Curriculum Materials
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Royal Air Force Historical Society Journal 29
ROYAL AIR FORCE HISTORICAL SOCIETY JOURNAL 29 2 The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the contributors concerned and are not necessarily those held by the Royal Air Force Historical Society. Copyright 2003: Royal Air Force Historical Society First published in the UK in 2003 by the Royal Air Force Historical Society All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from the Publisher in writing. ISSN 1361-4231 Typeset by Creative Associates 115 Magdalen Road Oxford OX4 1RS Printed by Advance Book Printing Unit 9 Northmoor Park Church Road Northmoor OX29 5UH 3 CONTENTS BATTLE OF BRITAIN DAY. Address by Dr Alfred Price at the 5 AGM held on 12th June 2002 WHAT WAS THE IMPACT OF THE LUFTWAFFE’S ‘TIP 24 AND RUN’ BOMBING ATTACKS, MARCH 1942-JUNE 1943? A winning British Two Air Forces Award paper by Sqn Ldr Chris Goss SUMMARY OF THE MINUTES OF THE SIXTEENTH 52 ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING HELD IN THE ROYAL AIR FORCE CLUB ON 12th JUNE 2002 ON THE GROUND BUT ON THE AIR by Charles Mitchell 55 ST-OMER APPEAL UPDATE by Air Cdre Peter Dye 59 LIFE IN THE SHADOWS by Sqn Ldr Stanley Booker 62 THE MUNICIPAL LIAISON SCHEME by Wg Cdr C G Jefford 76 BOOK REVIEWS. 80 4 ROYAL AIR FORCE HISTORICAL SOCIETY President Marshal of the Royal Air Force Sir Michael Beetham GCB CBE DFC AFC Vice-President Air Marshal Sir Frederick Sowrey KCB CBE AFC Committee Chairman Air Vice-Marshal -
Authors' Accepted Version: to Be Published in Antiquity Tormented
Authors’ Accepted Version: to be published in Antiquity Tormented Alderney: archaeological investigations of the Nazi labour and concentration camp of Sylt Sturdy Colls, C.¹, Kerti, J.¹ and Colls, K.¹ ¹ Centre of Archaeology, L214 Flaxman Building, Staffordshire University, College Road, Stoke-on- Trent, ST4 2DF. Corresponding author email: [email protected] Abstract Following the evacuation of Alderney, a network of labour and SS concentration camps were built on British soil to house foreign labourers. Despite government-led investigations in 1945, knowledge concerning the history and architecture of these camps remained limited. This article reports on the findings of forensic archaeological investigations which sought to accurately map Sylt labour and concentration camp the for the first time using non-invasive methods and 3D reconstructive techniques. It also demonstrates how these findings have provided the opportunity – alongside historical sources – to examine the relationships between architecture, the landscape and the experiences of those housed there. Introduction The Nazis constructed a network of over 44,000 (concentration, extermination, labour, Prisoner of War (PoW) and transit) camps across Europe, imprisoning and murdering individuals opposed to Nazi ideologies, and those considered racially inferior (Megargee & White 2018). Information about these sites varies in part due to Nazi endeavours to destroy the evidence of their crimes (Arad 1987: 26; Gilead et al. 2010: 14; Sturdy Colls 2015: 3). Public knowledge regarding the camps that were built on British soil in the Channel Islands is particularly limited, not least of all because they were partially demolished and remain “taboo” (Carr & Sturdy Colls 2016: 1). Sylt was one of several camps built on the island of Alderney (Figures 1 & 2). -
How the Luftwaffe Lost the Battle of Britain British Courage and Capability Might Not Have Been Enough to Win; German Mistakes Were Also Key
How the Luftwaffe Lost the Battle of Britain British courage and capability might not have been enough to win; German mistakes were also key. By John T. Correll n July 1940, the situation looked “We shall fight on the beaches, we shall can do more than delay the result.” Gen. dire for Great Britain. It had taken fight on the landing grounds, we shall Maxime Weygand, commander in chief Germany less than two months to fight in the fields and in the streets, we of French military forces until France’s invade and conquer most of Western shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, predicted, “In three weeks, IEurope. The fast-moving German Army, surrender.” England will have her neck wrung like supported by panzers and Stuka dive Not everyone agreed with Churchill. a chicken.” bombers, overwhelmed the Netherlands Appeasement and defeatism were rife in Thus it was that the events of July 10 and Belgium in a matter of days. France, the British Foreign Office. The Foreign through Oct. 31—known to history as the which had 114 divisions and outnumbered Secretary, Lord Halifax, believed that Battle of Britain—came as a surprise to the Germany in tanks and artillery, held out a Britain had lost already. To Churchill’s prophets of doom. Britain won. The RAF little longer but surrendered on June 22. fury, the undersecretary of state for for- proved to be a better combat force than Britain was fortunate to have extracted its eign affairs, Richard A. “Rab” Butler, told the Luftwaffe in almost every respect. -
Axis Blitzkrieg: Warsaw and Battle of Britain
Axis Blitzkrieg: Warsaw and Battle of Britain By Skyla Gabriel and Hannah Seidl Background on Axis Blitzkrieg ● A military strategy specifically designed to create disorganization in enemy forces by logical firepower and mobility of forces ● Limits civilian casualty and waste of fire power ● Developed in Germany 1918-1939 as a result of WW1 ● Used in Warsaw, Poland in 1939, then with eventually used in Belgium, the Netherlands, North Africa, and even against the Soviet Union Hitler’s Plan and “The Night Before” ● Due to the non-aggression pact with the Soviet Union, once the Polish state was divided up, Hitler would colonize the territory and only allow the “superior race” to live there and would enslave the natives. ● On August 31, 1939 Hitler ordered Nazi S.S. troops,wearing Polish officer uniforms, to sneak into Poland. ● The troops did minor damage to buildings and equipment. ● Left dead concentration camp prisoners in Polish uniforms ● This was meant to mar the start of the Polish Invasion when the bodies were found in the morning by Polish officers Initial stages ● Initially, one of Hitler’s first acts after coming to power was to sign a nonaggression pact (January 1934) with Poland in order to avoid a French- Polish alliance before Germany could rearm. ● Through 1935- March 1939 Germany slowly gained more power through rearmament (agreed to by both France and Britain), Germany then gained back the Rhineland through militarization, annexation of Austria, and finally at the Munich Conference they were given the Sudetenland. ● Once Czechoslovakia was dismembered Britain and France responded by essentially backing Poland and Hitler responded by signing a non-aggression with the Soviet Union in the summer of 1939 ● The German-Soviet pact agreed Poland be split between the two powers, the new pact allowed Germany to attack Poland without fear of Soviet intervention The Attack ● On September 1st, 1939 Germany invaded Warsaw, Poland ● Schleswig-Holstein, a German Battleship at 4:45am began to fire on the Polish garrison in Westerplatte Fort, Danzig. -
Blitzkrieg: the Evolution of Modern Warfare and the Wehrmacht's
East Tennessee State University Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University Electronic Theses and Dissertations Student Works 8-2021 Blitzkrieg: The Evolution of Modern Warfare and the Wehrmacht’s Impact on American Military Doctrine during the Cold War Era Briggs Evans East Tennessee State University Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.etsu.edu/etd Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Evans, Briggs, "Blitzkrieg: The Evolution of Modern Warfare and the Wehrmacht’s Impact on American Military Doctrine during the Cold War Era" (2021). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 3927. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/3927 This Thesis - unrestricted is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Works at Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Blitzkrieg: The Evolution of Modern Warfare and the Wehrmacht’s Impact on American Military Doctrine during the Cold War Era ________________________ A thesis presented to the faculty of the Department of History East Tennessee State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in History ______________________ by Briggs Evans August 2021 _____________________ Dr. Stephen Fritz, Chair Dr. Henry Antkiewicz Dr. Steve Nash Keywords: Blitzkrieg, doctrine, operational warfare, American military, Wehrmacht, Luftwaffe, World War II, Cold War, Soviet Union, Operation Desert Storm, AirLand Battle, Combined Arms Theory, mobile warfare, maneuver warfare. ABSTRACT Blitzkrieg: The Evolution of Modern Warfare and the Wehrmacht’s Impact on American Military Doctrine during the Cold War Era by Briggs Evans The evolution of United States military doctrine was heavily influenced by the Wehrmacht and their early Blitzkrieg campaigns during World War II. -
World War II-Related Exhibitions at the National Gallery of Art
National Gallery of Art: Research Resources Relating to World War II World War II-Related Exhibitions at the National Gallery of Art During the war years, the National Gallery of Art presented a series of exhibitions explicitly related to the war or presenting works of art for which the museum held custody during the hostilities. Descriptions of each of the exhibitions is available in the list of past exhibitions at the National Gallery of Art. Catalogs, brochures, press releases, news reports, and photographs also may be available for examination in the Gallery Archives for some of the exhibitions. The Great Fire of London, 1940 18 December 1941-28 January 1942 American Artists’ Record of War and Defense 7 February-8 March 1942 French Government Loan 2 March 1942-1945, periodically Soldiers of Production 17 March-15 April 1942 Three Triptychs by Contemporary Artists 8-15 April 1942 Paintings, Posters, Watercolors, and Prints, Showing the Activities of the American Red Cross 2-30 May 1942 Art Exhibition by Men of the Armed Forces 5 July-2 August 1942 War Posters 17 January-18 February 1943 Belgian Government Loan 7 February 1943-January 1946 War Art 20 June-1 August 1943 Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century Drawings and Watercolors from French Museums and Private Collections 8 August-5 September 1943 (second showing) Art for Bonds 12 September-10 October 1943 1DWLRQDO*DOOHU\RI$UW:DVKLQJWRQ'&*DOOHU\$UFKLYHV ::,,5HODWHG([KLELWLRQVDW1*$ Marine Watercolors and Drawings 12 September-10 October 1943 Paintings of Naval Aviation by American Artists -
Notable Local Floods of 1942-43
Notable Local Floods of 1942-43 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1134 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1952 CONTENTS The letters in parenthesis preceding the titles are those used to designate the separate chapters] Page (A) Flood of August 4-5, 1943, in central West Virginia, by H. M. Erskine. 1 (B) Floods of July 18, 1942, in north-central Pennsylvania, by William S. Eisenlohr, Jr________________________________________________ 59 ILLUSTRATIONS PLATE 1. Map of West Virginia showing location of points where flood determinations were made__________--_-_--__-_-_-_--__-_ 48 2. Map of flood area showing locations of stream-gaging stations, rainfall-measurement points, and isohyetal lines for July 17-18, 1942-____-___________________-___-______--_-_-____- In pocket FIGURE 1. Map of West Virginia showing location of Little Kanawha River basin_________________________-__-__--_-_---_-_ 2 2. Residence of Yeager family, which was flooded. ____________ 5 3. Residence, near Heaters, which was washed dowiistream_____ 6 4. Washed-out railroad bridge on Copen Run _________________ 6 5. Washed-out fill on State Route 5 at Jobs Run______________ 7 6. Rock and mud deposit from a hillside wash________________ 7 7. Typical sand and gravel deposits__________________________ 8 8. Typical hillside erosion_____________________-_____-__--__ 8 9. Cornfield destroyed by flood. _--_____________-__-__-_-__- 9 10. Isohyetal map of Little Kanawha River basin showing total rainfall July 26-30, 1943__________________--_-____--- 10 11. Isohyetal map of Little Kanawha River basin showing total rainfall August 4-5, 1943__ ______________-___-_--__--__ 13 12. -
World War Ii in Europe
“THEIR SACRIFICE, OUR FREEDOM” WORLD WAR II IN EUROPE War in Europe Lesson Plans Recommended Level: High School Time Required: 5 Days Introduction This unit covers the European Theater. Preceding these lessons, the students have covered the rise of dictators and identified Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin. These lessons begin with Hitler’s seizure of territories and end with V-E Day in Europe, and covers five days. Part 1 of the video gives an excellent introduction or review of the steps leading to World War II. It is used as a review of foreign policy in the 1930’s through the Allied invasion of Africa and Sicily. Part 2 covers from D-Day to V-E Day and may also be used as an introduction or review. It is used as an introduction of U.S. troops fighting in Europe. Along with excellent video, eyewitness accounts and commentaries are presented by our veterans giving the added value of thoughts and details on what it was like to be there at that time and place. Materials • Video – “Their Sacrifice, Our Freedom: World War II in Europe” • Internet resources • Map of European Theater • Art supplies and poster board Unit Goals After completing this unit, students will be able to: 1. Label and identify Hitler’s seizure of territories in 1930’s 2. Identify participants in the Munich Conference and understand the effects of appeasement. 3. Describe U.S. neutrality efforts in the 1930’s. 4. Identify Churchill and Roosevelt and the goals of the Atlantic Charter. 5. List effects of the fall of France on U.S. -
World War II Book.Indd
BOB HART WWllThe odyssey of a “Battling Buzzard” “Anything worth dying for ... is certainly worth living for.” –Joseph Heller, Catch-22 t was August 15, 1944, D-Day for Dragoon, the Allied invasion of southern France. Fifteen-hundred feet above a drop zone Ishrouded in fog, the wind buffeted Bob Hart’s helmet the instant before he plunged into the unknown at 4:35 a.m. “As soon as you got to the doorway all you saw was white. Most of us figured we were jumping over the Mediterranean. And for a split second all you could think was ‘I got 120 pounds of gear on me. What’s going to happen when I land?’ ” But now he was falling. “A thousand and one,” Hart said to himself as another paratrooper sprang from the doorway of the lumbering C-47. “A thousand and two. “A thousand and…” Hart’s body harness jerked taut reassuringly as the primary parachute billowed. Had he got past “three” he would have yanked the ripcord for the reserve chute bundled on his chest. The business about paratroopers yelling “Geronimo!” was mostly bravado that got old in a hurry after jump school. Paratroopers prepare for a practice jump from a C-47. Bob Hart collection 2 Bob Hart Descending in the eerie whiteness, the 20-year-old machine gunner from Tacoma fleetingly remembered how he and a buddy had signed up for the paratroopers 16 months earlier at Fort Lewis, reasoning they wouldn’t have to do much walking. Fat chance. After Hart landed hard in a farmer’s field in the foothills above the Côte d’Azur, he ended up tramping 50 miles through hostile countryside on an aching foot that turned out to be broken. -
The Demarcation Line
No.7 “Remembrance and Citizenship” series THE DEMARCATION LINE MINISTRY OF DEFENCE General Secretariat for Administration DIRECTORATE OF MEMORY, HERITAGE AND ARCHIVES Musée de la Résistance Nationale - Champigny The demarcation line in Chalon. The line was marked out in a variety of ways, from sentry boxes… In compliance with the terms of the Franco-German Armistice Convention signed in Rethondes on 22 June 1940, Metropolitan France was divided up on 25 June to create two main zones on either side of an arbitrary abstract line that cut across départements, municipalities, fields and woods. The line was to undergo various modifications over time, dictated by the occupying power’s whims and requirements. Starting from the Spanish border near the municipality of Arnéguy in the département of Basses-Pyrénées (present-day Pyrénées-Atlantiques), the demarcation line continued via Mont-de-Marsan, Libourne, Confolens and Loches, making its way to the north of the département of Indre before turning east and crossing Vierzon, Saint-Amand- Montrond, Moulins, Charolles and Dole to end at the Swiss border near the municipality of Gex. The division created a German-occupied northern zone covering just over half the territory and a free zone to the south, commonly referred to as “zone nono” (for “non- occupied”), with Vichy as its “capital”. The Germans kept the entire Atlantic coast for themselves along with the main industrial regions. In addition, by enacting a whole series of measures designed to restrict movement of people, goods and postal traffic between the two zones, they provided themselves with a means of pressure they could exert at will. -
Memorial Day 2015
Memorial Day 2015 Good morning and thank you for coming. It is an honor to see so many people here on a day like this. I would like to thank the students—the students who recited the Gettysburg address and Logan’s General orders so that we will never forget the sacrifice of the men and women who fought 151 years ago this year to keep us free in the civil war, and students who entertained us …. Today, I would like to thank all the veterans who have served us in all wars, and ask all those who have served, in war and in peace, to please raise their hands and be recognized. I want to pause today to recall one specific group of veterans, and one particular day in history, that day, 70 years ago on June 6 and a small beachhead in France at a place that few people at that time had ever heard of – a place called Normandy. This June marks the 70th anniversary of the greatest amphibious landing ever attempted, before or since, the landing at Normandy. Let me take you back to those days in World War 2. America had been in the war for only two and a half years—less than that really since it takes time to train men, deploy them and put them in to battle. It is hard to imagine today, but the war had not gone well at first for the Allies. Allied forces had been driven from Belgium, from Czechoslovakia, France had been overrun, Paris was run by Nazi soldiers, Italy was run by Mussolini-- a Nazi ally, 340,000 British soldiers had been forced to retreat from Europe back to Britain at Dunkirk. -
Operation Overlord James Clinton Emmert Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College
Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2002 Operation overlord James Clinton Emmert Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons Recommended Citation Emmert, James Clinton, "Operation overlord" (2002). LSU Master's Theses. 619. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/619 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. OPERATION OVERLORD A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Liberal Arts in The Interdepartmental Program in Liberal Arts by James Clinton Emmert B.A., Louisiana State University, 1996 May 2002 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis could not have been completed without the support of numerous persons. First, I would never have been able to finish if I had not had the help and support of my wife, Esther, who not only encouraged me and proofed my work, but also took care of our newborn twins alone while I wrote. In addition, I would like to thank Dr. Stanley Hilton, who spent time helping me refine my thoughts about the invasion and whose editing skills helped give life to this paper. Finally, I would like to thank the faculty of Louisiana State University for their guidance and the knowledge that they shared with me.