"Zerstorer" Hardback by John Vasco and Peter Cornwell - Coming from Wingleader in 2025

[Adriano Baumgartner]

My knowledge on the Bf 110 types and variants is almost nill, however I do give support to John Vasco statement that criticisms should be open and clear, signed by real names and persons.
Typos frequently happens, even after several reviews, with most of all writers, including "sprog writers" like me. Several of you (us) who have been published have passed throughout this kind of mistake (me including)...and that will not to demean or to denigrate no one.
Criticism, when frank help us becoming better human beings and professionals, but it most be not cowardly done, under the protection of walls, rather eye on the eye and openly.

[AndyMa]

Well, if someone has made mistakes in a review, then it is indeed fair game to comment in return.
However, I'm not sure why someone should be criticised for pointing out a typo. Yes, we all make them, but when dealing with serial numbers, it's quite important to arrive at the correct number...

[John Vasco]

Originally Posted by AndyMa

Well, if someone has made mistakes in a review, then it is indeed fair game to comment in return.
However, I'm not sure why someone should be criticised for pointing out a typo. Yes, we all make them, but when dealing with serial numbers, it's quite important to arrive at the correct number...

I didn't criticise. Read my post properly! I admitted the 'A2' error, but in turn pointed out their '2A' error.
So what are you on about, exactly...?

[INM@RLM]

John Vasco requested a couple of references ("tell me ..."). It would be ungraceful not to oblige with responses.

1. If the Scandinavian campaign was not to secure Germany’s northern flank (as well as exploiting all that it could from the countries invaded), then you tell me what the point of it was.

The Telling:
OKW Directive signed by Hitler on 1st March 1940.
"The development of the situation in Scandinavia makes it necessary to prepare for the occupation of Denmark and Norway by formations of the Armed Forces ('Case Weser-exercise'). This would anticipate English action against Scandinavia and the Baltic, would secure our supplies of ore from Sweden, and would provide the Navy and Air Force with expanded bases for operations against England."
Source: Trevor-Roper: Hitler's War Directives
i.e. nothing at all to do with "securing Germany's exposed northern flank against possible invasion."


2. After the fall of Dunkirk, look at any campaign map and you will see that the German army struck west & south. Or maybe they did not – you tell me…

The Telling:
The point I made actually related your account of the events after the breakthrough at Sedan: there was no mention of Dunkirk in your own published text on this page.
After Sedan the Germans actually struck west and north, not south as you wrote here: check the map at p.179 of Robert Forczyk's 'Case Red' or any equivalent study. First the pocket was closed by reaching the coast at Abbeville on 20 May, and only after that cordon had been made relatively secure were Boulogne and Calais attacked by the Germans coming up the coast from the south. Consequently Boulogne was not assaulted and captured by the Germans until three days later. It took even longer to secure Calais because of the "Stop Order" issued on the evening of the 23rd May. This is all further confirmed in detail by the map in Guderian's 'Panzer Leader' (multiple editions), and he was the man directly in charge of assaulting these two ports.
Sources as noted in the response.
So it was very much not the case that - as stated in 'Zerstörer'- the German thrust after 13th May was "west to the coast at Boulogne and Calais"

I've now corrected my typo and converted 2A into A2. My apologies, and thank you for that, John.

[John Vasco]

'...The Telling:
OKW Directive signed by Hitler on 1st March 1940.
"The development of the situation in Scandinavia makes it necessary to prepare for the occupation of Denmark and Norway by formations of the Armed Forces ('Case Weser-exercise'). This would anticipate English action against Scandinavia and the Baltic, would secure our supplies of ore from Sweden, and would provide the Navy and Air Force with expanded bases for operations against England."
Source: Trevor-Roper: Hitler's War Directives
i.e. nothing at all to do with "securing Germany's exposed northern flank against possible invasion."...'


If you actually believe that, then all I can say is that you are an apologist for the Third Reich! You are beginning to show your true colours...

[Jukka Juutinen]

Originally Posted by John Vasco

'...The Telling:
OKW Directive signed by Hitler on 1st March 1940.
"The development of the situation in Scandinavia makes it necessary to prepare for the occupation of Denmark and Norway by formations of the Armed Forces ('Case Weser-exercise'). This would anticipate English action against Scandinavia and the Baltic, would secure our supplies of ore from Sweden, and would provide the Navy and Air Force with expanded bases for operations against England."
Source: Trevor-Roper: Hitler's War Directives
i.e. nothing at all to do with "securing Germany's exposed northern flank against possible invasion."...'


If you actually believe that, then all I can say is that you are an apologist for the Third Reich! You are beginning to show your true colours...

Wow! Whenever someone starts hurling Nazi accusations to a critic, it is clear the person hurling those has lost the factual argument. An intellectual shot in one's own foot.

[John Vasco]

Originally Posted by Jukka Juutinen

Wow! Whenever someone starts hurling Nazi accusations to a critic, it is clear the person hurling those has lost the factual argument. An intellectual shot in one's own foot.

Not at all. You've got to study what is posted very carefully, and determine where the individual is coming from.

All explained in my last paragraph of post #63.

[twocee]

As they say, "Serving the anonymous critic is a fool's errand". Whoever INM is, I don't think that he deserved any response.

[John Vasco]

'...The Telling:
The point I made actually related your account of the events after the breakthrough at Sedan: there was no mention of Dunkirk in your own published text on this page.
After Sedan the Germans actually struck west and north, not south as you wrote here: check the map at p.179 of Robert Forczyk's 'Case Red' or any equivalent study. First the pocket was closed by reaching the coast at Abbeville on 20 May, and only after that cordon had been made relatively secure were Boulogne and Calais attacked by the Germans coming up the coast from the south. Consequently Boulogne was not assaulted and captured by the Germans until three days later. It took even longer to secure Calais because of the "Stop Order" issued on the evening of the 23rd May. This is all further confirmed in detail by the map in Guderian's 'Panzer Leader' (multiple editions), and he was the man directly in charge of assaulting these two ports...'
After Dunkirk, the Germans did attack west and south. Third Reich apologist strikes again. Twisting things to suit their (I say 'their' because I don't know whether you are male or female) agenda again.

History being re-written - over the decades I've seen many like you on the internet who try to change the factual course of history. I'm calling you out, Nazi.

And so, coward, come out from behind your pseudonym and tell us WHO YOU REALLY ARE!

You've piled into others on here in the past. Take me on, coward!

[INM@RLM]

Forgive me John, but if you attack west and south from Dunkirk, you will find yourself back in Calais, and the Germans had already captured that before they secured Dunkirk.

Again though your #58 is irrelevant to what you wrote on p.53 of 'Zerstörer', which is where we started.

This is great fun though.