Quote:
Originally Posted by bongodriver
Are you really sure about this......seriously, not necessary from whose perspective? and why the hell did it happen if thats the case?
|
Hitler could have waited to bring such an attack on Britain, but he didn't, he was afraid that waiting too long before dealing with the "British matter" could be counterproductive. It's probably this haste that cost him that battle.
Quote:
|
Obviously because you can't change the actual events of history.....thats only done in forums, what it did do was change the conditions at the time i.e. the Germans expected to invade britain and they were denied so.
|
yes, but it didn't affect the offensive potential of the German machine, as some believe. The RAF didn't give the Luftwaffe a blow from which they never recovered: they both lost similar numbers of potential, but soon caught up with production and achieved immense tactical experience from the battle.
Quote:
|
and our self preservation....somebody comes at you with a knife intending to stab you, you fight back and sefend yourself successfuly and escape the attack....thats a win for the defender and a lose for the attacker, even though he still has the knife and possibly the intent.
|
fair enough, but this is again your
personal achievement. It has nothing to do with the actual outcome of the battle.
Quote:
|
So what....the RAF and LW are not military?
|
of course they are, but for the two air forces it was a mere war of attrition, neither of the two was annihilated by it.
Why there isn't such a strong battle identification with the one that raged over Europe after the Americans joined, which was longer, more dramatic and above all more decisive than the Battle of Britain itself?
The Battle of Britain is considered more by a conflict per se here, unlike the rest that happened, and that's again only because of propaganda needs.