Subject: WWII-L Digest - 5 Oct 1994 to 6 Oct 1994

From: Automatic digest processor <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 1994 00:00:53 -0400

There are 67 messages totalling 2256 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. POL:Hiroshima (6)
  2. TRIV: Largest Group of Prisoners
  3. HYPO:  The "Big" what-if? (5)
  4. INF: USN Chronology 10-06-94
  5. BV-151 ne BV-141
  6. INF: 50 Years Ago - 07-OCT-1944
  7. Misc
  8. [FYI]  Lost Service Records Found
  9. WEAP: F82 Revisited
 10. Hiroshima (2)
 11. TACT:Could they have won ? (5)
 12. Fat Man question
 13. HYPO: The "Big" what-if? (4)
 14. Motivation Behind the SA Purge (4)
 15. MEDIA: Monty's PJs
 16. Italy in WW2---Elites, All Armies (2)
 17. SS in combat
 18. WEAP: Arado Ar-234C with E-381
 19. Carlson's Raiders
 20. Switzerland in WWII (3)
 21. {WEAP} P-38 (2)
 22. Churchill's bad decisions (from Economic Causes of the War)
 23. Media: Wait for Purple Heart
 24. HIST -- SA purge (4)
 25. TACT:Balkan strategy (2)
 26. SS and SA
 27. WEAP: Ar234C with E381
 28. ITALY IN WW2, MY $
 29. Gustav Geraet
 30. Raid in Poland (2)
 31. WWII-L Digest - 2 Oct 1994 to 3 Oct 1994
 32. [TRIV] Re: odd WWII air encounters
 33. POL:  Swiss Neutrality
 34. Italy in WW2, HOLLOW LEGIONS title
 35. Italy in WW2--book titles (2)
 36. Raid in Poland--Brandenburgers & Such
 37. [INF] USAAF 7 OCT 44

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 23:36:23 EDT
From:    Cassady Craft <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL:Hiroshima

Emmanuel said that weapons grade uranium is more dangerous than plutonium,
but there is much less of it.  This needs clarification, because there are
several ways that this might be misleading.  First, the reason why it may
be more dangerous (Emmanuel correct me if I'm mistaking your meaning) is
because of the simplicity of the weapons design required.  It really has
nothing to do with U235 or 239.  Second, when you say there is less weapons
grade uranium around, that is relative.  We are talking plenty of tons of
both substances (what, the US just bought something like 5 tons of Russian
materials--the problem is, we don't know (at least in the unclassified sources)
whether this was 3/4, 1/2, 1/4 or what of the Russian stockpile!--even more
scary, they probably don't either!) of which
either can be very dangerous in many forms.  Most reactors literally pump
this stuff out.  Any nation with a nuclear reactor can have weapons grade
material in a matter of time, it simply means recycling the spent fuel rods
(for uranium), and even less for plutonium.
This is expensive, as Emmanuel said.  Most nations, with no nuclear weapons
ambitions, prefer the cheaper route--new fuel in the rods.  Problem is, what
do you do with the old?  Get the idea?  We (joe blow) get nuked, sooner or
later, either way.

Incidentally, the US government, bowing to popular anti-
nuclear sentiment, has nixed R&D for "closed system reactors" that the
scientists really want.  They burn much more efficiently, leaving little waste.
The problem is the US invested so much in first generation reactors, and with
the public's fear of things nuclear, no progress can be made toward making the
environment safer (in meaningful terms.)  Notice about 10 lines ago, I said
this nuclear material is dangerous in many forms.  Emmanuel  is right again
about the dangers of ingesting plutonium.  Take about a gram and put in
the water supply of Paris, and you have a couple of hundred thousand dead
Parisians.  I think think this negates the        argument for uranium being
more dangerous than Plutonium, by the way.  After all, poisoning a water
source is neither a complex job, nor original (one of the oldest forms of
bio/toxin warfare is to put dead animals in the water).

Another interesting tidbit is the fact that some of the purest U235 around
is in the reactors of nuclear submarines.  Anyone know how many of these
babies have been lost by the US and USSR?  Lots.  Not many have been deemed
feasible for recovery by the governments--and sometimes there are weapons
themselves onboard.  But even if there aren't, some are only in a hundred or
so feet of water, so again, with guys as dedicated as the proverbial Beruit
barracks bomber, you can get your own.

Needless to say, proliferation is a huge problem that we better worry about.
North Korea is back in the news.  For those of you old enough to recall the
negotiations that "ended" the Korean conflict (it never ended),    you can
imagine how successful these negotiations have been.  Now the reprocessing
cycle _could_ be over, and they are ready to start the reactor again.  This,
folks (and here is a really political plug) is a REAL problem.  Consider that
the NPT comes up for renewal again in 1995.  If a majority of the countries
reinitial it, it will be a dismal failure.  Think about that!  Without a
signiture rate of about 95 percent, proliferation will be too big a problem
for any international organization, regime, or the US alone and with "nuclear
club" allies to handle.  If N. Korea restarts that reactor and does not bow
to the IAEA, then some of our allies in the Far East will be hard pressed to
stay in the regime.  Japan, who has the capability to produce a bomb in about
24 hours from a standing start, has already threatened to withhold a signature
to the NPT.  Others have security dillemas that are just as great.  FULL
DISCLOSURE by the N. Koreans is the only thing that will resolve this.  As it
is now, the US government's negotiating stance is "dont do that anymore."
However, the evidence of what happened in the past (when NK shut their reactor
down in 88 or 89) is gone.  If the worst case is true, then Kim Jong Il, or
whoever is really in charge over there, could have a couple of Hiroshima
or Nagasaki type bombs, with a fuel for a few more due to this last reproces-
sing.

Sorry about that.  I, for one am horrified at what appeasement could mean for
the entire world this time.

Thought for the day:  _Appeasement_ is politics by another means.

Cassady Craft
Department of Political Science
University of Georgia
e-mail [email-masked]
or
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 5 Oct 1994 23:53:43 -0700
From:    John Holtz <[email-masked]>
Subject: TRIV: Largest Group of Prisoners

My spontaneous, unresearched response...

> Here's a fun trivia question:
> What was the largest number of prisoners taken in a single battle?
> We'll probably need to precisely define "battle" in terms of time & space.
> Answer for the following nationalities:
>    American (Battle of the Bulge?)
        Lee's army at Appomattox?

>    British (Dunkirk?)
        Singapore (may have to change this to Commonwealth, not just
Brits)

>    French
        Sedan (1870)

>    Soviet
        Kiev pocket (1941) or Vyzama/Bryansk (1941)

>    German
        Ruhr pocket (1945)

>    Italian
        Tunisia (1943)

>    Japanese (Okinawa?)
        No idea; something in the Shogunate civil wars?

Of course, this may be taking this discussion away from WW2.

jwh

--
John W. Holtz, Asst. Professor       INTERNET: [email-masked]
Sangamon State University Library       PHONE: (217) 786-6633
Springfield, IL  62794-9243               FAX: (217) 786-6208

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 03:52:00 UTC
From:    "Edward S. Miller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: HYPO:  The "Big" what-if?

  > Could Germany have won the Second World War? -- Casssady, "The Big what-
  > if"

  > Please define the limits of the term "won" i.e. accomplishing no less
  > than ...?   -- Steve, "Speculation"

Steve asks the right question.  Did Germany ever state it's aim as clearly
as the western Allies unconditional surrender?  Would Hitler have settled
for, say, conquest of European Russia, neutered regimes in Siberia and
Britain, and a wary but passive US?  If so, for how long?  World conquest
seems too far fetched for a plausible outcome.

Edward S. Miller      Stamford, CT    [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 04:00:09 PDT
From:    "Keller, Theron P." <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: USN Chronology 10-06-94

UNITED STATES NAVY CHRONOLOGY
from:
//byrd.mu.wvnet.edu/pub/history/military/wwii/naval_chronology/chr4(4,5).txt

1944
10/06 Fri.  Japanese naval vessels sunk:
             Gunboat  SAGA, by mine, off Hong Kong,
              22 d. 17'N., 114 d. 10'E.
             Coast defense vessel NO. 21, by submarine SEAHORSE
              (SS-304), South China Sea,
              19 d. 17'N, 118 d. 08'E.

Theron P. Keller
Logicon, Inc.
Dahlgren, VA  22448 USA
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 07:40:17 EDT
From:    "Steve L. New" <[email-masked]>
Subject: BV-151 ne BV-141

     I'll leave the BV-151 for someone else.

     Assuming the BV stands for Blohn und Voss, are you referring to the BV
     141, the assymetical short range recon aircraft??

     Yes, I admit, I messed up the number.  That's what happens when I
     think faster than I type.  (You don't want to know what happens when I
     type faster than I think)

     Steve L. New

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 04:42:22 -0700
From:    John Davis <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: 50 Years Ago - 07-OCT-1944

On 07-OCT-1944, the following occurred -

World War II - The Battlefronts
-------------------------------
Western Front - The battle for the port of Antwerp continues. The Canadian
3rd Division sends reinforcements to the north bank of the Leopold Canal;
but they fail to arrive due to heavy German resistance. Wormeldange is
captured by the US XX Corps. This results in Luxembourg being liberated as
far as the Moselle.  The 90th Division is slowed down by German
counter-attacks in the Maizieres-les-Metz sector.

Italian Front - Units of the US IV and II Corps advance in the Monte Stanco,
Castelnuovo di Bisano and Monte Cavallara sectors. In the eastern sector, the
V Corps opens an offensive against the Rubicon.

Peleliu - Operations against the Japanese positions on Mount Umurbrogol are
suspended following new unsuccessful attacks carried out by the 5th Marines.

Pacific - Aircraft based in the Marianas carry out the heaviest raids to date
on Iwo Jima.

The Homefront
-------------
World Series - The Cardinals even the series by taking the fourth game, 5-1.

College Football - Army 59, Brown 7; Navy 55, Penn State 14; Alabama 63,
Howard 7; Michigan State 2, Kentucky 0; Notre Dame 26, Tulane 0; South
Carolina 0, Miami 0.

=============================================================================

Sources: "2194 Days of War" by Cesare Salmaggi and Alfredo Pallavisimi, "The
World Almanac Book Of WW II" by Peter Young, "Facts On File Yearbook 1944,
Person's Index Of World Events" edited by R.L. Lapica.

Previous articles are archived at ftp.netcom.com in directory /pub/jbd or
through the WWW at URL: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/jbd/ww2.html.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Davis     [email-masked]      WWW: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/jbd/ww2.html
Cary, N.C.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 07:40:00 EDT
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: Misc

I picked this article up from the soc.history.war.world-war-ii
Usenet group and thought it might be of interest to this group.  I
sent e-mail to the author asking him if he wanted to join our
group.

Jack McKillop

This last month I was on a two week river trip in the Grand Canyon with, among
others, Martin Litton.  Some might recognize the name as a premier
enviornmentalist, river runner, founder of Grand Canyon Dories, and so on.
What I didn't know was his participation in WWII, including D-Day, Market
Garden, the Bulge, and Varsity.  As we were floating along one day, he started
talking about flying gliders in Market-Garden.  It turned out he had been a
transport pilot and had dropped paratroops during D-Day, but was washed out
when he was found to be color blind so he ended up being a glider pilot.
(when he applied to fly gliders they never asked and he didn't tell!)  One
story he told was after landing his glider safely during M-G, he and two other
glider pilots were making their way back to Allied lines.  Sleeping in a
forest one night, they could hear friendly troops marching by.   One of his
companions shifted his position, making noise; suddenly the marching stopped
and they could hear bolts being drawn back.  Even though they were American
troops, Martin knew they would shoot first and ask later, so he yelled "Be
still, you stupid son-of-a-bitch!" and the troops moved on.  He also related
flying supplies in during the Bulge, and then flying casualties out using a
snatch-and-go system wherein the glider was on the ground in a harness and was
picked up by a C-47 flying low and slow.   Finally he was in Varsity, the drop
across the Rhine in March 1945, and was wounded.  I thought "no wonder running
the rapids in the Grand Canyon hold no terrors for him."

Speaking of Pelieleu, I was on the Yampa River earlier this summer; one of the
passengers was an old guy from Florida.  One day he mentioned being in the
Navy during the war, so in my innocent curiousity I pressed him about what he
did.  He said he was a radioman, and was at Tarawa, Bougainville, and
Pelilieu, but as he started talking about it he began to tremble and break
down, so I quickly changed the subject.

And finally, in the Grand Canyon a few years ago (I do a lot of river trips,
professionally) there was another old guy who mentioned being in the Navy.  I
asked him where, and he said he'd been on the USS SALT LAKE CITY, a heavy
cruiser with a distinguished combat record.  It so happened I had written an
article on the "Swayback Maru," as she was called, so we talked at some
length.  It turned out he was the guy, featured in LIFE magazine (15 minutes
of fame!) who had been shot in the head by a line-throwing rocket; the rocket
and line went through his head, the heat of the rope passing through sealing
the wound (but OUCH!).  The rope was cut off, he was evacuated, and it was
removed at a hospital.   Still had the scars on both sides of his head.  He
later sent me lots of info on the SLC, including stuff on the crew members
association and so on.  You meet interesting folks on the river!

Roy Webb
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 08:08:36 -0400
From:    "Steven Pudlo, Dept. Computer Svcs." <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL:Hiroshima

Cassidy Craft writes:

[much stuff deleted]

>Another interesting tidbit is the fact that some of the purest U235 around
>is in the reactors of nuclear submarines.  Anyone know how many of these
>babies have been lost by the US and USSR?  Lots.  Not many have been deemed
>feasible for recovery by the governments--and sometimes there are weapons
>themselves onboard.  But even if there aren't, some are only in a hundred or
>so feet of water, so again, with guys as dedicated as the proverbial Beruit
>barracks bomber, you can get your own.

I have to take issue here Cas, The US has lost a grand total of 2, count'em
2 nuclear submarines, the Thresher and the Scorpion, and neither are anyway
near a hundred feet underwater. The Soviets have lost three (I think), one
of which was recovered by the US (Glossamer Explorer, 1970's) under a cloud
of controversy, and that one was in water much deeper.

Please, correct me if I'm wrong, or my fading memory fails, but I'd hardly
call the combined losses of 5 or so submarines during the past 35 years
"lots". They are not exactly waiting around like ripe melons waiting some
terrorist either. I'm sure they are constantly monitored...

[more stuff deleted]

Very informative post, otherwise.

                                                                Steve

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven E. Pudlo  - [email-masked] |"Life may be a drag BUT
STC Programmer/Analyst - (203) 885-2343  |  it sure beats the only
Three Rivers Community-Technical College |           known alternative"
574 New London Turnpike                  |                     (S.E.P.)
Norwich, CT. U.S.A. 06360                |No one gets out of it alive..
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 07:19:11 -0500
From:    Larry & Kim Jewell <[email-masked]>
Subject: [FYI]  Lost Service Records Found

[email-masked] writes in soc.veterans:
>Over Ten million military services records for the years 1942-45 and
>1950-54 (Army
>and Air Corps) have been located. If anyone has had trouble obtaining
>copies of records for these periods, they may do so by writing:
>            National Personnel Records Center NPRC/NCPNF-C
>            9700 Page Blvd.
>            St Louis, MO 63132-5199
>If you request information, include a copy of service member's
>Form DD214.
>
>Tiger Paw

--
[email-masked]; Co-Moderator: BYRD.MU.WVNET.EDU (Historical docs)
"Sunday's horoscope is note worthy because of its strange, sudden and wholly
unpredictable and inexplicable occurrences, affecting all phases of life."
Your Horoscope" L.A. Evening Herald Express, Sat, 12/06/41

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 07:46:17 EDT
From:    "Steve L. New" <[email-masked]>
Subject: WEAP: F82 Revisited

     John Meierhoffer
     [email-masked] New York State Education Dept
     518 486 2390
     Rm 5B44  Cultural Ed Center
     Albany NY 12230

     John,

     Excellant response.  Let me to my research, and I'll try to find your
     answers.

     I shall rebound!

     Steve New

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 08:25:10 EDT
From:    "Steve L. New" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Hiroshima

     The Arado E.381 had a span of (roughly) 16ft, length 16ft,
     empty weight 1,963 lb.  *** Pilot lay prone, amidst T-Stoff and
     C-Stoff fuel tanks. ***

     -Brian Nicklas

     Cassady,

     Grab your hammer, I think we found a volunteer!

        Steve L. New                     .............................
        Weapon System Manager            .............................
        Battalion Countermine Set        ............ /\ .............
        U.S. Army TACOM AMSTA-IM-FR1D    ............/  \.............
        DSN: 786-5403  FAX: 786-7788     ............    .............
        EMAIL  [email-masked]   ............    .............

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 08:34:39 EST
From:    Aldo Hubert <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TACT:Could they have won ?

Hello, William, Terry & All,

>    But to answer your question, I would have used those resources,
>accumulated at great sacrifice, for reserves on the Eastern Front, as
>best as possible.

Supposing (to the ire of some) that, instead of  to the Bulge,  the
resources had been sent to the E. Front, do you think this may have
altered the Political out-come of the war (i.e. perhaps less than 1/2
of Europe would have ended-up communist).  It seems like a silly,
obvious thought, but I'm curious if anyone has thoughts on the
matter.

[email-masked]

Aldo M. Hubert
University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Greensboro NC 27412

OBESA CANTAVIT

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 08:46:36 EDT
From:    Ken Koester <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Fat Man question

On Wed, 5 Oct 1994 18:38:01 EDT Cassady Craft said:
>By the way, you can make a bomb with a piece of uranium and a hammer--and one
>_really_ dedicated individual.  I think the guy who "did" the Marine's
>barracks in Beruit would have qualified.

You are likely to get a "fizzle" that way.  More interesting is simply to
include some uranium with conventional explosives.  You won't get an atomic
blast, but you will create a lot of local fallout.

ken koester
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 08:42:33 -0500
From:    Drew Halevy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HYPO: The "Big" what-if?

I always got the impression from readings that Hitler wanted the UK on
his side, and would have left them alone if the let him have his way in
Europe. As for Hitlier and the US, I don't think that he gave the US much
thought or consideration, and I have even read that he had a feeling that
the US would collapes under its own racial/social problems. -Drew

Drew  Philip Halevy      |      If we are marked to die, we are enow
Department of History    |      To do our country loss; and if to live,
University of Arkansas   |      The fewer the men, the greater
[email-masked]    |      share of honor. -Henry V Act IV Scene III

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 09:50:00 EST
From:    "Eliot K. Friedman" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Motivation Behind the SA Purge

File item: FOO.C 10/6/94 9:12AM

3035
>On Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:14:41 +0059 Ira H Krakow said:
>>Brad,
>>
>>  The Night of the Long Knives occurred in 1934 when Hitler was
>>consolidating power.  His biggest rivals were an internal Nazi
>>group called the SA, headed by Ernst Rohm.  The SA was essentially
>>a private army headed by Rohm, and posed a potential threat to Hitler.
>>Rohm was also a homosexual.  Hitler, and his ally Heinrich Himmler of
>>the SS, concocted a scheme to have Rohm discovered in flagrante delicto
>>and assassinated him.  While they were at it, they assassinated a lot
>>of the top SA brass, thus eliminating this group as a rival.  Apparently
>>knives were the weapon of choice.  The elimination of the SA, along
>>with the Reichstag fire, were the key events in Hitler's consolidation
>>of power.
>>
>Then William Lippert said>
>
>   It was not Hitler and Himmler who plotted the neutralization of the SA
>and the elimination of the top brass, but Himmler and Goering.  Hitler was
>very close friends with Roehm, and it took some 24-48 hours for him to decide
>that Roehm should be eliminated.  Himmler disliked, among other things, that
>the SS was subordinate to the SA.  It was a struggle for power on his part.
>Goering, also, desired more power.  As for Himmler, some have maintained that
>his swing to support Hitler and fight Roehm was taken at the last minute -
>it could have been the other way around.  Additionally, it is more or less
>proven that the plot was concocted by such personalities as Rheinhard
>Heydrich, for his own ends.  The fact that Roehm was homosexual, however,
>had little bearing as to the motives of the purge, though it was used as
>an explanation to the public.  Hitler had been aware of the top SA's homesexual
>tendencies for quite since the very early days of the 1920's.

As I recall from my readings, there was more than just internal party
power at stake.  Roehm and the SA had become a liability to Hitler and
the Party in their attempts to gain the support of the Wehrmacht and
the rich, groups without whom, chancellorship or not, Hitler would not
have been able to impose the kind of fundamental changes he desired for
Germany.

Roehm and the top SA men had ambitions to become commissioned officers
in the Wehrmacht, a matter of considerable social significance in prewar
Germany.  The incumbent officers were anxious to keep "common street
brawlers" out of their "gentleman's club".  "Night of the Long Knives"
was a way for the Party to reassure the Wehrmacht that it would keep its
monopoly of national defense.

Additionally, Roehm made the mistake of believing the "Socialist" in
"National Socialism" (not surprisingly, in the political campaigns before
1933, Party posters had alternately stressed the two words, depending on
the character of the neighborhood they were posted in).  Roehm supported
policies that would have led to redistribution of wealth.  The biggest
industrialists wouldn't fully support Hitler while Roehm was around.

El

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 10:17:30 -0400
From:    James E Irwin <[email-masked]>
Subject: MEDIA: Monty's PJs

>From the DoD Newswire 28 September 1994

:FIELD MARSHALL MONTGOMERY'S FLANNEL PYJAMAS SOLD

    LONDON, Sept 27  - A pair of pink flannel pyjamas which
once belonged to British war hero Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery
sold for 319 pounds ($500) at auction on Tuesday.
     The pyjamas, complete with name tags, had languished in an attic
for 50 years. Montgomery, victor of El Alamein and the general who led
Allied troops into France during World War Two, had lent the nightwear
to Brigadier Hugh Mainwaring.
     Mainwaring forgot to return the pyjamas, and when he got back
home to Britain his wife gave them to a raffle as a prize.
     May Campbell, now 60, won the general's pyjamas, which carry
"B.L. Montgomery" tags on top and bottom. She put them in her attic,
where she forgot them until this year.
     "I am delighted with the result of the sale and pleased to think
that they will now be put to good use," she said in a statement
released by auctioneers Sotheby's. "Hopefully they have now found a
good home." Sotheby's said the pyjamas were sold to an absentee bidder
who left a written offer.

=====

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 James E. Irwin (Jim)                  Internet address:
 Defense Personnel Support Center        [email-masked]
 2800 S. 20th Street                   215-737-3678
 Philadelphia PA  19101-8419           Autovon 444-3678

                     "Never in the field of human conflict
                     was so much owed by so many to so few."
                               Winston S. Churchill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 10:26:21 -0400
From:    Barone <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HYPO: The "Big" what-if?

Drew Halevy <[email-masked]> writes:
> I always got the impression from readings that Hitler wanted the UK on
> his side, and would have left them alone if the let him have his way in
> Europe. As for Hitlier and the US, I don't think that he gave the US much
> thought or consideration, and I have even read that he had a feeling that
> the US would collapes under its own racial/social problems. -Drew

        There is a very good article in the Spring 1992 issue of Military
History Quarterly concerning Germany's declaration of war against the US.
It is written by Gerhard Weinberg, a professor of history at the University
of North Carolina, who has had access to Hitler's writings.  Weinberg's
contention is that Hitler always intended to wage war against the US.

        "The reality is that war with the United States had been
        included in Hitler's agenda for years, that he had deferred
        hostilities only because he wanted to begin them at a time,
        and under circumstances, of his own choosing...  Already
        in the summer of 1928 he had asserted in his second book
        (not published until I did it for him in 1961, as "Hitlers
        zweites Buch") that strengthening and preparing Germany for
        war with the United States was one of the tasks of the
        National Socialist movement."
--
Joe Barone
[email-masked]
The only way I got to keep them Tigers interested is to
let them shoot holes in me.

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 15:38:02 +0100
From:    Emmanuel Gustin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL:Hiroshima

On Wed, 5 Oct 1994, Cassady Craft wrote:

> several ways that this might be misleading.  First, the reason why it may
> be more dangerous (Emmanuel correct me if I'm mistaking your meaning) is
> because of the simplicity of the weapons design required.  It really has
> nothing to do with U235 or 239.

Correct. An U235 bomb is simpler to design than a Pu 239 one.

> either can be very dangerous in many forms.  Most reactors literally pump
> this stuff out.  Any nation with a nuclear reactor can have weapons grade
> material in a matter of time, it simply means recycling the spent fuel rods
> (for uranium), and even less for plutonium.

Again: No! You have to recycle spent fuel rods for Plutonium 239, but not
for Uranium 235. Nuclear reactors actually burn up U235; you insert rods
with (for a PWR system) 4% of U235, and you remove them when the level of
U235 has decreased too much. U235 has to be won from natural ores, 0.7%
average of the U in it. And Uranium ores are plenty. The enriching process
for U is more expensive than refining Pu 239, but that doesn't mean that
the latter is very easy. The amount and purity of  Pu 239 produced also
depends on the reactor type and time the rods are left in.

> Incidentally, the US government, bowing to popular anti-
> nuclear sentiment, has nixed R&D for "closed system reactors" that the
> scientists really want.  They burn much more efficiently, leaving
> little waste.

This is getting rather far from WWII. But if you are talking about 'fast
breeder' designs that produce more (Plutonium) fuel than they burn
(Uranium) up, I would not be so happy with those. They are difficult to
control, with shorter reaction times than conventional designs, and are
cooled by liquid sodium --- water would slow down the neutrons too much.

> about the dangers of ingesting plutonium. Take about a gram and put in
> the water supply of Paris, and you have a couple of hundred thousand dead
> Parisians.  I think think this negates the argument for uranium being
> more dangerous than Plutonium, by the way.

I am not a chemist, but I understood that spreading Pu around in this way
would *not* be that easy. Can someone fill in that? It is true that the
allowed safety levels for Pu ingestion are extremely low.

Emmanuel Gustin

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 09:48:51 -0500
From:    Greg Kelley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Italy in WW2---Elites, All Armies

ooh, boy, does this mean we can talk about the Rumanian Army's Royal
Guard Division, and maybe even the Conducator's Bodyguard Regiment?  Can we?
Please? Huh?  (ohboyohboyohboy)

C'mon, I'm willing to discount the value of Iron Guard/Greenshirt assault
units used during the Russian campaign--personally, I figured them to be
a handy expedient for Antonescu to rid the country of political loonies,
but the Royal Guards, and, of course, the Conducator's Bodyguard, now
THERE were some nifty troops.....

Anyone?

                                          Glad To Be Of Service!

                                          Greg Kelley
                                          St. Paul Public Library
                                          [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 10:09:01 -0500
From:    Greg Kelley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: SS in combat

what-- no credit to Alfred Naujocks for creative thought?

                                          Glad To Be Of Service!

                                          Greg Kelley
                                          St. Paul Public Library
                                          [email-masked]

On Wed, 5 Oct 1994, William L. Huber - SAA wrote:

> >         The facts, however, are that a squad of SS/Gestapo took a group
> > of political prisoners from a Nazi concentration camp to a border
> > point close to Gleiwitz. The prisoners were forced to put on Polish uniforms,
>
> To *really* pick nits, let me add that Aryan looking prisoners were
> brought along to be laid out in German uniforms (boarder guards etc)
> along with others dressed in Polish uniforms to really make it look
> good.  That Walter Schellenburg, what a guy.  He thought of
> everything.... :-)
>
> Cheers, Bill Huber / [email-masked]
>

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 11:28:19 CCS
From:    Jorge Merino <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Arado Ar-234C with E-381

> The Ar 234C never really entered production, it remained one of the
> numerous Ar 234 prototypes. There also was an Ar 234P version, this was a
> nighfighter with a conventional 'solid' nose. Just wait for some
> manufacturer to produce a model of this one...  (One of the more
> remarkable 'flights of bold imagination' of a model manufacturer that I
> have seen was a nightfighter version of the Messerschmitt P.1011
> swing-wing prototype, armed with equally imaginative air-to-air missiles.)

Yes, DML has a couple of versions of the P.1101, including that nightfighter
version with AA missiles. Other imaginative DML kits are nightfighter versions
of the Gotha (Horten) Go-229 (two seater), and I think, the Ar-234 version
you mentioned (I have to review the catalog again). If I'm not wrong, there
is also a Me-163 nightfighter. Huma has also produced many kits of late-war
german projects. There is some kit of a Ta-184?? jet fighter. Looks similar
to the early Lavochkin desings. Hope someone could talk further about this
plane.

Jorge Merino

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 11:29:43 EDT
From:    William Lippert <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Motivation Behind the SA Purge

On Thu, 6 Oct 1994 09:50:00 EST Eliot K. Friedman said:
>
>As I recall from my readings, there was more than just internal party
>power at stake.  Roehm and the SA had become a liability to Hitler and
>the Party in their attempts to gain the support of the Wehrmacht and
>the rich, groups without whom, chancellorship or not, Hitler would not
>have been able to impose the kind of fundamental changes he desired for
>Germany.
>
>Roehm and the top SA men had ambitions to become commissioned officers
>in the Wehrmacht, a matter of considerable social significance in prewar
>Germany.  The incumbent officers were anxious to keep "common street
>brawlers" out of their "gentleman's club".  "Night of the Long Knives"
>was a way for the Party to reassure the Wehrmacht that it would keep its
>monopoly of national defense.
>
>Additionally, Roehm made the mistake of believing the "Socialist" in
>"National Socialism" (not surprisingly, in the political campaigns before
>1933, Party posters had alternately stressed the two words, depending on
>the character of the neighborhood they were posted in).  Roehm supported
>policies that would have led to redistribution of wealth.  The biggest
>industrialists wouldn't fully support Hitler while Roehm was around.
>
>El

El,
   I agree with your statements of the deeper causes of the "Long Knives"
deal.  There were many factors and it was a complex situation.  My attempt,
however, was to reply to the specific event - the purge itself - and why it
happened at that exact time and in that exact manner.  In sum, I maintain
that it happened as it did because of Himmler and Goering pushing for more
power.  The army factor, it is true, was there but secondary to the immediate
actions.  Same with the economic, SA power, etc. factors.  Hitler was, I think,
bamboozled by H and G, and that was the pebble that started the avalanche,
so to speak.

William Lippert,
The American University.

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 15:14:00 UTC
From:    "Edward S. Miller" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Carlson's Raiders

  > John Davis and Jack McKillop ask about Carlson's Raiders:

  The leading scholar of the Raiders who is writing a bio of Evans F.
Carlson is Phyllis A. Zimmerman of Ball State University.  We shared a
podium at a USMC seminar at Quantico a couple of years ago.  She gave a fine
talk.
  I recall FDR's son James was Raider.  Carlson did carry on a private
correspondence with the president.  FDR, like Churchill, seemed to have a
romantic weakness for Special Ops early in the war.
  Ed Miller   [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 11:20:45 CDT
From:    Robert Hohlt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Switzerland in WWII

Terry, Ken and or all,

Which allied air forces if any, were apt to stray over
Switzerland airspace from time to time(accidentally of course),
and what was the policy of the allied air forces if they were
attacked by them(Swiss/neutrals).

Providing the allied aircraft were able(not shot up too badly)
to evade and or fight back.

  ?? Shoot them down in a nonbelligerent manor?

  ?? Cut them in two with no malice aforethought???

Just curious,

Robert Hohlt, Jr.

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 11:23:37 CDT
From:    Robert Hohlt <[email-masked]>
Subject: {WEAP} P-38

Hello all,

John Meierhoffer wrote :

>A some citations that support the proposition that the P-38 was
>outclassed as an air superiority fighter over Germany:

{many good quotations, references and page numbers deleted}

Wouldn't dispute any of them (references) but everytime I read
about how the P-38 didn't do so good against the German single
engine fighters, I remember reading that the P-38 was designed
and engineered as a bomber intercepter/killer.

(my reference is 650 miles away in League City Public Library)

To me the record of the P-38 used in any kind of dogfighter
capacity shows that the design was at least somewhat adaptable
and the pilots that flew that bomber killer in the fighter/escort
role deserve an enormous tip of the hat too.

How about it Emmanuel, P-38 adaptable bomber killer and/or pathetic
air superiority fighter?

Just my opinion,

Robert Hohlt, Jr.

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 12:27:26 EDT
From:    Ken Koester <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL:Hiroshima

On Thu, 6 Oct 1994 15:38:02 +0100 Emmanuel Gustin said:
>On Wed, 5 Oct 1994, Cassady Craft wrote:
>> about the dangers of ingesting plutonium. Take about a gram and put in
>> the water supply of Paris, and you have a couple of hundred thousand dead
>> Parisians.  I think think this negates the argument for uranium being
>> more dangerous than Plutonium, by the way.
>
>I am not a chemist, but I understood that spreading Pu around in this way
>would *not* be that easy. Can someone fill in that? It is true that the
>allowed safety levels for Pu ingestion are extremely low.

Nor I, but this seems a little improbable, not on the grounds of toxicity,
but on the grounds of actually being able to ingest any of the stuff.
How could you guarantee dispersion?  You'd be more likely to make one
building, or even one apartement, dead as opposed to several arrondisements.

The subject is interesting, but I suggest interested parties take it private
before our long-suffering listowner feels obliged to speak up (-:

ken koester
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 10:54:41 -0500
From:    "Tim J. Watts" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Churchill's bad decisions (from Economic Causes of the War)

Bob Stewart pointed out that Churchill wanted to invade the Balkans, a
bad decision.  Joe Barone replied that Anzio was Churchill's idea too.
While I think Churchill was an incredibly inspirational wartime leader,
I am convinced more and more that he had a very bad habit of interfering
with operations and almost always made the wrong decision.

How many bad decisions can you folks come up with that Winnie made?
One that comes to my mind is send most of the military resources from
North Africa in early 1941 to Greece; instead of probably taking all of
North Africa before the Africa Corps could intervene, he made the
political decision to prop up Greece, who was obviously going to be
overrun by the Germans.

Anyone think of other times when Churchill made decisions that were
bad ideas?

Tim J. Watts
Valparaiso University

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 09:45:21 -0800
From:    Yarbrough James L <[email-masked]>
Subject: Media: Wait for Purple Heart

>From Statesman Journal, October 6, 1994:

Wait for Purple Heart spans 50 years
Emi Endo Statesman Reporter

Talk about being patient.

Frank Hills of Salem finally received a Purple Heart award - 50 years after
being wounded in World War II.

He was presented the award on Oct. 1 at a WWII veteran reunion in Charleston,
S.C.

The U.S. Marine veteran was injured when a Japanese soldier thrust a bayonet
into Hill's upper right arm.

That happened on the South Pacific island of Peleliu, Palau, in the wee hours
of Sept. 22, 1944.

The Americans fought a monthlong assault to take over the island.

"All I know is that the Japanese were trying to infiltrate through our lines,"
Hills said.

After he was wounded - by a soldier wielding a bayonet in his hand - the
22-year-old sought help at a battalion aid station.

"They stitched my arm and asked me what I wanted to do," Hills said.  Instead
of seeking safety on board his ship, he decided to go back to his unit.

"I wanted to be with my buddies," said Hills, who was then a private.

So, he kept fighting.

He said the pain didn't bother him until a few days later.

After the war, Hills figured that the report of his injury just got lost in the
confusion of all the mortar and machine gun fire.

He knew he should have gotten the Purple Heart, he said, because he later got
two for serving in the Korean conflict.  In that war, he got shrapnel in his
right shopulder and a gunshot wound in his left leg.

"The reason I didn't do anything about it before," Hills said, " was that
everybody that was with me either got killed or died.  I never got in touch
with them."

That was untuil Hills, now 72, came across the name of his commanding officer
in a WWII veternas' newsletter a few years ago.

He called Lt. Col. Arthur Parker, who immediately remembered Hills and the
incident.

Parker said he recalled how unusual it was that Hills wanted to go back to his
unit.

"He went back in one of the most dangerous places of all," Parker said, " all
at his own request."

And now, Hills' request for his award has been filled.

Hills said he felt especially honored that Parker was the one to present the
long-overdue award.

----end of article----

This is the first mention of the fighting in the Pacific that the paper has
printed.  At least that I can find.

Jim

[email-masked]

New rules adopted by the agency require me to state that all my opinions are
mine, not that anybody else would want them, and not to hold the State of
Oregon or anybody else responsible.

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 13:03:22 -0400
From:    Warren Thompson <[email-masked]>
Subject: HIST -- SA purge

Question to those out there: I should know this, but I somehow don't:

        What role, if any, did Heydrich play in the purge?

-- Warren Thompson
LEBANON VALLEY COLLEGE
Annville PA 17003

[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 13:07:49 -0500
From:    Mike Yaklich <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Italy in WW2---Elites, All Armies

        Hey, Greg...where are you finding all this stuff about the
Rumanians?  I am also for some obscure reason interested in the performance,
equipment, etc, of the smaller European powers and I'd love to read some of the
sources you obviously have.  I already have my university's ILL dept looking
for a copy of J.Lee Ready's "Forgotten Axis" ("Forgotten Allies" was
first-class stuff), do you have any other suggested readings (forget Paul
Carell, I've already read everything he's written).  For instance, where did
you get that stuff about the Rumanian special guards units??

        Appreciating any help

        Mike Yaklich

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 18:14:07 +0200
From:    "A.Bouis" <[email-masked]>
Subject: TACT:Balkan strategy

Tim, Bob, very interesting answers. All arguments seem to be very valid, except that I'd like to comment, Bob,
that Hitler's loans from German banks do not result in foreign debt and therefore do not constitute a point of contradiction with the author's discourse.

Thanks, I'll try to find John Kenneth Galbraith's work if it can easily be read by someone with a scientific, not economic, education.

Your point about the "soft underbelly of Europe" enables me to bring Part II of the discussion on Fuller, as he notably disagrees with you.
What makes you think driving for Central Europe would have been a bad decision ?
Terrain considerations ? Fear of German power in 1943 ? Could it have been worse or better than Italy ?

Arnaud.

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 13:50:43 EDT
From:    Alan Wild <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TACT:Could they have won ?

If the resources were diverted from the bulge, the Soviets may have gotten
a piece of Germany anyway. Why? IMHO because they had a bartering chip
with Japan. They minimized their occupational intentions there so that they
could mess with Europe and impose/advance their communist doctrine to the
West. -Al

-Al

A)bort,  R)etry,  I)gnore,  V)alium?

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 12:39:20 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: SS and SA

Hello, Bill!

Great post and most interesting.

> sponsored formations.  Same for NSDAP leaders too.  There was one
> Gauleiter who served as a Gefreiter in a Gebirgsjaeger Regt.  Baldur
> von Schirach (Reichjugendfuehrer) served as a Leutnant in the army for

    I just wanted to add that von Schirach served with the
Grossdeutschland Division during the war.

    Terry

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 12:44:09 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TACT:Could they have won ?

Hello, Emery!

> Wasn't this the show STALIN: PORTRAIT OF A BLOOD TYRANT?  It
> occcasionally airs on the Discovery Channel as a multi-segmented
> documentary.  It's a good program.

    Yes.

    Terry

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 13:36:55 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HYPO:  The "Big" what-if?

Hello, Cassady!

To answer your question, I think you would have to consider if Hitler
was out to take on the world, I would say no. If, as I think, his
aims only went as far as Europe, I would say yes, if the US had
stayed out of it.

More on this later.

Terry
> Very simple hypothetical question:  Could Germany have won the Second World
> War?  I expect reasonable answers, well thought out, ably argued, and with
> brilliant, witty, and inciteful prose!
>
> (No, this is not a trick question)
>
>
> Thought for the day:  The easy way is always mined.
>
> Cassady Craft
> Department of Political Science
> University of Georgia
> e-mail [email-masked]
> or
> [email-masked]
>

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 13:40:40 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Ar234C with E381

Hello, Joe!

I can speak to the Ar-234C from experience as I have a good
relationship to a fellow who had flown that aircraft.

For specific info, I will post that to you tomorrow. In short the
four engined version of the Ar-234 represented a compromise with the
aircraft engine industry as the available Jumo-004 engines, consigned
at the time to the Me-262 program left this jet bomber program in the
lurch and this aircraft, the Ar-234C was forced to accept a lesser
powered version, hence the four engines. I believe these engines were
made by BMW rather than the Junkers factory.

I will post to you the info on this aircraft tomorrow.

Terry
> are from the line art from the catalog so I could be way off.)  Can any
> of the resident aircraft specialists offer any info on these planes?
> Thanks.
> --
> Joe Barone
> [email-masked]
> Look, when we was in the bocage country, we was assaulted by them Tigers!
> You know what I mean by assaulted, hunh?!  Well, I mean *assaulted*!!
>

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 13:44:10 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: ITALY IN WW2, MY $

Hello, Ben!

I would have one question.

> I think that this may be the beginning of an interesting thread to discuss:
> just really how good were the so-called "elites" of a country or a country's
> armed services. In the case of the Marine Corps, we had Carlson's 2d Raider
> Battalion on the west coast, comprised of volunteers who went through an
> interview by Carlson or one of his officers.

    How would Carlson's Raiders have compared with the Merrill's
Marauders? The personnel in this outfit were also interviewed by
Merrill before being accepted, and the same was done with Colonel
William O. Darby's Rangers. I realize these are two army outfits, but
they both carry the same appellation, namely, elite units.

    Any thoughts?

    Terry

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 13:49:44 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Gustav Geraet

Hello, Tim and others!

I have the info on the Paris Gun, and there is considerable info on
this weapon. Since it relates to WWI, I can only state that what I
send would have to be compared with what I have already posted on the
Gustav.

Terry

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 13:51:52 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HIST -- SA purge

Hello, Warren!

At the time, Reinhard Heydrich didn't have a role in this as it came
earlier than his arrival on the scene. At the time, the SD was not in
existence and didn't come into existence until around 1935 and
even then, he had to compete with the Abwehr which he always regarded
as "a nest of spies".

Hope this helps.

Terry

 >
>         What role, if any, did Heydrich play in the purge?
>
> -- Warren Thompson
> LEBANON VALLEY COLLEGE
> Annville PA 17003
>
> [email-masked]
>

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 13:53:59 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Raid in Poland

Hello, Tim!

> The raid on the radio station that kicked off the Polish campaign--wasn;
> t that conducted not by SS but by Brandenburgers???  Does anyone else
> remember this besides me???  TAS                                        as

    No. The Brandenburgers weren't considered an active unit until
much later in the war. The operation carried out at the Gleiwitz
radio station was conducted exclusively under SS supervision and
participation.

Terry

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 13:59:12 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Switzerland in WWII

Hello, Robert!

> Which allied air forces if any, were apt to stray over
> Switzerland airspace from time to time(accidentally of course),
> and what was the policy of the allied air forces if they were
> attacked by them(Swiss/neutrals).

    Aircraft that landed or strayed over Switzerland were those
which could not make it back to base, i.e., severe battle damage or
low fuel reserves.

    There were instances, however, that American aircraft
deliberately landed their aircraft to escape combat.

     > Providing the allied aircraft were able(not shot up too badly)
> to evade and or fight back.
>
>   ?? Shoot them down in a nonbelligerent manor?

    No. I have never heard or read of any Swiss retaliation for
Allied aircraft flying over Switzerland.

 >   ?? Cut them in two with
no malice aforethought??? >

    The question is, what happened to these fellows after they landed
and what happened to them after repatriation. The answer that I
received on this some time back from Con Crane was that nothing
happened to them. They weren't court-martialed and in some cases,
after a reasonable confinement were sent back on flight status.

    Hope this helps.

    Terry

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 14:02:09 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TACT:Could they have won ?

Hello, Aldo!

> Supposing (to the ire of some) that, instead of  to the Bulge,  the
> resources had been sent to the E. Front, do you think this may have
> altered the Political out-come of the war (i.e. perhaps less than 1/2
> of Europe would have ended-up communist).  It seems like a silly,
> obvious thought, but I'm curious if anyone has thoughts on the
> matter.

    No. The outcome would not have been altered. Russian casualties
would have been higher, and some time may have been gained in keeping
them out of Eastern Germany, but the result would have been the same.
Germany would have been partitioned and occupied, as had already been
decided upon at Yalta with the details of partitioning already having
been worked out in London.

    Terry

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 14:05:17 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HYPO: The "Big" what-if?

Hello, Joe!

>         There is a very good article in the Spring 1992 issue of Military
> History Quarterly concerning Germany's declaration of war against the US.
> It is written by Gerhard Weinberg, a professor of history at the University
> of North Carolina, who has had access to Hitler's writings.  Weinberg's
> contention is that Hitler always intended to wage war against the US.

    I don't think there is any doubt about that. As you know, he had
deliberately refrained and restrained his U-Boat crews from attacking
American shipping, but he had planned or had reckoned with a war with
the US later, in 1942. The Pearl Harbor attack changed all that.

  Thanks for allowing my comment.

  Terry

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 14:13:11 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TACT:Could they have won ?

Hello, Jim!

>  An examination of the events in WWII may suggest a fairly precise answer,
> but I wonder: at what point =during= the war did the Allies believe they
> were over the hump, that victory was beyond question?

    With the successful landing in France on 6 June 1944.

    My opinion, anyway.

    Terry
>  Anyone?
>  - Jim Brady

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 15:12:49 -0400
From:    Bob Stewart <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: TACT:Balkan strategy

>Tim, Bob, very interesting answers. All arguments seem to be very valid, except
>that I'd like to comment, Bob,
>that Hitler's loans from German banks do not result in foreign debt and
therefor
>e do not constitute a point of contradiction with the author's discourse.

Arnaud,

        The point I was trying to make was that Fuller's loan-capitalism vs
barter system dichotomy seems to be of his own invention. Germany under
Hitler was as capitalist as the US under Roosevelt. The institution of a
barter system in trade had more to do with Germany's problem with the
outflow of wealth than any philosohic opposition to capitalism. Other
countries took steps to improve their trade balances. Roosevelt tried
purchasing gold to deflate the dollar and make exports more attractive and
imports less so.

>
>Your point about the "soft underbelly of Europe" enables me to bring Part II of
>the discussion on Fuller, as he notably disagrees with you.
>What makes you think driving for Central Europe would have been a bad
decision ?
>Terrain considerations ? Fear of German power in 1943 ? Could it have been
worse
> or better than Italy ?

        Probably the biggest negatives were the grearter distance from
logistacal and air bases and the terrain of the area. The problem with
Italy, fighting up a narrow, mountainous peninsula was that it tied up a
much greater percentage of our resources than of the German's. If that had
been our principal route of attack the war might have gone on til 1946. A
balkan campaign would have yielded similar results, with perhaps a greater risk.

     Bob Stewart    [email-masked]   (202) 232-3433
     1835 Lamont St., NW
     Washington, DC

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 15:34:15 -0400
From:    David Rising <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Motivation Behind the SA Purge

El said:

> Roehm and the top SA men had ambitions to become commissioned officers
> in the Wehrmacht, a matter of considerable social significance in prewar
> Germany.  The incumbent officers were anxious to keep "common street
> brawlers" out of their "gentleman's club".  "Night of the Long Knives"
> was a way for the Party to reassure the Wehrmacht that it would keep its
> monopoly of national defense.

Wasn't Roehm a lieutenant (captain?) during the 1st WW? I think that it's
pretty clear that Night of the Long Knives was more of a consolidation of
Himmler/Goering/Hitler/s power. Strasser/Roehm/et al weren't following the
direction they wanted to go, so they were killed.
David Rising

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 15:39:38 EDT
From:    Cassady Craft <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HYPO:  The "Big" what-if?

Ed, see my other posting, or yes to what you said.  I'm really getting at
the "if Germany takes Moscow, the war is over" vs. "Germany could have never
defeated Russia, because they were imregnable behind the Urals, and the Brits
were safe behind the ditch, and the US the arsenal of democracy (communism)"
argument.  I'm also looking for "key decision" that could have been decisive
in preventing Germany from winning the war.  Mr Yarborough's answer was very
cogent, I think.  I would like more details about what the Fuhrer did wrong
in the summer of 41, etc.  Lots of knowledge on the list that I would learn
from, and I'm trying to provide a mechanism.  What-if scenarios can be
excellent teaching tools, just as the "revisionist" works are.
Thanks in advance to all who partake.

Cassady Craft
Department of Political Science
University of Georgia
e-mail [email-masked]
or
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 15:45:49 EDT
From:    Cassady Craft <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL:Hiroshima

Steve, I think the Russians may have a few more than that unaccounted for.
But I will see.  I'm sorry for misleading, I was also thinking of some of the
submarine burial grounds in the Russian north.  It was more expensive to
extract the uranium than to just scuttle the ship.  I will find more.  I'm
afraid, though, that someone is going to say wait a minute, this isn't WW II,
so we might need to rearrange somewhat.  My fault on getting away from the
subject matter of the list.

Cassady Craft
Department of Political Science
University of Georgia
e-mail [email-masked]
or
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 15:18:10 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WWII-L Digest - 2 Oct 1994 to 3 Oct 1994

Hello, Cassady!

Thanks for the note.

> Terry and others, maybe the professor was referring to the Soviet adaptation
> of the Christie chasis for their tanks.  Perhaps with the Germans training
> in Lipetsk, they acquired some of these.  Just a guess, hopefully enough
> to get someone who knows more to weigh in.

    The Christie chassis was sold or the rights to it were sold to
the Russians in the 1920's, 1923, I think, because the U.S.
Government didn't think that the development of such a vehicle would
be necessary after the end of the war to end all wars, among other
things.

    The Russians however, did develop and use this chassis for their
T-34 design, which as we all know, was one of the best tanks to be
used in WWII.

    Anyway, the US did not build tanks for the Germans, and if they
were built they were constructed in secret or in Russia.

    Thanks, again, Cassady!

    Terry

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 15:25:37 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [TRIV] Re: odd WWII air encounters

Hello, Robert!

The Germans supplied the Japanese with plans for their propeller and
jet aircraft. I believe also that some equipment for study was sent
them and delivered both by submarine and auxiliary cruiser. In the
latter case, I remember reading that the Atlantis, CO'd by Captain
Bernhard Rogge, had delivered plans design plans to the Japanese on
at least one occasion.

Terry

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 15:33:29 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL:  Swiss Neutrality

Hello, Steve!

Thanks for the response.

>
>      Of course the return of the ME-110 crew was a violation of Swiss
>      neutrality.  But it was such a small violation, and resulted in such a
>      gain for the country (6 new fighters and the lifting of German
>      pressure) that, I'm sure, the Swiss took the realpolitik view.  What
>      impact could two fliers have had on the war effort?  At least they
>      destroyed, rather than returned, the aircraft.
>
>      When push comes to shove, a government is going to act in its national
>      interest, regardless of the "Rules of War".

    I think all countries directly or indirectly involved in the
conflict did some things in the name of expediency.

 >
>      In day to day terms, however, it was in the best interest of the Swiss
>      to maintain neutrality.  (It's kind of like secretly dealing with
>      terrorists to buy the release of hostages when official dogma is that
>      you don't deal with terrorists.  If no one finds out, you can't get
>      hurt.)

    I do agree with that.

    Thanks again, Steve.

    Terry

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 15:46:26 GMT-6
From:    "Robert T. Moore" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Switzerland in WWII

Hello, Ken!

A documentary went into this. It was called "Whispers in the Air".

> Which brings up the question:  exactly what was internment like for a
> downed flier?  Actual imprisonment?  House arrest?  Detained in the
> appropriate embassy?  Mixture of all 3 & others I haven't thought of? (-:

    Depending on the spot, and Sweden was preferred, from what I
know, is that it was a like a country club, in that Allied fliers
were given good quarters, plenty to eat and contact with the locals.
I think in Switzerland, it was somewhat different, in that fliers
were kept under house arrest.

 > > If so, weren't the Swiss obliged to intern the
> >> Germans as well?
> >
> >    Yes, but in this instance, the pressure from Goering and the
> >German air ministry was so intense, out of fear that the Me-110 would
> >fall into Allied hands, particularly the radar equipment on board,
> >that it all resulted in a compromise situation for the Swiss. My
> >source is Janusz Piekalkiewicz' book "Luftkrieg: 1939-1945" in German
> >which goes into much detail on this episode.
>
> Think I would have raised cain, had I been an Allied government at the time (-:
> Although, perhaps the Allies were evading neutrality on Swiss soil & figured
> they were overall gainers & didn't want to rock the boat.

    I think it worked out in the best interests of both. Some Allied
fliers were repatriated after awhile and returned to flight status. I
know of no instance of any courts-martial for those who deliberately
landed their aircraft in Switzerland or Sweden. In any event all this
was kept quiet, and had it become common knowledge, a stink would
have been raised.

    Thanks, Ken.

    Terry

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 16:36:03 EDT
From:    Kendall Miles <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HYPO:  The "Big" what-if?

  Could Germany have won the war with their current preparations at
the beginning of the war?  Assuming they became engaged in the same
theatres they did?  They certainly could have (and should have) won
in North Africa...all that was preventing them from doing so was
not sending enough supplies when they were needed, but flooding
Tunisia with supplies when it was too late.  Eastern Front?  If not
for Mussolini's Balkan venture and the six weeks of Hitler's
indecision, they could have taken Moscow, which as Hoyt points out
in "199 Days--The Battle for Stalingrad" was "the center of
communications and government, to a far greater degree that the
capital in any other country in the world.  Moscow gone, the USSR
would be brain-dead."  But still, something in my heart tells me
that it wouldn't be that easy... Eastern front no.
   I guess a secondary question (even MORE what-if!) is could
Germany have won the war given different preparations for war?
Perhaps given Donitz's 300 U-Boats?  Or at least substantially
more than the 59 he started the war with?  With 150 U-Boats
at the start of war and a priority on their production, the
"Happy Time" could have continued, starving Great Britain.
Or (and this is my obsession and probable thesis topic) why
was the "Uralbomber" strategic bomber not built?  If it had
been, the Battle of Britain would certainly have been
different with the expanded Luftwaffe strike radius forcing
Fighter Command to spread themselves across the country
instead of just SE England.  But these are just details...
they were not done.
   I guess my problem with this topic is that Hitler and the
Germans made so many mistakes that it's hard to tell which
were the crucial ones that could have changed the outcome.
Believing Goering in the BoB?  Failing to supply Rommel
adequately?  Not producing aircraft to near capacity?  Not
taking Malta?  Hitler taking command in Russia?  Anyway,
you know these types of questions, probably better than I.
  Of course this is all MHO, and of course others will
believe differently and I'm sure will state their
beliefs more eloquently... :)   But no, Germany could not
have won the war as it was, and perhaps Hitler's character
is what it comes down to in the end...

 Kendall Miles                   "Otium sine litteris mors est."
 [email-masked]              "Leisure without literature
 Graduate Student--History                   is death."

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 17:17:54 EDT
From:    Cassady Craft <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Hiroshima

Steve, OH S...T!

Cassady Craft
Department of Political Science
University of Georgia
e-mail [email-masked]
or
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 16:22:39 -0500
From:    Greg Kelley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Italy in WW2, HOLLOW LEGIONS title

Tim (and others)

yes, I have a copy of Cervi's THE HOLLOW LEGIONS-- a nice book.
Regarding the Italians in Albania, there is a great (well, maybe not
great, but where else ya gonna find it?) description of the heroic
defense of Durres by Abbas Cupi & the Royal Albanian Gendarmerie during
the Italian invasion of Albania in 1939.  Well spirited action, and these
were the city GENDARMES, fer cryin' out loud.. If only Zog had called out
the Army.....yes, he still would've lost, but with the Italians, you
never know.

KING ZOG AND THE STRUGGLE FOR STABILITY IN ALBANIA by Bernd Jurgen Fischer
(East European Monographs from Columbia University Press, 1984.

Cupi, by the way, went on to lead Albanian resistance fighters during
the occupation.

(now, don't get me started on Albania.  I've never agreed with Zog's 1938
reorganisation of the Royal Forestry Guards...)

                                          Glad To Be Of Service!

                                          Greg Kelley
                                          St. Paul Public Library
                                          [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 16:28:03 -0500
From:    Greg Kelley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Italy in WW2--book titles

Tim (and others)

Riccio's ITALIAN TANKS OF WORLD WAR II-- I agree, good reading material.
Wish it went into more detail about the independent tank & armoured car
companies assigned to the Dodecanese Island garrisons, though.  Anybody
have numbers available?  Just an ongoing point of interest...

                                          Glad To Be Of Service!

                                          Greg Kelley
                                          St. Paul Public Library
                                          [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 17:38:30 EDT
From:    Cassady Craft <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: POL:Hiroshima

Sorry about the slip up on the refueling thing.  My fingers were walking too
quickly for my concentration to keep up.  Besides, I wanted to get to the
plug at the end!

I'll try to stay in the WWII discussion area.

Cassady Craft
Department of Political Science
University of Georgia
e-mail [email-masked]
or
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 16:39:32 -0500
From:    Greg Kelley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Italy in WW2--book titles

Tim (and others)

boy, I should've combined these into one long memo-- would've been easier
for everyone to delete with a single stroke.

Two other titles to suggest:

WHITECOATS UNDER FIRE: WITH THE ITALIAN EXPEDITIONARY COPRS IN RUSSIA, 1941
by Roy Mark-Alan.  Helios Books, 1972 (officer attached to a medical unit)

SUICIDE SQUAD: SEA DEVILS
by J. Valerio Borghese.  Regnery, 1954.  (Italian frogmen, and yes, they
operated in the Black Sea, where the Royal Rumanian Navy assisted in
protecting Axis shipping lanes)

                                          Glad To Be Of Service!

                                          Greg Kelley
                                          St. Paul Public Library
                                          [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 16:48:49 -0500
From:    Greg Kelley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Raid in Poland--Brandenburgers & Such

Anyone out there familiar with Georg von Konrat's ASSAULT FROM WITHIN?
Von Konrat was a member of the Brandenburgers and participated in
commando operations behind Soviet lines in both the Baltic States and in
Odessa.  Of course, we all know who else was down by Odessa at the time,
don't we?

(sure the Rumanians had trouble with the siege. They were up against
troops equipped with "Terror Tanks".  Why do you think they called 'em
Terror Tanks, eh?)

                                          Glad To Be Of Service!

                                          Greg Kelley
                                          St. Paul Public Library
                                          [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 22:45:38 +0100
From:    Emmanuel Gustin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: {WEAP} P-38

On Thu, 6 Oct 1994, Robert Hohlt wrote:

> >A some citations that support the proposition that the P-38 was
> >outclassed as an air superiority fighter over Germany:

> Wouldn't dispute any of them (references) but everytime I read
> about how the P-38 didn't do so good against the German single
> engine fighters, I remember reading that the P-38 was designed
> and engineered as a bomber intercepter/killer.
>
> How about it Emmanuel, P-38 adaptable bomber killer and/or pathetic
> air superiority fighter?

Give me a break ;-). Problem is, as with most WWII fighters, that the last
P-38s differed strongly from the first ones, so you really shouldn't make
a general statement.

It is true that the Air Corps officer that drew up the specification for
the P-38, called it an 'interceptor' rather than a 'pursuit'. It was clear
that a twin-engined fighter would have poorer manoeuvrability than a
single-engined type, and this was the price paid for heavy armament and
long range.  The RAF test unit as Boscombe Down classified the Lightnings
they tested as "not particularly manoeuvrable for a fighter". These were,
of course, the worst P-38 ever built, Mark Is without handed propellers
and turbochargers. The first experiences of USAAF units with the P-38 in
North Africa were also inauspicious, with heavy losses.

But there was considerable modification during the production of the P-38.
The P-38F-15 introduced Fowler flaps that could be lowered partially in
combat, to enhance manoeuvrability. The new cooling system of the P-38J
strongly improved the high altitude performance. The P-38J-25 model added
dive flaps that cured the compressibility problem that previously had
restricted the diving speed. It also had hydraulically boosted ailerons,
that turned the unimpressive roll performance of earlier models in one of
the fastest roll rates of any WWII fighter.

Performance-wise, the P-38J was a good match for most other fighters of
WWII. It was, at 25000ft, faster than the Bf 109G, Fw 190A, A6M5 and
Ki.84, but slower than the P-51D, P-47D and F4U. In climb, the P-38J
almost equalled the P-51D, what means that the Bf 109G and Fw 190A had a
slight edge over it --- except in zoom climb, which was the strong point
of the P-38, benefitting from its weight and streamlining. Early models
could be outdived with ease by enemy fighters, but the problems was cured
when the dive flaps removed its speed restriction. The P-38 was also
reliable and sturdy, and on long escort missions it was less fatiguing to
fly than other types. It silhouette was easily recognized by the enemy,
but this also meant that it was less fired at by bomber crews than the
other allied fighters. The twin engines added safety, but at first they
were unreliable --- other Allison-powered fighters suffered from similar
problems.

In general, the P-38 could fight enemy single-engined fighters with
succes, provided that appropiate tactics were used: usually diving
attacks, using the powerful armament to get a quick kill, followed by a
zoom climb to get away. Dogfights were unadvisable, but a late P-38J with
powered ailerons could if required.

Emmanuel Gustin

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 18:09:28 EDT
From:    William Lippert <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HIST -- SA purge

On Thu, 6 Oct 1994 13:51:52 GMT-6 Robert T. Moore said:
>Hello, Warren!
>
>At the time, Reinhard Heydrich didn't have a role in this as it came
>earlier than his arrival on the scene. At the time, the SD was not in
>existence and didn't come into existence until around 1935 and
>even then, he had to compete with the Abwehr which he always regarded
>as "a nest of spies".
>
>Hope this helps.
>
>Terry
>
> >
>>         What role, if any, did Heydrich play in the purge?
>>
>> -- Warren Thompson
>> LEBANON VALLEY COLLEGE
>> Annville PA 17003
>>
>> [email-masked]
>>

I am sorry to say that the above (way above) info is incorrect.  This time
I have even looked it up to make sure I know what I'm talking about!  The
following information is from Heydrich, Hitler's Most Evil Henchman by
Charles Wighton.
   Chapter Five is called, "The First Big Role" and chronicles Heydrich's
activities and role in the Night of the Long Knives.  To begin with,
by the age of thirty, in 1934, he was chief of the SD and effective head
of the Gestapo.  Already many in the inner circles had recognized him as
a powerful and threatening person.  Around June 10, 1934 the SD was made
the sole Intel agency of the Party, by decree of the Fuhrer.  In the weeks
following plans were made by the SS for a possible SA coup.  At a secret
staff meeting at the Prinz Albrechtstrasse, Heydrich, Himmler, and others
sent out orders for a full SS mobilization.  By June 25, Heydrich began
giving out lists to senior SD personel who were to be liquidated and that
they were to search the Reich for additional names to be added.  In the
next few days the lists were expanded to include many non-SA persons.
   To ensure security, Gestapo agents shadowed the senior SD staff members,
at Heydrich's instruction!  The rest is generally well-known.  Hitler gave
the word and the SS ranged across the Reich swiping people left and right.
Heydrich, Himmler, and Goering were cloistered together in Berlin, overseeing
developments.
    After a whole bunch of people (estimates vary) were executed, Hitler
decided that enough was enough.  Heydrich, it is said by some, had wanted
it to continue to eliminate all enemies of the Reich.
   As a result of this purge, the Gestapo, SD, and thus Heydrich rose   e
inestimably in Hitler's favor.

I hope this clears up some this matter concerning the futur Obergruppenfuhrer
and Czech Protector Reinhard Heydrich.

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 18:26:09 EDT
From:    William Lippert <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HYPO:  The "Big" what-if?

Kendall Miles,

   You bring up some valid scenarios for a possible Reich victory solution.
I will attempt to address them as best I can.  First, as for Donitz's
U-Boat number, even though he believed to his dying day that more U-Boat's
could have won the war, some disagree (I am convinced of this, too).
One of the problems with the Americans in the Battle of the Atlantic was
that they failed to Convoy in the beginning - thanks to King's Anglophobia.
If Donitz was to have significantly increased Allied losses, then surely the
Allies would have responded - with more carrier escort, new sonar, better
air support, etc.  They would not just have let Donitz reign the sea
without reacting more quickly than they did.
   As for the bomber, I believe it was Goering's own stupidity; he did
not believe that a plane that one could "land a car on" would be very
safe.  As for Rommel winning in North Africa, I'd tend to believe that
even if he did so, he would not have been able to successfully repel
the Allied Torch landings.  Remember, he had enough trouble with supply
as it was - what with the Ultra intercepts and the US sinking his
transports.  Even if he could have had a large army, we would have
outsupplied it.  But taking Malta might have made a difference.
The Russia deal was generally screwed up - thanks to Hitler.
You are right in saying that the Germans made many mistakes and that
it is hard to pinpoint one or two specific ones.  But we must not
forget that the Allies had their share of mistakes: Java Sea, Guadalcanal,
Malaysia,and Market-Garden.  Someone said that war is a contest of who
can make the least mistakes.  Makes sense to me.

William Lippert,
The American University

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 18:39:51 -0400
From:    Christopher Morton <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Motivation Behind the SA Purge

>
> El said:
>
> > Roehm and the top SA men had ambitions to become commissioned officers
> > in the Wehrmacht, a matter of considerable social significance in prewar
> > Germany.  The incumbent officers were anxious to keep "common street
> > brawlers" out of their "gentleman's club".  "Night of the Long Knives"
> > was a way for the Party to reassure the Wehrmacht that it would keep its
> > monopoly of national defense.
>
> Wasn't Roehm a lieutenant (captain?) during the 1st WW? I think that it's
> pretty clear that Night of the Long Knives was more of a consolidation of
> Himmler/Goering/Hitler/s power. Strasser/Roehm/et al weren't following the
> direction they wanted to go, so they were killed.
> David Rising

Roehm was a captain in the storm troops (the specially trained close combat
forces of the Imperial Army) I believe.

The Roehm faction was much more economically and politically leftist and
radical than other elements in the Nazi party.  This was seen as a threat
by both the industrialists and the army.

Roehm wanted to replace the Reichswehr with a political militia based on the
SA.  Needless to say, the generals were unenthusiastic about being replaced
by what they considered an unruly mob of homosexuals, radicals, and street
criminals.

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 7 Oct 1994 01:05:54 +0100
From:    Emmanuel Gustin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HYPO: The "Big" what-if?

On Thu, 6 Oct 1994, Kendall Miles wrote:

> Perhaps given Donitz's 300 U-Boats?  Or at least substantially
> more than the 59 he started the war with?  With 150 U-Boats
> at the start of war and a priority on their production, the
> "Happy Time" could have continued, starving Great Britain.

I doubt it. The 'Happy Time' was not ended by numerical inferiority, but
by changes in tactics and technology: convoys, escort carriers,
centimetric radar, HF/DF, code breaking... Sooner or later, the U-boats
would have been chased from the Atlantic, unless the later types of
U-boats had been introduced earlier. On the other hand, if Doenitz had
been given 300 U-boats, the British war effort in 1941-1943 would have
been very seriously curtailed. One could imagine any series of
consequences you want: no support for British troops in the
Mediterranean, Mussolini saves his face in Africa and doesn't attack
Greece; no German intervention in the Balkan; Hitler wins six weeks and
the German army captures Moscow...

> Or (and this is my obsession and probable thesis topic) why
> was the "Uralbomber" strategic bomber not built?  If it had
> been, the Battle of Britain would certainly have been
> different with the expanded Luftwaffe strike radius forcing

Without long-range fighter escort, even heavy bombers would have suffered
heavy losses in the Battle of Britain, on long overflights perhaps even
similar to that of the 8th AF at Schweinfurt and Regensburg. The German
industry did not have to production capacity of the US counterpart, and
such losses would certainly have meant the failure of the offensive.

>    I guess my problem with this topic is that Hitler and the
> Germans made so many mistakes that it's hard to tell which
> were the crucial ones that could have changed the outcome.

Everbody makes mistakes. WWII itself was a mistake; Hitler didn't expect
that Britain would declare war for Poland...

Emmanuel Gustin

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 20:32:00 EDT
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: [INF] USAAF 7 OCT 44

COMBAT CHRONOLOGY OF THE US ARMY AIR FORCES
WEDNESDAY, 4 OCTOBER 1944
FTP SITES
  1. ftp.rutgers.edu in directory pub/wwii/usaf
  2. byrd.mu.wvnet.edu (129.71.32.152) in pub/history/military/airforce/
     wwii_chronology

AIRCRAFT MENTIONED IN THIS REPORT:
  A-20, Douglas Havoc
  B-17, Boeing Flying Fortress
  B-24, Consolidated Liberator
  B-25, North American Mitchell
  B-26, Martin Marauder
  C-47, Douglas Skytrain
  P-38, Lockheed Lightning
  P-40, Curtiss
  P-47, Republic Thunderbolt
  P-51, North American Mustang

NOTE: A number in parenthesis after a target name indicates the number of
bombers attacking.

AMERICAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  ALASKA (Eleventh Air Force): In the Kurile Islands, a B-24 weatheraborts a
photo run off Matsuwa Island; 4 B-25s bomb a freighter and a barge off
Shimushu Island; 15-17 fighters intercept and the B-25s score 1 victory.

CHINA-BURMA-INDIA (CBI) THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  BURMA-INDIA (Tenth Air Force): In Burma, 8 P-47s damage approaches to a
bridge between Myitkyina and Bhamo; 16 P-47s hit the town of Palwesho; 4
others hit small towns S of Bhamo, including Man The and Hantet.

  CHINA (Fourteenth Air Force): In China, 5 B-25s hit Hsinantien and areas N
of Chefang; 80+ P-40s and P-51s continue to attack targets of opportunity
during armed reconnaissance over areas of China S of the Yangtze River; 20+
fighter-bombers hit buildings, troops, and river shipping in the Paoching
area.

EUROPEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (ETO)

  AIRBORNE OPERATIONS (IX Troop Carrier Command): The 306th Troop Carrier
Squadron, 442d Troop Carrier Group, moves from Weston Zoyland, England to
Peray, France with C-47s.

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Eighth Air Force): Mission 664: 5 B-24s and 4 B-17s
drop leaflets in the Low Countries, France and Germany during the night.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Ninth Air Force): Bombers drop leaflets in the Metz
and Saint-Die, France and Saarburg, Germany areas; fighters support the US
First and Third Armies in W Germany and E France, escort B-26s, and fly armed
reconnaissance in forward areas, attacking rail and military targets. In
Belgium, HQ 365th Fighter Group and the 386th, 387th and 388th Fighter
Squadrons move from Juvincourt, France to Chievres with P-47s.

MEDITERRANEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (MTO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Fifteenth Air Force): 327 B-17s and B-24s, with
fighter escort, bomb the Munich W, Germany marshalling yard. In Italy, around
400 other heavy bombers, attack the rail line in the Trento-Mezzaselva area
covering 50+ miles (80+ km) of the Brenner route, Aviano Airfield, Avisio
viaduct, and railroad and road bridges at Pinzano al Tagliamento, Pordenone,
Latisana, Casarsa della Delizia, Mezzocorona, Ora, and San Dona di Piave. In
Greece, 39 P-51s strafe Tatoi, Kalamaki, and Eleusis Airfields. Other P-51s
escort Mediterranean Allied Tactical Air Force (MATAF) C-47s and fly
reconnaissance.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Twelfth Air Force): In Italy, weather restricts medium
bombers to attacks on 2 bridges at Bistagno and Villafranca d'Asti; fighter-
bombers closely support ground forces fighting in the Loiano-Quinzanod'Oglio-
Sassoleone areas, and hit communications N of the battle areas; HQ 47th
Bombardment Group (Light) and the 84th, 85th and 86th Bombardment Squadrons
(Light) move from Follonica to Rosignano Airfield with A-20s; HQ 79th Fighter
Group and the 86th and 87th Fighter Squadrons move from Southern France to
Iesi with P-47s.

PACIFIC OCEAN AREA (POA)

  AAFPOA (Seventh Air Force): B-24s from Saipan Island attack shipping W of
Iwo Jima Island and bomb airfields, the radio station, buildings, and area
targets on Marcus, Pagan, and Iwo Jima Islands. P-47s hit gun positions,
beach defenses, buildings, and the wharf area on Pagan Island. B-24s from the
Marshall Islands bomb the airfield on Moen Island, Truk Atoll.

SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AREA [SWPA, Far East Air Force (FEAF)]: On Celebes Island,
B-25s bomb Sidate and Bolaang-oeki. On Halmahera Island, P-40s and B-25s
attack Galela and Kaoe Airfields. B-25s and A-20s on a shipping sweep bomb
town and port area of Amboina on Ambon Island, hit a wharf at Halong on
Celebes Island, and attack shipping and shore targets of opportunity at
various points. In New Guinea, HQ 403d Troop Carrier Group moves from Los
Negros Island, Admiralty Islands to Biak Island; the 13th Troop Carrier
Squadron, 403d Troop Carrier Group, based on Espiritu Santo Island, New
Hebrides Islands, ceases operating from Los Negros Island and begins
operating from Wakde Island with C-47s; the 63d Troop Carrier Squadron, 403d
Troop Carrier Group, based on Biak Island, begins operating from Wakde Island
with C-47s. In the Moluccas Islands, the 35th Fighter Squadron, 8th Fighter
Group, moves from Owi, Schouten Islands to Morotai Island with P-38s.

SOURCES:
AIR FORCE COMBAT UNITS OF WORLD WAR II, Office of Air Force History,
  Headquarters USAF, 1961, ISBN 0-912799-02-1
COMBAT SQUADRONS OF THE AIR FORCE, WORLD WAR II, Office of Air Force
  History, Headquarters USAF 1982
THE ARMY AIR FORCES IN WORLD WAR II: COMBAT CHRONOLOGY, 1941-1945 by the
  Office of Air Force History, Headquarters USAF, 1973
THE MIGHTY EIGHTH WAR DIARY by Roger A. Freeman, ISBN 1-85409-071-2

Jack McKillop
USAF (Airways and Air Communications Service)
1955-59

-------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Jack McKillop         |  Those who have long enjoyed such      |
|  Bellcore              |  privileges as we enjoy forget in      |
|  Piscataway, NJ USA    |  time that men have died to win them.  |
|  [email-masked]  |                       FDR              |
-------------------------------------------------------------------

07/0034Z OCT

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 18:47:19 -0400
From:    Christopher Morton <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Raid in Poland

>
> I'll have to double check my sources when I get home tonight, but the
> first troops which would later be called "Brandenburgers" were assembled
> in the fall of 1938, under the command of an Army colonel whose name
> escapes me just now.  They were to assigned the responsibility of
> storming the Reichstag and arresting Hitler if the Munich Crisis hadn't
> resolved peacefully.  I'll check my copy of Harold Deutsch's HITLER AND
> HIS GENERALS: THE UNSEEN CRISIS, 1938 for details.

I'd be interested in hearing more about this.

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 6 Oct 1994 21:44:02 EDT
From:    William Lippert <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: HIST -- SA purge

On Thu, 6 Oct 1994 13:51:52 GMT-6 Robert T. Moore said:
>Hello, Warren!
>
>At the time, Reinhard Heydrich didn't have a role in this as it came
>earlier than his arrival on the scene. At the time, the SD was not in
>existence and didn't come into existence until around 1935 and
>even then, he had to compete with the Abwehr which he always regarded
>as "a nest of spies".
>
>Hope this helps.
>
>Terry
>
    I addressed the matter of Heydrich's involvement in another message, I
think, but there is one other matter I'd like to address.  Heydrich did
not bear any particular bad will for the Abwehr.  His relationship with it
was strained, but he and the Abwehr chief, Admiral Canaris, were best of
friends.  There was a time, back in 1938 I think, when someone had wanted
to investigate Canaris and his staff.  Heydrich made an immediate stop
to all investigations.
   Their friendship began during Heydrich's navy years.  In fact, Heydrich
was an officer on one of Canaris' boats.  And Canaris taught him all the
ropes of intelligence gathering.  Later, Heydrich and Canaris' wife had
many a string ensemble.  It might be hard to believe, but Heydrich had
a genuine affection for Canaris and so there was never any thought of
doing harm to him.

William Lippert
The American University

------------------------------

End of WWII-L Digest - 5 Oct 1994 to 6 Oct 1994
***********************************************