Quote:
</div><div class='quotemain'>
Jimbo
You are maintaining that the Beaches in the British Sector were uncontested and that is the reason that the funnies worked. I say you are wrong. I call on Sapper to let us know what the beaches were like on that day. Why? Because unlike you or me, he was there. And as he isnt a Historian maybe you will appreciate his testimony better.
We are asking you for sources to back up your assertions. As for me doing some reading, I suggest you read, as I have, Max Hastings Overlord and Carlo D'Este's Decision in Normandy. For example, you have made the claim that the British "built them because they had some old chassis sitting around and were experimenting" . Where did you find this out? Did you read it or are you just "Telling it like it is" off the top of your head?.
You posted this earlier in the thread:
As far as my “attitude”, I usually get that when I have deviated from the party line in my opinion and violated some politically correct agreement obligation. Isn’t that “Funny”? Sorry pilot but I can’t please everybody and you know how much I desire to do that. But if all I do is post the same old point of view as so many of you, what fun is that? If you only want to hear what you believe, get a tape recorderThats it. Opinions. with nothing to back up any claims except opinions. I like debate Jimbo and opinions but if that is the only essence of someones arguments then they come up a bit vacuous????
Here is a link to some tape recorders:
http://mytapedecks.mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/
[/b]
|
Gott, may I use Mr. McAllister's link? It illustrates exactly what I have been saying all along. It is a death box.
<span style="color:red">
"LT. C.F. RICHARDSON, of 'B' Company, had many reinforcements in his platoon and found it very hot as machine gun fire swept the woods and field." The Highlanders were giving as much gun support as they could but were having carriers knocked out by shelling. Lt. George Fawcett had his men help to relieve 'C' Company, and close by two Cameron Carriers that enemy fire had blasted.
An English Major, asked who was in charge and Major Forbes (who was leading 'B' Company) said he was the one responsible. The English Major asked what was slowing them, and Major Forbes replied that it was because of all their casualties. The English Major declared "Bring Up a Petard!...So up came a Churchill tank with its high explosive charge to blow walls and buildings." The next instant, there was a grand blast. When the dust had settled the grain was flowing in the breeze and there was absolutely no sign of the tank.
A German 88 had hit the Petard squarely and the explosion wiped out the tank totally. From then on a classic saying was 'bring up a Petard!' </span>
As you can see the phrase "bring up a Petard" became a byword mocking the stupidity of such a weapon. Now, if there were 88's hammering down on Sword beach like they were at Omaha, at the time the British rolled up a Petard, then wouldn't "those" 88's penetrate it and the explosion "wiped out the tank totally"? Is this not what I have been saying?
But logical deduction should tell you this.
1) Petard has no defense to take out an 88 without pulling up within 80 yards of its barrel which gives them time to take quite a few shots at it.
2) An 88 is an extremely accurate gun.
3) An 88 has no trouble going through Allied armor in WWII (yes, even Churchill’s)
4) The loud bang heard is not the 88 round going off but rather the mortars in side going off. A loud bang is a sign you better not be around it like you would have been on Omaha.
Is this not exactly what I said when you said "you haven't quoted a historian, you can't be smart enough to know that an 88 could easily take out a tank of any sort"?
That's not debate you are seeking, it is a "historian quote" p***ing contest. That's what is vacuous to me. Must we all be unable to make deductions that those that made deductions before us didn’t make? And, I didn’t say that Sword was uncontested, I said Petards might work on uncontested beaches. Sword was uncontested in an armor sense of the word. I also said that the British may have been able to use one and that “stranger things have happened”. Even if sapper saw them on Sword beach and if perchance there were an 88 present there (which I doubt) and if the funny managed to not explode and kill everybody around it, then I would say they are luckier than “dog crap” that day.
Now since you want quotes and believe nothing can be deduced with them then here is one that tells you how light the defenses were on Sword:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sword_Beach
Yes, I know that is a wikipedia reference, yes it was intentional but even more important it is an apropos link to make a statement about the insistence of quoting other men, few of whom can quote each other for fear of total contradiction. I can think of no better link to make a statement against the arbitrary exaltation of men that publish history material.