Mmmm much to serious methinks
Must admit, very keen on being historically correct but as pointed out (by OLD FAT ONE I think) in a movie nothing is ever portrayed historically correctly. We know history is written by the winner; no actually I mean the script writer or authour. In fact I find myself with a foot in both camps I wish it to be historically correct and F^%^$# the cuddly bears that cannot take life as it was. On the same token I do wish to see the movie remade so that those events of heroic historical significance are not lost. Therefore is it worth the effort to worry what the dog was called??
Unfortunately most books/movies show the main figure involved as being a wonderful chap. Having spoken to people that have been privileged to know some significant war time achievers the comments are generally in line with those of Guy Gibson, arrogant etc. Mind you I guess in those days when, someone who does not expect to survive the day out and does so, they have little time for pleasantries such as manners etc
Thread Creepppppp (apologise for the lack of tongue in cheek (no that’s not a gay point or is it?)
Is history important? Yep then why can’t we get it right? History is slowly bent and distorted by all as each has an individual perspective of what they saw, went through etc. Some people believe Bader was wonderful some would not, well that would be rude to say that.
Henry Crun but where did the original digger come from. Happy to be proven wrong but I believe it was applied to gold prospectors in Australia (Ballarat Victoria). A requirement for a Gold/Mine Licence (Eureka Stockade) and the term came about as” have you got your digger licence”, hence with trench warfare at Gallipoli the ANZAC’s all became diggers.