5 ms·

He says: > "Intelligence never wins a war on its own," says Prof > Ferris. Then says: > "I don't think Britain could have won the Falklands > conflict with

by bArray 6y ago

He says: > "Intelligence never wins a war on its own," says Prof > Ferris. Then says: > "I don't think Britain could have won the Falklands > conflict without GCHQ," Prof Ferris told the BBC. So intelligence gathering is not winning a war single-handed, but it's pretty important? I thought that must British people knew this... Of course the War effort was much larger than a few buildings down in Bletchley. I think this is just to sell his new book - say something controversial and barely featured in the book, then ride the press: > The new book - Behind the Enigma - is released on Tuesday > and is based on access to top secret GCHQ files.

DarkmSparks 6y ago
Anyone who has paid any attention to what went on at Bletchly, from knowing they had won the Battle of Britain to the single decoded message that determined the outcome of the D-day landings - should also be deeply offended by this sales pitch imho. I wonder if its rooted in a distain for Alan Turings sexuality that would lead them to think this kind of marketing ploy is OK? I really cannot think of any other reason right now. Akin to saying "The degree of racism in the US is over rated and the struggle against poverty was much bigger than that speech by Martin Luther King, buy my book".
- nickik 6y ago
  > from knowing they had won the Battle of Britain I mean they would have learned this eventually when the German stopped trying. They knew that they were winning anyways. > single decoded message that determined the outcome of the D-day landings What message?
  - DarkmSparks 6y ago
    "knowing they had won" meant knowing the Germans would not try a land invasion. The air assaults didnt stop. ->what message. Theres a good google talk called the "theory that wouldnt die" by Sharon McGreyne on youtube. It gets talked about in that iirc.
- KaiserPro 6y ago
  This world view assumes that Britain was a tiny island with little to no influence. The GDP of the british empire was totally astounding, the navy was bigger than any other country. The british _funded_ the US war effort. it paid for the factories, the tooling etc. Lend lease was basically the british transferring its vast wealth to the USA in exchange for materials. The myth that the battle of Britain was the last line of defence is laughable. The RAF was the first line. To invade, the germans would have had to have eliminated the RAF, then eliminate the navy (bear in mind that at this point its still twice as big as anyone elses, and that uboats are still not very good at this point) Not only that they'd have to somehow get across the channel (which given that the germans didn't like standardisation and were nowhere near as mechanised as the french, would have been a challenge) Plus they'd have to over come the anti air defences. The _only_ doubt about WWII is whether britian would have signed a peace treaty.
  - DarkmSparks 6y ago
    Britain was completely defeated by June 1940, after that until D day in June 1944 was pure survival tactics and nothing much else, without Bletchly the entire nation would have pretty much starved to death over those 4 years.
    - KaiserPro 6y ago
      you mean dunkirk? Thats not completely defeated though is it. Thats the BEF stranded on a beach. Sure its a loss of equipment, but its not as much of a loss of man and machine as the nazis lost during the invasion of france They lost something like a third of their _entire_ mechanised army. Britain was still in possession of India, most of Africa inc Egypt, Hong Kong, Burma, canada and Australia in 1940 The fall of singapore wasn't until 1942. by 1943 the tide had turned, it was a case of when not if the nazis were defeated. As I said, the only risk was Britain coming to terms with the Nazis.
      - DarkmSparks 6y ago
        Pearl harbour changed the course of the war, before that America wouldnt get involved and Britain had no Army, no food and no air force. Germany had a plan to invade (Operation Sea Lion), and by the numbers it would have been a successful invasion. Dads Army would not have been any resistance. They didnt invade because they thought the RAF was much larger than it actually was, Britain knew they thought this because of Bletchly, and therefore didnt surrender, instead declaring the Battle of Britain won in October 1940, the day or so after they decoded the message saying the invasion was being delayed indefinitely until the Luftwaffe could defeat (the already defeated) RAF. If anything the role of Bletchly and Alan Turing is still under rated.

by bArray 6y ago

DarkmSparks 6y ago

Anyone who has paid any attention to what went on at Bletchly, from knowing they had won the Battle of Britain to the single decoded message that determined the outcome of the D-day landings - should also be deeply offended by this sales pitch imho. I wonder if its rooted in a distain for Alan Turings sexuality that would lead them to think this kind of marketing ploy is OK? I really cannot think of any other reason right now. Akin to saying "The degree of racism in the US is over rated and the struggle against poverty was much bigger than that speech by Martin Luther King, buy my book".

nickik 6y ago
> from knowing they had won the Battle of Britain I mean they would have learned this eventually when the German stopped trying. They knew that they were winning anyways. > single decoded message that determined the outcome of the D-day landings What message?
- DarkmSparks 6y ago
  "knowing they had won" meant knowing the Germans would not try a land invasion. The air assaults didnt stop. ->what message. Theres a good google talk called the "theory that wouldnt die" by Sharon McGreyne on youtube. It gets talked about in that iirc.
KaiserPro 6y ago
This world view assumes that Britain was a tiny island with little to no influence. The GDP of the british empire was totally astounding, the navy was bigger than any other country. The british _funded_ the US war effort. it paid for the factories, the tooling etc. Lend lease was basically the british transferring its vast wealth to the USA in exchange for materials. The myth that the battle of Britain was the last line of defence is laughable. The RAF was the first line. To invade, the germans would have had to have eliminated the RAF, then eliminate the navy (bear in mind that at this point its still twice as big as anyone elses, and that uboats are still not very good at this point) Not only that they'd have to somehow get across the channel (which given that the germans didn't like standardisation and were nowhere near as mechanised as the french, would have been a challenge) Plus they'd have to over come the anti air defences. The _only_ doubt about WWII is whether britian would have signed a peace treaty.
- DarkmSparks 6y ago
  Britain was completely defeated by June 1940, after that until D day in June 1944 was pure survival tactics and nothing much else, without Bletchly the entire nation would have pretty much starved to death over those 4 years.
  - KaiserPro 6y ago
    you mean dunkirk? Thats not completely defeated though is it. Thats the BEF stranded on a beach. Sure its a loss of equipment, but its not as much of a loss of man and machine as the nazis lost during the invasion of france They lost something like a third of their _entire_ mechanised army. Britain was still in possession of India, most of Africa inc Egypt, Hong Kong, Burma, canada and Australia in 1940 The fall of singapore wasn't until 1942. by 1943 the tide had turned, it was a case of when not if the nazis were defeated. As I said, the only risk was Britain coming to terms with the Nazis.
    - DarkmSparks 6y ago
      Pearl harbour changed the course of the war, before that America wouldnt get involved and Britain had no Army, no food and no air force. Germany had a plan to invade (Operation Sea Lion), and by the numbers it would have been a successful invasion. Dads Army would not have been any resistance. They didnt invade because they thought the RAF was much larger than it actually was, Britain knew they thought this because of Bletchly, and therefore didnt surrender, instead declaring the Battle of Britain won in October 1940, the day or so after they decoded the message saying the invasion was being delayed indefinitely until the Luftwaffe could defeat (the already defeated) RAF. If anything the role of Bletchly and Alan Turing is still under rated.