Point Du-Hoc

[Kat]

Two years ago I went to Normandy with my uncle. We visited all the beaches and monuments as well as most musuems and I had to eat an unforgettable "plat du jour" or in other words FOOD OF THE DAY or what ever that is in English. (My uncle still teases me with it... Damn French!!) Anyway, I thought Point Du-Hoc was the best part of the entire 4 days we've been there. Omaha beach was mostly gone as well as Utah beach. I believe it was either Gold or Sword that had parts of that temporary harbor. I also went into a lot of those bunkers 'cept for some on Point Du-Hoc because they were all pitch black and I had to use my digital cam to see and after I saw a walking skeleton coming towards me I got the hell out of there. I was joking about that last part, but it looked very real to me... :P Anyway, I hope to see Point Du-Hoc in 1944!! :D

[lazlazlaz1]

they said its in there, and the whole of normandy is. so expect it.

[NicholasJohnson]

You will. :)

All the places you mentioned are in the game, even the Mulberry harbors.

Did your 'plat du jour' include Calvados brandy and Camembert cheese?

The Camembert I had was so bad, it should be used as a weapon in 1944.

[Kat]

Nah, it was pasta with chicken and carrots and it was all very warm and there was this 2 ml of liquid..something. My uncle ate it straight away but I was about to just puke by just smelling this horibble mixture of crap...

[sooch90]

Nah, it was pasta with chicken and carrots and it was all very warm and there was this 2 ml of liquid..something. My uncle ate it straight away but I was about to just puke by just smelling this horibble mixture of crap...

that sounds... freekin delicious. Seriously lol :D

That's pretty cool how you got to visit all of those places. I've always wanted to visit Normandy and look at the historical places, maybe I'll get a chance when I'm older.

[Toxicity]

yeah ive wanted to visit Europe in general just to see all the historic sites. I have never heard anyone complain after coming back from a Europe trip:p

[Kat]

Well I life in The Netherlands so it's not much of a problem for me. This year (in about 3 weeks actually) I'll be going to Bastogne and the surrounding places with my uncle.:D

[OliverMarshall]

Yea I went to Bastogne ast year, as well as Waterloo. I went to see FOy aswell since I wanted to see if CoD:UO looked the same, but it's completely different. Normandy was fun, got a school trip going there this year but i've been to most of the places so no big deal. The place I really recommend is St. Petersburg, Russia. It's really cool there lots of palaces and a big army museum I think as well as the cruiser which started the October Revolution.

[Kat]

Thanks for the tip, I might go t Russia n a few years.:D

[Kaos]

Yea I went to Bastogne ast year, as well as Waterloo. I went to see FOy aswell since I wanted to see if CoD:UO looked the same, but it's completely different. Normandy was fun, got a school trip going there this year but i've been to most of the places so no big deal. The place I really recommend is St. Petersburg, Russia. It's really cool there lots of palaces and a big army museum I think as well as the cruiser which started the October Revolution.

The cruiser?:confused:

[NicholasJohnson]

but I was about to just puke by just smelling this horibble mixture of crap...

I see. Must have been Camembert cheese in the mixture. :D

[DarkCanuck]

You will also see walking skeletons in the game....




They are called Germans! :D

[Kat]

LoL!! Glad to see these forums do not excist out of deadly serious people.:p

[DaveP]

You will also see walking skeletons in the game....




They are called Germans! :D


Damn man! And I'd just thought I'd had to much of the wine.. :rolleyes:

[[BEF]-R!G4M0RT!Z]

Wow, I would love to visit some of these places, such as Foy, and Bastogne, as well as Russia, that would be a great place to go! About the only place I have been to view battlefields and the like, is Belgium and the Somme area in France. It was really good, I went with my school, so we didn't get to do and see as much as I would have liked, but it was still extremely fascinating and well worth the money I payed for it.

[[FFTF]Eurofighter]

The place I really recommend is St. Petersburg, Russia.

Always wanted to go there mate. Looks like a great city to me. The funny thing is the city was created after the dutch city model. And since im from holland (amsterdam) i would really like to see it :) Only the money eh... :(

[Kat]

Hey! I'm from Zwolle! (Also The Netherlands.)

Well, now I'm getting interested in Russia. Ah well, I could... Holy crap! I could show you guys some photos I took in Normandy. But that'll take some time because I need to find that CD again and host them all.

[[BEF]-R!G4M0RT!Z]

Oooh, I would love to see your pics, if you could by any chance get them on the forums :)

[OliverMarshall]

If you are going to go, you need a visa, and its hard to get, you have to go to th erussian embassy and then collect it the next day.

The cruiser was the Astoria I think which fired a blank round in the direction of the Winter Palace to signal the assault of the bolscheviks on the palace.

I would like to see some WWI battlefields but i'm not that intrested in it and also haven't the trenches gone now? Also I would like to go to SE-Asia, aparently there are still tanks and guns just lying around.

[[BEF]-R!G4M0RT!Z]

Apparently Russian lakes are a large source of disused weapons of war, in fairly good condition.

Well a lot of the WW1 trenches are gone, and I was not too interested in WW1, although I now am, after the trip. There are however still a few preserved trench systems in Belgium, that I know of, such as Hill 60, and Hill62, the latter of which, I have visited, there is also Delville Wood, which still has some of the trenches left there, and there is that massive field full of trenches which have just been left how they were in July 1916 in the Somme, which are a memorial to the Canadians I think, except there are no visible weapons, but they don't let you walk across no mans land, or in most of the trenches because of the un exploded ordnance, but they are still extremely interesting to visit.

[[FFTF]Eurofighter]

If you are going to go, you need a visa, and its hard to get, you have to go to th erussian embassy and then collect it the next day.


Hmm, I've heard its not so hard and only takes some time. I've seen alot of advertisement here for trips to moscow and St.Petersburg. How long ago did you go?

[Toxicity]

-R!G4M0RT!Z']Apparently Russian lakes are a large source of disused weapons of war, in fairly good condition.

Well a lot of the WW1 trenches are gone, and I was not too interested in WW1, although I now am, after the trip. There are however still a few preserved trench systems in Belgium, that I know of, such as Hill 60, and Hill62, the latter of which, I have visited, there is also Delville Wood, which still has some of the trenches left there, and there is that massive field full of trenches which have just been left how they were in July 1916 in the Somme, which are a memorial to the Canadians I think, except there are no visible weapons, but they don't let you walk across no mans land, or in most of the trenches because of the un exploded ordnance, but they are still extremely interesting to visit.




WWI seemed really interesting.
id like to walk the battlefields due to the fact im sure id have much more a sense of the trench life and combat style.

[Kat]

If you went to Russia BEFORE the fall of the USSR it was apain in the ass to get there. I believe it's not that hard at all if you want to go there now. I'm not that interested in WWI mainly because of the way it was fought. Too much gas and being stuck in trenches for months, the second you show your face outside your trench your dead. You had no idea were the enemy was but the enemy has surrounded you and was keeping you in there with constant artillery fire. Not a real way to fight war if you ask me. Only after the Americans broke threw in Belgium (history repeats itself) that the real fighting began but it didn't take too long before the Germans had to surrender. Many of those politicians that surrendered in WWI also killed themselfs at the end of WWII because they didn't want to surrender two world wars. I guess I can understand that. Also the WWI tanks were a joke. Machineguns were the latest thing and since the tanks didn't have any armor on them all you had to do was shoot a hundred bullets at the tank and the entire crew was sure to be dead. The entire war was too slow, to much dirty tricks. I prefer WWII.;)

[[BEF]-R!G4M0RT!Z]

But WW1 still happened, and surely you should respect that fact, considering all of the men and women who died. It was not all fighting like what you described, especially early in the war when there was the race to the sea. Of course the fighting would not have moved much if the Generals had no real knowledge of modern combat, also the allies only won with the help of the Americans because of the sheer weight of numbers now stacked against the opposing Imperial forces, not just because America are 'so wonderful, they can win any war'. I respect all parties who took part in the war, but it just annoys me when ignorant people make it seem like America could have beat the Imperial army by itself.

[[BEF]-R!G4M0RT!Z]

WWI seemed really interesting.
id like to walk the battlefields due to the fact im sure id have much more a sense of the trench life and combat style.

Yea, it is so much easier to understand why things happened when you experience the landscape and trenches first hand. Trust me, if you want to have a better understanding of what it was like, I would advise you to go to some of the afore mentioned places. :)

[Kaos]

WWI seemed really interesting.


Ladies and Gentlemen, the understatement of the millenium :p

[Kat]

I respect any war and all emn and women who died in them. It's just so that I prefer the landing on D-Day, Market Garden and the Battle of the Bulge (and many battles in the pacific) much more interesting then men hiding in trenches for months while their constantly being bombarded. I never said Americans were great at all either. I don't like Americans at all but we should still thank them for WWII. Not because America is the only country that could have defeated Germany. In fact, the Soviets were in greater numbers and since the officers and generals didn't care much for their soldiers' lifes they would always win a battle no matter how high the casualties would rize. I know for a fact that if America would have defeated japan and just said "Meh.." to Europe and Hitler I'm sure all of Europe would then be Soviet and maybe still would be Soviet because once you have the entire continent of Europe you don't have to wurry about money aspecially not since communists don't need a lot of money anyway.

But back to WWI, I do like the movies and documentaries about it but I really didn't like the way it was fought because it didn't have very strategic operations but instead it was more like 'wait in the trenches untill the general decides otherwise'. I've also seen a documentary about shellshock and I really felt sorry for all those soldiers since they were turned into lunatics. Some of them would have constant reflexes all the time, like epilepsy but worse. Others would be scares shitless by simply looking at a uniform and others would hide under anything by the mere mention of the word 'bomb'.

[OliverMarshall]

I went about a month ago, well its not to difficult to actually get the visa but since I had to drive 2 hours to get to the embassy in the capital it was annoying and I had to do it 2 days running.

ALso WWI was not won because of America, American soliders only started arriving in small numbers in 1918 also Germany had been morally broken and their industry and economy was kaput, America gave a huge moral and equipment boost though. The war could have been won without America except it would have taken longer, the same goes for WWII.

Also I hate it how most Americans think that they won WWII, the UK had been in it for 3 more years aswell as the Free French, the Netherlands, Belgium ect.

[Kaos]

America obviously didn't win the war on it's own but it did play a somewhat huge part...

[OliverMarshall]

I agree, myabe I said it wrong. Some americans think that they could have won the war on their own, when they couldn't. The British had more troops in Normandy than the Americans did.

[DavidUpton]

I hate this idea that America "saved our ass" in both wars.

WWI: Thanks to naval blockades, Germany was on the verge of starvation. It would have thrown in the towel even if America hadn't joined in.

WWII: We held out against the Germans before Amerca arrived. Chances are the Russians would have still beat the Germans anway and, in theory, all we would have to do is keep holding out until Germany fell.

[Kaos]

Ah give the German's some credit, They were still in it until the very end. :rolleyes:

[OliverMarshall]

The Germans could have beaten either the Allies or the Comintern(Russia) at the beginning, but their mistake was to engage on both flanks.

[Kaos]

Plus the African front.

[DavidUpton]

Hitler made many mistakes. If it were me, I would:

1: Do what Hitler did and invade Poland, France, Denmark, etc.
2: Leave Russia alone and worry about Britain.
3: Deal with the RAF by knocking out factories and airfields (like the Luftwaffe started off doing) BUT STICK TO IT. I would NOT switch to city bombing.
4: Invade Britain and knock them out of the war.
5: This means forces can be drawn from Africa.
6: Invade Russia. With 100% of your forces commited to Russia, its JUST possible that Moscow could be taken. Additional forces might be able to be drawn from Italy, who owes Germany a favor for solving its Africa problems.
7: America joins in, but thanks to Britain being knocked out, it has no where close to Germany to invade from.

[Kaos]

Invading Poland would've gotten Russia involved in the war anyway, I'm sure they wouldn't take lightly the Germans so close to their borders even with the Nazi-Soviet pact still under agreement.

[-=OTR=-Nemo]

You have some good points. If Hitler had stuck to one front at a time he would of definatley of been able to invade Britain which would knock them out of the war. This would of definatley had some very good future benefits for the German's since the Allies would never of had any nearby areas to attack from, and open up the Western front. It's kind of weird to think that if Hitler played his cards right, we might all be speaking German right now.:(

[Kaos]

It's kind of weird to think that if Hitler played his cards right, we might all be speaking German right now.:(

Hahaha dude, Allies won, and the Germans aren't speaking English :/

[DavidUpton]

It's alright. If the Germans had won I wouldn't exist.

[Kaos]

Oh let's not get started, If the German's had won:rolleyes: .........

[DavidUpton]

I think we all know what would have happened...

[Kaos]

You wouldn't have been born? :p

[DavidUpton]

I was thinking something more along the lines of mass genocide. :)

[Kaos]

That happened anyway remember?

[NicholasJohnson]

That happened anyway remember? Not in Britain. But it would have if Germany won.




Come to think of it, I hate the assumptions about my country. (not directed at anyone here) Assumptions that: "America wasn't needed" or "Americans think that they won WW2 by themselves." :rolleyes:

Come on, no reasonable person with knowledge of history thinks the US won the war by themselves, and/or did not need help from anyone. But you have to be fair to the other side. Britain could not have won the war in the West by themselves either.

Anyway, this should really be in its own topic, as this is supposedly about Pointe Du Hoc.

[OliverMarshall]

There was a thread in WW2 history about how hitler could have won the war, before but it got eliminated in the spring clean, I liked that thread........

[Kaos]

I remember that thread too.

Start another one Shrapnel. Go on. You wouldn't :p

[Kat]

Best if this would get locked.;)

[enigma]

Couple of points guys n girls


I would like to see some WWI battlefields but i'm not that intrested in it and also haven't the trenches gone now?

Couple of docs ive seen in recently months, for example one on the Somme.
The trenches are still there.
They wernt all these 6-8+ deep rectangles as we would picture them, well anyhoo the massive dip in the ground where they would have been are still there.
so technically chunks of the lines still exist.

(for example on one of the docs, the guy was sitting in some woodland in a dip in the land and stated this was the position of some UK division before there advance, i think it then cut to other side of the field, where again he was in a massive dip in the ground and stated this was the german line etc etc. I remember the program well (in respects to its main subject, which was Haig) it stated that FM Haig wasnt this complete and utter git and butcher we mostly think about him, he moulded the army into a fighting force which won the war etc etc)

Am sure i saw a doc as well which a team revealed a rear area trench system and underground bunkers underneath some dudes garden and cellar (something along those lines)
cant remember if it was restored or not.


Only after the Americans broke threw in Belgium (history repeats itself) that the real fighting began but it didn't take too long before the Germans had to surrender.
the real fighting:
if you refer to it as mobile fighting, a lot of this happened in the opening months of the war, also alot in the other theatres.
In 1918 if memory serves the Germans smashed through the lines all over the front. but where thrown back eventually, which lead to the allied advance which broke through.
But as others said the surrender was also due to factors which did not happen on the battlefields of France, Belgium and Germany



3: Deal with the RAF by knocking out factories and airfields (like the Luftwaffe started off doing) BUT STICK TO IT. I would NOT switch to city bombing.
i think they could have never won that way, from what ive read once the squadrons down south or the airfields where to screwed. The plan was to withdraw to the midlands.
The Germans would then have there precious air cover they needed, but we would then hammer them still as our guys would still be able to fly south and engage.

I also read somewhere that it was only a portion of the RAF engaged we still had the majority of 3 groups to call upon to woop backside, as well as out producing the germans in aircraft.

(the above reasons behind many peoples opinions and iirc the victory in several official wargames after the war why we would have won in an operation sealion style invasion)

Another source i have read which i found interesting but the guys opinions in most parts where very far fetched.
He theorised that if the germans lost the few hundred tanks and 10 divisions they where planning on using during 'operation sealion'
they would have fully mobilised after this shocking defeat. The factory and all out effort of the country of the later war years would have happened earlier ensuring victory for the Germans.

If we further theorise from that guys point, the raf winning the battle of Britain thus won the war :p lol :) (although some also believe UK and commonwealth forces getting involved in Greece which caused the 6 week delay for the German assault on Russian … thus ensuring there survival by making it 6 weeks closer to winter … 6 weeks which some also believe the Germans could have captured Moscow in, if it wasn’t for the winter)

anyhoo think we should open new topics up for all of this and get back to the original discussion :)

[OliverMarshall]

The operations in Greece and on Crete were disasters which meant that the advance in North AFrica had to be paused until the divisions and squadrons got back, this led to the Africa Korps landing. If there would have been no defence of Greece NA would have been Brtish w years earlier than historically.

[enigma]

yep that is true, we could have thrown the Italians out back then ... or at least came dam close to but we didnt.
And as people have theorised it was those ... the germans where delayed. Although i should point that some state that the balkans campaign had no impact ont he prep for barbarossa.
at any case it kept Rommel off the ruskies backs lol :)

(and crete stopped the Germans using there paras en mass again :) .. and also slaughterd aload of them ... which is a plus in the whole context
edit: crete was a gamble for the Germans, they were close to losing that one)

[[FFTF]Eurofighter]

well... I always say: A smart country is a neutral country ;)

[Kat]

A neutral country can also be seen as political cowards. The UK for instance didn't have to go to Irak but they did. This is smart because in the future America owe's the UK and the UK can take a big advantage out of this in the years to come.

[Kaos]

Of course the UK didn't have to go join the USA in the Coalition invasion of Iraq, but remember what President Bush said? "If you're not with us, you're against us!"

[Kat]

Well the Dutch army is in Iraq but we don't fight. We're just... There. And if I was the head of the EU I'd make Europe a more united alliance so we don't have to fear America and it's power. Instead, America wouldn't have such a big mouth to Europe ever again. But I don't think our politicians are smart enough to realize that Europe as 1 united "country" is much stronger then simply having the EU...

[Kaos]

Well the Dutch army is in Iraq but we don't fight.

That's kind of like us. Australia is in Iraq, protecting Japanese troops. Wonder who's protecting us?

[Kat]

LoL! Probably some other country that is in Iraq but isn't fighting.:p We're all just there and Bush thinks we all love him and America and that we're there just because he kindly asked us.

[DavidUpton]

I dunno. I wouldn't say that Britain fears the USA...

As for a United Europe... Its always something I have speculated about. I actually think that the EU is the first step in that direction. I have also read about plans for a 'combined' armed forces (which could actually turn out to be the biggest in the world). In fact, in theory, if Europe did merge into one it would probably surpass the USA, bearing in mind that Europe has at least three powers in it (Britain, France and Germany).

On the other hand, there would be many who would fear losing their national identity. Bye-bye Queen. Bye-bye £. Bye-bye Union Jack.


That's kind of like us. Australia is in Iraq, protecting Japanese troops. Wonder who's protecting us?

Us. Britain loves all its good little children who have all grown up and looks after them. :p

Except the rebellious ones... ;)

[Kaos]

I think the point about national identity is the biggest one stopping Europe from becoming more like Kat described. Besides losing culture, there aren't really that many negatives.

[NicholasJohnson]

Please continue your discussion about a united Europe and surpassing the big bad USA, what Hitler should have done, etc and all that to another topic...this is about Pointe Du Hoc.

:cool:

[DavidUpton]

Fair point. I was going to mention that myself actually.

[Kat]

Well, first of all: Get the Euro! I have long ago gotten used to it. We have a queen (and soon will have a king) in The Netherlands and I hope it stays that way because whyshould we give up a part of our cukture like so many other countries? I'd rather have a queen then some freakin president. We could all keep our borders and everything but our national politicians would be overruled by the president and the politicians of Europe.:)

[Kat]

Please continue your discussion about a united Europe and surpassing the big bad USA, what Hitler should have done, etc and all that to another topic...this is about Pointe Du Hoc.

:cool:

Sorry, didnt see your post...:(

[Kaos]

I'm still trying to figure out how we got so sidetracked! :confused:

[Kat]

Someone needs to lock this up!!:mad:

[ThomasStewart]

:eek: Oh dear, look what happens when Im not around to supervise you kiddies. ;)