Return to Index  

Bomber Command and such!

December 20 2009 at 10:50 AM
Ken Joyce 


Response to Efficacy of Torture

Michael

No problem, however Speer was dead wrong about one industry over the other. One industry in particular was obviously effected. I say OBVIOUSLY effected. That was the production of aircraft. As I said before, you would have to be lacking in your faculties not to realize that on June 6, 1944. It was not necessarily where the bombs hit but where it shifted the focus of German fighter strength. It is incredible that historians can't see that? As of June 1944, the evidence of lagging fighter numbers is not only seen in France, but also in Italy and the Russian front. But I suppose, according to the experts, lack of aircraft on the part of the enemy had nothing to do with the winning of the war. In addition, if you add to that the effect of Coastal Command Bomber aircraft on the submarine threat. The evidence is self explanatory. Again, when aircraft production seems to rise in Germany is usually when BC and the USAAF are tasked to other things like preparations for invasion. There was a lack of bomber aircraft throughout the war. The so-called arsenal of democracy took quite some time to get up to speed. In fact I think it finally did at the end of the war.

As for torture, you did not read my post very well. Did I not say that torture and the THREAT of torture/death turned German agents ( you can say agents because they were true spies ) under the effort of the XX system under M-I5's Sir John Masterman. It was Lt. Col. T.A. Robertson who turned them. What more do I need to explain about that? You can't put the turning of agents and the strategic outcome of the war together? Do you think these agents just volunteered? Grow up! I am not going to write a book here for you. As is commonly stated on this forum, Go and read a few books! At this reference you can read the methods used at Camp 020.http://www.historyandpolicy.org/papers/policy-paper-78.html. The author of the article obviously does not feel that torture provides results. However it all depends on what you call torture. Tickling and mental fatigue ARE forms of torture and are still taught to units like the SAS today. Those forms DID produce results as clearly stated. ALSO, as I stated, the threat of death proved effective. Another good book about ULTRA is by Ronald Lewin called "Ultra Goes to War". It will inform you about the impact of of the use of ULTRA. However the connection to deception is still largely unknown as no one has touched on it in detail outside of FORTITUDE. I came up with JUPITER however there were hundred's of deceptions created that required the use of these XX agents. It is also silly sometimes to think that ALL records were released and it is also silly to think that M-I5 can't cook records. Most truly incriminating records were destroyed during the war. There is plenty of evidence of that. Interviews with people responsible for this work are recorded. Anywhere where sensitive intelligence was read there always existed a furnace for burning. Then there was vital intelligence that was never written down. The author of the article on 020 is also mistaken if he thinks the buck stopped at JIC. The buck stopped at Churchill and his little groups. Like today, Congressional, Parliamentary committees on intelligence during WW2 were actually told very little about nasty secrets. Things like the mounting of operations and large loss of life simply to add to a deception plan or to simply look like you are doing something to the public and other govt's even though it is known that you will fail etc.

As for your comment that sabotage is somehow covered in conventions is silly. It is not. Sabotage is covered if it is carried out by a uniformed force. SIS and SOE did conduct sabotage in plain clothes during the early part of the war. SIS did it throughout the war.They were also responsible for feuling these actions by an un-uniformed resistance. They also supplied a small amount of arms to resistance units known to use torture and execution. The communist resistance was notorious for this. As I stated, one possibility was a Canadian SOE agent named Lieutenant Pierre C. Meunier who was endangering his entire FFI circuit and the outlying circuits. If no method could be found to immediately extract him, they would have shot him. Dozens of German's were shot dead or killed on the streets of Paris just sitting sipping a glass of wine. Another famous example (and there are many unfamous examples) is the assasination of SS dude Heinrich Heydrich by uniformed members of the Czech section of SOE.

The destruction of the heavy water shipment over Lake Tin in Norway is another good example of something that would not be tolerated today. Explosives were placed on a ferry full of civilians in order to stop the PERCIEVED danger of a fission weapon in German hands. I say FISSION, because it did not have to be an atomic bomb. However as we now know it, there was little threat of this. Still those Norwegian civilians died.

Do you think that governments today would condone such actions to say, save the lives of Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan? If they knew an IED was being made in an unapproachable village full of civilians however they had to bomb that village at 12:00 noon on Friday or it would be moved? The resulting attack would definately kill civilians because some sort of happening was to occur? NO, or if they did and it got caught on CNN, all hell would break loose.

I am not saying I agree with going berzerk with bombs and guns or to torture anyone, I just want you to understand that in the past ( a thing called HISTORY) this stuff was done and it did have results. As I have said before, do you think in the lefty world we live in today that an invasion of France would have occurred knowing in advance that an estimated 20,000 French civilians would die in the initial days of invasion? No it would not. Would we allow the bombing of targets in Britain at the cost of thousands of lives just to keep secret that we were reading German target lists? We would all be speaking German today. War requires some hard decisions that people today are simply not capable of making. That said, the best type of war is NO war at all. But explain that to the trouble makers in the world.

In short, today we are not WILLING to do what it takes to WIN war even on the conventional level. I am not saying torture or indescriminate bombing, but some sort of balance. This all began in Korea and we are sucking the results back now. If war is not fought, the result is a never ending turmoil that goes on and on. Rather than do it right and get it over with, people just continue to die for nothing. It is all politics today and who can be the squeaky cleanest. That is one reason I would NEVER join the military. They dont care enough about you. That is the only reason I think modern conflicts like Afghanistan are a waste of time and precious life. No one wants to take it seriously.If we leave, the results of that wishy washy stance will be evident in the blood that will be spilled by the civil populace. The same thing happened in Korea, Vietnam and is happening today. You just never heard about it because the left wing media never thought to tell anyone. Just keep smoking that red dubie man and keep on trucking!




 
 Respond to this message   
Responses

canadiansoldiers.com