View Full Version : History Channel "the Atlantic Submarine War"
mayandlex
07-18-06, 04:09 AM
This programme was shown on the History Channel in N.Z. last night and although showing some interesting footage and interviews there were some thought provoking parts. "The Atlantic U Boat war" described the u boats as "cowardly and treasonous" with their crews "murdering innocent civilians" by their "cowardly" acts of sneaking around unseen. (nobody else had submarines ??)
Shipwrecked sailors from torpedoed boats were shown as being in constant and real fear of being murdered by surfaced u boats with their flack guns
The usual stories implying that Germany declared war on Britain and that Germany alone was responsible for the unrestricted submarine warfare were trotted out.
All these comments on a programme made up in recent years was I thought odd.
Think what you will of the events of this time but surely contemporary reports should now stick more to the facts and discard the 1940's British Newsreel type of reporting.
I now feel like a real meanie "sneaking around in my submarine" I will stock up on Moro Bars to hand out to survivors. or give them vouchers to McDonalds.
Cheers, just offered this for food for thought.
"...being in constant and real fear of being murdered by surfaced u boats with their flack guns."
:rotfl:I´ve only read about one occasion on which the uboat commander killed the survivors with machinegun. On the same article it was said that uboats, when engaging targets with deck gun, used sometimes flak guns also to shoot at the command bridge and other 'vital' parts of the ship. I just hate those pro-allies point of view documentaries. :down::nope:
Who ever wrote the commentary to the programme, did they back up there remarks with proof?
These documentaries are all the same. Same with Discovery. (We know the Nazis were bad, but german soldiers were not any worse than other soldiers, give us a break)
Yeah, and all - ALL - American books on WW2 present the British as somewhat stupid. It kinda gets old after a while.
Yup. Many people judge the germans in ww2 like they were all SS guarding the extermination camps. In fact, the Kriegsmarine was the least political weapon of Hitler's.
What about the Laconia incident ? Nobody (and especially the americans) won't talk about that. I'm sure that the image of Hartenstein's U-156 (http://uboat.net/find_boat.php3?find_boat=156) loaded with Laconia survivors is not something to make people like the ones that do such documentaries...very comfortable...or is it ?
http://uboat.net/ops/laconia.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laconia_incident
These articles are more than explanatory.
It's very interesting...Hartenstein even transmitted uncoded his position to the allies, and requested back-up. What was the american response when a LIberator spotted the four submarines (three german and one italian) with their decks packed with people...and towing life rafts ?
"
The next morning, September 16 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_16), at 11:25am, the four submarines, with Red Cross (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Cross) flags draped across their gun decks, were spotted by an American B-24 Liberator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-24_Liberator) bomber from Ascension Island. Hartenstein signalled to the pilot requesting assistance. Lieutenant James D. Harden of the U.S. Army Air Force (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Air_Forces) turned away and notified his base of the situation. The senior officer on duty that day, Captain Robert C. Richardson III (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_C._Richardson_III), replied with the order "Sink sub."
Ducimus
07-18-06, 10:46 AM
"...being in constant and real fear of being murdered by surfaced u boats with their flack guns."
:rotfl:I´ve only read about one occasion on which the uboat commander killed the survivors with machinegun. On the same article it was said that uboats, when engaging targets with deck gun, used sometimes flak guns also to shoot at the command bridge and other 'vital' parts of the ship. I just hate those pro-allies point of view documentaries. :down::nope:
Think you meant this boat:
http://www.uboat.net/boats/u852.htm
It's the only one.
Puster Bill
07-18-06, 11:01 AM
While there was only one documented instance of suvivors being killed in lifeboats, that isn't the same as sailors THINKING that they will be gunned down. I'm pretty sure that was a common fear amongst the merchant marine, mainly due to Allied propaganda.
NeonSamurai
07-18-06, 12:01 PM
Ya thats the problem with revisionist history, one tends to make the enemy look as horrible and evil as possible, while brushing all the horrible and evil stuff the side that won did under the rug.
Jah, sure, propaganda was fierce on both sides. But sailors knew very well that on the other side were...sailors like them. With mothers...fathers...daughters...wifes...girlfirend s...sisters and so on, with fears and wishes, with feelings. Naval warfare is an impersonal one...the human tragedies usually remain unknown. Ships fight each other, not men... In the torpedoroom, you don't hear the horror screams of those trapped between the decks, who were infortunate enough not to be killed by the first torpedo. On the bridge of a beautiful destroyer...who cuts the waves at full speed...you also don't see the diformed faces in terror of those drowned and crushed by your depth charges.
Roads88
07-18-06, 12:46 PM
I recall an article about "Muss" Mortan machine gunning some Sons of Nippon in the water. He is one of the U.S. Navy's most highly regarded WWII Sub commanders.
An body here think that anything would have been done if he had made it through the war.
Someone said earlier, winner write history.
This has very quickly degraded to a bach US post.:nope:
I have a great respect for ALL the soldier that participated in WW2, friends and foe. Wether thier tactics were right or wrong.
Lets actually contribute to this post and stop the stupid US bashing, because if truth be told, we don't give a **** about what you think of us, and there isn't much you can do to change that. So have a nice warm cup of stf*
Proud Member of the UNITED STATES ARMY.
***End Rant***
Yap...we are all here of various nations. If we learn from the past mistakes...maybe someday there will be no more wars.
"...being in constant and real fear of being murdered by surfaced u boats with their flack guns."
:rotfl:I´ve only read about one occasion on which the uboat commander killed the survivors with machinegun. On the same article it was said that uboats, when engaging targets with deck gun, used sometimes flak guns also to shoot at the command bridge and other 'vital' parts of the ship. I just hate those pro-allies point of view documentaries. :down::nope:
Think you meant this boat:
http://www.uboat.net/boats/u852.htm
It's the only one.
Yup, that´s the one. Thanks mate! :up:
Subnuts
07-18-06, 03:11 PM
Submarine warfare is really, really, mean?
I'm shocked.
I dont see any US-bashing in this thread, so stop with the paranoia. The examples are there to show the opposite side of something that is clearly biased.
I don't trust the History Channel anyway when it come to Military History... On one show they said the reason Gemrany lost the war was because of they way they used the Stuka:88) heh yea...
Someone said earlier, winner write history.
This has very quickly degraded to a bach US post.:nope:
I have a great respect for ALL the soldier that participated in WW2, friends and foe. Wether thier tactics were right or wrong.
Lets actually contribute to this post and stop the stupid US bashing, because if truth be told, we don't give a **** about what you think of us, and there isn't much you can do to change that. So have a nice warm cup of stf*
Proud Member of the UNITED STATES ARMY.
***End Rant***
Yes what a lovely way to even things out man. "That not fair, you guys are mean, I DONT GIVE A FU*K WHAT YOU THINK! I'm also a soldier so whatever you say thats critical of my nation is personallyoffensive no matter how valid it is. Thank you for being so understanding."
Why is it that you're a soldier matters? And if you dont care what "we" think about you why do you care if we are critical of the US? And talking about how the Germans are portrayed on modern TV and Movies in the US is part of the thread's subject. If that means being critical of your nation it isn't unsubstantiated "bashing". It's called critical analysis. The US isn't perfect. Nor is Britain or Germany. Hell Canada (my home btw) is definately suspect about alot of stuff. I'm a proud Canadian but I also know we made Napalm and Agent Orange for the US during Vietnam and are thus by connection responsible for alot of death and suffering. And don't try and say that we're disrespecting the soldiers of the war by being critical of what they did or did not do. That's just called history, you know talking about what happened and who dunnit. Plus if you are interested in respecting the memories of all the soldiers regardless of nationality then the way the Germans are portrayed in your country and others ought to be right up your alley. SO what I'm saying is don't accuse us of anything. It just sounds petty. And if anything reinforces the stereotype of arrogant and ignorant Americans.
So here's my personal addition to this thread. I believe it was Winston Churchill who said during WW2 that "I intend to write history".
I am American, but I believe Dutch has entered the wrong thread, as I do not see one ounce of "US-bashing." We are instead talking about how all navies of the Second World War committed their share of inexcusable atrocities -- the US included. We are also talking about how modern documentaries unfairly portray the Kriegsmarine.
Now that Dutch knows what we're talking about, lets get back to the subject.
Eichenlaub
07-19-06, 07:51 AM
Apart from the Peleus affair (U-852, Eck), the Kriegsmarine fought an unusually honourable war in my view. Of all the services in WWII, of all major combatant nations, the KM stands out as a service with an excellent record.
I of course do not consider submarine warfare "mean", "cowardly" or "vicious" at all. To me it is an accepted form of warfare, and all nations practiced it with varying degrees of effort and success.
If you can read German, perhaps you'd like to read this site: http://www.wlb-stuttgart.de/seekrieg/kriegsrecht/schiffbruechige.htm. It's about alleged and proven war crimes on the seas. The Peleus is the only German offence that can be proven. The U-247 and U-516 incidents were not proven to be crimes despite eyewitness testimonies in the latter's (and presumably in the former's as well) case. Uboat.net doesn't list Matschulat and Wiebe as having done anything out of the ordinary. It seems that in both cases survivors were killed by gunfire, but not specifically aimed at - which must have happened all the time of course.
Kind regards,
Eichenlaub
Frenssen
07-19-06, 08:32 AM
I recommend Discovery`s three part series "U-Boat War". It is unbiased and has interviews of veterans from both sides of the conflict.
Seaveins
07-19-06, 09:26 AM
I am a US citizen and veteran. One grandfather was a Danish resistance member and the other flew "the hump" in Asia for 3 years. I grew up with plenty of German/Japanese bashing like "the only good thing about Germany is that she lies between Denmark and Russia", etc., etc. What I have learned these past 40 years as a student of history is that war itself is the enemy. Right and wrong can be dynamic viewpoints and all countries have blemishes in their war histories. My country is having a hard time keeping our noses clean as I write.
One last thing...I work for the Smithsonian Institution and am lucky to associate with many historians on a daily basis. The History Channel's first priority is entertainment.
Respectfully - Lars
If you want a real good military history channel, try the Military Channel -- channel 112 on Time Warner Cable.
The BBC did a good three part series called The Battle of the Atlantic well worth watching.
The BBC did a good three part series called The Battle of the Atlantic well worth watching.
I believe I read the book. It had a little sticker talking about the TV series.
The thing about the History Channel, or any channel for that matter, is that they aren't run by professors who's major concern is to maintain credibility and to spread knowledge but is run by businessmen and is primarily designed to produce revenue. Bearing that in mind they will run shows that attract a larger audience sometimes even if they aren't entirely accurate. So what is the lesson here? Never take anything for granted. Always look at information presented to you with a critical eye. Don't just believe the propoganda and always don't be afraid to take an unpopular position about something.
I remember arguing with my History 12 teacher about the motivations of Hitler to erradicate the jews. She said he was just insane. I was rather more partial to the theory that his sociopathy was obcessed with the propoganda spread throughout Germany after WW1 about how the jews were responsible for Germany's loss. That and the fact that he spent influential years as a youth in Vienna, a notoriously anti-semitic city at the time, and considered it the "perfect city". My teacher said it was just insanity and inexplicable. It's never that easy.:down: Suffice to say I skipped most of that classes cause I couldn't stand my idiotic teacher.
I am a US citizen and veteran. One grandfather was a Danish resistance member and the other flew "the hump" in Asia for 3 years. I grew up with plenty of German/Japanese bashing like "the only good thing about Germany is that she lies between Denmark and Russia", etc., etc. What I have learned these past 40 years as a student of history is that war itself is the enemy. Right and wrong can be dynamic viewpoints and all countries have blemishes in their war histories. My country is having a hard time keeping our noses clean as I write.
One last thing...I work for the Smithsonian Institution and am lucky to associate with many historians on a daily basis. The History Channel's first priority is entertainment.
Respectfully - Lars
True one must se the History channel for entertainment and the sort of thing that leads us to more carefully research the periods or topics we find interesting. Not bad and I for one wish more people watched it. It can be good stuff- Ive learned alot about things that I probably wouldnt take the time to read about (time, so little of it.) It's also provided a good review/refresher of things I've read about or studied. Wile it is a shame that they don't explain the war time propaganda bits...well it may e really bad if it leads to increased or continued bias....er ok, so I do agree with the original posters point, but still, :hmm: trying to look on the bright side that's the kinda crap i was exposed to as a youth and managed to learn that it aint as simple as old wartime propaganda would have us believe; maybe the next generaton will work it out. ?
As a socially responsible person maybe you--or I-- should post something at the History Channels' website ?? I bet they have forums, eh ? :know:
Teach the youth will ya.
:arrgh!:
Teach the youth will ya.
:arrgh!:
I am the youth. Believe me. We're getting stupider every generation. We just don't give a Feck. Ask 'em what WW1 was about and you'll get a blank stare.
Seaveins
07-20-06, 11:18 AM
Teach the youth will ya.
:arrgh!:
I am the youth. Believe me. We're getting stupider every generation. We just don't give a Feck. Ask 'em what WW1 was about and you'll get a blank stare.
I admit that I am somewhat of a history nerd but I am afraid that many in my generation are no better than our youth. You guys might enjoy this: 20+ years ago during the "Trivial Pursuit" craze, a local radio station promo held a "Stump the Expert" contest. Anyone that could stump the expert on any subject received a free T-shirt. There were over 150 people in attendance and my turn came. I asked the expert: Which famous British ship was sunk by the Bismarck? He glared at me for a
while, challenged the audience (silent), and threw me T-shirt. I thought that was too easy but it amazed me that no one had a clue. I went on to seek a career/friends teaching history.
Eichenlaub
07-20-06, 11:22 AM
I am the youth. Believe me. We're getting stupider every generation. We just don't give a Feck. Ask 'em what WW1 was about and you'll get a blank stare.
P_Funk: they might even go wide-eyed and exclaim: "There was a first one?".:o
Aye, history and young ones...
Kind regards,
Eichenlaub
Sailor Steve
07-20-06, 11:22 AM
Which famous British ship was sunk by the Bismarck? You'd think everyone would know that.
My question would have been: What's the only battleship every to be credited with sinking a submarine? Hardly anybody knows that.
As for stupidity...err...lack of knowledge, your generation has no monopoly. I was a teenager during the Vietnam war, and most of my class's supporters and protesters couldn't point out Vietnam on a map.
Aye, history and young ones...
Ahem, there are exceptions... 15 years old here.
Although, I don't know the answer to your question Sailor Steve... Which BB was it?
Eichenlaub
07-20-06, 12:09 PM
Ahem, there are exceptions... 15 years old here.
:D
Yes of course, and I am glad too! When I was younger (I'm still young...:cool:), I was the exception myself.:rock:
I didn't mean to offend anyone of course. But I certainly recall being the odd one out among certain classmates for unexplicably loving history - I doubt much has changed since then. History simply isn't cool enough for most youngsters.
Kind regards,
Eichenlaub
But then again you are from Nijmegen! :D You almost have to be interested in history!
frenzied
07-20-06, 10:51 PM
My question would have been: What's the only battleship every to be credited with sinking a submarine? Hardly anybody knows that.
I just have to answer this one:
The battleship was HMS Dreadnaught in WW1, who sunk a German submarine (can't remeber which one) with gunfire. You have to wonder about a sub captain that surfaces near an enemy battleship...
I think that the problem with my generation (and others) is that the educational system in the western world is not very interested in teaching people to be critical thinkers. The idea behind education isn't to get you to remember a bunch of obscure dates and events but to make people's minds able to think and deduce, reason, and critically analyse information. A story a friend told me sums up the problem with a person who cannot think critically.
It was the end of grade 12 and the beginning of their History 12 exam. My friend was sitting down and writing his name down on the sheet. A girl next to him, not an idiot or a ditz but one of those overachievers with straight A's, leaned oiver and asked him one question. "Who won WW2?"
So she had gotten an A on all the tests, read all the required literature several times, andwas getting a solid A. However she could not for thelife of her figure out who had won WW2. Why? Because she lacked deductive reasoning. With all the knowledge she had she could figure out who won (I mean Hitler did die as the Russians were taking Berlin). But she didn't connect the dots. That is education's purpose.
If you look at every good democracy, I mean a truly socialistic one wiich is set on creating democracy it puts special emphasis on education because if citizens can't understand what politicians are saying and can't figure out when they're being lied to then democracy will forever be dysfunctional. Sweden is viewed by many as an example of a great democratic nation. Sweden has 3 education ministers, not 1 but 3. And their curriculum is about more than just learning how to count and read.
The West has a real problem with education and that's why people are such fools. That's why ignorance is so prevalent. It has become worse than before with my generation. My goddamned History teacher was illiterate in history. She called the Roman Empire of the Ancient world the Holy Roman Empire (the latter existed in the middle ages and was in no way related to the former in any way other than name).
Lament
Seaveins
07-21-06, 03:40 AM
Hear, Hear, P-Funk! Alas, there is still hope.
Eichenlaub
07-21-06, 06:50 AM
But then again you are from Nijmegen! :D You almost have to be interested in history!
Stabiz: actually I was born in Nuenen. You may have heard of that village, since Vincent van Gogh lived there for a few years. Perhaps better known is that Nuenen was featured in an episode of Band of Brothers. In the episode, the Airborne boys get the brunt of a German counter attack, that included heavy armour. At the end of the show, Winters and his men watch the bombing of Eindhoven from afar. Eindhoven is of course another city of Market Garden fame... I only moved to Nijmegen when I started studying history here.
Currently, the Nijmegen summer festivals are held here. It's just wonderful to walk past the ruins of Frederick Barbarossa's 12th century chapel and up to the balustrade of the Valkhof (the remains of the city's castle and former residence of Charlemagne) to look at THAT bridge, brightly lighting up the night with its yellow lamps.:rock:
There is some good history to be found in Nijmegen...:cool:
Kind regards,
Eichenlaub
Puster Bill
07-21-06, 07:11 AM
Yap...we are all here of various nations. If we learn from the past mistakes...maybe someday there will be no more wars.
You know, nothing in the past 5,000 years of written history leads me to believe that this will some day come to pass. Sadly, there will be more wars (and some really bad ones) in the future.
It is inevitable.
The best we can hope for is that the 'Good Guys' win (or, at least the 'lesser of two evils'), and that they are over quickly.
My goddamned History teacher was illiterate in history. She called the Roman Empire of the Ancient world the Holy Roman Empire (the latter existed in the middle ages and was in no way related to the former in any way other than name).
Lament
You guys give me hope... still that history teacher. :nope:
Sailor Steve
07-21-06, 10:39 AM
My question would have been: What's the only battleship every to be credited with sinking a submarine? Hardly anybody knows that.
I just have to answer this one:
The battleship was HMS Dreadnaught in WW1, who sunk a German submarine (can't remeber which one) with gunfire. You have to wonder about a sub captain that surfaces near an enemy battleship...
Good call, but not quite. It was indeed HMS Dreadnought, but she sank U-29 by ramming, not gunfire, killing her entire crew, including Otto Weddigen, who was famous for sinking the three British armoured cruisers Aboukir, Cressy and Hogue all on the same day in his previous boat, U-9.
Weddigen was apparently stalking the home fleet and raised his periscope right in front of Dreadnought. The battleship is reputed to have fired one of her 12-pounder anti-torpedo boat guns, but missed. She then rammed the submarine. The u-boat broached before sinking, and the crew saw the number U-29 painted on the conning tower before it sank.
Yap...we are all here of various nations. If we learn from the past mistakes...maybe someday there will be no more wars.
You know, nothing in the past 5,000 years of written history leads me to believe that this will some day come to pass. Sadly, there will be more wars (and some really bad ones) in the future.
It is inevitable.
The best we can hope for is that the 'Good Guys' win (or, at least the 'lesser of two evils'), and that they are over quickly.
I am not so pessimistic about the future (that being the distant future:damn:). Though now we see conflicts occuring constantly and people suffering around the world, people have been suffering for a very long time. People have been warring for a very long time. Pose the question of why do we fight and the answer could be the solution. It is theorized by some that our male-dominated patriarchal society began as a need for a strong military tradition in order to be able to survive the kind of tribal warfare that was breaking out over resource pockets needed to survive. Back when technology was in its most primitive form available resources were so scarce that survival was fascilitated by war; stealing from others what was needed to survive. Fast forward to the 18th Century and we find the science of economics well in development. The guiding principle of economics, that which drives all that it is concerned with, is scarcity. Scarcity is defined as a lack of sufficient resources to fulfill need or possibly want. Scarcity means hunger, thirst, and anything else humans need to survive. War began, so the theory goes, as a means to survival. In the ensuing thousands of years society has grown into many varied hierarchies and the class system has come to define our needs, wants, and capacity to fulfill the former 2. However today technology has given us the ability to say something we've never been able to before. We can fulfill the basic needs of nearly every, if not every, person on the planet. Don't misinterpret that as being the capitalist needs (like BMWs and face lifts) but the old fashioned needs, you know the ones that peasants had. Now people continue to die and suffer even though we have the ability to aid them. But now we have the potential to alieviate all basic human suffering. That gives me hope. Why? Because there is a chance that people might gradually wake up and become active citizens of their nations and actually realise that war is not necessary. That sounds utopian but Europe was once constantly at war and now is in a Union. One day the whole planet could be that way. Not within my lifetime or my children's or theirs children's or even my great grandchildren. But life goes on. Humans always survive and grow. In the last few hundred years the importance of the individual has become prominant in society. Theoretically individual rights are paramount to the integrity of society. Maybe one day all individuals will have empathy for those who suffer unjustly and maybe we'll help them rather than kill them.
There are no good guys. There are no bad guys. There are only human beings. And human beings are more than anything the product of their circumstances. The wealthy and powerful stand to gain most from war but they do it with the support of the poor and meek. Look at the Russian revolution. It ultimately failed but it proved that the power of the meek trumps that of the few wealthy. All we need to do is collectively recognize our true potential. Those who fight believe they must. We can give them a better life and we must remember that fighting is obsolete.
Seminole
07-22-06, 12:20 AM
There are no good guys. There are no bad guys.
:nope:
Wanna bet?
There are no good guys. There are no bad guys.
:nope:
Wanna bet?
Its all subjective. We are all human beings before anything else and circumstance only dictates that we might be enemies or friends. So in reality war and enmity and hatred can all be defeated if we try. If I was born in Lebanon instead of Canada I might be trying to kill an israeli. If I was born in Israel I might be trying to kill a Lebanese man. What is good and bad? Saddam Hussein and his soldiers when they were fighting Iran were our allies. They were great warriors! When he become inconvenient he was suddenly a terrible tyrant and his men were incompetant yet dangerous to us. its all subjective.
A spot on observation Funk!
It all boils down to the point of view!:hmm:
Yup, when the aliens come humanity will finally be united. (Before we get blown up)
hyperion2206
11-23-06, 09:32 AM
This programme was shown on the History Channel in N.Z. last night and although showing some interesting footage and interviews there were some thought provoking parts. "The Atlantic U Boat war" described the u boats as "cowardly and treasonous" with their crews "murdering innocent civilians" by their "cowardly" acts of sneaking around unseen. (nobody else had submarines ??)
Shipwrecked sailors from torpedoed boats were shown as being in constant and real fear of being murdered by surfaced u boats with their flack guns
The usual stories implying that Germany declared war on Britain and that Germany alone was responsible for the unrestricted submarine warfare were trotted out.
All these comments on a programme made up in recent years was I thought odd.
Think what you will of the events of this time but surely contemporary reports should now stick more to the facts and discard the 1940's British Newsreel type of reporting.
I now feel like a real meanie "sneaking around in my submarine" I will stock up on Moro Bars to hand out to survivors. or give them vouchers to McDonalds.
Cheers, just offered this for food for thought.
I think it was common to say that Germany used U-Boats, slaughtering thousands while the Allies had their heroic submarines to defeat the pure evil. Isn't propaganda just great?:p
I think it was common to say that Germany used U-Boats, slaughtering thousands while the Allies had their heroic submarines to defeat the pure evil. Isn't propaganda just great?:p
Yup, I forget exactly who it was who said it, but it was something along the lines of 'the germans have the Uboat (emphasis being upon that device as a cowardly and underhanded means of making war upon one's enemies) whislt we british have the Submarine which is an altogether more honest and noble device of conflict'. Or words to that effect, but ofcourse the bosche are evil and crawling while we are good and honestly straight up :hmm::lol:
hyperion2206
11-23-06, 10:48 AM
I think it was common to say that Germany used U-Boats, slaughtering thousands while the Allies had their heroic submarines to defeat the pure evil. Isn't propaganda just great?:p
Yup, I forget exactly who it was who said it, but it was something along the lines of 'the germans have the Uboat (emphasis being upon that device as a cowardly and underhanded means of making war upon one's enemies) whislt we british have the Submarine which is an altogether more honest and noble device of conflict'. Or words to that effect, but ofcourse the bosche are evil and crawling while we are good and honestly straight up :hmm::lol:
Yes, that's what I'm talking about!:lol: Too bad you don't know who said it as well.:shifty:
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.