[HN Gopher] Operation Leg - a pilot unlike any other (2020)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Operation Leg - a pilot unlike any other (2020)
        
       Author : FinnLobsien
       Score  : 158 points
       Date   : 2025-01-27 15:41 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.rafbf.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.rafbf.org)
        
       | blitzar wrote:
       | I have not read the book (Reach for the Sky - 1954) nor watched
       | the movie (Reach for the Sky - 1956) in a very very long time
       | however I recall them fondly from my youth.
        
       | cperciva wrote:
       | _In a remarkable piece of wartime diplomacy, German General Adolf
       | Galland notified the RAF of Bader 's missing right prosthetic leg
       | and, with Hermann Goring's permission, the RAF was given safe
       | passage to parachute in a replacement prosthetic in a mission
       | called 'Operation Leg'._
       | 
       | Not so remarkable when you consider that tying up RAF planes and
       | burning their fuel on missions like this reduces their combat
       | capabilities. It's the same logic which says that seriously
       | injuring enemy infantry is more effective than killing them,
       | since one dead soldier is one soldier who can't fight but one
       | injured soldier is one soldier who can't fight plus one or two
       | who won't fight because they're evacuating him.
       | 
       | (Of course, Russian doctrine now seems to counter this by leaving
       | seriously injured soldiers on the battlefield to bleed out...)
        
         | reaperducer wrote:
         | _Not so remarkable when you consider that tying up RAF planes
         | and burning their fuel on missions like this reduces their
         | combat capabilities._
         | 
         | Or, sometimes human beings act like human beings, even in a
         | time of war. In addition to the whole notion of "rules of war,"
         | there are thousands of examples, but here is a famous one:
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_truce
         | 
         | > The truces were not unique to the Christmas period and
         | reflected a mood of "live and let live", where infantry close
         | together would stop fighting and fraternise, engaging in
         | conversation. In some sectors, there were occasional ceasefires
         | to allow soldiers to go between the lines and recover wounded
         | or dead comrades; in others, there was a tacit agreement not to
         | shoot while men rested, exercised or worked in view of the
         | enemy.
         | 
         | People like you and me work at computers all day and start to
         | think like computers and try to use "logic" to explain
         | everything away. Fortunately, there are real people in the real
         | world who are free of our burdens.
        
           | aja12 wrote:
           | > Fortunately, there are real people in the real world who
           | are free of our burdens.
           | 
           | You might be right about the general, who knows. But Goring?
           | No, that man was definitely a computer.
        
           | cperciva wrote:
           | Christmas truces were absolutely a thing, but they came about
           | through the action of troops on the ground -- and the
           | commanding officers absolutely hated them.
        
             | short_sells_poo wrote:
             | I'm not condoning it at all, but I think it's easy to
             | understand why commanding officers didn't like their troops
             | fraternizing with the enemy. If GI John and Soldat Hans
             | share a coffee and a cigarette together, and perhaps even a
             | pleasant chat, they will quickly come to realize that both
             | of them are human beings, with human feelings, a family
             | worrying about them, children possibly, hopes and dreams,
             | and so on. And once you are acutely aware that your enemy
             | is just like you, only perhaps speaks a different language,
             | you are much-much less inclined to shoot them and stop
             | being an efficient soldier.
             | 
             | I've never been in a war, and hope I never live to see
             | myself in one, but the only way I can see one human
             | viciously trying to kill another is by not thinking of
             | their enemy as a human being, but rather just a thing.
        
               | cperciva wrote:
               | Absolutely. They were described as "disastrous to morale"
               | and units which had engaged in Christmas truces would
               | routinely be moved to other parts of the front in order
               | to avoid the issues you mention.
        
               | wizzwizz4 wrote:
               | > _you are much-much less inclined to shoot them and stop
               | being an efficient soldier._
               | 
               | But you also take _the other side 's_ soldiers out, in
               | the same way. Why wouldn't commanding officers like that?
        
               | short_sells_poo wrote:
               | I'm not a military thinker, so I might well be off on
               | this, but I'd say because that would usually results in a
               | draw, whereas the commanding officers generally want to
               | win so that they can achieve the overall plan set out by
               | strategic command - and want to achieve a crushing
               | victory from which the opponent cannot recover from.
               | 
               | I guess an army on the retreat who would favor an instant
               | draw would favor the fraternizing, but generally by that
               | point the winning army - including the soldiers - are not
               | amenable to stop their advance and play a friendly game
               | of football.
        
               | cperciva wrote:
               | The morale of your troops is known. The morale of the
               | opposing troops is suspected but not certain.
               | 
               | WW1 ended because the influenza epidemic was devastating
               | the troops on both sides but neither side knew for
               | certain how hard it was hitting the other side.
        
         | bb123 wrote:
         | I don't think that was the rationale. For captured
         | senior/important figures were given all kinds of affordances
         | and gestures made which contrast shockingly with the conditions
         | we know people endured in concentration camps.
         | 
         | For example Senior officers at Colditz often received parcels
         | from home with stuff like cigars, chocolates, and spirits,
         | sometimes through diplomatic agreements with the Red Cross.
         | This was at a time when Germany in general was starving. They
         | also organised theatre productions, orchestras, and even sports
         | events.
         | 
         | I think this is just a relic of a different era and a different
         | code of war - similar to how long before this Naval captains
         | from opposing sides often shared meals after a ship's
         | surrender. It is hard to imagine now.
        
           | advisedwang wrote:
           | > I think this is just a relic of a different era and a
           | different code of war
           | 
           | It's worth noting that this kind of civility only happened on
           | the Western front. The eastern front was a no-mercy teeth out
           | display of barbarism. I think the conclusion is that it's to
           | the era, but the specific conditions that resulted in acts
           | like this.
        
           | cperciva wrote:
           | _For captured senior /important figures were given all kinds
           | of affordances and gestures made which contrast shockingly
           | with the conditions we know people endured in concentration
           | camps._
           | 
           | It wasn't just senior and important figures; _POW_ camps
           | generally were nothing like the Nazi _concentration_ camps
           | since their purpose was internment rather than extermination.
           | People tend to conflate the two, partly because Eisenhower
           | worked so hard to document the Holocaust.
           | 
           | Western POWs were also treated better than Eastern POWs out
           | of fear of retaliation; the USSR wasn't a signatory to the
           | Geneva conventions and already treated their prisoners poorly
           | so there was no similar incentive to treat Eastern POWs well.
           | (And also layered on top of this was Nazi ideology about
           | Slavic races being inferior etc.)
        
           | carabiner wrote:
           | Germans and British were on friendly terms even right before
           | war. When the Germans completed a test flight of a new
           | aircraft (forget which), British engineers sent a "congrats!"
           | message to them to which the Germans were appreciative.
        
         | hindsightbias wrote:
         | The older cadre of Luftwaffe officers considered themselves
         | better than other forces, with a generational code of
         | honor/conduct. Their highest award was the Knight's Cross, so
         | the concept of chivalry among peers was at least a thing.
         | Aircrew POW camps were run by grounded/older Luftwaffe
         | officers.
         | 
         | Goring was a WWI ace, Galland was younger so maybe eager to
         | please.
        
           | schroeding wrote:
           | Goring also directly gave the order to Reinhard Heydrich to
           | organize the "Final Solution of the Jew Question" aka
           | Holocaust. So code of honor with strict restriction to
           | "Aryan" pilots of the western Allies, if at all, IMO.
        
           | Rebelgecko wrote:
           | At least towards the end of the war, Galland was not a fan of
           | Goring (he was a ringleader of the Fighter Pilots' Revolt)
        
       | untouchable wrote:
       | Small note, the airdrop was to Saint-Omer, a Luftwaffe airbase in
       | France not a castle. Bader was later imprisoned in Colditz
       | Castle.
        
       | cluckindan wrote:
       | The story certainly affirms the stereotype that Nazi officers and
       | especially officers of the Luftwaffe had a sense of "soldier's
       | honor".
       | 
       | In light of recent events, it is curious that this particular
       | story has surfaced now.
       | 
       | Perhaps it is prudent to remind that the Nazis still were the bad
       | guys.
        
         | kitd wrote:
         | The "soldier's honour" normally came from the Wehrmacht,
         | professional army officers & soldiers who were very different
         | (and considered themselves very different) to the SS divisions
         | whose leadership were little more than Nazi sadists.
        
           | wbl wrote:
           | The wehrmacht happily collaborated with SS units or engaged
           | in actions such as
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zambr%C3%B3w_massacre or
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciepiel%C3%B3w_massacre
        
         | Yoric wrote:
         | As a side-note, you can have a sense of honor, or even consider
         | yourself a good person, and nevertheless murder pregnant women
         | and children as part or your day job. They key is to not
         | consider them as human beings or, alternatively, to consider
         | that you're somehow doing it for their own good, e.g. by saving
         | their soul.
         | 
         | Nazis (and Imperial Japan, and Crusaders, and plenty of others
         | throughout history) made this possible at large scale by
         | spending years of propaganda dehumanizing the "other".
         | 
         | Sadly, we're seeing a trend of doing the same alongside
         | political lines these days. It's not yet as bad as Mein Kampf,
         | but it's very, very worrying.
        
           | close04 wrote:
           | > consider that you're somehow doing it for their own good
           | 
           | I was surprised to read about Fritz Haber, the man who
           | catalyzed nitrogen fertilizers and other "nice" things like
           | mustard gas, that he was convinced that mustard gas is the
           | humane solution for ending the war. Since WW1 would end
           | faster from his perspective he was saving lives.
           | 
           | Almost perfectly mirrors the view that people dropping atomic
           | bombs on Japan had.
           | 
           | Both horrible weapons, one used mainly on the battle field,
           | the other on cities packed with civilians. Both deployed with
           | the same "we're actually saving lives" attitude. Today only
           | one is considered an atrocity almost everywhere in the world.
           | The other still gets the same explanation as it did 8 decades
           | ago.
        
             | bagels wrote:
             | Which one is considered an attrocity? I'd argue both.
        
         | duxup wrote:
         | People are different from person to person and are complex and
         | make different / sometimes even conflicting choices.
         | 
         | We see this when it comes to "meeting your heroes" too.
        
         | almostnormal wrote:
         | If you get bitten by flying bug, that's it. No escape.
         | 
         | I would love to live a carbon-neutral live, but giving up on
         | flying - no way. An easy choice compared to those at war.
         | 
         | Bader willingly reentered the airforce, putting his life at
         | risk, just to be able to fly.
         | 
         | On the German side, to get to fly at least prentend to be a
         | Nazi. Without that, no flying.
         | 
         | Sacrifices have to be made to get airborn.
        
         | jayrot wrote:
         | "If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people
         | somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were
         | necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy
         | them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the
         | heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a
         | piece of his own heart?" -- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
         | 
         | ----
         | 
         | To be clear, I'm personally of the "nazis need to be punched in
         | the face" mindset, but I still love this quote. Life is nuanced
         | and people are complex. Even Solzhenitsyn knew.
        
         | wongarsu wrote:
         | "Germany" in the larger sense were the bad guys. And in the top
         | ranks of the party there plenty of individuals who were
         | definitely evil. But the regular military - from the foot
         | soldier up to the generals - were just regular people fighting
         | a war. They were no more or less cruel or honorable than their
         | British counterparts.
         | 
         | Remember that the holocaust only started 3 years into the war
         | (after this operation) and its extend was not widely known on
         | either side of the war; and any country takes great care that
         | any war they are engaged in is framed as a just cause
        
           | technothrasher wrote:
           | > Remember that the holocaust only started 3 years into the
           | war
           | 
           | Kristallnacht was a year before the start of the war. The
           | mass murders of Polish intelligentsia started immediately
           | upon the invasion of Poland in 1939. Auschwitz received its
           | first prisoners in the spring of 1940. While the formalizing
           | of the "Final Solution" was a bit more than three years into
           | the war (January of 1942), that is very disingenuous place to
           | claim the holocaust "began".
        
             | wizzwizz4 wrote:
             | Depending on how exactly you categorise Nazi atrocities,
             | Aktion T4 (September 1939) could be considered the start of
             | the Holocaust - putting the start point at 0 days into the
             | war.
        
             | wongarsu wrote:
             | Maybe I shouldn't have written holocaust but "systematic
             | mass-murder of all Jews". I assumed the intended meaning
             | would be clear, but in retrospect I can see how it might
             | offend. And I am open to arguments that this predates the
             | "Final Solution" by up to six months, putting us closer to
             | two years into the war.
             | 
             | But before that while there were events where thousands or
             | tens of thousands were killed, the general policy was to
             | intern people in camps. And while that is horrible enough
             | to our modern morals (precisely because of the Nazi
             | precedent) it was less abhorrent to people of that time.
             | Otherwise the US would have hardly put Japanese-Americans
             | in camps
        
               | wbl wrote:
               | No the policy was extermination of the Jews. Babi Yar,
               | the destruction of Vilna, the murder of nameless villages
               | now lost to us all took place from the very begining.
               | 
               | Both the straight and twisted path interpretations
               | acknowledge that Hitlers intention was the destruction of
               | European Jews, and that the Nazi state carried it out
               | with little resistance with the fact widely, unmissibly
               | known.
        
               | neverforget-at wrote:
               | Please just delete both this whole comment and your "3
               | years into the war" paragraph as long as there is still
               | time.
               | 
               | As an austrian it's clear you don't fully know what you
               | are talking about.
               | 
               | It's ok to get something wrong sometimes, it's never ok
               | to double down and start arguing because of it.
               | Especially if the topic is the _Holocaust_!
               | 
               | > the general policy was to intern people in camps
               | 
               | This is so wrong it hurts.
               | 
               | All the people in the camps were still meant to soon die
               | there, we are not talking refugee camps here. Comparing
               | these to US Japanese Internment camps is quite troubeling
               | too.
        
         | chgs wrote:
         | There's probably some truth that many normal soldiers fighting
         | for nazi germany were not aware of the full extent of the
         | horrors at the time. I suspect many just ignored the evidence
         | and believed they were in a traditional war like 1914, or
         | colonial wars of the late 19th century.
         | 
         | Certainly when Germans were shown the concentration camps after
         | the war they wouldn't believe the evidence in front of them.
         | They didn't want to think about it during the war either.
         | 
         | Theres no excuse now of course.
         | 
         | It's sickening that with the increased support of the far right
         | across the west being so apparent today, that it's the 80th
         | anniversary of Auschwitz today.
        
           | eastbound wrote:
           | The left is closer to nazism than the far right. And we
           | repeat "far right" only because the left dehumanizes them and
           | adds superlatives that become comical; Today, applying the
           | law is described as ultra-extremist. The left just has a very
           | clear racial project.
        
       | kitd wrote:
       | Ben Mackintyre's book about Colditz reveals that Douglas Bader
       | was actually a pretty unpleasant character, often tolerated by
       | his peers at best, and often loathed by his subordinates whom he
       | would bully. He was an outstanding pilot though and was given the
       | benefit of the doubt as a result.
       | 
       | To his credit, after the war he used his fame to become a vocal
       | advocate for the disabled. I remember him as such when I was
       | young.
        
         | simonbarker87 wrote:
         | Thoroughly enjoyable book. I read it recently and, having gone
         | to a UK boarding school, the stories about life in Colditz
         | being treated like a high stakes public (posh) boarding school
         | by the British Officers rang very true to me.
        
           | lazyeye wrote:
           | Britain setup a holiday/prison camp for high-ranking german
           | officers and bugged everything. It's a fascinating story..
           | 
           | https://www.amazon.com.au/Walls-Have-Ears-Intelligence-
           | Opera...
        
         | bloopernova wrote:
         | In WW2, Admiral Ernest King is reputed to have said _" When
         | they get in trouble, they send for the sons of bitches."_
         | 
         | There were a lot of utter assholes and bullies around at that
         | time. There were huge inter department feuds that resulted in
         | many thousands of deaths. Part of why Eisenhower was a good
         | supreme commander was that he could wrangle the assholes into
         | at least not fighting each other!
        
           | potato3732842 wrote:
           | >Part of why Eisenhower was a good supreme commander was that
           | he could wrangle the assholes into at least not fighting each
           | other!
           | 
           | That's a spicy take on the British.
           | 
           | (I kid, but the joke is in fact based in historical fact,
           | managing relations with the British was a key reason he was
           | given the job)
        
             | pfdietz wrote:
             | And the French.
             | 
             | As General Jacob L. Devers wrote to French General Jean de
             | Lattre de Tassigny in 1945, "For many months we have fought
             | together, often on the same side."
        
         | cab11150904 wrote:
         | Ben is unlikely to ever be surpassed as in author in my eyes. I
         | have read most of his books, well listened on Audible during my
         | commutes, and they are all amazing. He quite literally brings
         | history to life for me. His descriptions make you feel like
         | you're there. Prisoners of the Castle is the one I haven't
         | really had interest in but I'll probably get it at some point
         | just to hear them all.
        
         | DC-3 wrote:
         | An extremely capable and heroic man. But also an out-and-out
         | racist who was an unabashed supporter of apartheid Rhodesia.
         | People are complicated.
        
         | gnfargbl wrote:
         | Bader was also a chief proponent of the Big Wing, essentially
         | flying a shitload of planes together in formation. The Big Wing
         | which is usually considered [1] to have been a worse strategy
         | than the more dynamic, targeted and integrated Dowding System
         | [2] with which it competed.
         | 
         | He might have been a good pilot and a determined escapee, but I
         | don't think history has much else to say in his favour.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/battle-of-britain-big-wing-
         | wa...
         | 
         | [2] https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/what-was-the-dowding-system
        
         | matthewmorgan wrote:
         | Whereas bagging on a dead war hero due to something you read in
         | a book is highly creditable behaviour
        
           | kitd wrote:
           | Mackintyre is a professional historian whose work is based on
           | first hand accounts so I think it can be taken as fact that
           | many found him unpleasant.
           | 
           | I found it interesting & surprising to read of his character,
           | having (possibly like you) only known of him as a war hero,
           | and thought it worth mentioning, that's all.
           | 
           | So no need for vicarious outrage. As you say, he's long gone.
        
       | kylecazar wrote:
       | "Bader then used this leg to mount multiple escape attempts from
       | various prisons"
       | 
       | Coming soon to Netflix...
        
         | jonp888 wrote:
         | A film was made about his life a few years after the war, which
         | is now something of a classic, if only due to how often it is
         | shown on British Television. It was a flop in the US though.
        
           | chgs wrote:
           | Probably because it didn't have an American saving the day
        
             | lern_too_spel wrote:
             | The screenwriters could simply insert American characters
             | into the story.
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Escape_(film)
        
       | tetris11 wrote:
       | We had one member of the troup that did the real life Great
       | Escape visit our school.
       | 
       | He handed out schematics of how they tunneled, their day-to-day
       | logistics, communication with the outside, etc.
       | 
       | It was a really fun talk, but it ended on a somber note where
       | those who did not escape were later punished/executed in revenge
       | for the escape taking place.
       | 
       | In this context, someone asked him, "was it worth it?" and all I
       | remember about his answer was him gripping his handout and giving
       | a monosyllable reply.
        
         | dataflow360 wrote:
         | What syllable?
        
           | tetris11 wrote:
           | I genuinely can't remember, but it left me feeling washed
           | out.
        
         | byteknight wrote:
         | Both yes and no are one syllable. Your drawn out drama-incucing
         | style of writing left a huge hanger that makes it
         | unpleasurable.
        
           | pinkmuffinere wrote:
           | I suspect that's intentional. Not all writing aims to be
           | pleasurable, and I suspect the parent comment illustrates the
           | gut-wrenching pain of war really well.
           | 
           | What do I as a reader want the answer to be? That it was
           | worth the death of his friends? That he'd rather they never
           | tried? No answer is happy, and I think that's somewhat the
           | point. Even more touching if it's a true story, life is
           | sometimes so poetic it hurts.
        
             | JumpCrisscross wrote:
             | > _What do I as a reader want the answer to be?_
             | 
             | Whatever he feels. Would he do it again?
        
               | pinkmuffinere wrote:
               | Some writing conveys beliefs, and other writing makes
               | readers think about their own beliefs. Both are valid,
               | and the resulting effect may not even follow the writer's
               | intention. I feel this writing mostly makes me
               | interrogate my own beliefs.
        
           | boothby wrote:
           | I see "gripping his handout" as significantly more vivid than
           | the uttered response -- which OP confirms to have eluded
           | their memory. That's the story: the teller's reaction to the
           | question was more visceral than verbal.
           | 
           | Sometimes the truth is inherently dramatic. I know that when
           | I've responded in that way -- clenching and mumbling a
           | monosyllable -- the clench is honest, the syllable may be
           | effectively meaningless.
        
         | mikepurvis wrote:
         | If it's the famous Great Escape about which the movie was made,
         | only three men who escaped made it to freedom, and just eleven
         | more were recaptured and survived to the end of the war-- the
         | rest of the 77 were shot. Of those 14 survivors, most passed
         | away in the 1990s, so if you actually did get to meet one,
         | that's pretty neat!
         | 
         | Certainly the depiction in the movie is that it was absolutely
         | worth it to the men; maybe in practical terms it resulted in
         | greater loss of life than just cooperating with the
         | confinement, but there is value to the spirit in resisting evil
         | that goes beyond the simple imperative to stay alive.
        
           | hbrav wrote:
           | I bet you're right about there being value to the spirit. But
           | if I understand correctly escape was also regarded as a
           | matter of duty. By escaping you would not only stand a chance
           | of making it back to Allied lines, but you would also tie up
           | German forces searching for you.
        
       | nullbyte wrote:
       | This is an awesome story
        
       | gambiting wrote:
       | I don't know, I cannot accept in my head that in one part of
       | Europe Nazis were shaving men, women and children to use their
       | hair as industrial filling before throwing them in gas chambers
       | by the thousands, but somewhere else Nazi general was gracious
       | enough to allow British troops to airdrop a prosthetic leg for
       | their pilot - they even remained friends after the war! I'm sorry
       | but it just sounds like.....some kind of joke? Like it happened
       | in a different reality than the one that happened in Europe at
       | the time? Why was that general even allowed to visit the UK and
       | not in prison? Oh that's right - because Churchil has personally
       | advocated against prosecuting nazi generals because it would be
       | "unsporstmanlike".
       | 
       | I'm sorry, I cannot enjoy this article in the spirit it was
       | written in. I grew up next to Auschwitz and the idea of
       | borderline friendly(sorry, "diplomatic") relationship with nazi
       | forces makes me sick.
        
         | appleorchard46 wrote:
         | It makes the horrible things the Nazis did even more
         | horrifying. It's easy to think of the Nazi regime as a pure,
         | isolated evil, but when articles like this show that there was
         | room for even a little humanity, it makes it clear how many
         | individual choices for evil were made elsewhere every step of
         | the way.
        
         | schroeding wrote:
         | They maybe just forgot the extend of it. Don't forget that many
         | don't even know the difference between the "normal" (already
         | incredibly horrible and vile) concentration camps like Dachau
         | and the pure extermination camps like Auschwitz-Birkenau,
         | Treblinka or Sobibor. The Brits and Americans only liberated
         | the first kind, and it (mostly) wasn't their citizens who were
         | gassed or shot by Einsatzgruppen.
         | 
         | Also doesn't help that some think it was only done and caused
         | by the SS or Hitler / Himmler / Goring, as if there was no
         | connection with the remaining government, the police or the
         | Reichsbahn, and as if the Wannseekonferenz[1] and
         | Reichskristallnacht[2] had never happened.
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wannsee_Conference, also
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URSNN5mnI2g
         | 
         | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht
        
         | simonbarker87 wrote:
         | The reason the two co exist in the same regime is (awfully)
         | that they didn't consider Jews to be people while they
         | considered the British worthy opponents. It's horrible and
         | disgusting but if one can wrap their head around the idea that
         | a population can be indoctrinated into believing there are two
         | levels of people (effectively people and not people) then Nazi
         | Germany becomes more ... comprehensible. The shockingness of it
         | doesn't go away though.
         | 
         | I thought Churchill was against the trials because he thought
         | the Nazi leadership should just simply be executed or
         | imprisoned for life without the bother of a trial? Churchill
         | was very much a fan of unsportsmanlike behaviour, the more
         | devious the trick the better in his view.
        
       | lovegrenoble wrote:
       | Aleksey Petrovich Maresyev (1916 - 2001) was a Soviet and Russian
       | military pilot who became a Soviet fighter ace during World War
       | II despite becoming a double amputee.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksey_Maresyev
        
       | xpl wrote:
       | _> Bader then used this leg to mount multiple escape attempts
       | from various prisons_
       | 
       | Oh, that reminds me of the prosthetic leg joke from 'Guardians of
       | the Galaxy'. So it was a reference?
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJfMSE_3iSc
        
       | Onavo wrote:
       | Pilots (that are not bombers) were treated pretty well by the
       | Luftwaffe. Aviators share a comraderie that's hard to describe
       | (very similar to software engineers in a sense).
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-01-27 23:00 UTC)