Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Newbury Today Forum _ Newbury News _ Lack of acknowledgement
Posted by: Phil_D11102 Sep 13 2012, 04:36 PM
I feel absolutely insulted that the NWN has not even mentioned deep in the bowels of this week's edition that it's now been 20 years since the USAF left RAF GC.
I have always felt that the NWN has had a love affair with those who stood out side the fence. I am speaking about those who cost the UK tax payer millions over the years in various cost from clean up to repairing criminal damage Not to acknowledge some 50 years of presence in the Newbury area is shameful.
I always felt my time spent inside the fence at Greenham was worthwhile as the biggest threat to non Soviet Pact countries was stared down. I felt my time helped ensure future generations had liberties we sometimes take for granted.
Thank you NWN for your lack of acknowledgement from the thousands of U.S. forces who have served at RAF Greenham Common.
Maybe now I can understand why there aren't any monuments to the U.S. military personnel in Newbury.
Posted by: stewiegriffin Sep 13 2012, 04:47 PM
Phil, do come off it.
America is not the big deal to the British most Americans think it should be.
Are we supposed to be so grateful to you that we build statues to celebrate your gracing us with your wonderful American-ness?
If it's gratitude for your selfless service to the lowly folk of Britain you're looking for, I fear you may be barking up the wrong tree here.
Perhaps instead you should be grateful to us for allowing your country to base its missiles here?
Posted by: Penelope Sep 13 2012, 04:48 PM
I have always felt that the NWN has had a love affair with those who stood out side the fence. I am speaking about those who cost the UK tax payer millions over the years in various cost from clean up to repairing criminal damage Not to acknowledge some 50 years of presence in the Newbury area is shameful.
I always felt my time spent inside the fence at Greenham was worthwhile as the biggest threat to non Soviet Pact countries was stared down. I felt my time helped ensure future generations had liberties we sometimes take for granted.
Thank you NWN for your lack of acknowledgement from the thousands of U.S. forces who have served at RAF Greenham Common.
Maybe now I can understand why there aren't any monuments to the U.S. military personnel in Newbury.
It's not just the nwn who had the love affair, it extended throughout the media as a whole. Whole brigades of reporters talking to the "sisters" whilst the life of the camp and those serving within went largely unreported. And when the servicemen went the whole thing was gently swept under the shagpile like a bad stain.
Posted by: Adrian Hollister Sep 13 2012, 04:53 PM
It's good they are gone. NWN should have celebrated the fact that they have gone. Doesn't matter if you were pro or anti - it was a significant bit of our local history.
Posted by: Nothing Much Sep 13 2012, 05:05 PM
I think you will find that many folk remember the times that Greenham Common was used.
I have spent 30 years either cycling there as a child
or taking photos of big bro by his Jag (Even he admits it is a Mondeo)
on the tarrmac where a where a jet dropped a fuel tank on another on the ground. Burnt for 5 days.
The house I once lived in was used as a mess for 101st troops before D Day. Their art is still preserved in cellars.
I have visited the Cambridge memorial to American Airmen.
Best wishes, Christopher.
Posted by: Phil_D11102 Sep 13 2012, 05:08 PM
America is not the big deal to the British most Americans think it should be.
Are we supposed to be so grateful to you that we build statues to celebrate your gracing us with your wonderful American-ness?
If it's gratitude for your selfless service to the lowly folk of Britain you're looking for, I fear you may be barking up the wrong tree here.
Perhaps instead you should be grateful to us for allowing your country to base its missiles here?
To think back in 1944, the last time some American foot touched soil was up at RAF Greenham Common. That person jumped out of an airplane into France to fight back an enemy that was not at America's door, but at England's door.
Maybe that person with his wonderful American-ness didn't need to jump to his death that night or some other time. Maybe he should of went back to the grace of his family in America.
American's PROUDLY came to England, to Greeham Common for 50 years to help protect your butts as well as the butts of American's. You would gladly put down a monument to some footballer, but not to people who risked their lives, and in some cases gave their lives.
Instead of barking up your tree maybe it should be cut down. While you are probably in the minority of those who are unappreciative of their allies, it's the same minority that tarnish the reputation of an entire nation.
I am grateful that the missles were placed here, because it was through leadership who understood the threat and they had the courage to allow this to happen, but it took dedication to stand there ready to ensure that they were never used.
I am not looking to graditude, I am looking for acknowledgement of history and to the dedication of thousands who put their lives on the line so you can slur them later.
Posted by: dannyboy Sep 13 2012, 05:11 PM
Funny, I don't remember any love affair with the Peace Women in the NWN.
Posted by: Ron Sep 13 2012, 05:22 PM
Maybe that person with his wonderful American-ness didn't need to jump to his death that night or some other time. Maybe he should of went back to the grace of his family in America.
American's PROUDLY came to England, to Greeham Common for 50 years to help protect your butts as well as the butts of American's. You would gladly put down a monument to some footballer, but not to people who risked their lives, and in some cases gave their lives.
Instead of barking up your tree maybe it should be cut down. While you are probably in the minority of those who are unappreciative of their allies, it's the same minority that tarnish the reputation of an entire nation.
I am grateful that the missles were placed here, because it was through leadership who understood the threat and they had the courage to allow this to happen, but it took dedication to stand there ready to ensure that they were never used.
I am not looking to graditude, I am looking for acknowledgement of history and to the dedication of thousands who put their lives on the line so you can slur them later.
If I recollect correctly we had stood on our own for some considerable time during which we paid a considerable amount of gold to the USA for armaments, etc., before they came into the action. Brought on by the fact that the Japs hammered them in the Pacific not for any generousity of heart!!
Posted by: stewiegriffin Sep 13 2012, 05:24 PM
Maybe that person with his wonderful American-ness didn't need to jump to his death that night or some other time. Maybe he should of went back to the grace of his family in America.
American's PROUDLY came to England, to Greeham Common for 50 years to help protect your butts as well as the butts of American's. You would gladly put down a monument to some footballer, but not to people who risked their lives, and in some cases gave their lives.
Instead of barking up your tree maybe it should be cut down. While you are probably in the minority of those who are unappreciative of their allies, it's the same minority that tarnish the reputation of an entire nation.
I am grateful that the missles were placed here, because it was through leadership who understood the threat and they had the courage to allow this to happen, but it took dedication to stand there ready to ensure that they were never used.
I am not looking to graditude, I am looking for acknowledgement of history and to the dedication of thousands who put their lives on the line so you can slur them later.
Oh, purleeeze.
As everyone knows, America chose to sit out WW2 until the Japs forced its hand. Where were you all before Pearl Harbour?
And who exactly was 'risking their lives' by working at Greenham Common in the 80's? Absolutely nobody. Unless there was an attempted Soviet invasion I managed to sleep through.
That there was a US base here is a matter of historical fact. I simply fail to see the need for monuments to people who spent a few years driving absurdly oversized cars around town and then went home again.
Posted by: Penelope Sep 13 2012, 05:26 PM
Maybe that person with his wonderful American-ness didn't need to jump to his death that night or some other time. Maybe he should of went back to the grace of his family in America.
American's PROUDLY came to England, to Greeham Common for 50 years to help protect your butts as well as the butts of American's. You would gladly put down a monument to some footballer, but not to people who risked their lives, and in some cases gave their lives.
Instead of barking up your tree maybe it should be cut down. While you are probably in the minority of those who are unappreciative of their allies, it's the same minority that tarnish the reputation of an entire nation.
I am grateful that the missles were placed here, because it was through leadership who understood the threat and they had the courage to allow this to happen, but it took dedication to stand there ready to ensure that they were never used.
I am not looking to graditude, I am looking for acknowledgement of history and to the dedication of thousands who put their lives on the line so you can slur them later.
God bless the 101st airborne without whom we would not have stemmed the Nazi tide.
Posted by: Squelchy Sep 13 2012, 05:27 PM
Maybe that person with his wonderful American-ness didn't need to jump to his death that night or some other time. Maybe he should of went back to the grace of his family in America.
Unless of course he lived near Pearl Harbour.
Did anyone lose their lives at Greenham? (apart from one of the Peace Women?), as for monuments we have a Micky D's a Starbucks a Pizza Hut and a KFC, so thank you.
I was there on the Easter Sunday when the 501st Tactical missile wing (motto: Poised to Deter Qiuck to React) completely failed to stop thirty women dressed as bunny rabbits from getting over the fence.
We all hoped the the Ruskies didn't attack in fancy dress after that.
Posted by: dannyboy Sep 13 2012, 05:31 PM
The entire Cold War was an embarassment between two posturing sides keen on World domination, but who were too scared to actually confront each other.
Reminds me of the school bullies who are supposed to have a scrap to spend the entire break standing face to face saying 'Yeah?!' to each other & then later beat the **** out of some younger kid to prove how tough they are.
Posted by: Penelope Sep 13 2012, 05:33 PM
Reminds me of the school bullies who are supposed to have a scrap to spend the entire break standing face to face saying 'Yeah?!' to each other & then later beat the **** out of some younger kid to prove how tough they are.
So, you would have preferred the alternative?
Posted by: dannyboy Sep 13 2012, 05:35 PM
The allies at the end of WWII shaking hands & congratulating each other for a job well done? Yes.
Posted by: Phil_D11102 Sep 13 2012, 05:46 PM
Yes, England paid for armaments, and the U.S. stood out of the war because of politics, not lack of will. The Japanese may of got the first strike in, but one battle don't make a war.
That there wan a US base here is a matter of historical fact. I simply fail to see the need for monuments to people who spent a few years driving absurdly oversized cars around town and then went home again
The fact war didn't break out was because Greenham was ready. Funny how there is monument to the peace women right outside the gate. Sure, they were the ones who ended the Cold War...
You mean the woman who walked into traffic. Terrible loss. Who died up at Greeham? Paratroopers training and those who jumped into France and fought on later. In aircraft accidents, 2 in 1958, another in 1964. One Airman was murdered in a hit and run accident while he was on vacation on the south coast in the late 1980's.
Posted by: Penelope Sep 13 2012, 05:48 PM
Dream on.
Posted by: Phil_D11102 Sep 13 2012, 05:48 PM
I thought the western allies did that, but the Soviet Union had other plans..
Posted by: lordtup Sep 13 2012, 05:53 PM
I am deliberately not quoting any individual postings on this topic but it is very interesting how history has been interpreted by those who obviously where not present at the time but who have read widely on the subject ,material written equally by people who weren't there either.
Though the USA air force's presence in Newbury is part of it's history, in no way should we assume that they were here for our benefit whether 1944 or 1984 . 
Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 13 2012, 06:00 PM
The question is, did we benefit by them being 'over paid and over here'? Regardless of motive, I suggest Europe benefited from the US presence, assuming we wished to stem Soviet sprawl. It was a quid pro quo.
Posted by: dannyboy Sep 13 2012, 06:01 PM
Both sides had plans.
Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 13 2012, 06:04 PM
Although the Brits were less than impressed by the alleged US support for the IRA.
Posted by: Rusty Bullet Sep 13 2012, 06:05 PM
Phil_D11102, just a suggestion, but you might want to read a few history books before you start shouting the odds.
You forgot this (or maybe you didn't now, or maybe it was inconvenient to your list.
http://kingsclere.org.uk/pdf/murders.pdf
Posted by: Strafin Sep 13 2012, 06:07 PM
To be fair Greenham Common has a lot of history, and forms a part of modern Newbury. I think the NWN should have reported on the 20th Anniversary of the USAF leaving as it is significant. I don't think there should be a tribute as such, but I don' think there should be one for the peace women either.
Posted by: Squelchy Sep 13 2012, 06:08 PM
If I remember correctly, wasn't Macdonalds (allegedly) the biggest corporate doner to NORAID, which meant that not one of their restaurants ever suffered a bombing?
Posted by: Strafin Sep 13 2012, 06:13 PM
No.
Posted by: Biker1 Sep 13 2012, 06:18 PM
I think "peace women" was / is a misnomer.
We all want peace, it's just that some have different ways of trying to achieve it.
Posted by: JeffG Sep 13 2012, 06:20 PM
What's so special about 20 years, anyway? Commemorations normally tend to go in 25's.
Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 13 2012, 06:26 PM
As it happens it was the Soviet Union that did the lion's share of defeating the Germans and winning the war as a whole, and mainland Britain was saved from invasion by victory in the Battle of Britain which was won by RAF fighter command with faithful help from Polish, Czech, Australian, New Zealand, South African, and a few other European nations. I'm grateful to the American nation for their contribution, but there's nothing glorious about war and many people did their duty with honour on both sides of the conflict.
Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 13 2012, 06:32 PM
Yes, imagine what it felt like to be a german soldier seeing that armada coming at you from over the horizon!
Posted by: Phil_D11102 Sep 13 2012, 07:01 PM
You forgot this (or maybe you didn't now, or maybe it was inconvenient to your list.
http://kingsclere.org.uk/pdf/murders.pdf
I have heard of something that happened, but you are saying that incident describes 50 years of the American precence in the area. Nevertheless it's not something I am covering up or ignoring, or happy about.
Funny how there have been reports about the peace camps after 10 years, as well as the fences around the base coming down after 10 years.
I take it you never heard of the Eagle Squadrons, and other American's who served in HM Forces before Pearl Harbor.
I don't want this to be a p*ssing contest, but you would think after 20 years after the last USAF personnel left RAF GC, the event would of been acknowledged by the local press, and by this time a monument put up at the base for all who served, regardless of nationality or role...
Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 13 2012, 07:26 PM
Sure, there were seven US servicemen involved in the Battle of Britain, and I mean no disrespect to them, but the fact remains that Blighty was saved from invasion by the fight she put up with her largely non-American friends, and the war as a whole was won by the Russians. That last part is significant because the Russians were our allies and they're the "enemy" you're slating, and like you say
I don't like your bellicose glorification of war, and certainly not of the cold war. If humanaity can come through without nuking itself to eternity then that would indeed be something to celebrate, but we're some way from achieving that. A good next step for Britain would be a complete nuclear disarm, now that would be worth a plaque.
Posted by: dannyboy Sep 13 2012, 07:27 PM
You forgot this (or maybe you didn't now, or maybe it was inconvenient to your list.
http://kingsclere.org.uk/pdf/murders.pdf
that was a spat between American GIs & MPs. The landlady unfortunately got caught in the crossfire.....
Posted by: dannyboy Sep 13 2012, 07:31 PM
I don't like your bellicose glorification of war, and certainly not of the cold war. If humanaity can come through without nuking itself to eternity then that would indeed be something to celebrate, but we're some way from achieving that. A good next step for Britain would be a complete nuclear disarm, now that would be worth a plaque.
The Russians were in it for whatever they could get out of it. At the start of the War they invaded Poland from the east a week after the Germans from the west.
Posted by: Darren Sep 13 2012, 07:41 PM
And most likely, if Stalin hadn't known about the A-Bomb (they found out in 1942), wouldn't have stopped at the Elbe as there is no way the combines US, UK, Free Polish, ANZAC, Indian etc. forces would have been able to stop the Red Army had it wanted to go to the French coast. Patton knew the threat they posed.
Back to the OP. Certainly something to recognise the contribution made to keeping the peace (however you want to define it) through the conflicts. It doesn't need to "glorify" war and nor should it. It should recognise that GC marked that last point in many young men's lives, for many lost, without even seeing the enemy.
Remembrance in all it's forms is just as much about looking to the future as it is about looking at the past.
Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 13 2012, 07:42 PM
Dont' get me wrong, I say they were our allies, but they fought a brutal, disgusting, uncivilised war, raping as they rampaged into Berlin, and Stalin was a monster no less than Hitler. The Nazis were monsters, but not all Germans were Nazis, and Britain has its skeletons too. War is hull, and people can be batsards, the point is that we learn from our mistakes isn't it? The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was one of the good things to come out of WWII, but it took the UK decades to ratify it and it's probably one of the most loathed piece of UK legislation. Plus ça change.
Posted by: Blake Sep 13 2012, 07:44 PM
As everyone knows, America chose to sit out WW2 until the Japs forced its hand. Where were you all before Pearl Harbour?
And who exactly was 'risking their lives' by working at Greenham Common in the 80's? Absolutely nobody. Unless there was an attempted Soviet invasion I managed to sleep through.
That there was a US base here is a matter of historical fact. I simply fail to see the need for monuments to people who spent a few years driving absurdly oversized cars around town and then went home again.
How then do you explain the Eagle Squadrons who fought in the Battle of Britain, Clare Chenault, the Flying Tigers and many Americans who, as individuals, could not get here fast enough to help us.
I hate this anti-American bigotry. The world would be a dark place without the Pax Americana. Perhaps you'd rather China was hegemonic (with Tianamen Square treatment and one party governance).
Britain's foreign policy has always been about building alliances with countries for centuries, be it Portugal, France, with Japan, so many examples.
Posted by: Phil_D11102 Sep 13 2012, 07:45 PM
I don't like your bellicose glorification of war, and certainly not of the cold war. If humanaity can come through without nuking itself to eternity then that would indeed be something to celebrate, but we're some way from achieving that. A good next step for Britain would be a complete nuclear disarm, now that would be worth a plaque.
What was the count, some 6700 Americans in the RAF or RCAF before Pearl Harbor. How they were used was decided by neturality laws and the the RAF/RCAF.
I think the part the base played in history, global and local is of more signifigance than a plaque outside of house who some celeberity who spent the night there. Do I gloify war, far from it, and I won't ignore what happened up at the base over the 50 years.
As for the Russians, they wanted extract revenge on the Nazi's for Hitler's betrayal of the non aggressive pact he signed with Stalin. Proof of this is based on the number of German military units surrending to the US/UK forces as opposed to the Russians. It was a political decision to have the Russians take Berlin.
Posted by: dannyboy Sep 13 2012, 07:50 PM
The smart thing to do would have been ally with Hilter in the early days of the war & then have invaded the Soviet Union.
several Wallonian units did just this as Belgium fell......
Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 13 2012, 07:56 PM
I'm sorry, I meant to mention the Canadians but forgot, you're quite right.
As I say, I mean no disrespect. I've visited a number of battle grounds and civil memorials around the UK, and I've stood at the Canadian Memorial in the New Forest. For me one of the most significant memorials is the Turkish memorial to Anzacs who fell at Gallipoli (though I've never visited), significant because of the honour and respect shown to them by the Turkish state, their enemy.
Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 13 2012, 07:59 PM
I think people are unfairly confusing international politics with the service men that had little power to decide where they plied there effort. To that end, I tend to agree with Phil_D11102. In the event things got messy, the first ones we would have look to do something about it would have been the armed services.
Posted by: stewiegriffin Sep 13 2012, 08:03 PM
I hate this anti-American bigotry. The world would be a dark place without the Pax Americana. Perhaps you'd rather China was hegemonic (with Tianamen Square treatment and one party governance).
Britain's foreign policy has always been about building alliances with countries for centuries, be it Portugal, France, with Japan, so many examples.
What the **** has China got to do with it? Have you been on the rice wine?
And I'm fairly sure that parts of the world are already fairly dark due to American foreign policy.
The Middle East for instance. And Iraq is several tens of thousands of people short right now due to America's lust for oil. And I'm pretty sure that Vietnam and Korea could have done without them too.
America has done far more harm than good in the last few decades. Bigotry doesn't enter into it. Just fact.
Posted by: Darren Sep 13 2012, 08:21 PM
Korea was started by the North Koreans, who invaded the South in an attempt to unify the country under Kim Il-sung. The US forces in the area did intervene at the request of South Korea, who in turn sought UN support which incorporated US, UK forces along with many other nations.
Posted by: Roost Sep 13 2012, 09:52 PM
And I'm fairly sure that parts of the world are already fairly dark due to American foreign policy.
The Middle East for instance. And Iraq is several tens of thousands of people short right now due to America's lust for oil. And I'm pretty sure that Vietnam and Korea could have done without them too.
America has done far more harm than good in the last few decades. Bigotry doesn't enter into it. Just fact.
Really? I think the Middle East situation may have something more to do with British foreign policy from more than a few decades ago.
Posted by: Darren Sep 13 2012, 10:04 PM
And the continual tit-for-tat actions of Suni against Shia and Shia against Suni.
Posted by: dannyboy Sep 14 2012, 07:12 AM
Just like the Afghans requesting Soviet millitary help in 1979!
Posted by: Mark NWN Sep 14 2012, 08:37 AM
Before this thread veers into choppy waters it is my understanding that we have been attempting to contact some people who would contribute to a stronger story and would wish to be included, the issue has not been ignored or forgotten, merely that we are trying to broaden some aspects of it, and you should look out for it in the pages of Thursday's NWN.
Hope this helps.
Posted by: Timbo Sep 14 2012, 08:42 AM
Don't give into the pressure of the American's.
Posted by: Adrian Hollister Sep 14 2012, 08:48 AM
Hope this helps.
I do hope you cover all aspects of the history: pro and anti; the people and the legacy.
Posted by: Amelie Sep 14 2012, 08:57 AM
Britain's foreign policy has only ever been about it's own self interest and making the rich richer.
"Over a quarter of the world’s tax havens are British property. More than half of Britain’s colonial territories and dependencies are tax havens. Strip out Antarctica, the military bases and the scarcely-habited rocks and atolls, and of the 11 remaining properties, only the Falkland Islands is not a recognised haven. The obvious conclusion is that Britain retains these colonies for one purpose: to help banks, corporations and the ultra-rich to avoid tax."
— George Monbiot
Pin-striped Pirates
Posted by: dannyboy Sep 14 2012, 09:17 AM
"Over a quarter of the world’s tax havens are British property. More than half of Britain’s colonial territories and dependencies are tax havens. Strip out Antarctica, the military bases and the scarcely-habited rocks and atolls, and of the 11 remaining properties, only the Falkland Islands is not a recognised haven. The obvious conclusion is that Britain retains these colonies for one purpose: to help banks, corporations and the ultra-rich to avoid tax."
— George Monbiot
Pin-striped Pirates
Could you name a country which does not have a FP based around the self interest of its Citizens?
Posted by: Squelchy Sep 14 2012, 09:47 AM
Hope this helps.
In February 1982 Newbury District Council revoked the common land bye-laws for Greenham Common and became the ‘private landlord’ for the site, instituting Court proceedings to reclaim eviction costs. Seven years later, this action was ruled as illegal by the House of Lords. (Jolly well done Newbury)
At Reading Crown Court on 18 May 1991, Judge Josh Lait declared the fence around Greenham Common to be illegal. (Which meant that prosecutions for getting over it or around it could be struck out) This was 'hushed up' at the time.
You might also like to point out that between October 5th and 10th 1987 Newbury Civic Leaders were flown to the States for a holiday, sorry, fact finding mission, sponsored by the United States Airforce.
Although it appears that some on here have no memory of how your paper was used to help the pro-Cruise lobby, I do hope you'll point out that on 30th July 1982 the then editor of the N.W.N. 'closed all further correspondence" on the Cruise debate.
Posted by: Amelie Sep 14 2012, 09:51 AM
Our FP has only ever been based around the self interest of SOME of our citizens.
Posted by: dannyboy Sep 14 2012, 09:54 AM
I'd have to disagree.
Posted by: Mark NWN Sep 14 2012, 10:31 AM
All I did was ask for patience, I have nothing else to do with the story. Given that I enjoy communicating with people through this forum I thought it sensible to comment.
Posted by: JeffG Sep 14 2012, 10:40 AM
What an odd take on the situation. As far as I know, there was an active anti-Cruise lobby - you know, those women. The rest of us just put up with the situation. I don't recall anything you could call a "pro-Cruise lobby".
Posted by: Squelchy Sep 14 2012, 12:24 PM
Of course. And I was just giving you and or the story writer a few pieces of info that may, or may not, have helped.
Posted by: Cognosco Sep 14 2012, 07:09 PM
If my memory is not playing tricks with me I do believe there was a memorial erected to those that served at GC I think it was removed to Fairford when GC closed?
Posted by: Exhausted Sep 15 2012, 04:03 PM
What would be the point of a memorial in or around Newbury for Americans who served or were lost in the world wars and other operations out of Greenham etc. How often and how many of their citizens would visit to see it. It's bad enough that the area outside the gatehouse is cluttered up with piles of rusty iron to commemorate a load of women who really believed that they were the reason the Yanks went home.
If the ex serving Americans or their families do want something like that, send your dollars over, tell us what you want and we will find some space up at Greenham. We are grateful for the sacrifices made during the wars, that is clear from the lists of names on memorials in every town and village but that is our own, with families still living here.
Is it that the Americans want to continually remind us how much gratitude they believe we owe them. After the last war, when we were on our knees, our financial debt to the USA made sure we stayed on our knees while they poured finances into Germany, knowing that the next enemy was Russia and we were no longer of strategic importance. When the two bully boys were facing up to each other during the cold war, the Americans should be grateful to us for allowing them to put their destructive weapons on our precious island, not the other way round..
Posted by: On the edge Sep 16 2012, 06:25 AM
Quite agree. Has to be recognised that it was a World war. Like the other allies the Americans joined to save themselves. After, keeping World peace, there were American bases in many Countries, just as there were British ones elsewhere.
Posted by: Sherlock Sep 16 2012, 07:29 AM
Given Romney's very Hawkish stance on Iran and huge funding from defence contractors, he'll no doubt be keen to launch another Middle Eastern attack/war if he's elected. Let's hope he isn't but if Democrat voters stay at home in November he probably will. Obama has been a disappointment but Romney would be a disaster.
Posted by: Nothing Much Sep 16 2012, 11:02 AM
On The Edge wrote.
"Has to be recognised that it was a World war"
There were units from Brazil fighting alongside US,UK,and Empire troops at Monte Cassino.
A bloke from Argentina was uncles bomber pilot.
He wrote home " Funny old world,seems everyone from around the globe is here. Still he gets us home".
In the end neither made it home.
So there was mayhem all over the world. There is quite a stark film of the battle off Australia in New Guinea.
Kokoda Trail. Tells the story of untrained youngsters offloading ships in Port Moresby. They were in uniform.
Given guns and told to head over that mountain and hinder the 10,000 Japanese advance. Until we can get troops.
"Or they will be in Darwin in a few days".
It is now a tourist attraction, forgotten for 60 years. There is a memorial at Hyde Park.
ce
Posted by: Exhausted Sep 16 2012, 11:09 AM
Maybe now I can understand why there aren't any monuments to the U.S. military personnel in Newbury.
I assume that you have read the honest opinions and perhaps understand where most of us stand. We have a certain amount of anonymity here which means we can in most cases be honest in our opinions, unlike the politicians who suck up to the USA because not to do so might mean that their dinner money will get stolen. (ref Stewiegriffin).
Why do you believe that we should be eternally grateful for the crumbs you have swept off your table. We have suffered extreme privation as a result of two wars, we suffer the consequences of America's continual meddling in other country's politics and I include the financing of the IRA in that statement. The UK is not lily white in all this and we ourselves have done our fair share of intervention both in the past and today, but finally, do you have a monument in America for all the British lost serving in your conflicts. Do you have a plaque anywhere thanking us for the use of our soil for your forward bases. I think not unless you can advise me otherwise. Perhaps if Americans spent a little less time peering up their own rectums then I for one might feel a little more disposed to wave an American banner.
Posted by: Exhausted Sep 16 2012, 11:37 AM
Just in case there is any doubt about the way we feel in our hearts about the loss of our fellow comrades in arms, Americans might want to spend a few moments looking at, if not visiting, the Amerian memorial site donated by the University of Cambridge in honour of the fallen.
http://www.abmc.gov/cemeteries/cemeteries/ca.php
Posted by: Squelchy Sep 16 2012, 12:29 PM
Does anyone know if there exists, anywhere in the U.S.A, a memorial to either the Australians or New Zealanders who lost their lives in the Vietnam War?
Posted by: lordtup Sep 16 2012, 12:35 PM
Is it me or do others find it somewhat tedious that personal viewpoints are seen as an invitation to attack individuals .
Surely the whole ethos of debate is to present one's argument in a concise and erudite manner , if others disagree then it's up to them to oppose in a similar vein , not to name call or ridicule .
Please can we stop and return to the business in hand . 
Posted by: Exhausted Sep 16 2012, 02:24 PM
Surely the whole ethos of debate is to present one's argument in a concise and erudite manner , if others disagree then it's up to them to oppose in a similar vein , not to name call or ridicule .
Please can we stop and return to the business in hand .
Who are you referring to here.
Posted by: lordtup Sep 16 2012, 03:28 PM
Unless I have been reading a different web page to the everyone else one would have thought it pretty b****y obvious , but I guess I am in a minority so I will be quiet .
Posted by: Newbelly Sep 16 2012, 04:24 PM
Whatever your view about what went on at Greenham Common, it is part our local history and I would have no problem with a memorial that retired service personnel and others could come and visit.
If the money could be found either here or in the US, it would be nice to see the old control tower restored and made a small museum or visitors centre.
Posted by: Nothing Much Sep 16 2012, 04:27 PM
I got quite involved with an Australian who was writing a history of a certain squadron.
It was about headstones. I ended up in some strange places. Often people were interred in a family tomb.
So they were quite hard to find. Sadly they were often overgrown.
I did Cambridge, Newmarket , we stopped for lunch opposite. ( Funny how they are all small).
And a few places in Hampshire.
Best not forget that the Confederacy and the Union armies lost their own in significant numbers
for a freedom.
ce
Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 16 2012, 05:35 PM
Yes, absolutely agree. There's a dearth of out-of-town coffee shops and the control tower is an iconic building which would make a tremendous place to call in for a coffee after walking the dogs on the common. There's also little in the way of interpretation into the history of the site and the conflicts it served and I would like to see that, though like Adrian says, it would need to honestly address all sides of the debate.
If WBC advertised for interested parties to come forward to manage the tower as a cafe/museum I'd be interested in getting involved and it might be possible to raise the money without any state involvement if WBC would simply empower it.
Posted by: Rowley Birkin Sep 16 2012, 06:11 PM
who owns the control tower?
Posted by: Newbelly Sep 16 2012, 06:24 PM
OK. I don't feel a need to get too pc about this - a memorial is to those who served and made sacrifices, not any foreign policy or politician - but I agree all aspects of history are worthy of mention. If Adrian has not been put off by that nasty abuse from Andy Capp, then I would be interested to hear more of his view on this.
Posted by: blackdog Sep 16 2012, 07:01 PM
WBC - they have it up for sale at present.
Posted by: Newbelly Sep 16 2012, 07:11 PM
Wow. Is there any information as to a price guide or whether a third party is involved?
Posted by: Penelope Sep 16 2012, 07:47 PM
The last time I heard it was set up as a bat roost inside. It would be illegal to disturb them.
Posted by: Strafin Sep 16 2012, 08:08 PM
No, I don't think that's true, but it does now have listed status.
Posted by: Penelope Sep 16 2012, 08:15 PM
Sorry, what part is wrong.
Posted by: Strafin Sep 16 2012, 08:24 PM
It's not a bat roost, as far as I can tell.
Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 16 2012, 08:28 PM
easy to slag off, very difficult to be accountable for what you say. go on be brave and honest: tell us who you are and who you support.
What difference does it make who I am? Slagging off people who died in the war is sick.
That is illogical nonsense; have another go.
Perhaps you could point one out?
Posted by: Penelope Sep 16 2012, 08:31 PM
I'm sure I saw something on the box, they had even decked out the inside with carpets hanging on The wall for them to roost behind, mind you I'm talking about seven or eight years ago.
Posted by: Penelope Sep 16 2012, 08:37 PM
Sorry, your right, its the small building next to it that was converted. Silly me. Still be illegal to disturb em though.
Posted by: stewiegriffin Sep 16 2012, 08:47 PM
No, that's your bag.
An empty room just called you an idiot. Go and row with that instead.
Posted by: Newbelly Sep 16 2012, 08:47 PM
I agree, but are you also willing to apologise for your insulting language on this thread?
Posted by: stewiegriffin Sep 16 2012, 08:51 PM
5000 posts down the line I reckon there's probably more than one. Come to think of it there's more than one on this page.
Posted by: Jo Pepper Sep 16 2012, 11:33 PM
Coward.
I can't find any reference to anyone slagging people off who died in the war. Did I miss something?
Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 17 2012, 09:34 AM
Yes I am. I am sorry Adrian Hollister for my language. It is not right on a forum like this and you didn't deserve it. However, it is only the language I apologise for, as I resent the sentiment you have posted on the subject.
Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 17 2012, 09:40 AM
I'm sure there are examples, I didn't say I was free from illogical posts, but it is not the norm.
Who I am is irrelevant. I slagged the party down, and I still stand by my point, if not the language. I'm not going to tell you who I am, but what I can confirm is that I have no party affiliation whatsoever, and never have done. I am just an average Joe posting from my living room. That is all you need and are entitled to know.
Posted by: On the edge Sep 17 2012, 09:51 AM
For what reason? Against the evidence, there seems no real logic produce such feelings or are we missing something.
The Americans are our allies and have been for many years. They entered the last world war to defend their nation, just as we did. They did the same during what was termed the cold war. In both cases, for tactical reasons, that meant their armed forces had bases and were operationally deployed in foreign countries. No more and no less than ours.
The terrible price our service personnel sometimes pay is wholly recognised and broadly appreciated. Being allies does not and in the free world should not, assume subserviance.
Locally, the Greenham Common Airbase is part of our local history - all of it.
Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 17 2012, 10:20 AM
I changed the word from despise to resent. Despise is too strong.
I quite agree with your post, but I think we should separate the politics and the people.
The service men did not decide to do what they did, it was the governments and the people in high office. When people go on about the Americans did this or that, and only joined the effort because it suits them, offend the memory of those that actually made the ultimate sacrifice. Further more, while we can debate the merits of the post war foreign policy, it was the men and women stationed at all the bases that had signed up to put their necks on the block once again, if it came to it.
A bit like Iraq. I dislike very much the politics of the invasion, but we should be prepared to appreciate the effort by those that have put their life on the line. Even more so the families that would rather wish their relatives were not there and possibly suffer just as much.
Posted by: Penelope Sep 17 2012, 10:40 AM
I quite agree with you post, but I think we should separate the politics and the people.
The service men did not decide to do what they did, it was the governments and the people in high office. When people go on about the Americans did this or that, and only joined the effort because it suits them, offend the memory of those that actually made the ultimate sacrifice. Further more, while we can debate the merits of the post war foreign policy, it was the men and women stationed at all the bases that had signed up to put their necks on the block once again, if it came to it.
A bit like Iraq. I dislike very much the politics of the invasion, but we should be prepared to appreciate the effort by those that have put their life on the line. Even more so the families that would rather wish their relatives were not there and possibly suffer just as much.
Whilst not being your biggest fan, I have to say I agree entirely with both your argument and your sentiment on this one.
Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 17 2012, 10:54 AM
While my 'attack' on Adrian Hollister was unjustified, I resent the situation where people and parties can launch almost xenophobic attacks on countries, both direct and implied, when they have the luxury of being in a position to do so, often in part because of the efforts of those they like to criticise.
Hmm ... I'm not sure that makes sense!
Posted by: Ron Sep 17 2012, 11:20 AM
Hmm ... I'm not sure that makes sense!
Yes it makes sense. People come here and act in a manner that would not be tolerated in their own part of the world.
Posted by: Phil_D11102 Sep 17 2012, 12:08 PM
Why do you believe that we should be eternally grateful for the crumbs you have swept off your table. We have suffered extreme privation as a result of two wars, we suffer the consequences of America's continual meddling in other country's politics and I include the financing of the IRA in that statement. The UK is not lily white in all this and we ourselves have done our fair share of intervention both in the past and today, but finally, do you have a monument in America for all the British lost serving in your conflicts. Do you have a plaque anywhere thanking us for the use of our soil for your forward bases. I think not unless you can advise me otherwise. Perhaps if Americans spent a little less time peering up their own rectums then I for one might feel a little more disposed to wave an American banner.
I have visited the British Cemetery in Rimini, along with the Polish one in Riccone. As for my request for a plaque, it has always been for ALL THOSE WHO HAVE SERVED up at RAF GC, regardless of nationality or role, military and civilian.
As for the crumbs, are you referring to those British folks who ae buried in U.S. cemetries, or those U.S. folks buried in UK cemeteries.
http://www.cwgc.org/find-war-dead.aspx?cpage=1&sort=dateofdeath&order=asc
Here also at Concord.. http://www.freefoto.com/preview/1212-17-24/Concord--Massachusetts--USA
It was nice for Cambridge Uni to donate the land to the U.S., but it was the U.S. that donated the folks there and at Brookwood.
If America's polices and actions are flawed, can it be based on the polices that were in place perviously? As for you comments regarding the IRA, I too have been affected. Funny how I don't see you mentioning those countries who sold the IRA their weapons.
Are their British monuments in the U.S.? Sure they are, a few forts built but were also attacked by the British..
Posted by: Phil_D11102 Sep 17 2012, 12:18 PM
A bit like Iraq. I dislike very much the politics of the invasion, but we should be prepared to appreciate the effort by those that have put their life on the line. Even more so the families that would rather wish their relatives were not there and possibly suffer just as much.
People who serve in the forces don't dictate policy, they follow it, when right or wrong. They are the instrument of the policy, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. RAF GC did work, twice. For that reason, and for the cooperation it took to make it work, there should be recognition for those who served there (again regardless of nationalility or rank).
Do I wish the military was not in Iraq and Afghanistan, yes. Why, because my eldest is due to be deployed there soon.
Posted by: Strafin Sep 17 2012, 12:35 PM
I've not really been to sure what to make of all this, but really there are lots of people who do dangerous and difficult jobs every day, if we went around having memorials for everybody we wouldn't get time for anything else! I do think Greenham is an important part of our history though, and the 20 year anniversary was certainly worth a mention. I also think that the peace women camp should not really have been "celebrated" with a tribute either. However the peace women were kind of different to every other group of their type so therefore were of interest to many people.
Posted by: On the edge Sep 17 2012, 01:51 PM
Frankly its this sort of comment that's putting the heat in here. Presumably you haven't see the roll of honour at Cambridge University in respect of both world wars. Of course, US servicemen died during the conflicts as they did from both sides. France and Russia lost huge numbers as well. - particularly when measured against population numbers. The word 'donate' is also singularly inappropriate - the US army was fighting a US war, as even your then President recognised. War is vile, it must ever be the last resort and fortunately, that we live in an elective democracy for us it is generally just that.
Posted by: Exhausted Sep 17 2012, 05:17 PM
I think you will see that I was quite clear, or at least I thought I was, about the loss of brave men who served in the conflicts hence me pointing you towards Cambridge. I'm glad you think that was "nice".
Don't start me on that one, if you care to research the subject you will see that the IRA were equipped with WW2 weapons prior to 1971. Then elements within the USA equipped them with Armalite rifle and a multitude of smaller arms. Some came from the USA ex a Corsican arms dealer (Mafia/organised crime). This carried on up till 1977ish including AR 15 Armalite, all funded by Republican Americans. Latterly Libya was the source and provided Russian and American weapons, even rocket launchers. Towards the end, yet more weapons sourced from the USA were discovered.
Some weapons were sourced though Holland, Czechoslovakia, Belgium, Norway and Sweeden.
A nice flippant remark, but I wanted to know if there are any monuments to what we did for America, raised and paid for by the American people not what happened when you were a British colony.
Posted by: Penelope Sep 21 2012, 06:01 PM
Well, as today has proved we haven't totally forgotten the sacrifices the American forces made while on UK soil.
Posted by: Exhausted Sep 21 2012, 06:22 PM
Exactly, a memorial unveiled by Princess Anne seems to go a long way towards appeasing the insult that Phil D11102 felt over lack of memorials. I seem to recall though that there was already a small tablet at Greenham, just in front of the ballroom that commemerated those two accidents.
That type of memorial stone is very appropriate in my opinion as it recognises the loss of life at Greenham as part of the war effort.
So Phil, what say you now or are you a little disillusioned about our lack of enthusiasm for the overall recognition of the base.
Posted by: Exhausted Sep 21 2012, 06:32 PM
Just noticed this on the other forum.
http://www.newbury.net/forum/m-1348159541/
Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 21 2012, 06:33 PM
Although the argument expanded, his original remarks on this thread were about the recognition in the NWN of the 20th anniversary of the 'Peace Women' over the efforts of the US forces.
Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 21 2012, 08:09 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-19675253
Would this have happened without the comments on this forum?
Posted by: On the edge Sep 21 2012, 08:16 PM
Would this have happened without the comments on this forum?
As this thread only started on 13 September, answer has to be yes
Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 22 2012, 07:01 AM
Not necessarily so.......
In the political world we would claim it!
Posted by: On the edge Sep 22 2012, 07:41 AM
In the political world we would claim it!
Can't argue with that!
In the spirit of collective responsibility, I now wholly agree!
Posted by: Exhausted Sep 22 2012, 01:33 PM
In the spirit of collective responsibility, I now wholly agree!
We might like to think so but I doubt Joss would have carved that in stone in such a short time.
Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 22 2012, 09:01 PM
Never confuse political opportunity and truth......
Posted by: Phil_D11102 Sep 22 2012, 11:27 PM
You are so correct...
This thread started on the 11th of Sept (http://forum.newburytoday.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=2080) led to the article on page 9 of the 20th Sept edition of the NWN. I was interviewed on the am of the 12th, and was surprised not to see anything in the NWN on the 13th.
Low and behold in the 20th of Sept addition of the NWN, in the "Old Memories Revived", 10 years ago is when the started on the Peace Women memorial garden.
Strange they couldn't get anything into the NWN edition the 20 years and 2 days since the last USAF personnel left, but they could squeeze in the Peace Women the week of their anniversary. As I was saying..
I was up and RAF Greenham Common for the unveiling of that beautiful memorial of those who died in those tragic accidents. I am very pleased that it was well attended, to include HRH the Princess Royal.
After the ceremony, I was speaking to several prominent individuals (no names mentioned), they all said the same thing I have been saying here "why isn't there a plaque or anything that recognises the signifigance of such an historic military site".
I am very pleased to see that the West Berkshire Council will consider erecting a "memorial" (I thought memorials recognised those who have passed) on the 25th anniversay of the base's closing. To be honest I would be very pleased to see the Control Tower, GAMA, and Bldg 274 turned into a Eisenhower/Newbury in WWII/Cold War/Fall of Communism museum, but I would be happy with a plaque simply saying "To All Who Served, Military and Civilian, British and American, 1943 to 1992".
Posted by: Squelchy Sep 23 2012, 11:17 AM
When the Yanks were in charge of the Airbase, (40 years approx) and were busy building firestations, bowling alleys, schools, etc, exactly how many memorials did THEY put up to their fallen comrades?
Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 23 2012, 11:34 AM
That is more to do with the way the military manage Realities of War. Such memorials are usually limited to the Chapel and Headquarters building, and would be removed with the fixtures and fittings on Stand Down of the base.
Posted by: Nothing Much Sep 23 2012, 01:26 PM
Sometimes the little memorials such as the ones I have spoken about in Norfolk to forgotten airfields were
provided by local folk and craftsmen.Surviving airmen and younger family members still trudge across beet fields
to remember lost friends.
I don't think we have forgotten . That includes 1776.
But we have to try and get things right.
As an avid western TV fan schoolboy I tried for movies, ...no luck.So I ended up as a West End bloke.
I was close enough to hear the Harrods bomb that killed. Baltic Exchange & a bomb exploded in a postbox opposite
(my usual pub). We had to empty the building because of a coded message on the 1st night of Elizabeth Taylor's
debut in London in "Little Foxes". I was quite lucky of course, The IRA funded by ??? were a nuisance.
The worst thing was the total lack of knowledge by Americans.It was during the time of "Annie" Perhaps 1980.
We had to do cursory checks of handbags . Dames from the midwest were outraged.
I had to ease the situation down a peg or 2 once to let the usher continue his checks.
I said don't you know about our troubles...No....Don't you know about the Weathermen?...no.
I gave up but Oklahoma woke them up.
More of a rant than I usually manage.
ce
Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 23 2012, 01:34 PM
Even American friends agree with my observation: the average citizen knows almost nothing about foreign affairs. Most news broadcasts ignore anything that is beyond the borders, unless there is a very specific US involvement to trumpet or mourn.
Posted by: Squelchy Sep 23 2012, 01:40 PM
I didn't ask how many were still standing, I asked how many were put up?
Posted by: Nothing Much Sep 23 2012, 01:42 PM
Thanks for that.I thought I was going to be in trouble again.
ce
Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 23 2012, 02:10 PM
Who knows, if they are removed on stand-down? I suspect if you visit current bases there will be some memorial at each one - but likely not in a public area......
Posted by: On the edge Sep 23 2012, 02:10 PM
Quite apart from anything else, would probably be an attraction. Trouble is we can't even run the existing museum in Newbury; let alone a bigger one.
Posted by: Simon Kirby Sep 23 2012, 07:41 PM
I wouldn't like to see local government involved spending tax-payer's money, but there are a number of private museums around so it can be done, and that's what I'd like. But Phil has a very blinkered view of the interpretation of the site and its history and that's not so helpful, there are several sides to the story and they all need to be told to make the experience an interesting and challenging one.
Posted by: On the edge Sep 23 2012, 08:47 PM
See what you mean. Taking a much wider approach would certainly create a much more interesting and dare I say challenging experience. Also opens up other fascinating possibilities.
Struck a chord as have been round Imperial War in London for first time in ages (appreciate its public funded) but its now laid out very well indeed and covers the whole spectrum. Certainly made me think and hard.
Posted by: stewiegriffin Sep 23 2012, 09:30 PM
Well I get the thinking part but really, was it that exciting???
Posted by: On the edge Sep 23 2012, 09:58 PM
Exciting would be the wrong word, enjoyable yes. Then, I'm a sucker for museums and such like; even ours! Just thought the Imperial War had done a good job and it was rather better than I'd remembered. Then again, I can't stand watching games; so suppose each to his own!
Posted by: NWNREADER Sep 23 2012, 10:36 PM
Maybe we should offer the Common as the 4th 'London' runway............
Motorway, train, roads, space.........
Just a shame the runway that was there was dug up
Posted by: blackdog Sep 23 2012, 11:39 PM
Motorway, train, roads, space.........
Just a shame the runway that was there was dug up
4th runway? It would be the sixth airport - I'm pretty sure the five existing ones don't share three runways.
It's not a new idea, it was a contender back in the 60s or 70s - thankfully it was not chosen. Still I expect the Say No To Sandleford campaign will be all for it - no one would want to build houses that close to the flight path so the contryside they are so keen on would be saved.
Posted by: Adrian Hollister Sep 24 2012, 08:49 AM
It's not a new idea, it was a contender back in the 60s or 70s - thankfully it was not chosen. Still I expect the Say No To Sandleford campaign will be all for it - no one would want to build houses that close to the flight path so the contryside they are so keen on would be saved.
lol
perhaps we should aim for the http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19634160...
Posted by: JeffG Sep 24 2012, 09:35 AM
Yep. It was the longest runway in Europe and a diversion strip for the space shuttle.
Posted by: Biker1 Sep 24 2012, 10:08 AM
Wow!, I never knew that.
Where did you get that information from?
Posted by: NORTHENDER Sep 24 2012, 10:18 AM
From Wiki.
RAF Fairford was the only TransOceanic Abort Landing site for NASA's Space Shuttle in the UK. As well as having a sufficiently long runway for a shuttle landing (the runway is 3 km long), Fairford also had NASA-trained fire and medical crews stationed on the base.
Fron another site.
Staff at RAF Fairford are gearing up for a possible emergency landing by NASA's Space Shuttle for, what could be, the penultimate time.
The final flight of Discovery is due to take place on Friday 5 November after being delayed due to bad weather in Florida.
As ever, the Gloucestershire airbase could be used as a landing site should something go wrong after take off.
The site's long runway makes it a suitable back-up destination.
A further space shuttle flight is scheduled for February 2011 when Endeavor will launch. There could also be a final flight for Atlantis in June next year.
We're a back up, to a back up, to a back up.
Airfield manager, Tony Maycock
Although staff at Fairford will be ready, should the runway be required, the chances of it actually being used are very slim.
"We're a back up, to a back up, to a back up in essence," said airfield manager Tony Maycock.
"They'll always try and recover the Shuttle to the United States.
"If they can't get there, there are three sites within Europe they'll go to before they think of us."
Emergency zones
Fairford is the only place in England suitable for a landing because of its runway length - two miles (3.2km) - which is needed by the Shuttle.
Because of the speeds involved, if something goes wrong it could be landing at Fairford just 15 minutes after launching from Florida.
As the Shuttle climbs it will pass through several emergency zones and the crew will be told where they would have to go in case of emergency.
Almost immediately after take-off they would try to return to the USA, to California, where they would normally touch down, but once they get to a certain altitude they would have to head out across the Atlantic and try to land at either Fairford or another base in Europe.
Tony Maycock said there will be a whole crew ready and waiting at Fairford.
"On the ground here we've got about 25 people actually involved on the site, from fire crash rescue and security, to the base commander who'll be heading up the convoy that will move out onto the airfield should it come here."
A Space Shuttle has landed at RAF Fairford, but that was on the back of a Jumbo jet when it was heading to the Paris air show in 1983.
Posted by: Biker1 Sep 24 2012, 10:30 AM
OK, now I realise that I am going to look really stupid here because I have probably missed something but I thought we were talking about Greenham?
The above is referring to Fairford?? 
Posted by: On the edge Sep 24 2012, 10:47 AM
perhaps we should aim for the http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19634160...
Oh yes!
I hate flying, simply because of the uncomfortable accommodation. Airships always seemed far more comfortable. Presumably, if they were still moored to towers, much better than having to go to an Airport. Just a bus into Town, book in at Camps and then a lift to the cabin!
Hydrogen may well be one of the answers for the future - its production can be used to 'buffer' intermittent energy production from the wind. Worth looking at other retro technologies, like absorption refrigeration.
Posted by: dannyboy Sep 24 2012, 10:48 AM
The above is referring to Fairford??
ie Greenham wasn't ever a Shuttle Landing site.
Fairford is an Emergency Landing site. There are two European sites ( both in Spain - Zaragoza & Moron ) which are Augmented Landing Sites.
Heathrow is the longest runway in the British Isles at 3902m = 12,801ft.
Fairford is just under 10,000ft with overrun of 1000ft at either end, the same as existed at Greenham.
In context -
Manchester 3048m
Stansted 3048m
Campbeltown (Macrihanish) 3049m
Boscombe Down 3212m
Gatwick 3316m
Heathrow 09R/27L 3660m
Heathrow 09L/27R 3902m
Fairford 3046m
Posted by: Nothing Much Sep 24 2012, 10:56 AM
A bit like cars Biker1. All to do with size and length.Landing strips that is.
Something I didn't know of, and I am sure I will forget quite soon.
As for Museums, there is a fine wall of names at Elvington in Yorkshire
to the Canadians and Free French who flew with the RAF.
The ones who didn't make it back that is.
The ones that did are probably in "some ornery tomb in Saskatchewen along with Liberty Valance"
as Col. J. Stewart might have said.
ce.
Posted by: Biker1 Sep 24 2012, 12:27 PM
So JeffG was incorrect then when he said that?
Posted by: dannyboy Sep 24 2012, 12:29 PM
I believe so.
Somthing to do with missles & stricken Shuttles not mixing.
Posted by: JeffG Sep 24 2012, 12:36 PM
OK - it was Fairford, not Greenham then. I can't remember where I got my information from.
But from http://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=22160, this:
which makes it over 600m longer than Fairford.
Although the site referenced in the quote appears to have been updated since that post was made in 2006. It also seems a bit pro-peace women.
Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 24 2012, 12:54 PM
But from http://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=22160, this:
which makes it over 600m longer than Fairford.
Although the site referenced in the quote appears to have been updated since that post was made in 2006. It also seems a bit pro-peace women.
My understanding was that GC was the longest military runway in Europe.
Posted by: dannyboy Sep 24 2012, 12:58 PM
But from http://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=22160, this:
which makes it over 600m longer than Fairford.
Although the site referenced in the quote appears to have been updated since that post was made in 2006. It also seems a bit pro-peace women.
Both have/had overrun, but it isn't paved. A bit like Edwards AFB - The longest paved runway there is 15,023ft ( 4579m ) with an additional 9000ft of unpaved overrun.
btw Edwards also has a 35900ft runway which is all unpaved.
Fairford only became as long as Greehnam was in 2002 after NATO spent $100million+ upgrading the runways. RAF Fairford is currently home only to civilian service personnel, who keep the base ready for a 24hr reactivation should the need arise.
Posted by: Phil_D11102 Sep 24 2012, 01:08 PM
In what way am I blinkered. Am I blinkered because I respect the right of the peace women to protest and their tenacity over the years to push their cause and to live the way they did in what they believed? Or is it because of the thousands upon thousands of pounds in damage they caused over the years, to include after it was publicly know and announced that the missles had left. That includes me being bitten in 1992 shortly before the base closed. Am I blinkered to the stories my father in law told about his days as a boy during WWII and afterwards about playing on the common, or the rights that the commoners had, sold and have again. Am I disappointed that the base looks like a right pile of s**t now as opposed to the way it was in 1992.
This should be a good explanation...
The base HQ is now demolished, but the 501TMW building (274) is still very much standing.. Someone pointed out to me a plaque put up in 1990 in honor of "Earth Day" that is still in place and in public view. To my knowledge, all the other plaques, etc have been taken away.
Should there be a plaque to those British Forces and Civilians be put up at RAF GC, **** yes. Where there some before? I honestly don't know, but there is alot of history to be acknowledged...
Posted by: dannyboy Sep 24 2012, 01:13 PM
I think it was a case of local brinkmanship/pride - it was one of the longest, but not the longest. Moron in Spain is for instance 3600m ( paved ). Zaragoza ( which was a USAF base, but is now jointly used by the Spanish military & commercial jets is 3700m.
Posted by: Andy Capp Sep 24 2012, 02:58 PM
And they always were longer? Certainly GC can now claim to have the shortest!
Posted by: dannyboy Sep 24 2012, 03:03 PM
Aye, both were built in the 1950s at those lengths.
I forgot Torrejon, also in Spain. it was built at just over 4000m in the early 50s & is now almost 5000m.
Posted by: Squelchy Sep 24 2012, 03:17 PM
Ah yes, 9 miles of razor-wire glinting in the sunlight. Lovely.
Posted by: Phil_D11102 Sep 24 2012, 03:29 PM
The way the icicles formed in the winter time, just beautiful.
And the lovely stacks of rubble where building had once been. Breathtaking..
Posted by: dannyboy Sep 24 2012, 04:58 PM
As the perimiter fence alone was 14 miles, there was a darn sight more than 9 miles of razor wire.
Which had to be removed in 3 inch lengths as part of the peace treaty with the CCCP.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)