Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Wars and ConflictsΒ  permalink

Liverpool

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 1 - 18 of 18
  • Message 1.Β 

    Posted by caveman1944 (U11305692) on Sunday, 23rd January 2011

    Watched old hat stuff on telly about the bombing, WW2 . I watched it purely for one reason; to verify what i suspected, that Liverpool would not get a mention...it never has when bombed places were mentioned.
    Clearly, some Liverpool housewife has upset officialdom and the place no longer exists.
    It is odd though, as in April1944 i got two letters in THailand , one of which was typed, and thoughtfully spoke of what a person so far from home ,and incarcerated as I was ,would want to hear.
    i passed that letter around , and one person said " your mother did not write that ". She didn't, it was written on her behalf by a female cousin , but nothing to indicate that.
    Now how did he know ? He knew nothing of me or my family.
    Ah ! I spoke (without realising it ) with a 'scouse'. accent and no 'scouse ' mother was capable of that.

    May I continue on the subject of bombing with a thought which only just struck me ?
    What a twit HItler was. Why attack a variety of places including London, when, had he directed the lot to Liverpool from the outset, that would have been curtains !!!??
    John

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Sunday, 23rd January 2011

    There was a story told to me by both my father and my uncles who having families in Bootle, were granted leave after the May blitz. They said as they came back up Scotland Road, many houses were flying white flags from their windows. Having watched the program and seen the stories of people leaving the cities, I can understand it. i was also told by a senior old time fireman, that the plans for the National Fire Service were based on plans drawn up in Bootle Town hall.

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Sunday, 23rd January 2011

    cavemen1944

    I don't think "never" is totally appropriate..

    A few months ago there was a special report from parts of Liverpool that I watched on News 24 on the anniversary of the beginning of the major bombing of Liverpool.. My grown up son too was watching because when I mentioned having seen a "Stan Smart" being interviewed as a survivor from one cellar shelter where people died as much from scalding water as from more normal bomb damage, he got to the name before me- "Stan Smart" being the name of his grandfather and uncle- though neither had any connection to Liverpool- as far as I am aware

    The same piece was used in another programme not so long ago, with the same interview with the children at a Liverpool Primary School that now stands on or near the place where Mr Smart survived, with the schoolchildren explaining just why it was important for them to know about the history of local people.

    As for bombing Liverpool earlier, I understood that even bombing the South of England meant stretching the missions pretty much to their limits in the early part of the war..

    Military equipment is not a forte (if I have one) but I get the feeling that with Hitler's emphasis on "lightning strike" Blitzkrieg warfare he was likely to be more interested in the use of air-power as an evolution of the First World War artillery barrage- that is softening up the enemy for the Army to go in on the ground.

    I think it quite probable that Hitler was quite genuine in assuring Great Britain that he was prepared to leave us out of his European wars, as long as we were prepared to keep out of them- leaving that as his zone..

    Before the First World War the Germans had the Schlieffen Plan to conquer France again in the files for almost 20 years. All the evidence suggests that the attacks on the UK were not really the result of serious long-term planning as to how Germany would succeed where other "master-race" states in Europe had failed for 400 years.

    The Battle of Britain was fought by the Germans to win air supremacy over the English Channel so that the Germans could neutralise the effectiveness of the Royal Navy, allowing the Bliztkrieg Army to cross the Channel.. The bombing of London seems to be a classic case of "mission creep".

    Cass

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 3.

    Posted by LairigGhru (U14051689) on Monday, 24th January 2011

    caveman1944,

    I guess you must have been referring to Ch.5's documentary 'Secrets of the Blitz: Revealed', which was broadcast on 20 Jan.

    Various cities that were bombed WERE mentioned, and I agree with you that it was surprising that Liverpool wasn't mentioned. However, the programme had a lot of ground to cover and it made its points by mentioning London, Coventry, Bristol, Plymouth and Manchester in the time available. I don't (as a former Merseysider myself whose family was bombed out prior to my birth) take umbrage at the fact that it didn't happen to get a mention. Everyone realises, I'm sure, how important Liverpool was and is.

    Report message4

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by MB (U177470) on Monday, 24th January 2011

    Lots of towns and cities were bombed but you cannot mention them all. The towns in the North East of Scotland received regular attacks because it was easy to come in low over the sea and often be away before defences could respond but most people do not know of the casualties there.

    Liverpool was more difficult to attack than London because of the distance so they would not be able to drop the bombload that they did on the docks in London.

    If the Liverpool had been bombed earlier then there would have been some disruption but more anti-aircraft guns would have been moved there.

    And more cargoes would be put through other ports.

    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 5.

    Posted by caveman1944 (U11305692) on Monday, 31st January 2011

    MB
    THose attacks were odd aircraft by day and not concentrated night attacks.
    THere were apprentices on strike up there were there not? So I learned !
    Miners were too. Glory be, strikes in wartime. Incredible. Worse than white flags.
    Liverpool handled 95% of everything incoming and outgoing., so much for other docks.
    London is one hell of a big place and can absorb a lot of bombing.
    Anyway, as I had pointed out to others, out of six years of war, there was eleven months of bombing, as also pointed out in that program,, and those months include weather etc which prevented bombing.
    I had experienced Merseyside bombing, and in 1940/1, walked to work over a mile during raids. I didn't notice much in Newcastle when on an ack-ack site there prior to Singapore.

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 6.

    Posted by Mike Alexander (U1706714) on Monday, 31st January 2011

    Strikes in wartime - well who can blame them? The unions held back from striking during WWI, having a "gentlemen's agreement" with the government. Unfortunately the government completed reneged on their side of the deal after the war. The resulting lack of trust contributed greatly to the crises that culminated in the national strike of 1926. Anyway, after this betrayal, any union would be wise to be sceptical of no-strike agreements during wartime.

    Interestingly, the only significant strikes of WWI also brought accusations of unpatriotic back-stabbing. The truth was that the government's "business as usual" economic policy was a disaster in wartime, and the 'red Clydeside' strikers were merely fighting for their livelihoods, their rents having skyrocketed beyond their ability to pay, at the hands of greedy landlords exploiting increased demand due to wartime industrial expansion.

    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 7.

    Posted by MB (U177470) on Monday, 31st January 2011

    Why is it that workers striking to take advantage of the demands of wartime are "fighting for their livelihoods" but landlords doing the same are "greedy"?

    I seem to remember that the Red Clydsiders became more enthusiastic about helping the war effort once Russia was attacked, before then their friends the Russians were of course helping the Nazis until then.

    My comment about bombing attacks on the North East of Scotland, these were obviously not as heavy as the big raids on the big cities but they were at times almost daily and the towns attacked were often quite small so a few casualties would have more impact.

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by FormerlyOldHermit (U3291242) on Friday, 4th February 2011

    I agree with you on that, Lairighru, about the need to cover other cities but Liverpool was bombed more than any other city outside of London. Its importance to the war effort is consistently overlooked and the battering it took is too. It gets a bit galling hearing about how badly places like Birmingham, Plymouth and Portsmouth and of course Manchester had it when outside of London, Liverpool was the worst hit of the big industrial cities.

    Report message9

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 9.

    Posted by MB (U177470) on Saturday, 5th February 2011

    I thought Hull was the worst bombed city outside London?

    MB

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 10.

    Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Saturday, 5th February 2011

    Per head of population the County Borough of Bootle just north of Liverpool was. It held most of the major docks, including the Gladson Dock, which was Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Port for the Western Approaches and the escort groups including 2nd Escort Group, Captain Walkers group.

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by Hastur1 (U14272072) on Monday, 7th February 2011

    This may be the urban myth that grew up about white flags and peace marches in Liverpool at the time The truth was that the "white flags" were curtains flapping out of broken windows.

    Your point is well made though, it does seem strange Liverpool never is mentioned in the same breath as the likes of Bristol, Coventry et al. Yet Churchill described the incident referred to in an earlier post (the death of 169 people following the bombing of Durning Road) as one of the worst incidents of the war.

    It is also worth noting that the Heinkel bomber had a range of around 1400 miles with a full bomb load, so could reach its targets. Fuel considerations were of more importance to fighters operating over England.

    Report message12

  • Message 13

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Monday, 7th February 2011

    Just finished watching a DVD called Spitfire combat operations 1939-1945, which is a series of short films and does not do what it says on the box. LOL the first film is one of those US Why we fight films, which covers the Battle of Britain and then the Blitz. But again focusing mostly on London, but a must for anybody interested in the BoB and Blitz.. The second is the servicing of a Spitfire, the third the different Mks. and the last Fighter Pilot. It was another gem from that chain of shops where everything is a Pound. Yesterday I watched the invasion of Russia, all done from the German angle. I have Normandy to Paris to look forward to having already seen The Fighting Lady and Memphis Belle. (On the same DVD.)

    Report message13

  • Message 14

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by MB (U177470) on Tuesday, 8th February 2011

    Just had a quick look in Wikipedia, it has the range of the Heinkel 111 as just over 1400 miles with a full fuel load, that suggests to me that it is not with a full bomb load.

    Report message14

  • Message 15

    , in reply to message 14.

    Posted by stalti (U14278018) on Wednesday, 9th February 2011

    MB
    Hull was indeed the most bombed city outside London and u are the only person to mention it

    it suffered the first daylight raid and the last bombing raid (1945)

    over half the population were made homeless - because of the news blackouts at the time it was never mentioned by nam - and lots of its damage was caused by "dumps" by bombers failing to reach their target

    i only know this because of a report on local telly recently - i never knew Hull had even been bombed - not once has Hull been mentioned

    re strikes in ww2 - betteshanger miners went on strike in 1942 about the payments made for working difficult seams - the owners refused to pay - the miners struck and some were jailed thousands were fined - all refused to pay and the government backed down

    it turned out (cant remember the book) that the owners were mining the difficult seams paid by the government - holding back the proffitable seams for after the war - patriots or what

    and even better - most pits had a home guard unit filled with fit young aggressive men - patriots we assume - even tho they were exempt as they were reserved occupation

    st

    Report message15

  • Message 16

    , in reply to message 15.

    Posted by MB (U177470) on Wednesday, 9th February 2011

    I think Hull also suffered worst from attack with butterfly bombs and this was kept secret to avoid panic in the rest of the country because they were really nasty anti-personnel devices.

    Report message16

  • Message 17

    , in reply to message 15.

    Posted by FormerlyOldHermit (U3291242) on Wednesday, 23rd February 2011

    Nope, pretty sure it was Liverpool that was the most bombed city outside of London during the war Stalti. Estimated 70,000 made homeless, around 4,000 deaths and half the metropolitan area's housing stock destroyed? I think in terms of bomb tonnage at the least Liverpool and Merseyside had the most bombs dropped on it, including Bootle where the docks such as Gladstone Dock were located.

    Report message17

  • Message 18

    , in reply to message 17.

    Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Wednesday, 23rd February 2011

    I grew up in Bootle, (Being born in 1946), and I remember well bomb sites or prefabs built on gaps between houses. Strangely when we came to sell my late parents end of terrace house in 1994, we found that we could get the full market value for it as it suffered from bomb damage, IE the outer wall had a slight bulge in it. A bomb had landed in the centre of the row of houses, demolishing a number of them, the houses further away suffered less damage the further away you went because they were buffered by the house next door, but ours on the end had nothing to buffer the shockwave. It seemed though that the landlord was paid War Damage to repair the house but pocketed it. My parents having moved in after my Grandmother died in 1950, bought it off him in 1952 Β£400. My Father I think must have failed to get a survey, but as he was still inside the bottle he climbed into after leaving the Royal Marines, I could understand it.

    GF

    Report message18

Back to top

About this Board

The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.

or Β to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

The message board is closed for posting.

This messageboard is .

Find out more about this board's

Search this Board

Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ iD

Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ navigation

Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.