Maybe 
because that book starts of by the ultimate WAH 
2 Likes
He just apologized for that rant in the stream.
4 Likes
The question might have been posed in jest, but given how it set Indy off it’s probably far from the first time the question has been posed to him in some form, and usually in complete seriousness.
The obvious problem is that, in context of this channel, it is a really stupid question as they have gone to great lengths to present the war in its totality and not just from a Western Allies perspective, much less an American one.
But additionally, for anyone reading this who isn’t American, please understand that D-Day has historically been presented in the United States as being extremely focused on Omaha Beach. It’s as if Omaha is some unique martyrdom of American soldiers. The 82nd & 101st Airborne are also mythologized. Utah Beach is glossed over as a happy accident cakewalk and Gold-Juno-Sword are effectively ignored and dismissed because they weren’t Americans. The fact that that neither the majority of soldiers hitting the beach on D-Day nor the majority of the ships supporting the landing were American would come as a shock to probably 95% of Americans. Indy, an American expat, is undoubtedly well aware of the disingenuous narrative that has his home country has built around D-Day over the last 75 years and presumably really f’n hates it.
5 Likes
Great points percentagewise more Allied soldiers died on Juno which wasn’t even in the Longest day. (I am the guy who bought the memorial to the First Nations guy Sparty mentioned).
Anyway, there will A LOT of new stuff there and many people working on it.
Also another OOTF is scheduled for November with a hardly known fact. No spoilers here 
2 Likes
I believe Indy’s reaction to her question was both accurate and correct. But, then again, I may not be fully civilized. I might be a work in progress. Or, she may be an idiot.
Don’t you just love freedom, everybody gets to decide for themselves.
Unless, of course, you are living under tyranny… like YouTube.
Just sayin’.
- List item
2 Likes
Indy didn’t rant in previous videos.
But he got married 2 months ago and now he is ranting.
3 Likes
LOL I 
2 Likes
Between the total dominance of Hollywood movies after WW2 (the lively British film industry was one of the expensive luxuries that had to be cut back in the austerity of postwar economic struggles) and the rise of TV (also mostly US-made, for US audiences) in the late 1950s, the vast majority of people would only see WW2 from the US point of view. The British contribution to the war might get a mention now and again, but the other allied nations? To many Canadians in the 1980s, it would have been a revelation to hear just how much Canada contributed to the allied cause. Off the top of my head, I can only think of one movie that includes Canadian involvement seriously: 1968’s The Devil’s Brigade, a highly fictionalized account of the US-Canadian 1st Special Service Brigade. Even then, the Canadians are portrayed more as British, but that probably had to be done to illustrate the difference between the US and Canadian men.
3 Likes
I dated an American lady for 9 years and every time I went down and talked to her friends and relatives and even complete strangers almost all had no clue Canada has a standing military and none knew Canada played a major role in WW2. To them it was US, GB, Germany, Italy, Soviet Union and Japan anybody else was just a minor player in the war.
It is something that still burns my ass at how uneducated Many Americans tend to be about the world. It’s all about them and nothing else.
3 Likes
While it is comendable that they don’t just focus on the American side for most events, let’s not forget that they are also guilty of one-sided reporting, particularly in regards to a certain Axis-minor.
3 Likes
did you try mailing them? They might read it more frequently than this forum.
2 Likes
This problem goes back years at this point; even to the very start when they lied to me, personally, that they were going to cover Bulgaria on Between Two Wars. It takes an insane amount of time to find and translate sources, only to have it be ignored. Or being called a whataboutist on their Instagram because I offered a grammatical correction on one of their posts.
If they need help, they can always send me a DM and I will be happy to help. Otherwise, I will just continue to point out their careless attitude.
2 Likes
What’s that?
Oh man, that’s rough.
1 Like
That question is more appropriate than you realize.
Flashback to when they were covering 1941 on Instagram, and they posted about the Drama uprising (another event I spent a whole afternoon translating a source for them, only for it to get ignored, and get covered as in-depth as the opening paragraph of a Wikipedia article). The post said something about Bulgarians settling into Aegean Thrace; to which I suggested correcting settling to resettling - citing that many of the settlers were former refugees that had left Aegean Thrace after WW1. Given that we are in a situation where one group of people was forced to leave an area, and then came back, I would say that this meets the dictionary definition of ‘resettling’. Not according to whoever was running their Instagram though.
Mind you, I’ve made one suggestion for a similar correction at a post from 1940 and was met with a positive response, so I figured in this case I would get a similar response. Instead, I was rudely told that the WW1 treaties had included population exchanges that Bulgaria agreed to. What does this have to do with my suggestion? Your guess is as good as mine.
After a bit more back-and-forth where I outright asked him/her what his/her problem is. the response was: “We do not like whataboutists (people who use whatabout-ism)”.
Just imagine spending an afternoon translating a source, only for it to be ignored, and to top it all off, you get called a whataboutist for making a literal grammatical correction. This was the first time I got some serious red flags about them, and their coverage of 1943 has only reinforced my belief that someone on that team has an agenda. Or at least a serious gripe.
2 Likes