadership and funny walks. And salutes. And funny hats.* Didn't you know?










*I bet people think I'm joking. Our in plain sight cover is secure... <_< >_>

dpe

An Coilean wrote: »

Of course agreeing that the Soviets would have a Sphere of influence in Eastern Europe is one thing, not telling the Polish government in exile, and actually leading them to believe there was room for manouver on the issue of a post war poland and that Britain would support Polish interests was quite another and a shameful act in my opinion.

Realpolitik. The British had Polish troops fighting for them. Sometimes expediency trumps honesty.

Dyr

bluecode wrote: »

Do you have a reference for this? I've never come across any suggestion this ever happened.

Maybe you are confusing it with incident where an RAF Spitfire flown by a Pole attacked a German bomber over County Meath. He was hit by return fire and crashed, later dying. The bomber carried on but crashed landed but all the crew survived to be interned.

I read it in a buke. And on looking it up it turns out that it was a free french pilot, not a pole, and the local defence force boyos opened up on him with bren's in retaliation for his blaggarding

ejmaztec

dpe wrote: »

Realpolitik. The British had Polish troops fighting for them. Sometimes expediency trumps honesty.

I met many Poles who stayed in the UK after WW2, and they all knew the reality of the situation re what was going to happen to post-war Poland. They were at an advantage in that they never trusted the Russians in the first place and expected them to do the dirty on Poland.

DEFTLEFTHAND

I don't think anybody knows whether their capable of killing somebody until they're put into that situation. The US Army in Vietnam strived to create a murder machine out of young men away from Mom and Dad for the first time. Instead in large parts they created long lasting pschological problems for these people. Many never got over the horrors and probably wish they'd died out there.

the_syco

Wibbs wrote: »

*I bet people think I'm joking.

I do actually. Was at the FKF (Flauschige Kaninchen Festival) and didn't see you there.

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Many never got over the horrors and probably wish they'd died out there.

When people came home to Ireland, many would never be able to talk to anyone about what they saw, the friends they lost, and how they lost them.

Many would be stripped of all benefits (esp any ex-Irish soldiers who left Ireland to fight the evil Nazis), and I don't blame one single person for living the remainder of their life in England, where IIRC they got a pension, and there were lots of voluntary bodies that would organise get togethers for WW2 veterans.

karma_

the_syco wrote: »

Many would be stripped of all benefits (esp any ex-Irish soldiers who left Ireland to fight the evil Nazis), and I don't blame one single person for living the remainder of their life in England, where IIRC they got a pension, and there were lots of voluntary bodies that would organise get togethers for WW2 veterans.

Not this again lad. The simple fact was they deserted their post during a time of war. Had they been serving in any other armed force at the time the penalty would have been no less severe.

foxcat

Wibbs wrote: »

A decade ago now I was in the Canaries on the piss

Why not go back - instead of making a life out of making 25,000 rubish/inaccurate/biased posts on here: A job would be good!

Seanchai

Wibbs wrote: »

karma_ wrote: »

You fought in WW2?

I believe so. Russian front. Wrong side. All mods are Nazis. Have our own Nuremberg style rallies. Well more like bierkeller meetings, beir being the important bit, with speeches from the party leadership and funny walks. And salutes. And funny hats.* Didn't you know?

Subtle attempt by moderator from less salubrious forum on Boards.ie to elevate himself to the lofty heights of an AFTERHOURS moderator.

Wibbs

foxcat wrote: »

Why not go back - instead of making a life out of making 25,000 rubish/inaccurate/biased posts on here: A job would be good!

I have one, indeed I employ and subcontract others. I'm not currently looking for any more, but should you find yourself in need, no doubt I can proffer some pointers that may help you. In any event not really much of a riposte to my last request for clarity of your post. Maybe you normally find yourself among a less discerning audience? Regardless you had your "facts" arseways at worst, uninformed at best. This is the reality and a demonstrable one to boot. No "bias" required, so at the risk of repeating myself, try again there Ted. Numero uno I'd suggest a reacquaintance with the chronology of the Boer war and how that impacted and informed Churchill's mindset later on. I'd also suggest a reacquaintance with the chronology of Herr Hitler. Then I'd suggest a compare and contrast.

Wibbs

karma_ wrote: »

Not this again lad. The simple fact was they deserted their post during a time of war. Had they been serving in any other armed force at the time the penalty would have been no less severe.

Well there were two types of people involved. The ones who had already signed up to the armed forces here, then walked away from that to sign up elsewhere and those who hadn't and signed up abroad(not just the UK, the US army received a goodly portion). TBH I have an issue with the former group. IMHO if you swear an oath, never mind of allegiance, an oath to your fellows and then walk away from that? Again IMHO that's pretty shabby bloody behaviour, regardless of what country is involved. As K said they got off bloody lightly when compared to other countries responses in such cases.