Originally posted by baff Always done alright so far.
Western Europe has become a military non-factor in recent years. If each Western European nation were bombed tomorrow, ala 9/11, they would roll over and beg for mercy if the US did not fight for them.
Originally posted by AlexAmore Originally posted by TookyG Originally posted by AlexAmore
If we did help other people in other countries maybe the world wouldn't hate us.
As a nation we give more aid than any other nation. Gratitude ftw!
A recent poll by the Program for International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland showed that most Americans still imagine that 20 percent of the federal budget goes to foreign aid. In reality, less than 1 percent of the budget is for foreign aid, and only about one-third of that is development assistance.
U.S. development aid has declined steadily over the past 15 years. The U.S. now ranks last among the 22 industrialized countries in percentage of national income given away in development aid: less than 0.1 percent. Tiny Denmark contributes ten times as much of its national income as American taxpayers do. Japan has been the largest provider of official development assistance for ten consecutive years.
Thats because noone else ever leaves their country to help, here send them money. Americans are the ones with their feet on the ground actually doing the job.
In America I have bad teeth. If I lived in England my teeth would be perfect.
Originally posted by baff Originally posted by //\//\oo
Originally posted by baff
Always done alright so far. Perhaps you have mistaken John Wayne and Bruce Willis films for history.
Where would England be without the intervention of the U.S. in WWII? They would be spreching Deutsch, that's what. What about Germany, if America had let Russia take all of it?
Britain defeated Germany at the Battle of Britain. The U.S. wasn't there.
The U.S. when it joined WW2 contributed fewer forces to the European theatre than Britain a small country of 40 million people. Had the Canadians not defeated Germany in the Battle of the Atlantic, the Americans would never even have made it.
America didn't stop Russia taking all of Germany. Russia volunteered to give most of it to the other allies of it's own accord. C.F. British and American controlled sectors of Berlin, dispite neither the armies fo Britain nor America being involved in the Battle of Berlin.
I think you overate both the size and effectiveness of the U.S. army in Europe at that time. While a very signifcant contributor to the last years of WW2, the U.S. was hardly in a position to stop the Russians doing anything, neither was America anything more than Britains weak cousin. The Germans were already on the run when the U.S. joined.
Oh dear, didn't Hollywood movies teach you that? Nevermind.
.
Comic in the extreme that you should want Japan and Germany to thank you for saving them from China and Russia when you were allied to both China and Russia in the pursuit of their destruction. For both of those countries the world would have been a better place without you.
We were definately not Britains weak cousin. I do think that Britain would have never been defeated by Germany but also Britain could not have defeated Germany either. If the U.S. doesn't enter the war it probably becomes a stalemate between Britain and Germany at least until the Germans invent the Atomic Bomb, then it would be all over for you.
Also when America joined the fight Britain was actually on the run, remember the Africa Campaign?
Bah! I don't want another America vs. the World thread disregard my post. Its too much like real life right now.
In America I have bad teeth. If I lived in England my teeth would be perfect.
You can spin the numbers how you want, but the Fed spends by far the most on Human Resources (education, medicare, job training, healthcare, social security, VA benefits) at $1.6 trillion.
... Thats because noone else ever leaves their country to help, here send them money. Americans are the ones with their feet on the ground actually doing the job.
All countries are in the various areas to help. Ever heard about Red Cross and all those organisations? Most countries have their own divisions. So it's not much different.
If you where refering to the US army, yes they are down there, but they mostly do the job the other way around.
Originally posted by seabass2003
... We were definately not Britains weak cousin. I do think that Britain would have never been defeated by Germany but also Britain could not have defeated Germany either. If the U.S. doesn't enter the war it probably becomes a stalemate between Britain and Germany at least until the Germans invent the Atomic Bomb, then it would be all over for you. Also when America joined the fight Britain was actually on the run, remember the Africa Campaign?
Bah! I don't want another America vs. the World thread disregard my post. Its too much like real life right now.
WW2 was done for Germany when they engaged Russia. When Hitler broke his deal with Stalin. When Germany wen't from fighting a one front war to a two front war, with massive loss. That is the reason we have a Europe now and not a third reich. Germany would never have a A bomb either, the program was stopped in 1942.
This thread wasn't intended as a hate vs USA thread. I just don't find the military expenses in USA logical. They don't fit the threat that is in the world. The "enemies" of USA can double or even tripple their military programs and USA will still be ahead. It just doesn't make sence to me.
If you look at the facts, you will see that the US spends the most out of every other country on foreign aid and relief money. We are talking over 50%. Without the US the world would be a very bad place. Many more people would die from poverty conditions than is dying from it now.
Originally posted by Phoenixs Originally posted by seabass2003
... Thats because noone else ever leaves their country to help, here send them money. Americans are the ones with their feet on the ground actually doing the job.
All countries are in the various areas to help. Ever heard about Red Cross and all those organisations? Most countries have their own divisions. So it's not much different.
If you where refering to the US army, yes they are down there, but they mostly do the job the other way around.
Originally posted by seabass2003
... We were definately not Britains weak cousin. I do think that Britain would have never been defeated by Germany but also Britain could not have defeated Germany either. If the U.S. doesn't enter the war it probably becomes a stalemate between Britain and Germany at least until the Germans invent the Atomic Bomb, then it would be all over for you. Also when America joined the fight Britain was actually on the run, remember the Africa Campaign?
Bah! I don't want another America vs. the World thread disregard my post. Its too much like real life right now.
WW2 was done for Germany when they engaged Russia. When Hitler broke his deal with Stalin. When Germany wen't from fighting a one front war to a two front war, with massive loss. That is the reason we have a Europe now and not a third reich. Germany would never have a A bomb either, the program was stopped in 1942.
This thread wasn't intended as a hate vs USA thread. I just don't find the military expenses in USA logical. They don't fit the threat that is in the world. The "enemies" of USA can double or even tripple their military programs and USA will still be ahead. It just doesn't make sence to me.
The US military budget is so high because the US is the only country in the world that can deploy superior military forces anywhere in the world and pwn any nation in a few weeks-months. It takes a massive amount of money to keep up that kind of advantage - where a nation is not only a regional power, but is a world power. It isn't technological superiority, it's the capability to go anywhere in the world and pwn any other military.
The Germans weren't truely screwed until they lost the battle of Kursk in 1943. They could have won before that. There was really no two front war until the Normandy invasion of June 1944. Sure Germany and Britain were at war, but neither side was actually fighting on the ground. There is no way the British could ever have invaded Nazi Europe by themselves. Sure, there was the war in Africa, but Germany sent very few of it's own soldiers there - A few divisions at the most. Who knows how the war would have turned out with no American invasion of Africa, no Allied invasion of France in 1944, no strategic bombing of German industries by the USAAF and RAF.
The US military budget is so high because the US is the only country in the world that can deploy superior military forces anywhere in the world and pwn any nation in a few weeks-months.
Apart from Russia, France, Britain and India for example. Paying specific note to Russia.
Originally posted by J0kerr1 If you look at the facts, you will see that the US spends the most out of every other country on foreign aid and relief money.
Amount wise, yes. Percent by citizen, no. Over here the avarage person gives way more than the average american. Both personal and through taxes. USA could easily give way more, and the world would be even better. Who needs to maintain enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world a 100 times? It's only possible to destroy it once.
abbaba. With no allied invasion, the russians probably wouldn't have stopped at Berlin. With or without USA the situation would have been pretty much the same. There wouldn't have been a third reich.
We were definately not Britains weak cousin. I do think that Britain would have never been defeated by Germany but also Britain could not have defeated Germany either. If the U.S. doesn't enter the war it probably becomes a stalemate between Britain and Germany at least until the Germans invent the Atomic Bomb, then it would be all over for you. Also when America joined the fight Britain was actually on the run, remember the Africa Campaign?
The atom was first split in Cavendish College Cambridge. German Atomic research was stopped by British commando action in Norway. (Full credits due to the Norwegian elements).
The Africa campaign? The Americans weren't at the Battle of Tobruk. Once again, the U.S. didn't show up until we had already beaten the Italians and the Germans. Our capture and control of North Africa opened up a second front in the Mediteranean. Until then we had only been assaulting in the North Atlantic only. The Russian Front was already in full swing.
Sorry you don't like being referred to as weak cousins, but since you had no army no navy and no military bases, and no military experience, that's all you were. You came out of that war well, but you didn't start with everything you have today, far from it. Most of your current territory was British prior to 1941.
No offense to the large ballsed and glorious warriors of the U.S. but I'm pretty tired of people trying to claim credit for fights they weren't in. Hollywood isn't history. This kind of self congratulatory nonsense directly relates to the wild claims of vast military superiority, despite only being the worlds no.2 military power at the present time and for the past 60 years.
I suggest that before you get too excited about your new found power you have a more careful look at Russia.
.
.
Multiple nuclear warheads are important as a deterrant. China for example only has a hundred or so, which means an effective first strike could prevent China from returning fire at all.
With the increase in research to anti missile systems, nuclear numeracy is again going to be a strategic consideration. It puts an end to the Start Treaties and all sides must look seriously at increasing their stockpiles again to ensure the balance of mutual assured destruction.
For countries that feel imminent and direct threat such as North Korea we can see that the development of a nuclear deterrant is normally placed at a higher priority than food. As it was for Great Britain also.
The Germans weren't truely screwed until they lost the battle of Kursk in 1943.
In all honesty the Germans weren't truely screwed until the very last hour. In 1945 they had cruise and ballistic missiles, jet fighters, super tanks and god knows what else. At no point until the very end was victory against Germany a certainty.
How interesting, well over 60 million people died in that war, over a span of several years, and yet here we are years later sitting back arguing about who was better.
Damn byotch dat aint no friggn moon fool, dat be a friggn space station byotch.
Originally posted by BlazinBlades How interesting, well over 60 million people died in that war, over a span of several years, and yet here we are years later sitting back arguing about who was better.
Originally posted by BlazinBlades How interesting, well over 60 million people died in that war, over a span of several years, and yet here we are years later sitting back arguing about who was better.
I beleive our team was better. WE WON!!!
The US contributes more money than any other country in the world to relief and helping less fortunate people. These countries are just mad because we have more than they do, we are better than them, we live better, and we have the most powerful country. If we stopped sending aid and turned our backs on the world they would all suffer and realize who is really helping them.
Why should the US care about World Relief? The US is not the welfare system for other countries. As to not spending or using resources we have, why should we? Yes we have plenty to go around, but why give our surplus on another country which cannot even support itself? Its a waste and in process weakens my countries future. The US is in for the long haul, not the short term fix! So quit begging and whining about the US.
Originally posted by xpowderx Why should the US care about World Relief? The US is not the welfare system for other countries. As to not spending or using resources we have, why should we? Yes we have plenty to go around, but why give our surplus on another country which cannot even support itself? Its a waste and in process weakens my countries future. The US is in for the long haul, not the short term fix! So quit begging and whining about the US.
Good point, if you were to say that the US does not interfere in the affairs of other countries either. However we all know that that is not true. The US loves to interfere in the affairs of anything going on in the world, so why should they not 'interfere' by helping out from time to time. Often, they contribute to worsening the poverty and problems in other countries. I will not provide specific examples to avoid this turning into too heated a debate. Oh, and on a note about resources, I would not state with so much conviction and confidence that you are solely uisng your own resources and not other resources obtained from other countries, be it through force or trade. If you really do think in that way, then imagine if the US was to survive totally on its own with no trade or links to the outside world As many have stated, you are just painting a worse picture for the US and contributing to the increasing world sentiment of dislike for its primarily selfish policies. As you so stated, if the US is really in for the long haul, then it should stop trying to make enemies by such sentiments. History has shown that civilisations don't last long when a nation's friends start to dwindle in number.
On another note, I do think that //\//\oo writes perhaps the most ignorant rubbish I have ever read. Still it did give me some light hearted amusement. I really do hope that you are not a typical representative of your country or there really is no hope for it or anyone else! I mean it does not sound like you know at all what is going on in the world, let alone outside your front door! Wake up and smell the flowers. I think the general perception of the world on the whole is that there are many of the US who really are very insular and narrow minded but you take the biscuit. Where do you get your 'facts' from? Your quote about America being so nice compared to the cruelty being inflicted in China and Russia? I'm sorry I didn't think we were still in the Cold War Do you have any evidence to speak of this cruelty currently being inflicted? Last I heard, I think the US gets the prize for declaring the most wars in the last century and this century. Must be a lot of spare cash that needs to be blown. Oh and as for the US being so powerful, saviour of the world and protectorate of Europe blah blah, there are many in Europe who currently feel the world would be a better place without the US. Also in case you hadn't realised, the oh so cruel nation of China with all the ritual sacrifices is rapidly catching up the US in terms of military and economic might. I am not saying that the US has always been portrayed in such a bad light, it just seems to be due to the more recent Governments in power.
Originally posted by xpowderx Why should the US care about World Relief? The US is not the welfare system for other countries. As to not spending or using resources we have, why should we? Yes we have plenty to go around, but why give our surplus on another country which cannot even support itself? Its a waste and in process weakens my countries future. The US is in for the long haul, not the short term fix! So quit begging and whining about the US.
I got no problem with you using the money on yourself. I don't need your money, the country I live in doesn't need your money. We have enough as it is. Africa and third world countries could need some though. It's just that, you aren't really spending money on yourself. You spend most of your money on nuclear bombs you don't need. Why not spend more of it on education and welfare? I'm sure the american population would suddently have it alot better.
Originally posted by xpowderx Why should the US care about World Relief? The US is not the welfare system for other countries. As to not spending or using resources we have, why should we? Yes we have plenty to go around, but why give our surplus on another country which cannot even support itself? Its a waste and in process weakens my countries future. The US is in for the long haul, not the short term fix! So quit begging and whining about the US.
Does U.S. welfare include invading another country which is under a dictators rule? Just curious.
Originally posted by baff Originally posted by abbaba
The Germans weren't truely screwed until they lost the battle of Kursk in 1943.
In all honesty the Germans weren't truely screwed until the very last hour. In 1945 they had cruise and ballistic missiles, jet fighters, super tanks and god knows what else. At no point until the very end was victory against Germany a certainty. That's debatable. I'd say the Germans were truly screwed when they opened up a two-front war. But, then again, most of your other opinions in this thread are debatable. And I didn't come to this conclusion through Hollywood, I took a 2 semester course on the Euro front in WW2. Britain didn't win BoB through anything other than Hitler's stupidity. Don't make them sound like heroes or anything.
Originally posted by blaze79 Originally posted by xpowderx Why should the US care about World Relief? The US is not the welfare system for other countries. As to not spending or using resources we have, why should we? Yes we have plenty to go around, but why give our surplus on another country which cannot even support itself? Its a waste and in process weakens my countries future. The US is in for the long haul, not the short term fix! So quit begging and whining about the US.
Good point, if you were to say that the US does not interfere in the affairs of other countries either. However we all know that that is not true. The US loves to interfere in the affairs of anything going on in the world, so why should they not 'interfere' by helping out from time to time. Often, they contribute to worsening the poverty and problems in other countries. I will not provide specific examples to avoid this turning into too heated a debate. Oh, and on a note about resources, I would not state with so much conviction and confidence that you are solely uisng your own resources and not other resources obtained from other countries, be it through force or trade. If you really do think in that way, then imagine if the US was to survive totally on its own with no trade or links to the outside world As many have stated, you are just painting a worse picture for the US and contributing to the increasing world sentiment of dislike for its primarily selfish policies. As you so stated, if the US is really in for the long haul, then it should stop trying to make enemies by such sentiments. History has shown that civilisations don't last long when a nation's friends start to dwindle in number.
While I agree with you in part. Here is something to think about. The US is in the middle east for a reason. The countries hurt most by this is the EU. But honestly I do not think the US cares much for the EU. Why?? Been to a Walmart lately. You only need to look on the back of a product from walmart to figure out why the US is less concerned about the EUs ideolgy of govt, economics and the fallacy of social welfare! 3 years ago when the US went into Iraq they hurt some of the EU nations. Why?? Because countries like france had side deals with Saddam Hussein . The EU didnt even follow its own program. Wanted to profit instead. They got caught.. Along with a couple other countries. So if I were one of the EU countries that lost profit I would be mad as well. Guess its payback for the nice french saying they needed help in vietnam. Saw how that turned out.
Honestly our world future depends on resources. The US is only siding with the right people now rather than those on the sidelines. China will be the top economy for the next 20 years. So the US can shun other countries. The asian market is the way to go! Long live WALMART!
As to US capitalism. Its just a practice that the US is repeating from previous EU nations in its prime. Britian, France,Germany. When we look at the EU we see a group of nations failing, faltering and dying. It is not a coincedence that the EU population is expected to fall by 15% within the next 5 years. That birthrates in the EU have declined by 20%. That the average age for a citizen in the EU will be 55 by 2010. We in the US do not choose to follow that design. Rather would have one that brings both prosperity and growthg to our homeland!
Originally posted by modjoe86 Originally posted by baff Originally posted by abbaba
The Germans weren't truely screwed until they lost the battle of Kursk in 1943.
In all honesty the Germans weren't truely screwed until the very last hour. In 1945 they had cruise and ballistic missiles, jet fighters, super tanks and god knows what else. At no point until the very end was victory against Germany a certainty. That's debatable. I'd say the Germans were truly screwed when they opened up a two-front war. But, then again, most of your other opinions in this thread are debatable. And I didn't come to this conclusion through Hollywood, I took a 2 semester course on the Euro front in WW2. Britain didn't win BoB through anything other than Hitler's stupidity. Don't make them sound like heroes or anything. Heroes? Absolutely!! Outnumbered and fighting in desporation to save their country! Sounds like heroic actions to me.
I do agree with your point about Hitler. He was the best weapon the allies had. If he would have left the planning to his generals the would could have been a different place.
Regarding the impact the U.S. had on the war, Brittian more than likely starved if it was not for the supplies sent by the U.S. YES, Canada was a huge help in the supply efforts, but if the U.S. had not helped out (even before we formally declared war) there might not have been much of a Brittian to supply.
And as for those who might feel that the U.S. does not help out enough, remember the Marshall plan? 13 bill to assist the European countries to rebuild after WWII.
I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.
Originally posted by baff Originally posted by seabass2003
We were definately not Britains weak cousin. I do think that Britain would have never been defeated by Germany but also Britain could not have defeated Germany either. If the U.S. doesn't enter the war it probably becomes a stalemate between Britain and Germany at least until the Germans invent the Atomic Bomb, then it would be all over for you. Also when America joined the fight Britain was actually on the run, remember the Africa Campaign?
The atom was first split in Cavendish College Cambridge. German Atomic research was stopped by British commando action in Norway. (Full credits due to the Norwegian elements).
The only thing stopped in Norway was Heavy Water production. The Germans unsuccessfully tried to develop a nuclear weapon, but never produced a sustained nuclear reaction, a step the allies reached in 1942.
The Africa campaign? The Americans weren't at the Battle of Tobruk. Once again, the U.S. didn't show up until we had already beaten the Italians and the Germans. Our capture and control of North Africa opened up a second front in the Mediteranean. Until then we had only been assaulting in the North Atlantic only. The Russian Front was already in full swing.
What's funny about this is that the fort at Tobruk was held mostly by Australians.
What about Operation Torch? Invasion of Sicily and Italy? Both were joint American/British efforts.
Sorry you don't like being referred to as weak cousins, but since you had no army no navy and no military bases, and no military experience, that's all you were. You came out of that war well, but you didn't start with everything you have today, far from it. Most of your current territory was British prior to 1941.
That's absurd. The United States had been gearing up for war since the late 30's, and president Roosevelt signed the selective service act (the draft) in September of 1940 - over a year before the US entered the war. Don't forget that the US had to split it's resources between the Pacific and Europe - that's right, a two front war - something the Germans couldn't pull off.
Most of our current territory was British prior to 1941? Like what, a few sandbars in the Pacific?
No offense to the large ballsed and glorious warriors of the U.S. but I'm pretty tired of people trying to claim credit for fights they weren't in. Hollywood isn't history. This kind of self congratulatory nonsense directly relates to the wild claims of vast military superiority, despite only being the worlds no.2 military power at the present time and for the past 60 years.
Number two military power? Who is number one by your standard? North Korea?
I suggest that before you get too excited about your new found power you have a more careful look at Russia.
Originally posted by blaze79 On another note, I do think that //\//\oo writes perhaps the most ignorant rubbish I have ever read. Still it did give me some light hearted amusement. I really do hope that you are not a typical representative of your country or there really is no hope for it or anyone else! I mean it does not sound like you know at all what is going on in the world, let alone outside your front door! Wake up and smell the flowers. I think the general perception of the world on the whole is that there are many of the US who really are very insular and narrow minded but you take the biscuit. Where do you get your 'facts' from? Your quote about America being so nice compared to the cruelty being inflicted in China and Russia? I'm sorry I didn't think we were still in the Cold War Do you have any evidence to speak of this cruelty currently being inflicted? Last I heard, I think the US gets the prize for declaring the most wars in the last century and this century. Must be a lot of spare cash that needs to be blown. Oh and as for the US being so powerful, saviour of the world and protectorate of Europe blah blah, there are many in Europe who currently feel the world would be a better place without the US. Also in case you hadn't realised, the oh so cruel nation of China with all the ritual sacrifices is rapidly catching up the US in terms of military and economic might. I am not saying that the US has always been portrayed in such a bad light, it just seems to be due to the more recent Governments in power.
So, I'm ignorant, but not ignorant enough to not format? Excellent!
Your ignorance astounds me to an even greater degree than my own: What could China have done? Oh, maybe they used the most evil torture known to man to get rid of the native religions in Tibet.
Maybe it's because of their severe neglect of human rights resulting in a myriad of dead babies floating in their rivers.
Unlike you Europeans, we Americans are exposed to many different cultures: If you had ever met a Chinese person in your life (one that had been at least partially educated in China for a minimum of 10 years and openly spoke to you about it), you would realize that their government instills the same sort of jingoism in them that was found in Japan during WWII.
If China were to come to power, you'd see labor camps (that currently exist in China consisting of their OWN people) and racial cleansing to a degree that only Hitler could have envisioned.
What about Russia? What about the THOUSANDS of jews that they had exterminated? Yes, anti-semitism was like a plague during that era, but Russia was one of the worst.
Yes, the U.S. declares war, but it is controlled by a document that is at least partially rational and impartial to race and religion. Tolerance is ingrained in American culture to a greater degree than anywhere else in the world (Although I could be wrong about some of the Scandinavian countries; they are, arguably, the most progressive countries in the world).
K Thx Bai
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.
... Unlike you Europeans, we Americans are exposed to many different cultures ...
Come on. We do have people from other parts of the world here too. Just to compare: 20% of the people in USA are immigrants, 12% of the people in Germany are immigrants. It's not like immigration is a non existant thing over here, like many of you seem to think.
Comments
Western Europe has become a military non-factor in recent years. If each Western European nation were bombed tomorrow, ala 9/11, they would roll over and beg for mercy if the US did not fight for them.
A recent poll by the Program for International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland showed that most Americans still imagine that 20 percent of the federal budget goes to foreign aid. In reality, less than 1 percent of the budget is for foreign aid, and only about one-third of that is development assistance.
U.S. development aid has declined steadily over the past 15 years. The U.S. now ranks last among the 22 industrialized countries in percentage of national income given away in development aid: less than 0.1 percent. Tiny Denmark contributes ten times as much of its national income as American taxpayers do. Japan has been the largest provider of official development assistance for ten consecutive years.
Thats because noone else ever leaves their country to help, here send them money. Americans are the ones with their feet on the ground actually doing the job.
In America I have bad teeth. If I lived in England my teeth would be perfect.
Where would England be without the intervention of the U.S. in WWII? They would be spreching Deutsch, that's what. What about Germany, if America had let Russia take all of it?
Britain defeated Germany at the Battle of Britain. The U.S. wasn't there.
The U.S. when it joined WW2 contributed fewer forces to the European theatre than Britain a small country of 40 million people. Had the Canadians not defeated Germany in the Battle of the Atlantic, the Americans would never even have made it.
America didn't stop Russia taking all of Germany. Russia volunteered to give most of it to the other allies of it's own accord. C.F. British and American controlled sectors of Berlin, dispite neither the armies fo Britain nor America being involved in the Battle of Berlin.
I think you overate both the size and effectiveness of the U.S. army in Europe at that time. While a very signifcant contributor to the last years of WW2, the U.S. was hardly in a position to stop the Russians doing anything, neither was America anything more than Britains weak cousin. The Germans were already on the run when the U.S. joined.
Oh dear, didn't Hollywood movies teach you that? Nevermind.
.
Comic in the extreme that you should want Japan and Germany to thank you for saving them from China and Russia when you were allied to both China and Russia in the pursuit of their destruction. For both of those countries the world would have been a better place without you.
We were definately not Britains weak cousin. I do think that Britain would have never been defeated by Germany but also Britain could not have defeated Germany either. If the U.S. doesn't enter the war it probably becomes a stalemate between Britain and Germany at least until the Germans invent the Atomic Bomb, then it would be all over for you.
Also when America joined the fight Britain was actually on the run, remember the Africa Campaign?
Bah! I don't want another America vs. the World thread disregard my post. Its too much like real life right now.In America I have bad teeth. If I lived in England my teeth would be perfect.
You can spin the numbers how you want, but the Fed spends by far the most on Human Resources (education, medicare, job training, healthcare, social security, VA benefits) at $1.6 trillion.
If you where refering to the US army, yes they are down there, but they mostly do the job the other way around. Bah! I don't want another America vs. the World thread disregard my post. Its too much like real life right now.
WW2 was done for Germany when they engaged Russia. When Hitler broke his deal with Stalin. When Germany wen't from fighting a one front war to a two front war, with massive loss. That is the reason we have a Europe now and not a third reich. Germany would never have a A bomb either, the program was stopped in 1942.
This thread wasn't intended as a hate vs USA thread. I just don't find the military expenses in USA logical. They don't fit the threat that is in the world. The "enemies" of USA can double or even tripple their military programs and USA will still be ahead. It just doesn't make sence to me.
If you look at the facts, you will see that the US spends the most out of every other country on foreign aid and relief money. We are talking over 50%. Without the US the world would be a very bad place. Many more people would die from poverty conditions than is dying from it now.
GO USA!!!
WE ARE THE BEST!!!
All countries are in the various areas to help. Ever heard about Red Cross and all those organisations? Most countries have their own divisions. So it's not much different.
If you where refering to the US army, yes they are down there, but they mostly do the job the other way around. Bah! I don't want another America vs. the World thread disregard my post. Its too much like real life right now.
WW2 was done for Germany when they engaged Russia. When Hitler broke his deal with Stalin. When Germany wen't from fighting a one front war to a two front war, with massive loss. That is the reason we have a Europe now and not a third reich. Germany would never have a A bomb either, the program was stopped in 1942.
This thread wasn't intended as a hate vs USA thread. I just don't find the military expenses in USA logical. They don't fit the threat that is in the world. The "enemies" of USA can double or even tripple their military programs and USA will still be ahead. It just doesn't make sence to me.
The US military budget is so high because the US is the only country in the world that can deploy superior military forces anywhere in the world and pwn any nation in a few weeks-months. It takes a massive amount of money to keep up that kind of advantage - where a nation is not only a regional power, but is a world power. It isn't technological superiority, it's the capability to go anywhere in the world and pwn any other military.
The Germans weren't truely screwed until they lost the battle of Kursk in 1943. They could have won before that. There was really no two front war until the Normandy invasion of June 1944. Sure Germany and Britain were at war, but neither side was actually fighting on the ground. There is no way the British could ever have invaded Nazi Europe by themselves. Sure, there was the war in Africa, but Germany sent very few of it's own soldiers there - A few divisions at the most. Who knows how the war would have turned out with no American invasion of Africa, no Allied invasion of France in 1944, no strategic bombing of German industries by the USAAF and RAF.
The US military budget is so high because the US is the only country in the world that can deploy superior military forces anywhere in the world and pwn any nation in a few weeks-months.
Apart from Russia, France, Britain and India for example. Paying specific note to Russia.
USA could easily give way more, and the world would be even better. Who needs to maintain enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world a 100 times? It's only possible to destroy it once.
abbaba. With no allied invasion, the russians probably wouldn't have stopped at Berlin. With or without USA the situation would have been pretty much the same. There wouldn't have been a third reich.
The atom was first split in Cavendish College Cambridge. German Atomic research was stopped by British commando action in Norway. (Full credits due to the Norwegian elements).
The Africa campaign? The Americans weren't at the Battle of Tobruk. Once again, the U.S. didn't show up until we had already beaten the Italians and the Germans. Our capture and control of North Africa opened up a second front in the Mediteranean. Until then we had only been assaulting in the North Atlantic only. The Russian Front was already in full swing.
Sorry you don't like being referred to as weak cousins, but since you had no army no navy and no military bases, and no military experience, that's all you were. You came out of that war well, but you didn't start with everything you have today, far from it. Most of your current territory was British prior to 1941.
No offense to the large ballsed and glorious warriors of the U.S. but I'm pretty tired of people trying to claim credit for fights they weren't in. Hollywood isn't history.
This kind of self congratulatory nonsense directly relates to the wild claims of vast military superiority, despite only being the worlds no.2 military power at the present time and for the past 60 years.
I suggest that before you get too excited about your new found power you have a more careful look at Russia.
.
.
Multiple nuclear warheads are important as a deterrant. China for example only has a hundred or so, which means an effective first strike could prevent China from returning fire at all.
With the increase in research to anti missile systems, nuclear numeracy is again going to be a strategic consideration. It puts an end to the Start Treaties and all sides must look seriously at increasing their stockpiles again to ensure the balance of mutual assured destruction.
For countries that feel imminent and direct threat such as North Korea we can see that the development of a nuclear deterrant is normally placed at a higher priority than food. As it was for Great Britain also.
How interesting, well over 60 million people died in that war, over a span of several years, and yet here we are years later sitting back arguing about who was better.
Damn byotch dat aint no friggn moon fool, dat be a friggn space station byotch.
I beleive our team was better. WE WON!!!
The US contributes more money than any other country in the world to relief and helping less fortunate people. These countries are just mad because we have more than they do, we are better than them, we live better, and we have the most powerful country. If we stopped sending aid and turned our backs on the world they would all suffer and realize who is really helping them.
USA USA USA...WE WON THE WAR
You could spend some more money on these:
http://www.break.com/index/quiz_on_world_affairs.html
That's debatable. I'd say the Germans were truly screwed when they opened up a two-front war. But, then again, most of your other opinions in this thread are debatable. And I didn't come to this conclusion through Hollywood, I took a 2 semester course on the Euro front in WW2.
Britain didn't win BoB through anything other than Hitler's stupidity. Don't make them sound like heroes or anything.
https://easynulled.com/
Free porn videos, xxx porn videos
Onlyfans nudes
Onlyfans leaked
While I agree with you in part. Here is something to think about. The US is in the middle east for a reason. The countries hurt most by this is the EU. But honestly I do not think the US cares much for the EU. Why?? Been to a Walmart lately. You only need to look on the back of a product from walmart to figure out why the US is less concerned about the EUs ideolgy of govt, economics and the fallacy of social welfare! 3 years ago when the US went into Iraq they hurt some of the EU nations. Why?? Because countries like france had side deals with Saddam Hussein . The EU didnt even follow its own program. Wanted to profit instead. They got caught.. Along with a couple other countries. So if I were one of the EU countries that lost profit I would be mad as well. Guess its payback for the nice french saying they needed help in vietnam. Saw how that turned out.
Honestly our world future depends on resources. The US is only siding with the right people now rather than those on the sidelines. China will be the top economy for the next 20 years. So the US can shun other countries. The asian market is the way to go! Long live WALMART!
As to US capitalism. Its just a practice that the US is repeating from previous EU nations in its prime. Britian, France,Germany. When we look at the EU we see a group of nations failing, faltering and dying. It is not a coincedence that the EU population is expected to fall by 15% within the next 5 years. That birthrates in the EU have declined by 20%. That the average age for a citizen in the EU will be 55 by 2010. We in the US do not choose to follow that design. Rather would have one that brings both prosperity and growthg to our homeland!
So best of luck!!
That's debatable. I'd say the Germans were truly screwed when they opened up a two-front war. But, then again, most of your other opinions in this thread are debatable. And I didn't come to this conclusion through Hollywood, I took a 2 semester course on the Euro front in WW2.
Britain didn't win BoB through anything other than Hitler's stupidity. Don't make them sound like heroes or anything. Heroes? Absolutely!! Outnumbered and fighting in desporation to save their country! Sounds like heroic actions to me.
I do agree with your point about Hitler. He was the best weapon the allies had. If he would have left the planning to his generals the would could have been a different place.
Regarding the impact the U.S. had on the war, Brittian more than likely starved if it was not for the supplies sent by the U.S. YES, Canada was a huge help in the supply efforts, but if the U.S. had not helped out (even before we formally declared war) there might not have been much of a Brittian to supply.
And as for those who might feel that the U.S. does not help out enough, remember the Marshall plan? 13 bill to assist the European countries to rebuild after WWII.
I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.
The atom was first split in Cavendish College Cambridge. German Atomic research was stopped by British commando action in Norway. (Full credits due to the Norwegian elements).
The only thing stopped in Norway was Heavy Water production. The Germans unsuccessfully tried to develop a nuclear weapon, but never produced a sustained nuclear reaction, a step the allies reached in 1942.
The Africa campaign? The Americans weren't at the Battle of Tobruk. Once again, the U.S. didn't show up until we had already beaten the Italians and the Germans. Our capture and control of North Africa opened up a second front in the Mediteranean. Until then we had only been assaulting in the North Atlantic only. The Russian Front was already in full swing.
What's funny about this is that the fort at Tobruk was held mostly by Australians.
What about Operation Torch? Invasion of Sicily and Italy? Both were joint American/British efforts.
Sorry you don't like being referred to as weak cousins, but since you had no army no navy and no military bases, and no military experience, that's all you were. You came out of that war well, but you didn't start with everything you have today, far from it. Most of your current territory was British prior to 1941.
That's absurd. The United States had been gearing up for war since the late 30's, and president Roosevelt signed the selective service act (the draft) in September of 1940 - over a year before the US entered the war. Don't forget that the US had to split it's resources between the Pacific and Europe - that's right, a two front war - something the Germans couldn't pull off.
Most of our current territory was British prior to 1941? Like what, a few sandbars in the Pacific?
No offense to the large ballsed and glorious warriors of the U.S. but I'm pretty tired of people trying to claim credit for fights they weren't in. Hollywood isn't history.
This kind of self congratulatory nonsense directly relates to the wild claims of vast military superiority, despite only being the worlds no.2 military power at the present time and for the past 60 years.
Number two military power? Who is number one by your standard? North Korea?
I suggest that before you get too excited about your new found power you have a more careful look at Russia.
So, I'm ignorant, but not ignorant enough to not format? Excellent!
Your ignorance astounds me to an even greater degree than my own: What could China have done? Oh, maybe they used the most evil torture known to man to get rid of the native religions in Tibet.
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engASA170042001
Maybe it's because of their severe neglect of human rights resulting in a myriad of dead babies floating in their rivers.
Unlike you Europeans, we Americans are exposed to many different cultures: If you had ever met a Chinese person in your life (one that had been at least partially educated in China for a minimum of 10 years and openly spoke to you about it), you would realize that their government instills the same sort of jingoism in them that was found in Japan during WWII.
If China were to come to power, you'd see labor camps (that currently exist in China consisting of their OWN people) and racial cleansing to a degree that only Hitler could have envisioned.
What about Russia? What about the THOUSANDS of jews that they had exterminated? Yes, anti-semitism was like a plague during that era, but Russia was one of the worst.
Yes, the U.S. declares war, but it is controlled by a document that is at least partially rational and impartial to race and religion. Tolerance is ingrained in American culture to a greater degree than anywhere else in the world (Although I could be wrong about some of the Scandinavian countries; they are, arguably, the most progressive countries in the world).
K Thx Bai
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.
... Unlike you Europeans, we Americans are exposed to many different cultures ...
Come on. We do have people from other parts of the world here too. Just to compare: 20% of the people in USA are immigrants, 12% of the people in Germany are immigrants. It's not like immigration is a non existant thing over here, like many of you seem to think.