Historic Anglo-Portuguese alliance marks 650 years

You just seem to ignore reality ? Where was England when Aus and NZ were slaughtered by Turks ? I take it you mean a Gallipoli ! It was a very good idea but delayed and executed very badly hence it went wrong.
Australia had 8700 casualties , NZ 2733, France 27000, England 0.
England doesn’t fight in wars !

The United Kingdom fights wars and it lost 73000 at Gallipoli.
So if you want to know where the English were, well they are still there and buried right along side our ANZAC comrades. In the Commonwealth War Cemeteries or in the ground in unmarked graves.

Over half the Allied casualties at Gallipoli (73,485) were British and Irish troops.

My English Great Grand father was there with the ANZAC’s. Also was left for dead until the medics saw him twitch under the blanket.

Not to forget Air Chief Marshall Keith Park,Jonno!

Great. I like it in The Battle of Britain film where he arrives at the airfield in his Private Hurricane!
My Dad met many Kiwis in the FAA and even named the pub they met up in; off Oxford St. I think it was the Lamb and Flag, James St.

Great stuff Jonno! Hope you are getting some Summer!!

Hence the comment ‘better late than never.’

BTW, any full accounting of British contributions must include sharing design and performance data re British Chain Home early warning radar system. 😊

You seem to have selective memory loss. Er what about the Peninsular War to rescue Portugal and Spain from Napoleon. Not just a skirmish on the fringe.

I would like to point out that Sweden provided the British with high quality bearings vital for aero engines. The British picked them up from Gothenburg, known as little London in Sweden. The British used converted MTB’s flying the Red Ensign. The first boats to arrive in Gothenburg were met with cheering crowds.

If I remember rightly not one MTB was lost.

The lesson Sweden took from WW2 was that armed neutrality was the way forward, hence the powerful and well equipped military that is now trying to join NATO.

The point is Sweden was not in a position to defend itself and had seen what happened to Norway. Not a position I’d want to be in…

Cheers CR

Hi chariot, yes that was the thrust of the argument, neutrality in these European states at that point may have be de Jure but the de facto state was that Germany could have overwhelmed any of them at any point if they did not effectively do what Germany wanted. For some like Spain it was actually a political choice and aligned Belief ( they wanted to support the axis) for others like Switzerland and Sweden…it was survival and they had to be seen toe the line ( Switzerland was at heart profoundly unhappy with what it did around jewish people trying to flee and the closing of its boarders.as well as issuing of passports with a J) The only really neutral state was Ireland, as politically and geographically it could simply sit it out with no threat or consequence.

The run up to war and the war itself were very dark days with nations traumatised by WW1 hoping against hope that it wouldn’t couldn’t happen again. A harsh lesson not to be forgotten.

I always thought Chamberlain’s sell out of Czechoslovakia was a dreadful betrayal. However, just recently I have become more aware of the state of the UK’s defences in 1938 and it was woeful. Chamberlain was apparently briefed on the readiness of Fighter Command although readiness was hardly the right word. Firstly, there were no Spitfires in frontline service, secondly, there were only 4 Hurricane squadrons and Chain Home radar stations still did not work..!

In short our fighter defence capability in 1938 was little better than 1918. Given what the Luftwaffe did in Spain I am now reluctantly thinking that Chamberlain had no other choice but to sell out to the axis an hope for a few extra months to get stuff sorted. Sadly, I think too many people actually believed the peace in our time rubbish, even Chamberlain initially did as well I think.

Desperate time desperate messures. Shame the current batch of politicians across the board didn’t know more about history.

Cheers CR

That is not a valid argument. The defences of Nazi Germany in 1938 were several times worse.

I was pointing out that the situation was far more complicated than we (and I include myself in that) tend to think. I still that with hindsight what happened to Czechoslovakia was a betrayal, but hindsight is a luxury that that only comes after the event.

I would also point out the the Luftwaffe was in much better shape than the RAF in 1938 and that was still true in 1940 given what happened to the Lysanders and Battles in France.

In 1938 there was a view that the bomber would always get through. I believe, that was based in part on the difficulties that the RNAS had in WW1 trying to patrol the skies around London against German bombers and airships. Not much had changed in 1938, as I said.

Fortunately, Watson-Watt got his Chain Home radar stations working just as war broke out (they were still working on the stations even as the war started) and Hawker and Vickers Supermarine sorted out their production of their respective fighters.

If the Battle of Britain was a close run thing so was our scramble to be prepared for trials of war…

I was also pointing out the perils of being unprepared. Right now I think the UK is in such a poor state of readiness it would not be unreasonable to draw parallels between the post WW1 and the post Cold War periods with regards to the level of our disarmament. OK NATO is a game changer relative to 1938, but our national state is pretty awful at the moment.

Cheers CR

Luftwaffe was not a better shape in 1938 , might have been in 1940, but not against the cumulative French and RAF, plus the Dutch and Belgium.

Consider it extremely unfortunate that there are but a mere handful of Churchillian voices in the wilderness of UK politics, clamoring for an expeditious and extensive rearmament program. The Poles, Finns, Swedes, Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians have certainly grasped the obvious. Hell, even the Germans and French have awakened to some degree. Remember the UK had the luxury of sheltering behind of the largest and strongest fleet in the world in rhe face the gathering European storm of the mid to late 1930″s, as well as a RAF largely able to match the productive capacity of the Luftwaffe. Unfortunately, those advantages have been ceded in a false sense of security (and therefore complacency), post Cold War I. When the ChiCom typhoon engulfs the Indo-Pacific, sincerely doubt whether they will suspend offensive operations for 5-10 yrs., in order to permit others to rearm sufficiently to make it a sporting proposition. 🤔😳

…the face…🙄

Ireland was allegedly offered Northern Ireland via back channels if it supported the German effort via any effect they might bring to bare against the UK, cough, cough leave the lights on for example…

In reality (and fence sitting government aside), thousands of Irish men answered the allied call to arms despite their governments irritation and many paid the ultimate price too….

In reality, it would simply have been rapidly occupied if the UK was defeated or forced to bow out of the conflict in some sort of deal, to prevent its possible use by the USA as a European toehold.

Had Germany won the European war and Uncle Sam stayed out of it, Hitler would have without doubt occupied Sweden, Switzerland,Ireland and Portugal and made Franco fully commit to the ’cause’.

I strongly suspect Franco would have met with an accident and been replaced with a more compliant ‘yes man’ leader.

I am not in disagreement with Portugal staying nonaligned just don’t think it would necessarily resulted in an invasion. Franco did not invade Gibraltar and I don’t think would have wanted war with the UK. They did lease us air bases in the Azores by the way.

Infact Spain actually offered to join the military axis in 1940, it was only the fact German and Spain could not agreeing on the future of Cameroon that stopped Spain fighting.

Interesting, a blunder by Hitler. If he had given ground on Cameroon, and got Spain signed up for the Axis, Franco could have taken Portugal and more importantly, Gibraltar, and then dominated the approach to the Med.
Spain may have invaded southern France and held and controlled it instead of Vichy French. Spanish forces in France might have released German troops in France to re-deploy to the Eastern Front.

They sent the Blue Division to the Eastern Front.

Hi Daniele, it was one of those legal fictions…as it was a German army division of the Spain ish volunteers….but given permission from and actively recruited to by the Spanish government. De jure neutrality with de facto support…it was basically to keep the US sweet so Spain would not loss US trade..and Hitler would not hand over Cameroon. Lucky for the UK….as pointed out by Graham Spain entering the war would have lost us the rock and with it the med…North Africa would have fallen giving Germany access to the Middle East and its oil…

Oh yes, I’m aware of the strategic failures of the German High Command.
Take Gibraltar. Take Malta. Goodbye North Africa, Rommels fuel wouldn’t have been sunk as much.
I still think they’d have lost on the Eastern Front eventually but it would have taken much longer and history may well have been different.

And widening that foreign volunteer theme. 5th SS Division Wiking was full of Danish, Norwegians, Swedes, and other Nordic types. Latvians were in the Waffen SS, so were Ukranians. Leon Degrelle of the Walloon Legion. The wider Waffen SS had a Europe vs Bolshevik theme.

Mark Felton on youtube, a brilliant,brilliant resource, had a piece on Swiss detachments on the Russian front.

At least our Brits and the Indians who joined were just a propaganda unit. The others all fought.

Yes people often forget that fascism was an evil that swept through Europe to a far wider extent than just a few people in Germany…Hitler was just the most famous bastard to ride that wave.

Hmm no. Hitler was a Nazi. Not a Fascist.
Both ideologies touched in Nationalism and Socialism
but there were no racial eugenic theories in Fascism.

Alex Nazism is a form of Fascism. That is a widely accepted academic view point. Italian Fascism, Nazism and Japanism are all considered to be fascist ideologies. I specifically chose my words as there were many forms of fascism, it had even more faces than communism. Spain had its own brand of fascism that was intermixed with Catholic ideology..even the Estado Novo, the Portuguese state that was overtly anti fascist was infact in reality a form of fascism that used the corporatist, authoritarian and nationalist elements of Italian Fascism.

I remember that time well Barry. Here in Durban there was a gathering of patriotic Portuguese men outside the City Hall determined to go North to Mozambique and mount some kind of last stand but the reality quickly set in as Portugal withdrew her soldiers very shortly thereafter.

Actually it was a very violent action with land sea and air forces innvolved resulting in 22 Indians and 30 Portuguese being killed.

The naval action involved a dual that lasted some hours between a pre WW2 design Portuguese warship and a Leopard Class Indian frigate if I remember rightly (read it somewhere, I’m not that old 🙂 ). I think it resulted in the loss of the Portuguese ship or at least she was seriously damaged.

Cheers CR