Thank you for this. My Dad, Petty Officer Writer John Marsh was on the Prince of Wales when it went down, 70 years ago this week. He survived as his battle station was three decks down keeping the ship's ledgers, an officer told him to get up on deck with them just as the ship was going down. He managed to jump UP onto the deck of a cruiser in the convoy as the battleship was so low in the water. He was a wonderful man with stories of Churchill and the Bismark. He died in December 1998, aged 80.
My Uncle Fred is in photograph top left. (point 2.10 on film)He survived the sinking spending six months living in the jungle with a small group., eventually reaching Singapore. Extraordinary to see this film, especially when I know what happened to him. And an absolute bonus to see him looking out at me.
@yonaioimete Australia was racist? What about Japan's contempt for Koreans and Chinese, not to mention many of your soldiers that got off on killing tall white POWs on the Bataan death march because they were Christian and believed in living and refused to die for some sack of moving bowels like Hirohito. Democracy sucked to you Japanese and you only have it today because MacArthur brought it to you. Australia didn't just defend themselves. They fought for others all over the world.
1941 was a momentous year in the history of the Prince of Wales. Fighting the Bismarck in May, while brand new, then carrying Churchill to a meeting with FDR in August, and finally its final batlle in the South China Sea two days after Pearl Harbor. This ship was a workhorse in 1941, and reflected the best of British Naval traditions.
@otaisik now very good friends, let go of the past because it's their past 2 generations ago. now i acknowledge them as one of the most nice people in the world.
@JBC814 churchill made many mistakes over the course of both world wars. All of them causing the deaths of many brave sailors and soldiers. If he had left the war theatre to those who knew best like fisher and cunningham, maybe the wars would have turned out differently with much less number of casualties.
@judge105: Isn't that the truth. Seems it always happens that the "armchair generals" give the orders while those who know what they are doing are ignored, such as when they made Eisenhower Supreme Commander instead of Patton. Ike was only a public relations man, he knew nothing of warfare and certainly couldn't fill Patton's shoes. The war wold have been over a year earlier if Patton was giving the orders.
@JBC814 With respect, Roll of the dice strategies are unsafe at the best of times and are costly in lives. Patton's appointment would have been a disaster as with Montgomery also. Eisenhower was the leveller even if not perfect and it was he who had to deliver.
I made my home in Nippon. A challenge. There is a fella in the local who has a few too many, and always goes down the Prince of Wales route. Sad, as all men who perish on the sea must get the ultimate respect. Then I remind him that Uncle Sam fucking obliterated his fleet. And King George V actually shelled the place I now live.
My Grandfather, William Westlake, died on the HMS Prince of Wales on 10th December 1941. Thank-you to who-ever put this video together. Chris Southcott.
If the lesson of air power vs capital ship hadn't been hammered home before. This scenario really did it.
My dad was supposed to be on the Cornwall. A county class cruiser that suffered a similar and much less documented fate in the Indian ocean at around the same time. He missed that posting thanks to an air raid.
Force Z originally consisted of Pince of Wales, Repulse and the Aircraft Carrier Illustrious. Unfortunately the Illustrious ran aground in the Caribbean so the fateful decision was made by the Admiral to continue without her; the result was the tragedy we now know. In mitigation, the Royal Navy was so stretched thin trying to protect the Atlantic Convoys that the Singapore situation was desperate enough to warrant the fearful risk of sending out capital ships without air cover.
snakes3425,my Mothers Uncle was a survivor of from Hms Repulse and the war.I remember as a kid he would tell my Dad about the action he was involved in,not in deep detail but enough to get the picture of how frightening it was for them all.
Funny. I left England two years ago, and live in Yamato-Takada, Japan. Locals in the local admire RN ships, but after a few beers, mock these ships. These capital ships were lone steel in distant waters. Not engaged in a serious confrontation, caught out. That`s war. Yet they go on about the Yamato. Great ship and crew. Bad commander. Did zero and sank.
It's obvious - in ww2 japan vs britain + all of her colonies and Japan would still win the brits easily. Just imagine if Japan had taken the place of that cowardly Italy during the war, Russia would have been overwhelmed by the Germans and Japs, Africa would be axis and Britain would be destroyed by Japan's carriers and warships.
Come to think of it, the world is lucky that 2 of the axis powers are on opposite ends of the world.
@tool619 You seem to forget that the Japanese were defeated by the Soviet three times before and during the war. The fate of battles depend of many factors. The Japanese were good excelent on Jungle warfare, but were unfamiliar to desert conditions. Such factor may have rendered them useless in battles like El-Alamein. As for the carriers... well, everything can be lost in 1 day, and Midway proved it.
makokun9 is refuring the Soviet-Japanese Border Wars of 1938-39 fought over the border of the Soviet Union and Occupied Manchuria, and Operation: August Storm, the Soviet invasion of Occupied Manchuria in 1945
@Noobssuckass300 The Soviets, not the Russians. In Like Khasan, in 1938, in Nomonhan, in 1939 (during the Soviet-Japanese Border Wars), and finally, during the Soviet invasion of Manchuria, in 1945.
@makokun9 yeah that was against the americans, but british carriers were obsolete and poorly commanded at least during the early years of the war, and anyway in Midway Japan still had 3 heavy carriers (Zuikaku,Shokaku and another one being completed)
The British defeated the Japanese army under General William Slim. Although as usual, Slim's and Britains contribution to the U.S. war effort in the Pacific has been ignored in U.S. history books. For three years, the British halted the advance of tens of thousands of Japanese troops in Burma that could have been otherwise redeployed against U.S. forces in New Guinea, the Philippines, Iwo Jima and Okinawa. If Britain had been defeated, the U.S. would have been overwhelemd By Japan.
@MrDeano324 I don't know about 'overwhelmed'. Japan spread their forces awfully thin. They needed Burma's resources and would've garrisoned it had Slim withdrawn. In some respects, WWII was several wars in one and the Pacific War was mostly the U.S.'s undertaking. Adm. Yamamoto didn't seem to think they could have 'overwhelmed' the U.S. He spoke in terms of gaining 'six months' when he attacked Pearl Harbor.
couple of points you have gotten wrong there. By overwhelmed, I mean they would not have taken as many jap held islands as they did. America struggled to take those islands back from the japanese and took tremendous casualties. Imagine the same situation, but with an extra 50-70 thousand jap soliders. Overwhelemed indeed. Second, Pearl harbour was a massive Jap faliure contary to popular belief. The japs attacked pearl to decimate the U.S carrier fleet. They were not at pearl...
@MrDeano324 It would have meant more work for U.S. forces, no question, but we would have taken how ever many islands as necessary. Between Dec. 1, 1941, and Dec. 31, 1946, more than 10 million had served in the U.S. Armed Forces (some est. 16), including combat and support, so we had a wide pool to draw from, unlike the Japanese; and look at late '45 when Germany surrendered. Many of those forces were already being earmarked for the Pacific Theater.
@Planetar17 You forget the Japanese could not leave Burma underdefended even if the British had pulled out. There were still U.S. forces at work under Stilwell in the India-Burma-China region, mostly air, but in the event of a pull out, the U.S. may have pressured Chang Kai-shek to commit more troops, especially given the hole left behind by your 50-70 thousand Japanese transfers. Roosevelt would have gotten it done. The U.S. was not as afraid of exposing troops to danger as they are today.
@MrDeano324 Not at all to minimize the British effort in the pacific, I believe that following the U.S. victories at Midway, and later Guadalcanal, the Japanese Navy was seriously decimated as a fighting force. American carrier forces then operated in the Pacific and further decimated the Japanese Navy in the Phillipines. Without their Navy, the Japanese were unable to ensure consistent supply lines. Only their tenacious fighting carried them into the summer of 1945.
Poor Prince of Wales never got a chance to shine. First she was molested by Bismark and Prinz Eugen, and then blown to hell by japs. What a waste, considering she was basicly brand new. At least Duke of York got a chanse to whoop ass during the Battle of North Cape. Also a shame to lose Rupulse, the last allied battlecruiser, and an end to the battlecruiser class in general (pisses me off because the name "battlecruiser" sounds so intimidating...
@DarkIndustry502 True - but as originally planned battle-cruisers were never intended to go one to one with their own kind. The thought was that they would take out the enemy cruiser screen and hunt commerce raiders ocean-wide. Their guns would out range any cruiser while they had just sufficient armour to protect them from the return fire of 8" guns of thereabouts
@freebeerfordworkers I wish the capatain of HMS Hood would have taken your advise- they were so desperate to take down one battleship (Bismark) that England threw everything they had at her, and attacked the broadside of a battleship with just the bow turrets of a battlecruiser (I assume you know the result). Anyways, u-boats were beter merchantman-hunters than surface vessels, so I dont get the frantic haste during the battle of the Bismark Strait....o- well, long live the area of big guns!!!!
@DarkIndustry502 Politics - Bismarck had to be taken out. British politicians always throw forces into action semi-trained. The P-o-W still had dockyard men on board & her main guns had problems. This is not an excuse no other navy would have sent a ship out like that but Churchill was notorious for it & thought he was the reincarnation of Marlborough and Nelson. In WW1 he sent 3 weak cruisers of navy reservists against the cream of the Imperial German Navy. Not surprisingly they were massacred
@pramboy09 You are no doubt right but she should not have been sent out to face up to a thoroughly worked up & tested opponent. Churchill again throwing green forces in only to have them hammered.
BTW The BBC broadcast an interview with Keith Park last month. He said good-humouredly he had an easy time in the Battle of Britain. Churchill often called at his headquarters & while he thought he was a great General & Admiral he knew nothing about the air force so he did not interfere.
@freebeerfordworkers Yeah, like the Canadians at Hong Kong. Totally green troops in harm's way with no chance of support. I am generally a big fan of Churchill, but nobody's perfect (Gallipoli was his brainchild, after all) and Winnie had his share of howlers. Mind you, the Canadians got what they asked for. They were bored, asking for action, and got in short order Hong Kong, and then Dieppe--though that was Mountbatten's cock-up. A great example of being careful what you wish for!
@DarkIndustry502 That was the battle of Cornell off Chile interestingly the subsequent Battle of the Falklands was about the only time battle- cruisers were used as intended. Two new battle-cruisers were rushed down to take on half a dozen German cruisers but then they had time to work up on the voyage south.
@freebeerfordworkers It always comes down to politics...sad. Did any battlecruisers survive the second world war, allied or axis? Gneisenau was at port a long time, did she survive? North Cape was an Ideal time for Sharnhorst to commense merchantman raiding, but was cought by the massive training escort way behind the convoy, and the outcome was yet another battlecruiser going to the bottom.I just have a passion for both the Battlecruiser and Yamato class warships- potential rarely used properly
@DarkIndustry502 iroscoe has summed up the situation pretty well inc reference to USS Alaska, Guam & Hawaii built after rumours that the IJN was building similar ships.
Gneisenau was mine damaged in the channel dash in 1942 and received further bomb damage in dry dock & written-off. I read she & her sister were actually built to to battleship standards to evade treaty restrictions & were to be fitted with 15" guns at a politically opportune moment.
@DarkIndustry502 HMS Renown the Repulses sister ship did stirling service and survived the war only to be scrapped,although identical when built Renown recieved extensive modifications between the wars that the Repulse never got . One could argue that the although the American Alaska class were classified as large cruisers by the USN that at just under 30,000 tons and mounting 9no 12" guns they really ought to be regarded as Battlecruisers .
@iroscoe Haha, now I remember- they jokingly called them "Refit" and "Repair" following the post-Jutland arguments. Hood was too supposed to get better deck armour, but it was for financial reasons delayed. Repulse got blown away, and Renown got sold for scrap I think- it should have been put inside a damn meuseam if you ask me...
@DarkIndustry502 Post war austerity bit very hard,soon after VJ day American loans dried up and we were mortgaged to the hilt to pay for the War frankly we didn't have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of.....because of that there is no Battleship/cruise alongside Victory and Warrior at Portsmouth its a crying shame but theres nothing to be done about it now .
The main factor for the Allied victory are as follows:
- Waging war on two fronts.
Lets face it. Royal mistake by good ol' Adolf.
Alternate history: Hitler doesnt declare war on Russia. Mainland Britain eventually falls/declares a truce. Few years later: Germany(Europe) vs USA/British Empire
Something to think about: Had the Axis won, none of us would be sitting here today on YouTube.
As far to my knowledge neither Lexington, Hornet, Akagi (although debries from Kaga has been located the main wreck has yet to be found), or Yamishiro have been located, however the Pacific is far larger and deeper then the Atlantic
Chuchill was incompetant as War Lord. It was a suiside mission to send in capital ships with no air cover. Same thing happened in Greece. He was a total idiot.
@JBC814 Total Idiot is not Churchill you have got to remember that Britian was the Alpha male of Dredanought warfare it was the Dredanoughts that Britian used to strave Germany in the first world war.
With the destruction of the US fleet Japan was dominant in the pacific the conflict was on there terms and when you have a warship you panic and do what ever you can to try and prevent it.
@thebritish25 : Hogwash! Churchill was a politician, not an admiral or general. He had no idea what he was doing in military matters. He and Chamberlain were idiots.
@thebritish25 Churchill was first sea lord during the battle of norway when he said he didn;t think the germans would attempt to invade narvik. Any body could have been in charge after the germans invaded russia ,and the outcome would have been the same. Churchill made good speeches ,but Atlee was decorated in ww1.
@jrobertsoneff Ah my mistake I am A afraid that I do not know a lot about Britian and its intrests in the 1950s.
But In one respect I do see hitler and churchill alike in the way how they where great leaders they rallied there nations and raised morale when things where bleek but made great cockups with there power example Hitler refussing to let the sixth Army reatreat from Stalingrad becuase of his hatred for Communism and Churchill with things like Galipoli and try to bypass the Tripz
@JBC814 Not only that but unlike in the First World war with his actions in say Galipoli yes that was incompetant.
But in the second world war Churchill had a lot on his plate with the struggle in the deseart the threat from Japan The Blitz the threat of Invasion the Allies at its weekest with the US fleet limping to California the German at the gates of Moscow Churchill had a lot more to do than cordinate fleet movments.
@thebritish25 : I may have exaggerated a bit, and Britain was hard put to find a leader that knew what to do at that time. Nevertheless, Churchill's military abilities were absolutely nil, and Chamberlain had no authority to guarantee Poland's borders against Hitler without Parliament's approval. Such a guarantee only made Poland more adamant in the face of Hitler's demands. Poland had no chance against Germany, and should have followed Czechslovokia's example, which would postpone a war.
@JBC814 in peace time yes Churchill was a useless leader but during war he was a fantastic leader and I do belive that it was churchill that stop hitler from Bringing Britian to its knees.
@thebritish25 : I will say one thing in Churchill's defense: he had the foresight to warn Parliament of Hitler's intentions, requesting that they increase military spending in preparation for war, but no one listened to him. They believed in that milk-toast Chamberlain instead, and waited until they were really behind the 8 ball.
Prince of Wales was not the sole survivor of the Battle of the Denmark Straight, Prinze Eugen was, she lasted till the end of the war and was given to the US Navy and used for Atomic Bomb testing.
yes.. very good catch... that was the rub with my comment below... British plans in the event of successfull invasion and occupation of Britian was to move parliament to Canada and fight from there... the RAF and RN being mobile and so capable of getting way to fight another day... so we still USA and Britian and its oh so usefull empire and all its resources. still not USA alone
Indeed the USA the indispensible power in both wars... by Aug 1918 over a million troops on the western front arrayed against Ger. This went a long in helping German high command to conclude they would not win. That along with the outcome of the Battle of Amiens. WW2 when Churchill informed of Pearl Harbour he is reported to have said... so we have won after all... and yet as important as USA was she still could not have won alone without Britain and Empire who had plenty of kick and resources
@MartinIDavies saw the documentary about the prince of wales the commander of the force was promised air cover by the RAF when he found out this was not to be he told high command this was suisadal (miss spelling) but was ordered to go anyway the most important nations in wining the war was Britain n Russia with a great deal of usa help Of course
@polygamous1 interesting. Kissinger in his book Diplomacy explains Anglo-American ww2 priorities Germany 1st then Japan. All allied war waging capabilities to be integrated under single command. So RAF in Asia given to Russia (protested by Britain), Stalin bitching about lack of allied help. leaving USAF as sole air power available to provide air cover to all allied battleships. Once USAF is destroyed in the Philippines hey presto no allied air cover and end of allied Battleships in Asia
Oh I think you can expect howls of protest from Americans about your comment that Britain provided the lions share of aid to Russia. I think you are incorrect. True B provided most of the transportation along with 3,000 hurricane fighters but most supplies like the 250,000 trucks not to mention the money to finance them came from USA.. BTW it was these trucks that provided the Red army its mobility which it had lacked in the start of Russian war
other than a lucky shot on the Hood. I think almost all the big battleships of WW2 went down as a result of airpower.. Bismarck, Taranto, Pearl, Prince of Wales and various Japanese ships whos name escape me. writing on the wall dead men walking. In the case of Asia Pacific if MacArthur had listened to advice and not lost his USAF in the Philippines these battleships might have survived and been able to contribute to the war
@MartinIDavies : You're absolutely correct, that pompous stuffed shirt MacArthur. Believe it or not, Eisenhower was his lackey in those days. Both of them couldn't shine Patton's shoes, much less devise strategies for worse-case scenarios.
@JBC814 MacArthur lined his planes in lines like soldiers on parade and was directly responsible for their destruction. The only remaining capable allied air force in Asia. He did this despite advice from Britain (which he hated getting) who advised parking fighters in random groups making their destruction harder. Meanwhile B RAF in Asian 600 Spits & Hurries had been given to Russia. And so US air power destroyed in 3 days period leaving allied battleships sitting ducks. MacArthur ineptitude
USA ships... I think you are being inaccurate about the ship building of USA in WW2. I read in a history about the USA pacific war that she end the war with 104 carriers testiment to her ability to bring fighting capabiliuty into existance. There is no doubt that teh USA was single indespensible power in WW2.. but that indesoenisble is not the same as saying she could have prevailed alone
The US was ultimately the deciding factor in not only World War II but World War I as well and both sides knew which ever one the US, with it's industrial might, vast resources, and military might, sided with with would eventually win the war. There's a story that when the Germans heard the US had built a Liberty Ship in just four days they began to see the war was lost, and Admiral Yamamoto knew full well Japan wasn't going to win after Pearl because he'd spent time in the US before the war
@snakes3425 yes Admiral Yamamoto had grave misgivings about the punch to America at Pearl. I seem to recall him saying something like we will have it all our won way for about 6 months but after that... the tide will turn... not these exact words but certainly the sentiments... we in the weestern world have much to be grateful for the USA... but next time be on time
@krazeeeone. you're right he did say he could run amok for 18 months before things sould get out of control would wke a sleeping gaint and fill it with terrible rage
@snakes3425 a Lot of what u say is correct But withoutthe battle of Britain n the battle of stalingrad both WON by the right countries the war would have been lost anyway n of course If the usa didn't enter the war n japan attacked Russia from the Pacific then what? it was many factors that helped us be free today n america's help was invaluable
You're right, when it comes to numerous factors contributing to victory in the war. the Battle of Britain was the first time a major defeat had been inflicted on Germany, El Alamain and Stalingrad were the first major defeats of a German Army in battle, Midway was also the first major defeat of the Japanese in their history and Guadalcanal was the first complete defeat the Japanese had ever suffered, and for the first time people began to see that the Axis could be defeated
And there are so many more factors: The Brits deciphering the Enigma code, Hitler insisting that the Me-262 should be built as a bomber until it was too late, a single US airplane that got lost and stumbled over the japanese carriers at Midway by accident, Hitler again overruling his generals in the east front, not allowing retreats, not even tactical ones (the only day he didn't intervene, Manstein took over, regrouped and devastated the russians) ... there are so many factors!
@PaladinusPL my god your not another that thinks if the brits and france had acted earlier ww2 would not have happened??? France's as a fighting force was a joke, their army was equipped as it was in world war 1 and looked like something from the boer war. Their airforce was a worse and only had a few hundred planes that could compete against the germans. The british were only just starting to modernise and at first the germans overrun both with superior numbers and firepower.
@pramboy09 When attacking Poland Hitler left hardly anything to defend German western border. Also if the Western Allies support for Poland had been stronger it could have prevented the soviet attack on 17.09.1939. thus allowing Poles to reorganise defense... and so on. However these are only speculations.
@PaladinusPL i've had this agruement before, just how on earth was the british and french suppose to attack the western boarder when they were getting beaten and pushed backwards? The poles had next to no airforce left after the first few days of the war and the luftwaffe had complete airsuperiority so to organise defences is next to immposible when you are being dived bombed by Ju87's and straffed by 109's.
@pramboy09 "when they were getting beaten and pushed backwards?" In 1939? Britain and France declared war on Germany on 03.09.1939 (3 days after invasion on Poland) and, with Belgium an the Netherlands still neutral, they were completely safe behind the Maginot Line and the British Channel. Hitler needed almost half a year to prepare his forces for invasion of France.
@PaladinusPL Poland was attacked from the west by the germans and on 17 September it was invaded by the Soviet Union from the east. It only took 26 days for the poles to surrender, you are trying to tell me after the soviets and germans had overan the country in 3 weeks that is enough time for the british and french to send a force big enough to push them back? Remembering they would not be able to go through "neutral countries" which also included belgium, Luxembourg, Denmark and Swiss.
USA alone via the Med.. No USA would be on the defense and unable to win the Battle for the Atlantic. B and USA together nearly failed no chance alone. Then consider D-Day and the small 21 miles of the channel it took everything we both had (mostly British Empire resources I might add). Forget delusionary notions of the Med from across the Atlantic. No Australia as a base with Canada and Mexico your heels. No USA would have been in a losing defensive war.
It's quite ironic that HMS Prince Of Wales survived when intercepting the Bismarck, but then sunk by the Japanese in the far east. Good video, good song.
if the brits and the japanese had confronted each other back then in a naval battle, the japanese would have given them a licking so bad the english would have cried out for their mommies
LOL Our "Rocks on water" made your country great you moron....
Again, like i said before. LOL. you clearly know nothing of ww2. YOU JOINED TWO YEARS LATE AND WE HAD ALREADY ENGAGED MANY GERMANS IN SEA AND AIR AND WON. Now, that i've cleared that up, I can get on with what i was doing.
Oh, by the way, you need to brush up on your English.
My English is pathetic? My English is the real deal, your American English is basically English with spelling errors.
Ok, fighting the Japanese was nothing? Battle of Britain? Invading France? North Africa campaign? Scandanavia campaign? Middle east occupation? fighting in northen India? Philippeans fighting? liberatine Holland and Crete?
Ummmmmmmmm, I don't barely see any of you Yanks there. Isnt it funny how Americans change history into their own version?
LOL, I'm not really bothered if i can't speak English, I seem to be better than you. Anyway, I'm Welsh, not English, therefore English is my second language as it's your first.
Ummmmmmm the second part about the campaigns really didn't make sense? What things did you do except bomb normandy and end up 10 miles in another location and nuke Japan. WELL DONE. :)
Kicking ass in France when you wern't there yet? Thar doesnt make sense..
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 before we where even engeged in the war u guys exchanged some pacific islands for 50 warships cause you guys where really feeling it, I dont see that as winning,sorry
Well, mostly being on your own and fighting two countries who have just built huge armies and most of our ships are concentrated in the Atlantic, I think it's worth trading.
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 A brit or two here and there, does not change things, in africa had patton not been there, you guys would have had your asses filled with desert sand
LOL. Ummmmmm who's pattern? American? I can go into many more things where the U.S did not listen to us Brits and therefore had huge more losses. But, the African campaign was mostly fought between Brits and Germans.
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 might have been, but we cleared europe from those varmints, and to mop up in the enemy's house is no small feat, they where fighting with tenacity in their homes, you guys, well, you guys where running in the other direction
You cleared Europe? No you never, you helped. Us British, African soldiers, Canadain and other Commonwealth of Nations countries and the French resistance and the USSR help to clear Europe.
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 yes we did, imagine had we not been there, the world would be a diferent place.
We where suplying the russians with war materiel, you guys, the chinese and then we had to step in with overwhelming war supplies men and balls, open two war fronts(something you guys evidently could not do or the germans) and succesfully do some cleaning, so you could be sitting in your pretty little chair and speak gay english to me today
You Yanks really are big headed and think you've done everything....
You helped to clear Europe. Get it in your head.
gay English? You speak it too you moron.... (BADLY ofcourse) Like i said, we had an invasion plan from Germany called operation sea lion, that was in 1940, we won, you hadn't even entered the war until Japan bombed you.
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 What was your invasion plan for Germany and with what? swiming across the channel? or with the fishing boats you guys used at Dunkirk? LOL!!
Yes, with allies, just like you had allies in the pacific. So, it wasn't easy and simple doing it alone, even for you yanks. So, go and rethink what you've said and get back to me. :)
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 We could have kicked their asses on our own with no allies, that is a fact. I base this on the capacity the U.S. had on industrial production vs the world and the U.S. control of world monetary reserves at the time witch equaled 44% of the worlds total. No country had our industrial capacity to churn 1 military ship a day
No you couldn't of. No one could of. Especially with your crappy sherman tanks, which were upgraded to Sherman firefly tanks and used the British turret etc... In the end, the upgraded tank actually did some damage.
Everyone had allies you twit. We all needed allies. Germany and Japan had allies.
Its quality by the way, not quantity. Remember that.
@enchilada01 nonsense USA could not by herself have prevailed especially without Britain and Empire. USA fighting alone implies Britains defeat and so her (and Empires) resources, fighting capacity and war fighting acumen changing sides and added to Axis powers. Recall early in the war Ger U boats operated close to USA eastern shores despite combined power of USA and Britain. No John Wayne can not do it all by himself
@MartinIDavies Churchill felt his panties had been ripped off and he had been placed doggie style when he learnt these two ships had been sunk. The only reason he was not concerned with Japan was that they where 1/2 a world away, the immediate threat was Germany
@enchilada01 LOL not sure I would use that term to describe Churchills response to news of these losses. But the reality was that B along with the other European states all lost in Asia well the Far East portion in WW2 and USA was felt to do the heavy lifting. And your right Germany much more pressing problem for Britian
@MartinIDavies Britain made it easier to combat the axis, had you guys fallen we would have looked for another way in, most likely thru the mediterranean.
As far as carriers go, the U.S. produced 29 during the war 2 large and 27 small, 350 destroyers over 200 submarines and around 80 cruisers. No, not all boats produced where Liberty ships
One of the few actual British/Japanese engagements
wank0r 1 month ago
guys wich is the title of the song ?
760fb 1 month ago
Thank you for this. My Dad, Petty Officer Writer John Marsh was on the Prince of Wales when it went down, 70 years ago this week. He survived as his battle station was three decks down keeping the ship's ledgers, an officer told him to get up on deck with them just as the ship was going down. He managed to jump UP onto the deck of a cruiser in the convoy as the battleship was so low in the water. He was a wonderful man with stories of Churchill and the Bismark. He died in December 1998, aged 80.
Marsh260418 1 month ago 2
el orgullo de la armada británica se me pone la piel de gallina pensando en la muerte de estos hombres
DAGGERVSMIRAGE 1 month ago
My Uncle Fred is in photograph top left. (point 2.10 on film)He survived the sinking spending six months living in the jungle with a small group., eventually reaching Singapore. Extraordinary to see this film, especially when I know what happened to him. And an absolute bonus to see him looking out at me.
cosmicsilverstar 2 months ago
I'm from Malaysia..
Long of history in Malaysia that must you know..
what repulse and prince of wales do..~
TheAmirShafiq 3 months ago
Friends in Britain,don't forget our common enemies are
China and Korea,especially Korea,cancer of the world.
OszuOzma 4 months ago
...Greatest respects to my Uncle William U. AB. HMS Prince Of Wales and all his Force Z comrades...In Memory
KlingKlangworkshop 4 months ago
@yonaioimete Australia was racist? What about Japan's contempt for Koreans and Chinese, not to mention many of your soldiers that got off on killing tall white POWs on the Bataan death march because they were Christian and believed in living and refused to die for some sack of moving bowels like Hirohito. Democracy sucked to you Japanese and you only have it today because MacArthur brought it to you. Australia didn't just defend themselves. They fought for others all over the world.
Planetar17 5 months ago
Comment removed
Planetar17 5 months ago
weak.
TheBioMenace 6 months ago
1941 was a momentous year in the history of the Prince of Wales. Fighting the Bismarck in May, while brand new, then carrying Churchill to a meeting with FDR in August, and finally its final batlle in the South China Sea two days after Pearl Harbor. This ship was a workhorse in 1941, and reflected the best of British Naval traditions.
WMJCPA 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
JPN>UK (^_-)-☆
syozo5656 6 months ago
UK bravely fought but Racist Australia ran about just only to escape.
yonaoimete 7 months ago
J Navy was different from the army. Decent. After the sinking, they put flowers over the water.
transonicbuoy1 7 months ago
Perjuangan sia2
MsBentayan 7 months ago
Hi... What song did you use ? Very nice music.
Mammoth10000 7 months ago
@Mammoth10000
Sleeping sun, by Nightwish
snakes3425 7 months ago
japan very bad anemy
otaisik 7 months ago
@otaisik now very good friends, let go of the past because it's their past 2 generations ago. now i acknowledge them as one of the most nice people in the world.
mrankhrm 7 months ago
BISMARCK AVENGED ...... SUCKER PUNCH
shadiest213 8 months ago
Blame Churchill: a totally stupid idea to go on after they lost the carrier that was accompanying them.
JBC814 8 months ago
Comment removed
judge105 5 months ago
@JBC814 churchill made many mistakes over the course of both world wars. All of them causing the deaths of many brave sailors and soldiers. If he had left the war theatre to those who knew best like fisher and cunningham, maybe the wars would have turned out differently with much less number of casualties.
judge105 5 months ago
@judge105: Isn't that the truth. Seems it always happens that the "armchair generals" give the orders while those who know what they are doing are ignored, such as when they made Eisenhower Supreme Commander instead of Patton. Ike was only a public relations man, he knew nothing of warfare and certainly couldn't fill Patton's shoes. The war wold have been over a year earlier if Patton was giving the orders.
JBC814 4 months ago
@JBC814 With respect, Roll of the dice strategies are unsafe at the best of times and are costly in lives. Patton's appointment would have been a disaster as with Montgomery also. Eisenhower was the leveller even if not perfect and it was he who had to deliver.
KlingKlangworkshop 4 months ago
@KlingKlangworkshop : I beg to differ with you. Read "Crimes and Mercies" or "Other Losses" by James Bacque.
JBC814 4 months ago
@JBC814 I think Bacque is doing what he's reasonable at, Fiction.
KlingKlangworkshop 4 months ago
@JBC814 I couldn't agree more.
judge105 3 months ago
@judge105
jef934 2 months ago
Jack's a top bloke, respect to those brave matelots.
Flags61 9 months ago
@snakes3425 no offense, but ur not the best speller
dialgafanclub99 9 months ago
I made my home in Nippon. A challenge. There is a fella in the local who has a few too many, and always goes down the Prince of Wales route. Sad, as all men who perish on the sea must get the ultimate respect. Then I remind him that Uncle Sam fucking obliterated his fleet. And King George V actually shelled the place I now live.
transonicbuoy1 10 months ago
to snakes3425.....awsome. Many thanks to you
yellowmorgan2 10 months ago
My son would like to sing this song in a talent quest...does anyone know the title please. Many thanks
yellowmorgan2 10 months ago
My Grandfather, William Westlake, died on the HMS Prince of Wales on 10th December 1941. Thank-you to who-ever put this video together. Chris Southcott.
csouthcott 10 months ago
........my birthday....
The16thai 10 months ago
All of the large capital ships have been located. Smaller support ships and a lot of subs are still unaccounted for. They are on eternal patrol.
windows2000bug 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I am proud i am Malaysian :)
Fatt09954 10 months ago
Japanese navy rewrote the rule of sea battle. ・・・・・・・・・Air planes with bombs and torpedos are mighter than huge battle ship.
no1kiyoko 11 months ago
@no1kiyoko
pity the Imperial navy didn't learn from the army's bombing success on force Z and frequently sent capital ships out without air cover
HelmutVillam 11 months ago
If the lesson of air power vs capital ship hadn't been hammered home before. This scenario really did it.
My dad was supposed to be on the Cornwall. A county class cruiser that suffered a similar and much less documented fate in the Indian ocean at around the same time. He missed that posting thanks to an air raid.
chutoi26 1 year ago
wahts song name !
Morauer1 1 year ago
@Morauer1 Sleeping Sun - Nightwish
thebritish25 1 year ago
@Morauer1 Hi there did you find out the name of the song please
yellowmorgan2 10 months ago
@yellowmorgan2
Sleeping Sun by Nightwish
snakes3425 10 months ago
Force Z originally consisted of Pince of Wales, Repulse and the Aircraft Carrier Illustrious. Unfortunately the Illustrious ran aground in the Caribbean so the fateful decision was made by the Admiral to continue without her; the result was the tragedy we now know. In mitigation, the Royal Navy was so stretched thin trying to protect the Atlantic Convoys that the Singapore situation was desperate enough to warrant the fearful risk of sending out capital ships without air cover.
Mozzafarian 1 year ago
snakes3425,my Mothers Uncle was a survivor of from Hms Repulse and the war.I remember as a kid he would tell my Dad about the action he was involved in,not in deep detail but enough to get the picture of how frightening it was for them all.
Mr5am50n 1 year ago
Comment removed
hsj444444 1 year ago
Funny. I left England two years ago, and live in Yamato-Takada, Japan. Locals in the local admire RN ships, but after a few beers, mock these ships. These capital ships were lone steel in distant waters. Not engaged in a serious confrontation, caught out. That`s war. Yet they go on about the Yamato. Great ship and crew. Bad commander. Did zero and sank.
transonicbuoy1 1 year ago
Good images and nice music = great video !!!
davidlopez09 1 year ago
@davidlopez09 Oh you like boys.
michaelwright999 1 year ago
@michaelwright999 I'm afraid I don't share those personal tastes that you claim .... sorry for you ....
davidlopez09 1 year ago
@davidlopez09 just piss taking, No harm ment.
michaelwright999 1 year ago
It's obvious - in ww2 japan vs britain + all of her colonies and Japan would still win the brits easily. Just imagine if Japan had taken the place of that cowardly Italy during the war, Russia would have been overwhelmed by the Germans and Japs, Africa would be axis and Britain would be destroyed by Japan's carriers and warships.
Come to think of it, the world is lucky that 2 of the axis powers are on opposite ends of the world.
tool619 1 year ago
@tool619 You seem to forget that the Japanese were defeated by the Soviet three times before and during the war. The fate of battles depend of many factors. The Japanese were good excelent on Jungle warfare, but were unfamiliar to desert conditions. Such factor may have rendered them useless in battles like El-Alamein. As for the carriers... well, everything can be lost in 1 day, and Midway proved it.
makokun9 1 year ago
@makokun9 do u mean the russo-japanese war? in that case japan won.
Noobssuckass300 1 year ago
@Noobssuckass300
makokun9 is refuring the Soviet-Japanese Border Wars of 1938-39 fought over the border of the Soviet Union and Occupied Manchuria, and Operation: August Storm, the Soviet invasion of Occupied Manchuria in 1945
snakes3425 1 year ago
@Noobssuckass300 The Soviets, not the Russians. In Like Khasan, in 1938, in Nomonhan, in 1939 (during the Soviet-Japanese Border Wars), and finally, during the Soviet invasion of Manchuria, in 1945.
makokun9 1 year ago
@makokun9 yeah that was against the americans, but british carriers were obsolete and poorly commanded at least during the early years of the war, and anyway in Midway Japan still had 3 heavy carriers (Zuikaku,Shokaku and another one being completed)
tool619 1 year ago
@tool619
The British defeated the Japanese army under General William Slim. Although as usual, Slim's and Britains contribution to the U.S. war effort in the Pacific has been ignored in U.S. history books. For three years, the British halted the advance of tens of thousands of Japanese troops in Burma that could have been otherwise redeployed against U.S. forces in New Guinea, the Philippines, Iwo Jima and Okinawa. If Britain had been defeated, the U.S. would have been overwhelemd By Japan.
MrDeano324 6 months ago
@MrDeano324 I don't know about 'overwhelmed'. Japan spread their forces awfully thin. They needed Burma's resources and would've garrisoned it had Slim withdrawn. In some respects, WWII was several wars in one and the Pacific War was mostly the U.S.'s undertaking. Adm. Yamamoto didn't seem to think they could have 'overwhelmed' the U.S. He spoke in terms of gaining 'six months' when he attacked Pearl Harbor.
Planetar17 6 months ago
@Planetar17
couple of points you have gotten wrong there. By overwhelmed, I mean they would not have taken as many jap held islands as they did. America struggled to take those islands back from the japanese and took tremendous casualties. Imagine the same situation, but with an extra 50-70 thousand jap soliders. Overwhelemed indeed. Second, Pearl harbour was a massive Jap faliure contary to popular belief. The japs attacked pearl to decimate the U.S carrier fleet. They were not at pearl...
MrDeano324 6 months ago
@MrDeano324 It would have meant more work for U.S. forces, no question, but we would have taken how ever many islands as necessary. Between Dec. 1, 1941, and Dec. 31, 1946, more than 10 million had served in the U.S. Armed Forces (some est. 16), including combat and support, so we had a wide pool to draw from, unlike the Japanese; and look at late '45 when Germany surrendered. Many of those forces were already being earmarked for the Pacific Theater.
Planetar17 6 months ago
@Planetar17 You forget the Japanese could not leave Burma underdefended even if the British had pulled out. There were still U.S. forces at work under Stilwell in the India-Burma-China region, mostly air, but in the event of a pull out, the U.S. may have pressured Chang Kai-shek to commit more troops, especially given the hole left behind by your 50-70 thousand Japanese transfers. Roosevelt would have gotten it done. The U.S. was not as afraid of exposing troops to danger as they are today.
Planetar17 6 months ago
@MrDeano324 Not at all to minimize the British effort in the pacific, I believe that following the U.S. victories at Midway, and later Guadalcanal, the Japanese Navy was seriously decimated as a fighting force. American carrier forces then operated in the Pacific and further decimated the Japanese Navy in the Phillipines. Without their Navy, the Japanese were unable to ensure consistent supply lines. Only their tenacious fighting carried them into the summer of 1945.
WMJCPA 6 months ago
Poor Prince of Wales never got a chance to shine. First she was molested by Bismark and Prinz Eugen, and then blown to hell by japs. What a waste, considering she was basicly brand new. At least Duke of York got a chanse to whoop ass during the Battle of North Cape. Also a shame to lose Rupulse, the last allied battlecruiser, and an end to the battlecruiser class in general (pisses me off because the name "battlecruiser" sounds so intimidating...
DarkIndustry502 1 year ago
@DarkIndustry502 True - but as originally planned battle-cruisers were never intended to go one to one with their own kind. The thought was that they would take out the enemy cruiser screen and hunt commerce raiders ocean-wide. Their guns would out range any cruiser while they had just sufficient armour to protect them from the return fire of 8" guns of thereabouts
freebeerfordworkers 1 year ago
@freebeerfordworkers I wish the capatain of HMS Hood would have taken your advise- they were so desperate to take down one battleship (Bismark) that England threw everything they had at her, and attacked the broadside of a battleship with just the bow turrets of a battlecruiser (I assume you know the result). Anyways, u-boats were beter merchantman-hunters than surface vessels, so I dont get the frantic haste during the battle of the Bismark Strait....o- well, long live the area of big guns!!!!
DarkIndustry502 1 year ago
@DarkIndustry502 Politics - Bismarck had to be taken out. British politicians always throw forces into action semi-trained. The P-o-W still had dockyard men on board & her main guns had problems. This is not an excuse no other navy would have sent a ship out like that but Churchill was notorious for it & thought he was the reincarnation of Marlborough and Nelson. In WW1 he sent 3 weak cruisers of navy reservists against the cream of the Imperial German Navy. Not surprisingly they were massacred
freebeerfordworkers 1 year ago
@freebeerfordworkers POW was sent out because she was the closest captial ship at the time with hood to the bismarck.
pramboy09 1 year ago
@pramboy09 You are no doubt right but she should not have been sent out to face up to a thoroughly worked up & tested opponent. Churchill again throwing green forces in only to have them hammered.
BTW The BBC broadcast an interview with Keith Park last month. He said good-humouredly he had an easy time in the Battle of Britain. Churchill often called at his headquarters & while he thought he was a great General & Admiral he knew nothing about the air force so he did not interfere.
freebeerfordworkers 1 year ago
@freebeerfordworkers Yeah, like the Canadians at Hong Kong. Totally green troops in harm's way with no chance of support. I am generally a big fan of Churchill, but nobody's perfect (Gallipoli was his brainchild, after all) and Winnie had his share of howlers. Mind you, the Canadians got what they asked for. They were bored, asking for action, and got in short order Hong Kong, and then Dieppe--though that was Mountbatten's cock-up. A great example of being careful what you wish for!
wilmanric1 1 year ago
@DarkIndustry502 That was the battle of Cornell off Chile interestingly the subsequent Battle of the Falklands was about the only time battle- cruisers were used as intended. Two new battle-cruisers were rushed down to take on half a dozen German cruisers but then they had time to work up on the voyage south.
freebeerfordworkers 1 year ago
@freebeerfordworkers It always comes down to politics...sad. Did any battlecruisers survive the second world war, allied or axis? Gneisenau was at port a long time, did she survive? North Cape was an Ideal time for Sharnhorst to commense merchantman raiding, but was cought by the massive training escort way behind the convoy, and the outcome was yet another battlecruiser going to the bottom.I just have a passion for both the Battlecruiser and Yamato class warships- potential rarely used properly
DarkIndustry502 1 year ago
@DarkIndustry502 iroscoe has summed up the situation pretty well inc reference to USS Alaska, Guam & Hawaii built after rumours that the IJN was building similar ships.
Gneisenau was mine damaged in the channel dash in 1942 and received further bomb damage in dry dock & written-off. I read she & her sister were actually built to to battleship standards to evade treaty restrictions & were to be fitted with 15" guns at a politically opportune moment.
freebeerfordworkers 1 year ago
@DarkIndustry502 HMS Renown the Repulses sister ship did stirling service and survived the war only to be scrapped,although identical when built Renown recieved extensive modifications between the wars that the Repulse never got . One could argue that the although the American Alaska class were classified as large cruisers by the USN that at just under 30,000 tons and mounting 9no 12" guns they really ought to be regarded as Battlecruisers .
iroscoe 1 year ago
@iroscoe Haha, now I remember- they jokingly called them "Refit" and "Repair" following the post-Jutland arguments. Hood was too supposed to get better deck armour, but it was for financial reasons delayed. Repulse got blown away, and Renown got sold for scrap I think- it should have been put inside a damn meuseam if you ask me...
DarkIndustry502 1 year ago
@DarkIndustry502 Post war austerity bit very hard,soon after VJ day American loans dried up and we were mortgaged to the hilt to pay for the War frankly we didn't have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of.....because of that there is no Battleship/cruise alongside Victory and Warrior at Portsmouth its a crying shame but theres nothing to be done about it now .
iroscoe 1 year ago
@DarkIndustry502 the name "battle-cruiser" was tainted enough during jutland! check out the ships the brits lost there.
pramboy09 1 year ago
@pramboy09 Hey 'Kiwi' - if you're going to call us 'Brits' , won't you at least capitalise the word - as you should! :-)
Factnotfictionpeople 1 year ago
@Factnotfictionpeople come on! really!
pramboy09 1 year ago
The main factor for the Allied victory are as follows:
- Waging war on two fronts.
Lets face it. Royal mistake by good ol' Adolf.
Alternate history: Hitler doesnt declare war on Russia. Mainland Britain eventually falls/declares a truce. Few years later: Germany(Europe) vs USA/British Empire
Something to think about: Had the Axis won, none of us would be sitting here today on YouTube.
uklapazz 1 year ago
On a completley different note.
I just wondered if any one knows has the USS.Lexington USS.Hornet IJN.Akagi IJN.Yamishrio ever been found??
thebritish25 1 year ago
@thebritish25
As far to my knowledge neither Lexington, Hornet, Akagi (although debries from Kaga has been located the main wreck has yet to be found), or Yamishiro have been located, however the Pacific is far larger and deeper then the Atlantic
snakes3425 1 year ago
@snakes3425 they better find them quick before they erode away.
kamikazeboy123 1 year ago
I think the year 1941 malaysia not exist anymore .. There is a Malaya or tanah melayu.. i know about it because im from malaysia..
zaa255 1 year ago
Brings tears to my eyes...my uncle Charlie (Charles Frost) died on the Repulse - 20 years before I was born
MichaelDJ07 1 year ago
Was the Prince of Wales head of the ABDACOM Fleet??
thebritish25 1 year ago
Chuchill was incompetant as War Lord. It was a suiside mission to send in capital ships with no air cover. Same thing happened in Greece. He was a total idiot.
JBC814 1 year ago
@JBC814 Total Idiot is not Churchill you have got to remember that Britian was the Alpha male of Dredanought warfare it was the Dredanoughts that Britian used to strave Germany in the first world war.
With the destruction of the US fleet Japan was dominant in the pacific the conflict was on there terms and when you have a warship you panic and do what ever you can to try and prevent it.
thebritish25 1 year ago
@thebritish25 : Hogwash! Churchill was a politician, not an admiral or general. He had no idea what he was doing in military matters. He and Chamberlain were idiots.
JBC814 1 year ago
@thebritish25 Churchill was first sea lord during the battle of norway when he said he didn;t think the germans would attempt to invade narvik. Any body could have been in charge after the germans invaded russia ,and the outcome would have been the same. Churchill made good speeches ,but Atlee was decorated in ww1.
jrobertsoneff 1 year ago
@jrobertsoneff yes but Atlee to put it bluntley made a balls of the 1956 Suze Cannal Criss.
but yes I agree with you
thebritish25 1 year ago
@thebritish25 I think it was anthony eden during the suez crises ,but atlee did get us into korea so that labour lost the next election.
jrobertsoneff 1 year ago
@jrobertsoneff Ah my mistake I am A afraid that I do not know a lot about Britian and its intrests in the 1950s.
But In one respect I do see hitler and churchill alike in the way how they where great leaders they rallied there nations and raised morale when things where bleek but made great cockups with there power example Hitler refussing to let the sixth Army reatreat from Stalingrad becuase of his hatred for Communism and Churchill with things like Galipoli and try to bypass the Tripz
thebritish25 1 year ago
@thebritish25 With the north atlanitc Convoys.
thebritish25 1 year ago
@JBC814 Not only that but unlike in the First World war with his actions in say Galipoli yes that was incompetant.
But in the second world war Churchill had a lot on his plate with the struggle in the deseart the threat from Japan The Blitz the threat of Invasion the Allies at its weekest with the US fleet limping to California the German at the gates of Moscow Churchill had a lot more to do than cordinate fleet movments.
thebritish25 1 year ago
@thebritish25 : I may have exaggerated a bit, and Britain was hard put to find a leader that knew what to do at that time. Nevertheless, Churchill's military abilities were absolutely nil, and Chamberlain had no authority to guarantee Poland's borders against Hitler without Parliament's approval. Such a guarantee only made Poland more adamant in the face of Hitler's demands. Poland had no chance against Germany, and should have followed Czechslovokia's example, which would postpone a war.
JBC814 1 year ago
@JBC814 in peace time yes Churchill was a useless leader but during war he was a fantastic leader and I do belive that it was churchill that stop hitler from Bringing Britian to its knees.
May I ask why are you Anti-Churchill??
thebritish25 1 year ago
@thebritish25 : I will say one thing in Churchill's defense: he had the foresight to warn Parliament of Hitler's intentions, requesting that they increase military spending in preparation for war, but no one listened to him. They believed in that milk-toast Chamberlain instead, and waited until they were really behind the 8 ball.
JBC814 1 year ago
Prince of Wales was not the sole survivor of the Battle of the Denmark Straight, Prinze Eugen was, she lasted till the end of the war and was given to the US Navy and used for Atomic Bomb testing.
spookespook 1 year ago
they say that this ship is unsinkable..yeah because the brits underestimated the japanese and from that this unsinkable ship was a joke..
madcowsuckangel 1 year ago
HMS prince of wales takin 3 damge in 31m
from bismark
if her captian shot frist he was win the battle
i bismark <3
ecw1985 1 year ago
prince of wales takin 3 damg in 31min from bismark
ecw1985 1 year ago
yes.. very good catch... that was the rub with my comment below... British plans in the event of successfull invasion and occupation of Britian was to move parliament to Canada and fight from there... the RAF and RN being mobile and so capable of getting way to fight another day... so we still USA and Britian and its oh so usefull empire and all its resources. still not USA alone
MartinIDavies 1 year ago
Comment removed
MartinIDavies 1 year ago
Indeed the USA the indispensible power in both wars... by Aug 1918 over a million troops on the western front arrayed against Ger. This went a long in helping German high command to conclude they would not win. That along with the outcome of the Battle of Amiens. WW2 when Churchill informed of Pearl Harbour he is reported to have said... so we have won after all... and yet as important as USA was she still could not have won alone without Britain and Empire who had plenty of kick and resources
MartinIDavies 1 year ago
@MartinIDavies saw the documentary about the prince of wales the commander of the force was promised air cover by the RAF when he found out this was not to be he told high command this was suisadal (miss spelling) but was ordered to go anyway the most important nations in wining the war was Britain n Russia with a great deal of usa help Of course
polygamous1 1 year ago
@polygamous1 interesting. Kissinger in his book Diplomacy explains Anglo-American ww2 priorities Germany 1st then Japan. All allied war waging capabilities to be integrated under single command. So RAF in Asia given to Russia (protested by Britain), Stalin bitching about lack of allied help. leaving USAF as sole air power available to provide air cover to all allied battleships. Once USAF is destroyed in the Philippines hey presto no allied air cover and end of allied Battleships in Asia
MartinIDavies 1 year ago
Oh I think you can expect howls of protest from Americans about your comment that Britain provided the lions share of aid to Russia. I think you are incorrect. True B provided most of the transportation along with 3,000 hurricane fighters but most supplies like the 250,000 trucks not to mention the money to finance them came from USA.. BTW it was these trucks that provided the Red army its mobility which it had lacked in the start of Russian war
MartinIDavies 1 year ago
other than a lucky shot on the Hood. I think almost all the big battleships of WW2 went down as a result of airpower.. Bismarck, Taranto, Pearl, Prince of Wales and various Japanese ships whos name escape me. writing on the wall dead men walking. In the case of Asia Pacific if MacArthur had listened to advice and not lost his USAF in the Philippines these battleships might have survived and been able to contribute to the war
MartinIDavies 1 year ago
@MartinIDavies : You're absolutely correct, that pompous stuffed shirt MacArthur. Believe it or not, Eisenhower was his lackey in those days. Both of them couldn't shine Patton's shoes, much less devise strategies for worse-case scenarios.
JBC814 1 year ago
@JBC814 MacArthur lined his planes in lines like soldiers on parade and was directly responsible for their destruction. The only remaining capable allied air force in Asia. He did this despite advice from Britain (which he hated getting) who advised parking fighters in random groups making their destruction harder. Meanwhile B RAF in Asian 600 Spits & Hurries had been given to Russia. And so US air power destroyed in 3 days period leaving allied battleships sitting ducks. MacArthur ineptitude
MartinIDavies 1 year ago
USA ships... I think you are being inaccurate about the ship building of USA in WW2. I read in a history about the USA pacific war that she end the war with 104 carriers testiment to her ability to bring fighting capabiliuty into existance. There is no doubt that teh USA was single indespensible power in WW2.. but that indesoenisble is not the same as saying she could have prevailed alone
MartinIDavies 1 year ago
The US was ultimately the deciding factor in not only World War II but World War I as well and both sides knew which ever one the US, with it's industrial might, vast resources, and military might, sided with with would eventually win the war. There's a story that when the Germans heard the US had built a Liberty Ship in just four days they began to see the war was lost, and Admiral Yamamoto knew full well Japan wasn't going to win after Pearl because he'd spent time in the US before the war
snakes3425 1 year ago
@snakes3425 yes Admiral Yamamoto had grave misgivings about the punch to America at Pearl. I seem to recall him saying something like we will have it all our won way for about 6 months but after that... the tide will turn... not these exact words but certainly the sentiments... we in the weestern world have much to be grateful for the USA... but next time be on time
MartinIDavies 1 year ago
@krazeeeone. you're right he did say he could run amok for 18 months before things sould get out of control would wke a sleeping gaint and fill it with terrible rage
thekrazeone 1 year ago
@snakes3425 a Lot of what u say is correct But withoutthe battle of Britain n the battle of stalingrad both WON by the right countries the war would have been lost anyway n of course If the usa didn't enter the war n japan attacked Russia from the Pacific then what? it was many factors that helped us be free today n america's help was invaluable
polygamous1 1 year ago
@polygamous1
You're right, when it comes to numerous factors contributing to victory in the war. the Battle of Britain was the first time a major defeat had been inflicted on Germany, El Alamain and Stalingrad were the first major defeats of a German Army in battle, Midway was also the first major defeat of the Japanese in their history and Guadalcanal was the first complete defeat the Japanese had ever suffered, and for the first time people began to see that the Axis could be defeated
snakes3425 1 year ago
@snakes3425 Tobruk was the first major defeat of the german Army and Milne bay was japans first defeat
59acu 1 year ago
@59acu German army ! they were outnumbered by 8 to 1
jrobertsoneff 1 year ago
@jrobertsoneff
still lost, besides at milne bay it was 4 to 1 and the japanese were battle hardened and had armour support.
59acu 1 year ago
@snakes3425 The battle of britain was when the RAF were playing at home .But they lost the battle of france which was on neutral ground.
jrobertsoneff 1 year ago
@snakes3425 But the japanese help open the eyes of the Asian peoples that the European powers are not invincible.
phadil 1 year ago
@phadil hell, yeah, the first one to fall was imperial russia, the jap forces decimated the russian pacific fleet
salamander163 1 year ago
@polygamous1
And there are so many more factors: The Brits deciphering the Enigma code, Hitler insisting that the Me-262 should be built as a bomber until it was too late, a single US airplane that got lost and stumbled over the japanese carriers at Midway by accident, Hitler again overruling his generals in the east front, not allowing retreats, not even tactical ones (the only day he didn't intervene, Manstein took over, regrouped and devastated the russians) ... there are so many factors!
Puschit1 1 year ago
@polygamous1 And everything could have ended in 1939 if the British and French reacted to the invasion of Poland.
PaladinusPL 1 year ago
@PaladinusPL my god your not another that thinks if the brits and france had acted earlier ww2 would not have happened??? France's as a fighting force was a joke, their army was equipped as it was in world war 1 and looked like something from the boer war. Their airforce was a worse and only had a few hundred planes that could compete against the germans. The british were only just starting to modernise and at first the germans overrun both with superior numbers and firepower.
pramboy09 1 year ago
@pramboy09 When attacking Poland Hitler left hardly anything to defend German western border. Also if the Western Allies support for Poland had been stronger it could have prevented the soviet attack on 17.09.1939. thus allowing Poles to reorganise defense... and so on. However these are only speculations.
PaladinusPL 1 year ago
@PaladinusPL i've had this agruement before, just how on earth was the british and french suppose to attack the western boarder when they were getting beaten and pushed backwards? The poles had next to no airforce left after the first few days of the war and the luftwaffe had complete airsuperiority so to organise defences is next to immposible when you are being dived bombed by Ju87's and straffed by 109's.
pramboy09 1 year ago
@pramboy09 "when they were getting beaten and pushed backwards?" In 1939? Britain and France declared war on Germany on 03.09.1939 (3 days after invasion on Poland) and, with Belgium an the Netherlands still neutral, they were completely safe behind the Maginot Line and the British Channel. Hitler needed almost half a year to prepare his forces for invasion of France.
PaladinusPL 1 year ago
@PaladinusPL Poland was attacked from the west by the germans and on 17 September it was invaded by the Soviet Union from the east. It only took 26 days for the poles to surrender, you are trying to tell me after the soviets and germans had overan the country in 3 weeks that is enough time for the british and french to send a force big enough to push them back? Remembering they would not be able to go through "neutral countries" which also included belgium, Luxembourg, Denmark and Swiss.
pramboy09 1 year ago
@pramboy09 You should really capitalise 'proper' names - tut-tut........
Factnotfictionpeople 1 year ago
USA alone via the Med.. No USA would be on the defense and unable to win the Battle for the Atlantic. B and USA together nearly failed no chance alone. Then consider D-Day and the small 21 miles of the channel it took everything we both had (mostly British Empire resources I might add). Forget delusionary notions of the Med from across the Atlantic. No Australia as a base with Canada and Mexico your heels. No USA would have been in a losing defensive war.
MartinIDavies 1 year ago
It's quite ironic that HMS Prince Of Wales survived when intercepting the Bismarck, but then sunk by the Japanese in the far east. Good video, good song.
sirpyan 1 year ago
Great video! Thank you for posting. What is the name of the song used?
BIGBUCK20 1 year ago
Sleeping Sun by Nightwish
snakes3425 1 year ago
@snakes3425 Thank you!!!
BIGBUCK20 1 year ago
nightwish sleeping sun ijn navy should of remember this considering when their own ship went to attack with no air cover musashi and yamato
thekrazeone 1 year ago
@thekrazeone Very true, but I don't think the IJN had much worth while air cover left at that point of the war.
BIGBUCK20 1 year ago
if the brits and the japanese had confronted each other back then in a naval battle, the japanese would have given them a licking so bad the english would have cried out for their mommies
enchilada01 1 year ago
@enchilada01
You cunt. Germans would of wiped the floor with you lot.
By the way, its not English, as there is Scotland and Wales and N. Ireland in Britain.
Dumbfuck.
2k8FARNHILL2k8 1 year ago
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 I could care less what there is on your looser rocks sticking above the water.
What does this have to do with germans u moron? the germans would have made u lick their ass had we not stepped in and saved your filthy pink asses!
enchilada01 1 year ago
@enchilada01
LOL Our "Rocks on water" made your country great you moron....
Again, like i said before. LOL. you clearly know nothing of ww2. YOU JOINED TWO YEARS LATE AND WE HAD ALREADY ENGAGED MANY GERMANS IN SEA AND AIR AND WON. Now, that i've cleared that up, I can get on with what i was doing.
Oh, by the way, you need to brush up on your English.
2k8FARNHILL2k8 1 year ago
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 we coincide in one thing, I thought your english was pathetic!
You guys won? yeah, an engagement or two. but clearly u guys where on the concentration camps direction hahahahahaha!
Your rocks above water made nothing great, 80% of current U.S has nothing to do with your rocks...
enchilada01 1 year ago
@enchilada01
My English is pathetic? My English is the real deal, your American English is basically English with spelling errors.
Ok, fighting the Japanese was nothing? Battle of Britain? Invading France? North Africa campaign? Scandanavia campaign? Middle east occupation? fighting in northen India? Philippeans fighting? liberatine Holland and Crete?
Ummmmmmmmm, I don't barely see any of you Yanks there. Isnt it funny how Americans change history into their own version?
2k8FARNHILL2k8 1 year ago
@2k8FARNHILL2k8
Liberating**
2k8FARNHILL2k8 1 year ago
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 yup your english not only is pathetic but you guys speak with a homosexual accent.
Wow! all those campaigns really took you guys to be, well...rocks above water hahahahahahahahahaha!
You guys co-invaded france because we where there kicking ass, north africa? you guys where getting a licking there too!
Dont start with india, phillipines and that bullshit, it wasnt even english fags fighting, it was indians, australians and heaven knows who else
enchilada01 1 year ago
@enchilada01
LOL, I'm not really bothered if i can't speak English, I seem to be better than you. Anyway, I'm Welsh, not English, therefore English is my second language as it's your first.
Ummmmmmm the second part about the campaigns really didn't make sense? What things did you do except bomb normandy and end up 10 miles in another location and nuke Japan. WELL DONE. :)
Kicking ass in France when you wern't there yet? Thar doesnt make sense..
North Africa we were winning.
2k8FARNHILL2k8 1 year ago
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 before we where even engeged in the war u guys exchanged some pacific islands for 50 warships cause you guys where really feeling it, I dont see that as winning,sorry
enchilada01 1 year ago
@enchilada01
Well, mostly being on your own and fighting two countries who have just built huge armies and most of our ships are concentrated in the Atlantic, I think it's worth trading.
2k8FARNHILL2k8 1 year ago
@enchilada01
SAS originated in Africa. We were beating the Germans, therfore, we took Africa?
Well, thats' where you are wrong about India, I have speaken to many ex veterans who fought in India, including my grandfather.
Idiots......
2k8FARNHILL2k8 1 year ago
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 A brit or two here and there, does not change things, in africa had patton not been there, you guys would have had your asses filled with desert sand
enchilada01 1 year ago
@enchilada01
LOL. Ummmmmm who's pattern? American? I can go into many more things where the U.S did not listen to us Brits and therefore had huge more losses. But, the African campaign was mostly fought between Brits and Germans.
2k8FARNHILL2k8 1 year ago
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 might have been, but we cleared europe from those varmints, and to mop up in the enemy's house is no small feat, they where fighting with tenacity in their homes, you guys, well, you guys where running in the other direction
enchilada01 1 year ago
@enchilada01
You cleared Europe? No you never, you helped. Us British, African soldiers, Canadain and other Commonwealth of Nations countries and the French resistance and the USSR help to clear Europe.
2k8FARNHILL2k8 1 year ago
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 yes we did, imagine had we not been there, the world would be a diferent place.
We where suplying the russians with war materiel, you guys, the chinese and then we had to step in with overwhelming war supplies men and balls, open two war fronts(something you guys evidently could not do or the germans) and succesfully do some cleaning, so you could be sitting in your pretty little chair and speak gay english to me today
enchilada01 1 year ago
@enchilada01
You Yanks really are big headed and think you've done everything....
You helped to clear Europe. Get it in your head.
gay English? You speak it too you moron.... (BADLY ofcourse) Like i said, we had an invasion plan from Germany called operation sea lion, that was in 1940, we won, you hadn't even entered the war until Japan bombed you.
2k8FARNHILL2k8 1 year ago
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 What was your invasion plan for Germany and with what? swiming across the channel? or with the fishing boats you guys used at Dunkirk? LOL!!
enchilada01 1 year ago
The plan was to liberate the eastern side of Germany along with Italy in the north. With allies ofcourse, you clearly know nothing.
What was your greatest thing in ww2? Nuking Japan, landing a beach and claiming two lands in the the pacific?
Well done Yank. Now, grow up!
2k8FARNHILL2k8 1 year ago
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 I see now, the plan was to liberate...with allies of course, with out them it was just plans, whatever
enchilada01 1 year ago
Yes, with allies, just like you had allies in the pacific. So, it wasn't easy and simple doing it alone, even for you yanks. So, go and rethink what you've said and get back to me. :)
2k8FARNHILL2k8 1 year ago
Comment removed
2k8FARNHILL2k8 1 year ago
Comment removed
2k8FARNHILL2k8 1 year ago
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 We could have kicked their asses on our own with no allies, that is a fact. I base this on the capacity the U.S. had on industrial production vs the world and the U.S. control of world monetary reserves at the time witch equaled 44% of the worlds total. No country had our industrial capacity to churn 1 military ship a day
enchilada01 1 year ago
No you couldn't of. No one could of. Especially with your crappy sherman tanks, which were upgraded to Sherman firefly tanks and used the British turret etc... In the end, the upgraded tank actually did some damage.
Everyone had allies you twit. We all needed allies. Germany and Japan had allies.
Its quality by the way, not quantity. Remember that.
2k8FARNHILL2k8 1 year ago
@2k8FARNHILL2k8 they might have been crappy but British tanks where wors!
Of course we where producing on average a ship a day, do your math
enchilada01 1 year ago
@enchilada01 nonsense USA could not by herself have prevailed especially without Britain and Empire. USA fighting alone implies Britains defeat and so her (and Empires) resources, fighting capacity and war fighting acumen changing sides and added to Axis powers. Recall early in the war Ger U boats operated close to USA eastern shores despite combined power of USA and Britain. No John Wayne can not do it all by himself
MartinIDavies 1 year ago
@MartinIDavies Churchill felt his panties had been ripped off and he had been placed doggie style when he learnt these two ships had been sunk. The only reason he was not concerned with Japan was that they where 1/2 a world away, the immediate threat was Germany
enchilada01 1 year ago
@enchilada01 LOL not sure I would use that term to describe Churchills response to news of these losses. But the reality was that B along with the other European states all lost in Asia well the Far East portion in WW2 and USA was felt to do the heavy lifting. And your right Germany much more pressing problem for Britian
MartinIDavies 1 year ago
@MartinIDavies Britain made it easier to combat the axis, had you guys fallen we would have looked for another way in, most likely thru the mediterranean.
As far as carriers go, the U.S. produced 29 during the war 2 large and 27 small, 350 destroyers over 200 submarines and around 80 cruisers. No, not all boats produced where Liberty ships
enchilada01 1 year ago
@MartinIDavies Britain's resources could not have fallen to the axis powers, Canada, Australia and India had to be taken by forc