Max Hastings slanders 1 Canadian Army

Originally posted by Crewman
Hello Allied friends, my two cents in this discussion…

Best regards and do not shoot at me, friends

C.

Don't worry Crewman, I'd never shoot you. I'd use my cast iron skillet frying pan ... but you're safe from that too as you're way out of my throwing range

I think you're right about "it's up to our generation" and our kids to clean up perceptions, inform, and present things as was, maybe mending some fences through understanding, while not poopslinging? One can only hope.

In any argument/stand off, the only bridge is willingness for objectivity and the ability to see things as actually is/was. Every side had it's role to play, every side won and lost many things, every side feels very strongly.

Passions run deep. Its good to hear about the what's and why's , and hows, of that too. But I do understand depth of feelings and these things, animosities etc, were very much part fof that history, and even carried into our present.

Hmmm ... dammit, I sound like a peacekeeping CANADIAN ... (one who wields a frying pan??? How peaceful is THAT? : )

[JDCAVE]

I threw it out years ago. Filled with incredible errors pertaining to tactics and strategy. As a result his conclusions one takes with a grain of salt.

Hastings draws his conclusions on Canadians in Europe from Montgomery who had low regard for them. However, an excellent read is "Montgomery in Europe" by Richard Lamb. There's a whole chapter dedicated to the Canadian effort called Canadians on the Coast. Lamb details Monty's clash with Crerar. Lamb is quite supportive of the Canadian cause. During the Canadian assault on the Scheldt, they were starved for supplies while Monty squandered it all on the Arnhem debacle. Meanwhile the Germans dug in on the approaches to Antwerp.

For crying out loud people, he's a friggen newspaper editor with no university education in Military History. He left Oxford after a year! Read between the lines! He failed out!

Sorry but when you've read some really good, critical history, and then you run up against newspaper journalism gussied up as history, it turns one's stomach.

Jim