It might help to understand the chain of command. The Joint Chiefs of Staff set out the objectives and appointed Eisenhower as Supreme Commander.
Beneath him were the Army, Navy and Airforce commanders.
Montgomery was in charge of all the land forces. He bought in Percy Hobart who engineered "Hobart's Funnies" which were a series of modified tanks designed to overcome the Beach obstacles, pill boxes, enemy machine guns etc. These were offered to Bradley (US commander) but he rejected all of these save the swimming DD tanks.
Unfortunately these were launched too far out and sunk in heavy seas.
This left the infantry exposed which resulted in heavy casualties.
Nevertheless Omaha beach was secured on D Day and the following day or so the beaches were united into one long strip.
Miscalculation is the deadliest error in any battle.
What drivel.
D Day and Normandy were planned to be completed by September 44, it was completed by August 30th ahead of time.
Patton reported to Bradley who reported to Montgomery until the end of the Normandy campaign when Eisenhower took over command of the land battle with disastrous results which led to the German Ardennes counter offensive which was the greatest defeat of American forces and its heaviest battle casualties in its entire history. Luckily Montgomery stepped in to help and backed US General Joe Collins who stopped the German advance ensuring their ultimate defeat in this battle.
Was the victim in this case arrested for being racist against the scaffolder?
You deliberately miss the point about pure cold rage.
The rage is not against the Sikh community, not the Kirpan, nor even the murderer.
The rage is against the DEI and Positive discrimination policies started by Blair after the McPhearson enquiry that has led to the whole woke racism BLM, white privilege, white guilt campaign to create racism against white people.
This led to the DEI training in the police that led to the attitude of the police officers in accepting the lies of the murderers against the evidence of the distress and innocence of the victim.
You ought to withdraw your criticism as it is deeply wrong.
Not it seems in this case. Verbal abuse is or should be rarely punished with a custodial sentence. This sentence seems excessive as no physical assault took place.
In terms of “Two Tier Justice” can you think of an example where threats to rape and murder Jews made by Palestinian protesters has resulted in an equal custodial sentence?
I can’t.
In my humble opinion if we are to compare the Battle of Normandy with the Battle of Bagration we should take into account the relative forces and their ratios for comparison.
Source Wikipedia and Grok
GERMANRUSSIAN
Combat troops486,493 830,350 (assumed 50%)
Total troops849,0001,670,300
Tanks 118 3,841
Assault guns 452 1,977
Artillery 3,236 32,718
Aircraft 920 7,799
Later in the battle reinforcements arrived but these increased the Russian ratio even further save in Tanks where the numbers increased to 800 German to 6,000 Russian
So the ratios in Russian favour are circa
Men 2 to 1
Tanks 6 to 1
Assault guns5 to 1
Artillery 10 to 1
Aircraft8 to 1
In Normandy
GermanyAllies
Men380 to 640,000 1,452,000 to 2,000,000+
Tanks2,5004,000
Aircraft2,1274,101
Ratios in favour of the Allies
Men 3 to 1
Tanks1.7 to 1
Aircraft2. To 1
Clearly the Russian ratios are overwhelming compared to Normandy.
The difference (IMO) was the strategic plan and tactical capability differential as in equipment quality, in Russia it favoured the Russians whereas in Normandy it favoured the Germans eg;
In Tanks the T34/85 was superior whereas in Normandy the Tiger and Panther were superior.
It is never widely acknowledged particularly in America but the General in charge of the Battle of Normandy was Bernard Law Montgomery who commanded all troops in France including both Generals Bradley and Patton.
Normandy was Montgomery’s finest victory.
@DickheadDarrel@oJARDINEo The reason for his sentence is that he pleaded guilty rather than defending his actions leaving him at the mercy of the court of which there was none.
Evidence is evidence and simply saying "you should not have seen that" speaks volumes as to the rights and wrongs of the issue.
Colin Brazier set it out brilliantly in a pod cast yesterday and the issue is simple.
Since the tragic murder of Stephen Lawrence and the Mc Pherson report the Blair Government sought to change society (with good intentions but dreadful consequences) by using "Racism" as a "heresy" similar to "Witchcraft" in the 1600s which perversely has not led to racial harmony but rather to racism against white people.
We have to return to the simple rule of equality everywhere for everyone with no special treatment to any race or religion.
The Kirpan is a symbol of the Sikh religion. The Sikh religion is about kindness, peace and love. The Kirpan is a weapon that can kill, it must therefore change to reflect the main tenants of the religion. The Kirpan needs to be modified so that it remains a symbol yet not a deadly weapon.
Remove or blunt the blade or if not then it will have to be banned.
@Saritanitharwal@Rothmus I do not see that any of that matters. The simple fact is that unless you treat EVERYONE the same under the law then the law is biased to one person over another and that is in itself prejudice.
No one, least of all Nigel Farage, is sowing the seeds of racial hatred or division. Nor is he disrespecting the Novak family.
All he is saying is that everyone must be treated equally under the law.
The current situation is that there is clearly a two tier policing and judicial system. Starmer, Badenoch and Davey are all shouting at Farage for things he never said. Starmer and Davey clearly want a DEI system that operates preferentially towards ethnic minorities. They just need to say it loud and clear so that everyone
knows where they stand and can vote accordingly.