World War II began on September 1st, 1939 when Germany's evil Nazis invaded Poland.  Although the Nazi Germans were strong enough to invade on their own, they divied it up with Russia.  England and France promised to help, but sat on their bums.  Anyway, Nazi Germany invaded France and then they fought Britain.  The Brits fought back with everything they could, but at least they held the line.  Then Nazi Germany invaded North Africa and then Russia.  Then Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and America was brought into the war.  America decided to put an end to this whole game and liberated France when they struck at Omaha Beach (which happens to be on Normandy Beach).  Oh yeah, Britain and Canada were in there too.  There were lots and lots of Germans, and Hitler sent his best units, but America emerged victorious because they fought with camaraderie.  Paris rejoiced when American troops marched into Paris.  Then America struck at the heart of Nazi Germany, but Hitler shot himself just before American troops entered Berlin.  The world rejoiced since the war was over!  The was something in the Pacific too, but then America nuked Hiroshima!  What's up with that?




???




Is it just me, or is this widely accepted view of World War II becoming ever more frustrating?  Every time I look for anything (book, movie, game, whatever) it's America fighting Germany.  There's almost no mention of other Allies, and much less of other Axis.  This is half of my justification for visting Japan next year; maybe I can get a different viewpoint (but I will have to find a good friend/translator ).  I sure hope Europe gets a better perspective of things, but I have to admit, the last place I'd want to be to learn about World War II is Germany.

Quote:

Sshh!  That never happened! And Japan never invaded China and Korea, America never imposed tariffs...

What I'm mostly after here is books.  I was looking around in my local library (though I've always said it was bad) and  Half Price Books, and lo and behold, all that could be found was Holocaust, Nazis and America.  The only book that looked worth buying was a book actually written by a U-Boat commander, but I was strapped for cash that day.  Personally, I'm looking for info on the Pacific, but it became apparent to me just how bad the distortion is between the French battlegrounds, the rest of Europe and the rest of the world.  I even resorted to Barnes and Nobles!

I understand the films, but I figured perhaps in other countries there would be films on wars besides World War II (where the only participants are Germany and America).  You can't blame it all on Hollywood, because as I remember, the Thin Red Line didn't sell that well, neither did Windtalkers.  But Windtalkers was poor movie.

As for Games, the only titles that come to mind are Medal of Honor: Allied Assault and  Call of Duty (which surprisingly casts Russians).  Then again, I don't play that many games.

It really depends what aspect of the war you wish to look into. Amazon has lots of good second hand books that are out of publication as does eBay....

Is there anyone that actually believes the Americans took Berlin?  That's pretty ignorant.

Quote:


 Actually Barnes and Nobles has a good selection of books concerning World War Two in the Pacific.  Look for "Rape of Nanking", "Samurai" and "Genda's Blade: Japan's Squadron of Aces" (my favorite).

 As for films, I think the Allied effort has been well repersented, atleast those on the Western side of the war.  Here's some films to check out:
 The Longest Day
 Is Paris Burning?
 A Bridge Too Far
 Devil's Brigade

 As for the Russian side of the war, not too long ago there was a film about snipers in Leningrad.  Can't remember the name of the flick, but it stared Jude Law.

 As for the Japanese side of the war, look for a Japanese made film titled "Zero".

 I can even remember an Italian made film about the war from the point of view from the Italians.  Can't remember the name but it stared Peter Falk.  Just remembered the name of this flick, it was called "Attack and Retreat".

Quote:


 Thanks for the update, Steve-O.  I knew there was someone out there who would set me straight.

Quote:

I could be wrong, but once again all those films are about the European Allies.  It'd be nice if Hollywood made something from the Axis viewpoint.  Modern culture seems to have some sort of sick, abnormal fascination with Nazis or anything with a Swastika, so I'd imagine such a film would sell well.  As far as I've seen, that's about the only kind of war film that does well here.  It more of a problem with society than with Hollywood.

I actually thought Enemy at the Gates was a rather bad film.  Besides getting you interested in the story, its a bit too dramatic.  Movies like that just don't sync well with what veterans have to say about war.  Glory vs despair.

Hagar, you must be some sort of genious with the Google engine, because most of my search results aren't that great.  Perhaps I'm trying too hard?  The book listed in your first link interests me most, as most books list the Japanese conflict as 1941-1945, rather than 1931.  Again going with the whole World War II according to America in lieu of just World War II.

There's a lot of meat here in these replies, and that's just what I was looking for.  It's kind of frustrating when you can get individual troop movements for the Battle of Normandy, and you can't get more than a synopsis for anything else.  Kind of inhibitive when you're trying to learn about World War II in a balanced manner!

I'd still like to know if it's kind of the same story in Europe.

Quote:

No genius but I am an expereinced 'surfer'. I can find information on most subjects in a few minutes. It's a matter of choosing appropriate key words. This will usually bring up literally thousands of web pages to start with, many of which will be useless. Narrow the search down by adding specific words until you find what you're looking for. Glad my link was the kind of thing you're after.

Quote:

I like to think we're a little more aware of the overall picture here. Not only with British books & films but those from all over the world including Europe. One of the best WWII books I have ever read is Das Boot, about the German submarine service. There was also an excellent mini-series made for German TV. I believe the original version lasted 6 hours or more & was subtitled. It was shown here in two parts on consecutive evenings & I couldn't tear myself away from it. Very powerful television.

Us Brits tend to think that the average American knows very little of WWII history before Pearl Harbor. The first US forces in England were the USAAF bomber crews of the Eighth Air Force in 1942. I think this was the start of Britain's reputation for being cold & wet as it rained heavily all that summer & many of them were living under canvas. The old complaint was 'Overpaid, Oversexed & Over Here". GIs based in Britain were better paid, better fed, had smarter uniforms & obviously had their pick of the girls while our chaps were serving overseas, sometimes for years on end. This naturally caused some resentment but on the whole the American airmen won people over with their charm & generosity, not to mention their bravery. During 1944 in the build-up to the Normandy Invasion the number of US troops based mainly in Southern England rose to a staggering 1,537,000. http://www.olive-drab.com/od_history_ww2_ops_battles_1944normandy.php

I was brought up on the old British-made films on WWII. Many were in black & white but I think these were generally more historically accurate than their Hollywood equivalents. They are worth watching even today as they will give you good idea of what life was like in Britain & how the people dressed, behaved & even talked although most of the actors used "upper-class" accents. One small criticism is that many of these stories are told from the officers point of view rather than the ordinary troops.

There are decent films if you look round for them. Das Boot is excellent & available on DVD. I always thought 'Tora, Tora, Tora' was one of the better Hollywood efforts & gave a fair account of the attack on Pearl Harbor.

It's silly to make a subject like this. If you did a whole true story of WW2 you would need huge posting space and a person like me, lol!

Britain and France did what they could! It would probably be too costly to ship heaps of soldiers to Poland. But they invaded just like they should have. Not all Germans were Nazis, just bear that in mind when you say the Nazi Germans invaded. Sure the guys who told them to go to Poland were Nazi, but Quote:
. Ozzy, I've seen some of those movies!

U-571, anyone? (It's a movie).

Quote:


Damn right.


Quote:


...and it sucks arse.

Quote:

I think you're missing the point Bomber old chap.

Quote:

Pure fiction presented as fact. The sort of rubbish Skörpion is complaining about.

Quote:

I was thinking of the lesser-known films made in the late 40s & 50s. The sort of thing they used to show on British TV during the afternoons before those stupid "reality" shows became popular. They might seem corny & over-sentimental now but are far better than many modern feature films. Some don't have much gung-ho action or even footage of aircraft or combat. No huge multi-million dollar budget either. What they do have is a darned good story, well told & competently acted. 'The Way to the Stars' (1945) ('Johnny in the Clouds' in the US) is just one example & deals with the experiences of the USAAF bomber crews when they first came to England. Treated suspiciously at first but gradually accepted by the locals. The script was by the famous dramatist & playwright Terence Rattigan. http://www.learmedia.ca/product_info.php/products_id/94 Lots more like that.
'Dunkirk' (1958 ) is another black & white classic. http://www.radiodirectory.com/ukstoreproductsB00004CWKU.html (Look at the bottom of that page for more of the same.)
'The Cruel Sea' starring Jack Hawkins is another classic film of a classic book. They just don't make 'em like that any more.

I also thought the more recent 'Memphis Belle' was very well done.

What stands out in all those old classics is the lack of special effects & graphic violence. Those old film-makers could portray the horror of war & every other emotion without that being necessary. You could also understand every word without turning the volume up full-blast or learning to lipread. I think some of the modern film-makers could benefit from watching them too.

Quote:


Except the point that the gunners were destroying at least 2183248956 german aircraft in that movie.
Unrealistic.

Quote:


I'd say Britain did a lot more than "hold the line" in WW2 considering the size of the country compared to Germany and might even go as far to say that they probably did more to defeat the Germans in WW2 than the Americans did.

Quote:


  I don't think Hollywood has a fscination with Nazis, its just that they, and what they stood for, makes them the perfect bad guys and easy targerts for our hate.

  Also, in the "politically correct" world we now live in, its more palatable to show caucasian males as villians than Asians, even though the atrocities done by the Japanese during World War 2 were just as brutal as those done by the Nazis.

Quote:


  Or is it that Sony owns a major motion picture studio?  The conspiracy theories abound!

This just goes to show the greatness of Simviation.  I was initially reluctant to post this for fear of those disputes that result when people are convinced their opinion is right, but alas Simviation, at its core, is the same as the day I joined it. Moving on...

I often find myself in a paradox regaurding movies.  The older films have some horrendous visuals, poor audio than often leave me on the brink of dozing, but all the new films are pure, empty gild delivered in 5.1! The best war movie I've seen actually isn't World War II.  A Korean made war movie about the... erm... Korean War: Tae Guk Gi.  While there are some things about it that stick out, it plays off in the end very nicely.  It far surpasses Band of Brothers as my favorite on screen experience.  I generally frown on love/action stories, but somehow I don't think the love story in Tae Guk Gi counts.  I bought the Das Boot DVD, but I've never watched it.  It's kind of hard to find a solid six hours open between work, sleep and play.

I personally am not bothered by the violence in movies.  If it can be excluded, then it very well should be, but it's only a problem when it's used in place of a good, hard-hitting story, which it usually is nowadays.  Movies just don't seem to combine the best of all worlds.  Good script, realistic, factual, believable, good acting, impressive presentation.  Looking at some of the older films, I'm sure in their day, they delivered all of those, but for those in my generation, the effects are just too dated.  Of course when I write this, I remember films like a Bridge Too Far, which I just didn't care for too much, but when I remember Patton, I'm forced to eat my words a bit.

Also, I must give special thanks to Hagar, because after reading the gargantuan and ginormous Barbarossa, I've felt a special craving to know the happenings of the Sino-Japanese conflict, American Island Hopping, and the British in Indochina.  I shall now engage in the rare act of giving Barnes and Noble my money.  Despite my hate of school and academic things, I miss reading a good book. 'Tis been a few months.

Quote:

Speaking of movies again, how would you guys rate 'Deep Blue World' ?
And I'm asking for a neutral point of view, not the one from a Spit or love story lover.


P.S: I've seen BoB on DVD for 10€. Might go and get it.

Quote:

Ah, that explains why I couldn't find it. Never heard of it before but from the reviews I've seen it looks worth watching.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0000648X2/103-9576535-0494234?v=g...

Quote:

Yes I am. I'm just being up myself, that's all.




















Quote:

I want to know why you think that Heretic. I really do. ???


Many Australians did die in Bomber Command. I once spoke to a veteran (Ron Elms if anyone wants to know) and asked him whether he knew someone who'd seen someone shot down by a German nightfighter after I asked him if he'd seen anyone downed, and he said that the guy who'd seen someone downed saw the guy go down close to base and that the Germans would stalk the bombers back near their bases and shoot them down when they were getting near landing time. The Japs are still one bit sneekier (Sydney Harbour )

Quote:

I couldn't agree more. Bob Hoover is one of my heroes although I never saw him perform in real life. Too late now as I believe he's retired.

From memory, many American pilots volunteered for the RAF before the US was involved in WWII. Some flew during the BoB & obviously flew RAF types like the Hurricane & Spitfire. The Americans were posted to their own units which were known as the Eagle Squadrons. When the US officially became involved they were given the choice of remaining with the RAF or transferring to US units. These were equipped with Spitfires until they had their own aircraft.

PS. http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/es.html

Quote:


Gunners always greatly exaggerated the number of enemy planes they claimed to have destroyed. This is actually okay for them, since no one can determine who of the many gunners targeting an enemy fighter finally destroyed it. But the numbers are crap for historical documents.
You always get the most accurate numbers about victories from the other side.
For example, B-17 gunners usually claimed more than 150 vicories over german fighters per sortie, whereas the german lists only stated between 25 and 40 fighters lost.

Beating the dead horse again.

Just today, a(n online) BBC story:

Quote:


They must add, in the Pacific.  They seem to have left out "in Europe" when talking of VE Day so many times several months ago.

This coverage is a footnote when compared to VE day, which I'm sure many of you will remember, as there was all sorts of non-stop hooh-hah about it.  You might also remember, it was hailed as the anniversary of the end of World War II.  Period.  Only sometimes it would be mentioned that it was in fact the anniversary of VE Day.  I still contest that World War II began not in 1939, but in 1931.

It may seem silly to some, but it bothers me to no end.  Maybe I should shut up and go back in my box.

Quote:


Same league as "Saving Pvt. Ryan".

Quote:


Enemy At The Gates had some very nice ideas but could have been better.


Quote:


Interesting. If we did that, some elements of our country's society would call us Nazis.

Dresden is being rebuild to its old face... faster than you can imagine.

Quote:

I try to differentiate between Nazi and German when I can; the same for Fascist and Italian. The leaders may "speak for the people" but not necessarily what the people would want them to actually speak. I'm not the only one who's said that not every German was a Nazi and not every Nazi was (or is) German. The truth is that not every American is democratic.

Quote:

As you only infer by the entry, the U.S. still has its communist, nazi and fascist elements, amongst others; certainly the same for the U.K.

Quote:

To bolster the example, although I intend the (past) leadership no shame, when the controversy about A.Roy Brown's WW1 'victory' of M.vonRichthofen began, another ace pilot stated that, had "he [Brown] not been a Canadian, there would have been no questioning of it [the victory]."
Additionally, VE-Day did not end the war for the British (nor for the USSR nor even the French). Australia, New Zealand, etc.(......), were part of the United Kingdom -- in such respect, the U.K. was still fighting for its homelands. I almost posted this without the intended emphasis that, obviously, the United States was not the only major, effective force against Imperial Japan right to the end of the war.