Wreck of WWII German U-boat found off North Carolina

Started by a2capt, October 21, 2014, 07:50:44 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

THRAWN

Quote from: RiverAux on October 27, 2014, 01:49:21 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 27, 2014, 01:40:59 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on October 27, 2014, 01:17:15 PM
Perhaps more detailed digs into the records may reveal that some of those incidents weren't quite what we thought as well, but so what?

Exactly. Why let facts get in the way of a good story?

If you want to know all the facts, don't get into military history.  We will never know exactly what happened at every moment during an entire war, or even a particular campaign or battle.  Thats just the way it is. 

What we have for the most part is the reports of CAP members who said they did such and such at some place and time.  I would be surprised if there ever was any actual physical evidence or reports from others (US or German) to corroborate these CAP reports.  Thats the way things work in war.

Or any kind of history....

No one is saying that we have to know all of the facts, all of the minute details, for every moment of every day. However, sinking one sub, let alone two, is a pretty big claim. The burden of proof is not on the people who doubt the claim in the face of the evidence, but on CAP, who is making that claim.

No question that CAP had a presence on the coastal areas in question. Big question about just how effective that presence was.
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

RiverAux

Well, I do agree that CAP history seems to begin and end with the WWII subchasers and while that heritage is important whether or not we sunk any subs it was only a small part of what we did in WWII much less the rest of our history. 

For proof of the overemphasis on WWII, just look at the latest CAP history book which devotes more than half of its pages to WWII era stuff. 

RiverAux

Quote from: THRAWN on October 27, 2014, 02:25:07 PM
However, sinking one sub, let alone two, is a pretty big claim. The burden of proof is not on the people who doubt the claim in the face of the evidence, but on CAP, who is making that claim.

Keep in mind that the information needed to refute the reports of our pilots wasn't available for many, many decades after the war. 

I'd say that since our current national historian is now disputing any such claims that it is unlikely that the sub sinkings will be claimed at the national level in the future (though I wouldn't doubt that a few such references will make it into public affairs news releases for a while). 

But, just what evidence do you want CAP to produce showing that we did attack German subs?  There are probably some original patrol reports in the archives that could be put together, but the chances of finding corroborating information are nil. 

THRAWN

Quote from: RiverAux on October 27, 2014, 02:26:40 PM
Well, I do agree that CAP history seems to begin and end with the WWII subchasers and while that heritage is important whether or not we sunk any subs it was only a small part of what we did in WWII much less the rest of our history. 

For proof of the overemphasis on WWII, just look at the latest CAP history book which devotes more than half of its pages to WWII era stuff.

It's 4 years out of the past 70+. Reminds me of the high school prom queen who keeps talking about the "glory days". Lots of stuff has happened since then....
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

THRAWN

Quote from: RiverAux on October 27, 2014, 02:31:55 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 27, 2014, 02:25:07 PM
However, sinking one sub, let alone two, is a pretty big claim. The burden of proof is not on the people who doubt the claim in the face of the evidence, but on CAP, who is making that claim.

Keep in mind that the information needed to refute the reports of our pilots wasn't available for many, many decades after the war. 

I'd say that since our current national historian is now disputing any such claims that it is unlikely that the sub sinkings will be claimed at the national level in the future (though I wouldn't doubt that a few such references will make it into public affairs news releases for a while). 

But, just what evidence do you want CAP to produce showing that we did attack German subs?  There are probably some original patrol reports in the archives that could be put together, but the chances of finding corroborating information are nil.

Since CAP is making the claim, it's not my responsibility to tell them what kind of evidence to produce. The Germans and the US Navy have both produced enough evidence that no boats were lost in the areas or time periods claimed that it nullifies the claim.
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

Eclipse

#45
Quote from: RiverAux on October 27, 2014, 02:31:55 PM
But, just what evidence do you want CAP to produce showing that we did attack German subs?

What authority awards a maritime "kill"?  The Navy?

I know there's a process, just don't know what it was at the time, and certainly it wasn't taken lightly.

Until that authority, whatever it was or is, awards it officially, it didn't happen, just like any military decoration or award.

"That Others May Zoom"

LSThiker

Quote from: Eclipse on October 27, 2014, 02:48:45 PM
What authority awards a maritime "kill"?  The Navy?

I know there's a process, just don't know what it was at the time, and certainly it wasn't taken lightly.

Until that authority, whatever it was or is, awards it's officially, it didn't happen, just like any military decoration or award.

I believe it was the Navy at the time. 

RiverAux

Quote from: THRAWN on October 27, 2014, 02:37:42 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on October 27, 2014, 02:31:55 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 27, 2014, 02:25:07 PM
However, sinking one sub, let alone two, is a pretty big claim. The burden of proof is not on the people who doubt the claim in the face of the evidence, but on CAP, who is making that claim.

Keep in mind that the information needed to refute the reports of our pilots wasn't available for many, many decades after the war. 

I'd say that since our current national historian is now disputing any such claims that it is unlikely that the sub sinkings will be claimed at the national level in the future (though I wouldn't doubt that a few such references will make it into public affairs news releases for a while). 

But, just what evidence do you want CAP to produce showing that we did attack German subs?  There are probably some original patrol reports in the archives that could be put together, but the chances of finding corroborating information are nil.

Since CAP is making the claim, it's not my responsibility to tell them what kind of evidence to produce. The Germans and the US Navy have both produced enough evidence that no boats were lost in the areas or time periods claimed that it nullifies the claim.

In case you missed it, the CAP national historian was in this thread specifically denying this claim.  While parts of CAP may still be using this information (since it is still found in various official places), your overall point is moot. 

RiverAux

Quote from: Eclipse on October 27, 2014, 02:48:45 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on October 27, 2014, 02:31:55 PM
But, just what evidence do you want CAP to produce showing that we did attack German subs?

What authority awards a maritime "kill"?  The Navy?

I know there's a process, just don't know what it was at the time, and certainly it wasn't taken lightly.

Until that authority, whatever it was or is, awards it officially, it didn't happen, just like any military decoration or award.

What award would have been given in relation to an attack on a submarine?  I'm not talking about the reported kills, but the 50+ reported attacks. 

LSThiker

Quote from: RiverAux on October 27, 2014, 09:49:16 PM
Quote from: THRAWN on October 27, 2014, 02:37:42 PM
Since CAP is making the claim, it's not my responsibility to tell them what kind of evidence to produce. The Germans and the US Navy have both produced enough evidence that no boats were lost in the areas or time periods claimed that it nullifies the claim.

In case you missed it, the CAP national historian was in this thread specifically denying this claim.  While parts of CAP may still be using this information (since it is still found in various official places), your overall point is moot.

I think both of you are agreeing that the claim is unsupported.

AirAux

In a further attempt to sink CAP and discourage members by demonstrating their uselessness to the Air Force, our renewal membership cards are now plastic coated paper instead of plastic.  Obviously saving $.23 of our $60.00 dues.  Guess you won't flash that around for credibility anymore.. 

Eclipse

Quote from: AirAux on October 27, 2014, 10:37:11 PM
In a further attempt to sink CAP and discourage members by demonstrating their uselessness to the Air Force, our renewal membership cards are now plastic coated paper instead of plastic.

Not really related, but I noticed that as well.

Why not just make it an app and call it a day.?

"That Others May Zoom"

LSThiker

Quote from: AirAux on October 27, 2014, 10:37:11 PM
In a further attempt to sink CAP and discourage members by demonstrating their uselessness to the Air Force,

Talk about a straw man argument.

Майор Хаткевич

Quote from: Eclipse on October 27, 2014, 10:41:41 PM
Quote from: AirAux on October 27, 2014, 10:37:11 PM
In a further attempt to sink CAP and discourage members by demonstrating their uselessness to the Air Force, our renewal membership cards are now plastic coated paper instead of plastic.

Not really related, but I noticed that as well.

Why not just make it an app and call it a day.?

Are you saying that they are even worse than before now?

Eclipse

Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 27, 2014, 11:23:28 PM
Are you saying that they are even worse than before now?

Yes.  My health insurance card is literally thicker as is my library card.
Now that I think of it, so are my kid's school IDs.

"That Others May Zoom"

Майор Хаткевич

I know we had the nice cards 4-5 years ago, which were changed to the skinnier Ines. Are they even worse than that now, or is that what were talking about ?

Eclipse

Next-Gen Worse.

It'll be "print your own" on 20lb bond next.

"That Others May Zoom"

Cliff_Chambliss

Aw for Pete's sake can't you find something meaningful to complain about?  For years CAP Membership Cards were paper as were FAA Certificates, state drivers licenses, and the list goes on.  If something like a coated paper membership card is all it takes to get panties in a wad it's a shallow organization indeed.

On the U Boat saga who really cares?  If all kill claims were true then there were many more aircraft shot down, subs sunk, etc than were ever built.  It's called "Fog of War".  It happens and often it does take years to even start correcting the data.  Get over it.
11th Armored Cavalry Regiment
2d Armored Cavalry Regiment
3d Infantry Division
504th BattleField Surveillance Brigade

ARMY:  Because even the Marines need heros.    
CAVALRY:  If it were easy it would be called infantry.

Private Investigator

Quote from: THRAWN on October 27, 2014, 02:34:45 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on October 27, 2014, 02:26:40 PM
Well, I do agree that CAP history seems to begin and end with the WWII subchasers and while that heritage is important whether or not we sunk any subs it was only a small part of what we did in WWII much less the rest of our history. 

For proof of the overemphasis on WWII, just look at the latest CAP history book which devotes more than half of its pages to WWII era stuff.

It's 4 years out of the past 70+. Reminds me of the high school prom queen who keeps talking about the "glory days". Lots of stuff has happened since then....

I know who you are talking about. 1966 Prom Queen and today still says her little brother went to Viet Nam to take her parents attention away from her. "That little brat!" Funny if was not so sad.  8)

THRAWN

Quote from: Cliff_Chambliss on October 28, 2014, 02:11:44 AM
Aw for Pete's sake can't you find something meaningful to complain about?  For years CAP Membership Cards were paper as were FAA Certificates, state drivers licenses, and the list goes on.  If something like a coated paper membership card is all it takes to get panties in a wad it's a shallow organization indeed.

On the U Boat saga who really cares?  If all kill claims were true then there were many more aircraft shot down, subs sunk, etc than were ever built.  It's called "Fog of War".  It happens and often it does take years to even start correcting the data.  Get over it.

I care. And you should. And all members should. The claim has been made for years. It has also been called into question for years and finally, we have a national historian who is not afraid to put down the Kool Aid and take a good honest look at the evidence.

Claiming that something happened, or using statistics, or any metric that you use to attract members and not having anything other than anecdotal evidence to back it up calls into question the integrity of the organization.
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023