Comments on: WikiLeaks in World War II http://www.historynet.com/wikileaks-in-world-war-ii.htm From the World's Largest History Magazine Publisher Sat, 18 May 2013 15:30:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Malcolm Duncan http://www.historynet.com/wikileaks-in-world-war-ii.htm#comment-342858 Malcolm Duncan Tue, 28 Sep 2010 01:33:10 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13682615#comment-342858 Luke,I believe that Pattons dismissal actually saved thousands of Allied lives in the Normandy invasion.Patton was part of "Operation Fortitide",the deception operation to convince Hitler and the German high command that the actual invasion would be in the Pas du Calais area.If Hitler had not bought the deception,the causalities at Normany would have been much higher. Luke,I believe that Pattons dismissal actually saved thousands of Allied lives in the Normandy invasion.Patton was part of "Operation Fortitide",the deception operation to convince Hitler and the German high command that the actual invasion would be in the Pas du Calais area.If Hitler had not bought the deception,the causalities at Normany would have been much higher.

]]> By: The Forester http://www.historynet.com/wikileaks-in-world-war-ii.htm#comment-313560 The Forester Fri, 30 Jul 2010 02:17:23 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13682615#comment-313560 During WWI, the tactics employed & results achieved necessitated criminalizing nearly to the point of treason any criticism of the war or or its prosecution. Re: casualty expections - if we expect much from these weapons it's because we were promised more when they were originally foisted on, er, sold to, us. During WWI, the tactics employed & results achieved necessitated criminalizing nearly to the point of treason any criticism of the war or or its prosecution.

Re: casualty expections – if we expect much from these weapons it's because we were promised more when they were originally foisted on, er, sold to, us.

]]> By: tioedong http://www.historynet.com/wikileaks-in-world-war-ii.htm#comment-313542 tioedong Fri, 30 Jul 2010 01:18:54 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13682615#comment-313542 some would say the "exposes" on Patton salpping a soldier, etc. were the WWII equivalents of Wikileaks. I leave it to historians to estimate the US casualties that resulted from his temporary removal. some would say the "exposes" on Patton salpping a soldier, etc. were the WWII equivalents of Wikileaks.

I leave it to historians to estimate the US casualties that resulted from his temporary removal.

]]> By: Luke Truxal http://www.historynet.com/wikileaks-in-world-war-ii.htm#comment-313382 Luke Truxal Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:31:56 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13682615#comment-313382 What I find amazing is what the military and society considers acceptable or unacceptable civilian casualty numbers. Despite considerably high civilian casualties from American daylight bombing their numbers were considered low and acceptable at that time. Many of the Germans were amazed at the low civilian casualties from daylight bombing at times. However, in today's world those numbers would be a tragedy. Now if one drone attack kills a handful of civilians it is considered an unacceptable loss. It seems that as technology and information has progressed our expectations have as well. I wonder if Eisenhower would have survived his North African campaign if it had the same coverage we have now. It seems that technology has raised our expectations to an unprecedented level. We now expect results faster than ever whether it is on the battlefield or in civilian jobs back at home. Any civilian losses are a tragedy but the way society seems to view them versus back then has changed dramatically due to the amount of coverage. What I find amazing is what the military and society considers acceptable or unacceptable civilian casualty numbers. Despite considerably high civilian casualties from American daylight bombing their numbers were considered low and acceptable at that time. Many of the Germans were amazed at the low civilian casualties from daylight bombing at times. However, in today's world those numbers would be a tragedy.

Now if one drone attack kills a handful of civilians it is considered an unacceptable loss. It seems that as technology and information has progressed our expectations have as well. I wonder if Eisenhower would have survived his North African campaign if it had the same coverage we have now. It seems that technology has raised our expectations to an unprecedented level. We now expect results faster than ever whether it is on the battlefield or in civilian jobs back at home.

Any civilian losses are a tragedy but the way society seems to view them versus back then has changed dramatically due to the amount of coverage.

]]> By: WikiLeaks in World War II » HistoryNet http://www.historynet.com/wikileaks-in-world-war-ii.htm#comment-312893 WikiLeaks in World War II » HistoryNet Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:43:39 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13682615#comment-312893 [...] original here:  WikiLeaks in World War II » HistoryNet Post a [...] [...] original here:  WikiLeaks in World War II » HistoryNet Post a [...]

]]> By: Bill Nance http://www.historynet.com/wikileaks-in-world-war-ii.htm#comment-312875 Bill Nance Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:15:01 +0000 http://www.historynet.com/?p=13682615#comment-312875 This is increasingly becoming an issue in modern society. People see and read more than ever, but their comprehension is very low. Scarily, this is influencing how we wage warfare - whoever can get the most shocking soundbite or graphic 30 second TV or youtube video gets the advantage. This is increasingly becoming an issue in modern society. People see and read more than ever, but their comprehension is very low. Scarily, this is influencing how we wage warfare – whoever can get the most shocking soundbite or graphic 30 second TV or youtube video gets the advantage.

]]>