Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Rubber Tanks and Sonic Trucks: the Ghost Army of World War II (hackaday.com)

Posted by samzenpus on from the more-real-than-real dept.

szczys writes: While you may have heard of the Ghost Army that was used to fake troop movements during WWII, it's unlikely that you truly grasp the level of skill and success these elite groups achieved. At its surface, the story is about inflatable armies that could fool German intelligence from afar. That is one visual component, but there were many more involving sound and radio communications. Before the digital age, it was quite a trick making authentic audio recordings of military vehicle sounds on 2-mile long spools of very thin wire played back from vehicles outfitted with 500 Watt speakers. The A/V wasn't complete without radio communications spoofed to look like the Ghost Army was the real deal: this used the best of personal-morse-code-style impersonators. Elite groups trained in these phony arts operated throughout the European theater. Their story was top secret long after the war because the craft was considered a strategic asset well into the cold war era.

57 of 82 comments (clear)

  1. rubber tanks OR sonic trucks by turkeydance · · Score: 4, Funny

    either could be your band's name.

  2. Lame,,, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    How exactally does this relate to news 4 nerdz??

    man things get worse as the year goes on..
    Are you guys really participating in the killing of this institution, just to get rid of it at the right price..

    Shameful..

    1. Re: Lame,,, by __aagigi1968 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My thought exactly. And for all the releases and all the programs made about ww2,our governments are still inventing new lies about it and leaning on old lies to try and stop folk learning too much of the truth. If you have good walking legs and boots,can read maps and have some knowledge of major points in ww2 history,it's amazing what you can find in the southern half of the UK,but you have to be very careful cos being a tiny,cramped little island there are only so many places that current establishments and kit can be hidden .if you think you have some strange mapping anomolies in America,you want to try the UK.it's fun if you have a large collection of old maps and don't mind loads of trouble with supposed land owners,troops etc etc. You soon realise how much of our "history" is pure bs...

    2. Re: Lame,,, by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      > You soon realise how much of our "history" is pure bs...

      such as?

    3. Re: Lame,,, by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Some of the more interesting ww2 related crypto news is at this blog
      "Christos military and intelligence corner"
      http://www.chris-intel-corner....
      The blog has offered some great insight into what Germany could break wrt US and UK codes.
      What other nations did to Germany and other nations experts helped Germany gain some interesting insights into US and UK mil thinking.
      A lot of the low and mid level codes where junk and its nice to see some new info beyond the usual Enigma like efforts.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re: Lame,,, by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      Pretty much anything to do with the American War of Independence for starters.

      I call bs.

      Hey! That works pretty well!

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    5. Re: Lame,,, by Iamthecheese · · Score: 1

      If you have specific examples you'll be able to provide them. Otherwise you're full of bovine fecal matter.

      --
      If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
  3. More info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's a PBS documentary called The Ghost Army on Netflix about this that was made in 2013. This group was mostly Hollywood effects men and not soldiers, which made it especially dicey when the Germans actually advanced on their position quite rapidly at one point and they had to run like hell to get away as they had no real weapons or training to fight! The documentary is quite good if you're interested. It's an hour and seven minutes long.

    1. Re:More info by pipedwho · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Probably a really good thing that they ran, as they would have been dramatically outnumbered if they'd hung around to 'fight'.

      Keep in mind that this was a couple of guys in a vehicle pretending to be a whole battalion. So any attack on them would have been made by a force big enough to have some chance of success against the much larger 'illusory' target.

  4. Re: This is news? by KGIII · · Score: 2

    I went and found you one of my favorite documentaries on the subject:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    The whole series is pretty good. It's biased but they all are. This is less biased than some. It's a good enough series to warrant watching the entirety of it. I... err... I don't really watch television so much, or movies really, but I do generally watch more documentaries than is healthy. This is one of my favorite subjects. There's still loads more for me to learn.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  5. Patton vs. Bradley by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The big victory here, was that the Germans swallowed it hook, line and sinker. The Germans considered Patton to be the most formidable General that the Allies had. Unfortunately for Patton, he was on the shit-list, because he slapped a patient in a field hospital in Italy, who Patton mistakenly claimed was just suffering from cowardice.

    The German spooks heard of this, but discarded it quickly. Why would an Army sideline a brilliant General, just because he slapped a simple enlisted man? At any rate the "Patton Threat" really played a crucial role in all this, and helped the Normandy landings to be a success.

    Personal Note: I met an old German soldier a long time back, and we discussed the Normandy landings. He said, "We were waiting the whole time for Patton to land in Calais."

    Hey, fooled you, most awesomely!

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by Noah+Haders · · Score: 3, Interesting

      america sucks at how we treat our most talented generals. patton, macarthur, mcchrystal, petreus. all shut down by the paper pushers. its like the ultimate muscle-flexing by the civilian-controlled military. any time a military leader gets too powerful, knock him down a few rungs.

    2. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by mjwx · · Score: 4, Informative

      The big victory here, was that the Germans swallowed it hook, line and sinker. The Germans considered Patton to be the most formidable General that the Allies had. Unfortunately for Patton, he was on the shit-list, because he slapped a patient in a field hospital in Italy, who Patton mistakenly claimed was just suffering from cowardice.

      The German spooks heard of this, but discarded it quickly. Why would an Army sideline a brilliant General, just because he slapped a simple enlisted man? At any rate the "Patton Threat" really played a crucial role in all this, and helped the Normandy landings to be a success.

      Personal Note: I met an old German soldier a long time back, and we discussed the Normandy landings. He said, "We were waiting the whole time for Patton to land in Calais."

      Hey, fooled you, most awesomely!

      This was no error on the part of the Germans, well at least not a stupid one. The Allies deliberately built a huge propaganda machine centred around Patton for the express purpose fooling the Germans into believing that Patton was leading the invasion and it would be at the Pas de Calais. It wasn't just propaganda either, everything from false intelligence fed through double agents to using Hollywood experts to build an entire fake army around Patton.

      And as you said, the Germans swallowed it hook, line and sinker. When Hitler's aides woke him and informed him of the Normandy landings he dismissed it as another raid and refused to allow the release of armoured reinforcements because he was that convinced the invasion would be at Calais. A deception that saves thousands of allied lives.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    3. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by k6mfw · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The German spooks heard of this, but discarded it quickly. Why would an Army sideline a brilliant General, just because he slapped a simple enlisted man?

      Hey, fooled you, most awesomely!

      I wondered the same myself. I think Patton slapping a GI is small stuff, probably did much more to piss off his superiors. Maybe they used that to create a red herring for German spies. Back when History Channel had history, one panelist commented if Patton was active on Normandy landings, they would have been more successful (not sure how to define success, airborne troops scattered about was a disaster but it really confused the Germans to exact beachheads). Speaking of ghost armies, I read that Saddam Hussein really believed he had formable WMDs and other weapon systems because his staff pumped up the numbers out of fear if they really told him he had no capable WMDs, they would be fired (literally). Apparently the American spooks fell for this as well.

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
    4. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by youngone · · Score: 4, Informative
      I have no personal view about Patton's ability, but I have read of men who served under him that were appalled by his disregard for the lives of his men.

      MacArthur however was treated with barely concealed contempt by the Australians (in particular) because of his grandstanding, and the way he was followed around constantly by camera men.

      He also viewed the Australians as second class soldiers, despite their heroism in appalling conditions at Kokoda (for example). He ended his career by being sacked after going behind the president's back during the Korean War.

      Petreus' end speaks for itself.

    5. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ... appalled by his disregard for the lives of his men.

      Winston Churchill has been getting some attention lately. The movie 'The gathering storm' shows him as something of a war-monger. But examining the African campaign reveals he wanted a victory to get the respect of the Americans and didn't care about the cost to England or its undersized army that struggled to hold Africa for the allies.

      War is usually seen as throwing bodies at a problem until one gets the solution one desires. But decisive victories, those that change the course of the war are made by leveraging other resources. England chose superior technology while the USA chose and continues to choose, superior fire-power.

    6. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by dbIII · · Score: 1

      The last did the same as Snowden but just because he wanted to fuck a journalist - he shut himself down after being promoted to one of the highest posts in the USA.

    7. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by dbIII · · Score: 4, Interesting

      MacArthur however was treated with barely concealed contempt by the Australians (in particular)

      Very obvious lies inspired that. Taking credit for the actions of Australian forces long before he even turned up didn't go down well, but his entire career was like that - whatever real success he had did not seem to be enough for him to boast about.
      I don't know if it's true or not but the history taught to Chinese kids about the Korean war says that the Chinese decided to join in when MacArthur looked across the river into China with binoculars. Reality is likely to be different since the initial North Korean soldiers were the many Koreans that fought in the Chinese army in WWII anyway, and still in units, so effectively China was in the war on day one even if the force committed was a lot less than later.

      Petreus' end speaks for itself.

      Ironically due to wanting to "get his end in" with a journalist.

    8. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      both patton and macarthur just wanted to make america great again.

    9. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Apparently the American spooks fell for this as well

      No. Don't you remember that the "intelligence" had to be mocked up by a PR agency because nobody in the CIA etc would put their name on anything?

    10. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by k6mfw · · Score: 1

      you remember that the "intelligence" had to be mocked up

      that too! I was thinking of military conflicts through the centuries how much was driven and diverted from solid intelligence, rumors, lies, and everything in between. Getting back to rubber tanks, same kind of mischief continues on but very good photoshopping and CGI, insert this stuff through intelligence channels.

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
    11. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      Civilian control of, what? Civilization I guess. Use it or lose it.

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    12. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      "anything but his own reputation". I detect a pattern here. (Not Bradley, though. An exception)

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    13. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      Sun Tzu wrote well about deception in warfare and how critical it is.

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    14. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by KGIII · · Score: 2

      Patton's mistake was, as I recall, doing it while press was present.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    15. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by gtall · · Score: 2

      Old ideas never die. Schwarzkopf during the first Gulf War used the Marines history of storming beaches to fool the Iraqis into thinking the U.S. was going to retake Kuwait for the fat boys in robes via a seaborne invasion. He had them practicing beach storming in the Gulf in ways the Iraqis could see.

      I wouldn't be surprised if the Patton ruse was a British idea. The things the Brits did to the Germans during WWII with misdirection, deceit, etc. were really amazing.

    16. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by jafiwam · · Score: 1

      Merkel is a soviet communist. Once you realize that, things make a lot more sense.

    17. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by operagost · · Score: 1

      Petraeus's end points out that you can only get away with having affairs and mishandling classified information if your last name is Clinton.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    18. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      Back when History Channel had history, one panelist commented if Patton was active on Normandy landings, they would have been more successful (not sure how to define success, airborne troops scattered about was a disaster but it really confused the Germans to exact beachheads).

      Patton had his soldiers drive till they either engaged the enemy or ran out of gas. Often exceeding their supply lines in doing so. He usually come sup not in D-Day but later when the allies finally broke through the hedge rows. Unknown to the allies, the way to Paris was wide open. One reporter managed to take his jeep, drive to Paris, have some drinks at a cafe, and drive back unmolested. By time he reported that, the Germans had regrouped and filled the gaps. The general feeling is that if Patton had been there, that reporter would have been following tanks all the way to Paris.

    19. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      In Patton's writings, he claimed to be very concerned for the lives of his men. He tried to reduce US casualties by various means, including ones that were very dangerous to some men. He ordered his men to take risks that would reduce the overall casualty count if successful, and not kill to many if unsuccessful.

      I've read that he wanted his men to walk through minefields on the attack. The reason is that the Germans normally didn't defend behind the minefields very well, and that delaying until the minefield was cleared would allow the Germans to set up more lethal defenses.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    20. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I'd be interested in any halfway plausible account of how his death could have been deliberate. It looks to me like completely accidental.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    21. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Patton did get in trouble for slapping a couple of patients around (and doing worse; I believe "slapping" was claimed in one case to minimize what he did). That was not acceptable in the US Army. He got in trouble for saying politically inconvenient things in public (the wartime alliances were a lot more delicate than they look in retrospect). However, he was arguably the best US general of the war (although he would have been a total disaster in Eisenhower's role), and the Army tried to get him back into the field. When he was promoted to full General, Army Chief of Staff Marshall asked him not to spoil the occasion with words. Patton chuckled and complied.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    22. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Another issue with regards to Paris was that there was a French armored division in the Allied forces (the 2eme Blindee) that Eisenhower wanted to liberate Paris for political reasons. Patton, of course, would have sent what he had into Paris, without regard to the politics.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    23. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by spads · · Score: 1

      The German spooks heard of this, but discarded it quickly. Why would an Army sideline a brilliant General, just because he slapped a simple enlisted man?

      Hey, fooled you, most awesomely!

      I wondered the same myself. I think Patton slapping a GI is small stuff, probably did much more to piss off his superiors. Maybe they used that to create a red herring for German spies. Back when History Channel had history, one panelist commented if Patton was active on Normandy landings, they would have been more successful (not sure how to define success, airborne troops scattered about was a disaster but it really confused the Germans to exact beachheads). Speaking of ghost armies, I read that Saddam Hussein really believed he had formable WMDs and other weapon systems because his staff pumped up the numbers out of fear if they really told him he had no capable WMDs, they would be fired (literally). Apparently the American spooks fell for this as well.

      "In America they break the strongest man."

      I heard this once on the NPR show "Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me" and have always wondered as to the original source.

      --
      Bukowski said it. I believe it. That settles it.
    24. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by k6mfw · · Score: 1

      Patton, of course, would have sent what he had into Paris, without regard to the politics.

      and probably wanted to be the first of the Allies entering Paris with the siren on the hood of his jeep blaring away. Maybe it was Eisenhower's or Marshall's plan to sideline Patton so not cause that embarrassment to the French, and have DeGaulle lead the way to the city instead. Another curious thing, how Paris was spared airstrikes and artillery bombardments?

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
    25. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by k6mfw · · Score: 1

      "got in trouble for saying politically inconvenient things in public" as portrayed in the movie when Patton mentioned a New World Order, his assistant said, "don't forget the Russians."

      "he would have been a total disaster in Eisenhower's role" Ike spent much of his time balancing the egos of various generals from the allied nations.

      Army Chief of Staff Marshall: There was an article about George goes to work early in morning. He fights [politically] the British, the French, the Soviets, the Dutch, the Belgiums, etc. Gets home late at night and his wife reminds him that he needs to fight the Germans!

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
    26. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by k6mfw · · Score: 1

      It looks to me like completely accidental.

      Ironic that Patton commanded all sorts of major battles but to eventually die from result of automobile accident after the war was over. A line from the movie, I wonder if a German officer really said (paraphrasing here), "lack of war will kill him."

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
    27. Re:Patton vs. Bradley by youngone · · Score: 1

      Yes, as I said, I have no strong views about Patton, he won battles regularly. Men die in war and it's a general's job to send them to die. My Dad for instance hated Churchill, because he could have negotiated a treaty with the Nazis in 1940 and Dad would not have spent the best part of 6 years fighting. I think my Dad was wrong about that and Churchill was right, but then I wasn't at El Alamein or Monte Casino and he was.

  6. a bodyguard of lies by z0idberg · · Score: 2

    From the first line in TFA:
    Winston Churchill once told Joseph Stalin “In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies”

    Certainly explains a lot about how the truth is handled in the War on Terror.

  7. We did the same thing in the Gulf War by OctobrX · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So I was a 93F with the 101st and one of the first things we did when we got in country was take a trip into Iraq. I was amazed at the HUGE giant amount of tanks I saw as we approached our area to run a met mission(fly a weather balloon lol). As we got closer and closer... I started to notice something. About 50 feet away, I noticed there were wires holding these inflatable vehicles down and let out the biggest cackle you'd ever heard. It was brilliant.

    We were there as a part of the GHOST ops to make it look like stuff was happening. Pretty smart if you think about it.

    --
    geeky stuff I'm proud to have been a part of: linux.com / themes.org / sourceforge.net / sicnus.com
    1. Re:We did the same thing in the Gulf War by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      The W-M-Ds were probably also inflated fakes.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    2. Re:We did the same thing in the Gulf War by AHuxley · · Score: 3, Informative

      The problem now is the numbers of rushed in, poorly vetted contractors, random dual citizens working for contractors, other nations workers, private sector staff, US gov staff who are needed to provide support for the once secure all US mil only areas.
      As the US looks to out source and no bid contract even more of its invasion, occupation and other massive war like efforts, the amount of random people wondering around, looking around will be interesting.
      WW2 worked well as Germany only had look limited fancy new down platforms and had to work with vast radio and telephone capture. German over flight optics was only so good.
      Germany had lost its spies in the UK early in WW2. The UK always had very good methods to track people globally.
      The UK was also very active in hunting down Germans or people in contact with Germany in neutral nations too (MI5 section 1a teams, Camp 020 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ).
      UK teams would go to neutral nations and find German related radio networks and turn them or ensure the radio traffic stopped.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:We did the same thing in the Gulf War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The problem between the US then and the US now is that the enemy discovered how to turn the press against us. In Vietnam, the press decided to tell the Army to F-off, and start showing Vietnamese being killed. It made for great profits for the news companies, and sank the US's war effort.

      The first Gulf War was a stroke of genius. Iraq was pushed out of Kuwait, then the US left Saddam still in power and the balance in the ME was maintained with the same evil men at the helm... but evil men that were known evil men and has shit to lose if they decided to attack the US or NATO. The second? Fail on every count. The push into Afghanistan was understandable. Iraq? It ensured that the US now has to spend time and effort with that soul-destroying part of the world for decades to come.

      The US as it stands now is so easily played by propaganda artists. Daesh makes YT videos which are then linked by domestic press so their torturing and beheading winds up on the TV set of middle America. In previous decades, that would be considered giving aid and comfort to the enemy, but with the current state journalism in (where Buzzfeed and Diply are the vanguard of the modern news organization), until someone in power puts their foot down and stops allowing Daesh full unfettered access to distribute in the US, Daesh will keep scoring the propaganda victories, which are as important as military victories.

      The US also is on the contractor system. This means that something specced for a high grade of stainless steel can be made out of zinc based pot metal, and when it breaks, the contractor just shrugs and declares bankruptcy, leaving the costs with taxpayers, the C-level brass with the golden parachutes. Until there is actual criminal responsibility (i.e. top brass seeing prison time because showerheads were electrocuting servicepeople), this circus will continue.

      Of course, the "toymaking" needs a backseat to stuff that actually makes a military work. Look at Russia. They are turning out jets that actually can fight/bomb, not win bigs. Compare the S400 system to the PATRIOT system and the cost of upkeep for each. The US can make better stuff, if the contracting companies so chose, and someone holds their feet to the fire. But right now, the steady progress of Russia is winning this race.

      Of course, we need a Churchill. The US and European countries all have leadership following the Chamberlain model of appeasement. However, just like with 1930s/1940s Germany, you can't appease Daesh. Buy their oil, it just funds more recruits. Allow them to take more land? The idea of them being THE legit caliphate becomes more firmly entrenched and gains them more recruits worldwide. People recognizing them as a nation by using nomenclature stating they own the Middle East including Jerusalem? Just makes them stronger and allows their attacks to become more sophisticated.

      No, Churchill tactics are not politically correct for those who have to run to their college's "safe room" whey they are "verbally raped" by something they don't want to hear. However, war is never pretty, and the alternative is having everything from the Eiffel Tower to the Kremlin razed to the ground, just as old cities are being reduced to rubble by Daesh as of now.

      Hopefully the US and Europe can pull out of their death spiral. It may take some effort actually making weapons that win conflicts rather than contract bids (for example, when one compares the AR to the AK/SKS based rifles, the AK lineage has won every conflict every time), but that is definitely better than extinction.

    4. Re:We did the same thing in the Gulf War by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The press was not the cause of Vietnam War protests. The protests were against fighting a long war in a country almost nobody had heard of before the war, having tens of thousands of US dead, and how Johnson was screwing it up. Had the war been competently handled, there still would have been protests but not on the same scale.

      Unfortunately, mass politics is an extremely blunt weapon, and this turned into a lot of political pressure to get the US out of Vietnam, allowing North Vietnam to conquer the South with an armored offensive in 1975.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  8. Not news and 1/3 of the story by xororand · · Score: 1

    1. Not news. Story reheated too many times. Older articles:
    http://www.theotherside.co.uk/...
    http://www.voanews.com/content...
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/his...

    2. The Russians did it too.
    https://books.google.de/books?...

    3. The Germans/Axis did it too:
    http://www.track-link.com/foru...
    This is also mentioned in the monumental 1970s British documentary "The World At War", which I strongly suggest to watch instead of reading this drivel.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  9. Re: Just think of how many corporations... by QQBoss · · Score: 1

    War is the biggest form of corporate welfare those Republicans have ever invented.

    Epic fail of flamebaiting even by AC standards:

    There was prior art even before the first republicans- the Romans.

  10. Re: This is news? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    So do I, and I did.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  11. Quaker guns by Catmeat · · Score: 1

    Deploying fake weapons is a tactic that goes back hundreds of years. See Quaker gun

  12. The "cold war asset" nonsense. by sergueyz · · Score: 1

    Russians weren't that far behind. I am mostly posting because of the "cold war asset" reason for secrecy.

    One link: http://leon-spb67.livejournal.... (Russian)

    During the War, Russians made wood artillery base mockup. Germans dutyfully bombed that mockup using... wooden bombs!

    After learning that germans know about mockery, headquarters decided to place real artillery there and brought fire to germans from unexpected direction.

    Just one of many episodes from our War.

    1. Re:The "cold war asset" nonsense. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      During the War, Russians made wood artillery base mockup. Germans dutyfully bombed that mockup using... wooden bombs!

      Sounds legit.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  13. So it's hackaday this time... by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

    So it's hackaday raiding Reddit for story ideas this time. Sorry, Buzzfeed, I blamed you out of habit.

    Seriously, https://www.reddit.com/r/histo... was yesterday.

  14. The Man Who Never Was -- True Disinformation Story by bdwoolman · · Score: 1

    A very well done film was made in the Fifties about an operation along these lines. Check it out.

    --
    "No fear. No envy. No meanness." Liam Clancy
  15. Re: This is news? by KGIII · · Score: 1

    I'm actually familiar with that book. I read it as a child. I grew up on base, my father was a career Marine, and we had many such books in our library. It's probably in my library at home. Garbo is a great character - absolutely brilliant. And they fell for it! He gave them just enough information to keep them wanting more and only some of it was factual but enough was true to be of interest.

    I forget his name but there was a Soviet spy who managed to get a medal from both the Germans and the Russians. They're entertainment reads and watches so I don't memorize names, places, and dates very well. I know, it probably seems strange to do such but, well, it's my entertainment. The spy craft really took on a whole new meaning with that age. The Cold War really made it excel and today, I'm sure, they've gone even further.

    There was an interesting work, I forget the name of the book, that was written by a lady OSS member. That was a good read. She'd helped to vet some of the inbound refugees and whatnot. She'd also gone undercover for a while but she was a secretary who could not type so that didn't last very long. She survived, that's good. Unfortunately, the name escapes me. If I think of it, I'll try to reply.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  16. Inflatible decoys? Thats crazy! by Speck'sBacon · · Score: 1

    I had been playing Metal Gear Solid 5 a lot recently, and in that game there are inflatable decoys (of personnel, not materiel). I had thought that this was another one of Hideo Kojima's outlandish bits of in-game humor, but after learning about this, apparently is isn't so far fetched after all.

  17. Re:escortsserviceinhyderabad by tehcyder · · Score: 1

    Welcome to HYDERABAD MODELS client service which is Hyderabad and begumpet model association! Here you can arrange a date with one of the finest Hyderabad models or Hyderabad call young women as they are moreover named by clients. http://www.escortsserviceinhyd...

    On slashdot, it is traditional to post pictures of your "products" when you advertise them.

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  18. Still going... by MagickalMyst · · Score: 1

    "Elite groups trained in these phony arts..." are alive and well in the 21st century.

    For example, they pulled off 9/11 and made it look like a bunch of freedom hating Muslims did it.

    Sadly, there are still some people who believe that official conspiracy theory put forth by the Bush administration. (Which is absolutely ridiculous and has more holes in it than swiss cheese)

    It's all about the manipulation and control of the average person.

    --
    Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
  19. Re: This is news? by Talderas · · Score: 1

    I am bemused by my accidental mistake given the topic.

    I imagine that what I meant to conclude with was that it contains a lot of insight into the execution of fortitude as well as interviews and comments from post-war high rank German commanders and captured intel that indicated how effective it was.

    --
    "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork