Re: Stalingrad: 70 years ago (bloodiest battle in world history)

[Sarah Ehrett's Lesbian Love Interest]

On Sunday, February 3, 2013 2:39:25 AM UTC-8, News wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
>
>
>
> Contrary to popular U.S. history (thanks to Western war movies), most of the
>
> fighting in World War 2 was *not* in the West, but on the Eastern Front.
>
> Notoriously, The Battle of Stalingrad (now Volgograd) in 1942/43 was the
>
> bloodiest battle the world has ever seen, ending on this date (Feb. 2) in
>
> 1943. A minimum of 1.2 million (1,200,000) people died in the struggle for
>
> control of that city starting on August 23, 1942.

The US should have stayed out of WWII. Let USSR and Germany slog it out, then we could have come in and mop up the mess with little loss of American life. Results may have been no Cold War.

[danny burstein]

On Sunday, February 3, 2013 2:39:25 AM UTC-8, News wrote:
>
> Contrary to popular U.S. history (thanks to Western war movies), most of the
> fighting in World War 2 was *not* in the West, but on the Eastern Front.

Quite true, which gets me to one of my back burner issues. "We",
as in the US/Europe/Australia, have a dozen or so "Big" [a]
movies about WW-II, and maybe a hundred or even more mid
level types.

I've kept my eyes open for any similar productions out of Russia,
but even allowing for my limited access (being in the US and semi-
restricited to English films) it seems there are very few.

I did find one thanks to the tv channel associated with Jane Fonda's
ex-hubby. They ran "Ballad of a Soldier" [b], which featured the
story of a "signals officer" (radio type fella) whom becaues
he had to... took out two German tanks. As a reward his CO gave
him a pass to go back home for a bit, and the other folk on
the train didn't believe him...

Anyone know of any others? Thanks

[a] hey, I had to use some descriptive term. We all know
what I mean...

[b] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballad_of_a_Soldier


--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

[MWB]

>
> The US should have stayed out of WWII. Let USSR and Germany slog it out, then we could have come in and mop up the mess with little loss of American life. Results may have been no Cold War.
>

Germany declared war on the United States on December 11, 1941.


GO 49ERS

Mark

[danny burstein]

In <kem504$d0p$1...@dont-email.me> MWB <bic...@gmail.com> writes:

>> The US should have stayed out of WWII. Let USSR and Germany slog it out, then we could have come in and mop up the mess with little loss of American life. Results may have been no Cold War.

>Germany declared war on the United States on December 11, 1941.

Don't stop him, he's rolling.

[Sarah Ehrett's Lesbian Love Interest]

On Sunday, February 3, 2013 8:58:59 AM UTC-8, MWB wrote:
> >
>
> > The US should have stayed out of WWII. Let USSR and Germany slog it out, then we could have come in and mop up the mess with little loss of American life. Results may have been no Cold War.
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> Germany declared war on the United States on December 11, 1941.
>
>

And Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 1492. Your point being? That Germany would have somehow had the manpower to hop across the Atlantic and invade?

My point is we could have watched the whole war from the comforts of homes, waited until both sides beat each other into bloody pulps, then become involved. Europe would now be speaking English, the fall of the Soviet Union would have happened decades later. Isreal would be located in Europe (South Germany I would guess). And the whole Middle East quagmire would be science fiction.

[Sarah Ehrett's Lesbian Love Interest]

Correction: Fall of Soviets "deacades earlier" , not later.

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <c5a43c92-fa4d-4f80...@googlegroups.com>,
Sarah Ehrett's Lesbian Love Interest <wilm...@gmail.com> wrote:
...

> My point is we could have watched the whole war from the comforts of
>homes, waited until both sides beat each other into bloody pulps, then
>become involved. Europe would now be speaking English, the fall of the
>Soviet Union would have happened decades later.

I assume you mean "earlier".

>Isreal would be located
>in Europe (South Germany I would guess). And the whole Middle East
>quagmire would be science fiction.

Your analysis is probably correct. Unfortunately, you seem to have
forgotten what the actual reason for war is.

Hint: follow the money.

--
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
~ Epicurus

[Sarah Ehrett's Lesbian Love Interest]

On Sunday, February 3, 2013 9:17:25 AM UTC-8, Kenny McCormack wrote:

> Your analysis is probably correct. Unfortunately, you seem to have
>
> forgotten what the actual reason for war is.
>
>
>
> Hint: follow the money.
>

Hint? You just gave away the answer. I was going to guess something like John Wayne and Hollywood, but you just blurted out the answer and ruined the fun. Thanks alot!

[MWB]

TV programming began in 1948.



GO 49ERS

Mark

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <6274d9a1-ce27-4e07...@googlegroups.com>,

Sarah Ehrett's Lesbian Love Interest <wilm...@gmail.com> wrote:

Point taken. I'll be more careful in future.

--
Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as foolish,
and by the rulers as useful.

(Seneca the Younger, 65 AD)

[Bob Martin]

In the USA, perhaps.
The BBC was broadcasting television in the mid-1930s but suspended it during WW2.
It restarted right after the war.

[Brad Ferguson]

In article <an969u...@mid.individual.net>, Bob Martin

The New York Times was publishing the local daily TV schedule by
mid-1944. Two channels, IIRC.

[Hank]

Huh? The British were the first, with 405-line TV from Alexandra
Palace in 1936.

Actual programming in the US began with the New York World's Fair in
1939, officially "experimental" (no commercial advertising allowed,
and several manufacturers built TV receivers for sale to the consumer
public. Originally 441 lines, upgraded to 525 lines. The RCA TRK-12
was used at the World's Fair and inside RCA, as well as marketed to
consumers. Several other manufacturers built sets for the consumer
market in that period. The NTSC standard wasn't finalized and
approved until July 1941; differed from what RCA used in having FM
sound rather than AM. Broadcasting continued on a limited schedule
through the war on about ten stations in a few cities around the
country.

http://www.earlytelevision.org/prewar.html

Check out the prewar German Volkfernseher (1938) while you're at it.

Hank