Say that you’re a military historian.
One day an American school or newspaper asks you, “We would like you to write a list of the most impressive feats accomplished in WWII, for educational purposes. This will be published.”
Now, without knowing any further details, would you take this to mean that Axis feats should be included on the list as well, or only Allied feats?
You’ve omitted
© ask them for a more detailed brief (including what they mean by “educational purposes”, as well as the substantive question you pose)
(d) who’s going to publish it, how, who retains the copyright, and what sort of payment might be involved.
Both.
If you take it to mean Allied feats only, you remove the biggest individual badass in history from contention, even though he was a heroic figure fighting to save his homeland from an evil empire, just because he happened to be technically on the Axis side.
Mannerheim?
I’m guessing Simo Häyhä
Anyway, I’d be more wondering whether they meant individual feats, or group accomplishments, but yeah, I’d consider both Allies and Axis.
Was that a deliberate attempt at derailing someone else’s thread? If so, congratulations.
There’s also the feats accomplished by both Sweden and Switzerland; maintaining neutrality and making a fair few bob at the same time
If I’m a military historian I’ll make the list accurate and include the Axis feats. If someone only wants impressive Allied feats they have to ask for it.
Häyhä was only active during Winter War - Finland wasn’t yet allied to Germany and Soviet Union wasn’t really part of the allies at that point.
Joe DiMaggio’s 56-game hitting streak.
How do you define “in WWII”?
If they wanted to exclude one side of the war, they should have specified. It seems a bit silly to assume that specific of an exclusion without specifying it - if you’re trying not to include things that promote the ‘bad guys’, the USSR was not exactly a shining beacon of democracy.
If it’s an American school or newspaper asking, they likely are only interested in the stuff done by Americans. Maybe toss the Brits a bone, but nothing that lessens the perception that we won WW2 all by ourselves.
And that’s a shame. The Eastern Front is such a tragic portion of history. In my opinion the Eastern Front has ramifications today in how Russia views Europe and its borders. The amount of people the USSR lost during that war is not properly comprehended by the West.
And we wonder why Putin views US actions with skepticism. If we look at World War II with a bit of the Russian perspective and take into account justifiable desire for Russian security the world today could be a better place.
The industrialization of the USSR, to me, was an impressive feat.
.406 was no small accomplishment, either.
I thought of that first, but that was topped by many players before Williams.
Sure, but that does that mean you would include him if the list was only of Allies?
(Kind of brings up the question of whether Soviet Union would be considered Allies if you’re making a semi-jingoistic list for Americans?)
But not during WWII.
I’m thinking Otto Skorzeny.
The man was dangerous as a Jedi on a good day.