Bismarck tried to surrender?

[Paul in NZ]

Wasnt it something to do with stopping some power hungry Genocidal psycho from taking over more and more countries?

I'm not saying it was justified and that we were on the 'right' side. Its just I'll bet some poor cunt stoking the boilers wasnt thinking about glory when he was pitched into the cold Atlantic...

[jaffaonajappa]

Its just I'll bet some poor cunt stoking the boilers wasnt thinking about

Yeah, your right - putting it like that. 100%.

One exception tho. Stokers didnt think. Period.

[Maha]

...They didn't even come second, they lost!
No point for further embarrassment going for the three-peat was there?

[James Deuce]

Wasnt it something to do with stopping some power hungry Genocidal psycho from taking over more and more countries?

That's the commonly accepted propaganda.

[Elysium]

Fuckem' it was War!
The Bismarck was the greatest battleship at one point of time in history.
Fortunately it ended up alongside all the others that it destroyed, at the bottom of the ocean.
Hilter holds the record for 'Most kills of any race during any war'...6,000,000?

Pretty sure Stalin holds that record.

[Paul in NZ]

Pretty sure Stalin holds that record.

Shit yes - he beat that killing his own guys n gals

[scumdog]

That's the commonly accepted propaganda.

Nicelt summed up

[MotoKuzzi]

My old man joined the Navy in 1943 as a seaman boy, 15 going on 16, amazing to think they were only kids involved in something so big. Trying to compare how I was at the same age or my kids now, it's unbelievable.

Most of his life was shaped by those few years in the war and at age 84 with Alzheimers it's all he can relate to or remember now.

[rebel]

Pretty sure Stalin holds that record.

Especially since all these mass graves and body remains of the 6 million haven't been found.

[Jantar]

Especially since all these mass graves and body remains of the 6 million haven't been found.

Not much left to put in a mass grave when the bodies have been burnt in a furnace. However many were also buried in mass graves, and most of those have ben found.

[GrayWolf]

Correct on all counts - except perhaps the use of the term 'citadel'. WW2 BB's didnt really have a citadel as its known in modern times.

Depends on what you view as the 'citidel'.. there were no true 'all or nothing' armoured battleships, I will completely agree with that; but the principal of the 'citidel' was developed from HMS Dreadnought onwards. Heavily armoured internal fortress, encasing the vitals and armoury/stores, engines/controls etc. The armoured barbettes, turrets and conning tower were in effect 'towers' jutting up from the citidel. In that instance the Bismarck's internal Citidel was intact. Although I also gather there is now some discussion that KMB and KMT suffered from poor welding as these were the first large ships of war to be fully welded and not rivitted. Hence the total loss of the superstructure on sinking and I understand a crew member (junior officer) has commented the conning tower looked like a swiss cheese with shell holes BUT was splitting at some of the welded joints too.

[Woodman]

That's the commonly accepted propaganda.

Elaborate please.

[jaffaonajappa]

Depends on what you view as the 'citidel'.. there were no true 'all or nothing' armoured battleships, I will completely agree with that; but the principal of the 'citidel' was developed from HMS Dreadnought onwards. Heavily armoured internal fortress, encasing the vitals and armoury/stores, engines/controls etc. The armoured barbettes, turrets and conning tower were in effect 'towers' jutting up from the citidel. In that instance the Bismarck's internal Citidel was intact. Although I also gather there is now some discussion that KMB and KMT suffered from poor welding as these were the first large ships of war to be fully welded and not rivitted. Hence the total loss of the superstructure on sinking and I understand a crew member (junior officer) has commented the conning tower looked like a swiss cheese with shell holes BUT was splitting at some of the welded joints too.

Oh crap.
Remind me to Never ever dispute warship design or terminology with you again, for my sake.

My understanding of older ships were they relied on compartmentalisation - could lose certain sections of the ship without it sinking - or having a too dramatic effect on other compartments. And that no real thought was given to the entire 'centre areas' of a ship were looked at as a Whole / ie damaging one compartment would breach the citadel implying reducing the effectiveness of all compartments?
Arghhhh. I think I better stop there lol.

[James Deuce]

Elaborate please.

You'll be bored after the fourth paragraph and won't agree with me or the 40 odd historians I'll end up quoting so lets just say that the 'Allies" weren't as allied as you'd expect and the Axis was an invention of a couple of conventions. No one cared about dead Poles, murdered Jews or millions of dead Chinese, let alone the reassimilation of millions of German people separated from their countrymen by overly punitive treaty restrictions post-WW1.

When war threatened the post-depression economic recovery someone got involved on both sides (Ford and GM built trucks and rail rolling stock for Germany, using impressed French labour and American management until 1944. Nice people those Americans. Not.) to ensure the establishment of a military industrial complex that would prevent a plunge into global depression. 2/3rds of the "major" Allies were dragged into war by treaty obligations or some idiot over reaching himself and invading a grossly resource superior "enemy".

The other third of those Allies saw the opportunity to reap major economic advantages on a global scale and the opportunity to shape the post-war world in its own favour. That's only just fallen apart thanks to over-weening greed.

The most interesting thing to bear in mind is if the US had had a Republican government throughout the Depression years and leading into WWII they would have been far more likely to back the Axis powers. The opposition Republicans even tried to stage their own Putsch, badly using a much decorated Marine Brigadier General in the process.

[IdunBrokdItAgin]

You'll be bored after the fourth paragraph and won't agree with me or the 40 odd historians I'll end up quoting so lets just say that the 'Allies" weren't as allied as you'd expect and the Axis was an invention of a couple of conventions. No one cared about dead Poles, murdered Jews or millions of dead Chinese, let alone the reassimilation of millions of German people separated from their countrymen by overly punitive treaty restrictions post-WW1.

When war threatened the post-depression economic recovery someone got involved on both sides (Ford and GM built trucks and rail rolling stock for Germany, using impressed French labour and American management until 1944. Nice people those Americans. Not.) to ensure the establishment of a military industrial complex that would prevent a plunge into global depression. 2/3rds of the "major" Allies were dragged into war by treaty obligations or some idiot over reaching himself and invading a grossly resource superior "enemy".

The other third of those Allies saw the opportunity to reap major economic advantages on a global scale and the opportunity to shape the post-war world in its own favour. That's only just fallen apart thanks to over-weening greed.

The most interesting thing to bear in mind is if the US had had a Republican government throughout the Depression years and leading into WWII they would have been far more likely to back the Axis powers. The opposition Republicans even tried to stage their own Putsch, badly using a much decorated Marine Brigadier General in the process.

Very simplified but I agree that USA didn't really seem to know which way it was going until then, hence their initial reluctance to directly involve itself in WW2.

However, I still believe that the Japanese declaration of war forced it's hand - rather than economic opportunities (if it was on the winning side).

And on the other two thirds of the Allies - very few people understand the link between the post-napoleonic treaty alliances within europe, which in turn initiated WW1 and the associated treaty of versailles - which was used as an excuse by Hitler to start WW2. But you seem to have a good understanding of it.

Also, just as a side note, there was no love lost between Japan and Germany either - Japan saw WW2 as an opportunity for expansion. Nothing more than that, which is why they allied with Germany.