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.
They were heroes. When all other nations in the world bowed down they stood and fought.
Aside from Hitlers "stupidity" they had the technical advantage of Radar, advanced fighter aircraft and enough of them, bravery and strong leadership. These are the heroes of my nation. They fought and died.
Originally posted by WantsumBier 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 don't deny the U.S. played a key part. As for "help", Brittain paid for those supplies. Canada (amongst other friends) sent them free and money besides.
And the U.S. didn't so much formaly declare war as have war formally declared against it. I hope you remember that up until this time you were also supplying Germany. Profitting from both sides.
Britain also lent lots of money for the reconstruction of Europe. I really don't want to dispute America's glorious contribution to that war. I would however like to have it taken in full perspective of all the other contributions made by all the other peoples of the world.
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.
Heavy water is a requisite for an Atom bomb. Atom bomb production was halted there.
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.
Australia is not in America.
What about Operation Torch? Invasion of Sicily and Italy? Both were joint American/British efforts.
Italy is not in Africa.
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.
The British were fighting in the Atlantic the Mediterenean AND the Pacific. Europe, Asia AND Africa. A three front war. And they did it for twice as long as you. The second world War was an expensive war, it cost Britain it's empire.
Most of our current territory was British prior to 1941? Like what, a few sandbars in the Pacific?
Malaysia, the Carribean, Hong Kong, Burma the trade routes to Australia, India and New Zealand. Singapore etc etc etc. The "sandbars" so vital to naval domination that you now own, we used to. Without them the shipping lanes are just so much submarine bait. The only sandbar you had was Pearl.
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?
While North Korea has more soldiers than the U.S., it, like you, pales in comparison to Russia. Throughout the Cold War Russia maintained an 8-1 military superiority over the combined forces of NATO. Now that the Cold War is over and we have all reduced our forces substantially, Russia still has the biggest flleet, tank force and airforce and a nuclear superiority of 3-2. They are an advanced technology military with stealth, satelittes, smart munitions, advanced tanks, missiles, carriers, WMD and all the rest.
You may wish to believe you are number one, but you are not. (You are still much more powerful than my nation and your acheivements are not to be sniffed at).
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.
No, you are not.
Not only have I visited China I also have immigrant and domestic Chinese friends. I do not judge a country by it's relatively few exiles.
China's government instills jingoism? What government doesn't. You do't really get anymore Jingoist the The U.S. with all that flag waving and talk of being the worlds only superpower, and saving Europe and without the U.S. I would be spreching Duetch etc etc etc. Hello?
The Difference between Germans and Americans is not that they meet foreigners inside their own country, it's that they meet foreigners outside their own country, and the foreigners they meet are not only immigrants but also tourists. German History is intertwinned with the histories of scores of other cultures. Europeans don't just have a history of immigration, they have a history of invasion. Of being subsumed by a foreign culture entirely. Again and agian throughout history.
An immigrant wishes to join your culture. He is not a nationalist. A tourist manitains his own love for his own culture first. Geographically Germany is close to 20 or thirty different cultures. Each with different governmental systems, religions, genetics, languages intrests hobbies and social orders. The U.S. is geographically close to 3. An American living in the mid west might never meet a foreigner let alone explore his culture.
An American friend of mine once said to me, he was not uncultured as he had been to Mexico. As it happened he was one of the more open minded Americans I have met.
.
America's monoculturism is it's unifying strength. It is the reason why 300 million people can unite in a common cause work towards a single goal and create an enormous influence on the world. It is also the source of it's intolerance and lack of understanding.
.
For the record neither Chinese nor Russians are evil, they are all very nice people. The Russian Gulags were a lot nicer places that Guantanamo Bay or Belsen, and the U.S. (like every country) has had it's fair share of Genocides too. It's a pity that your own self image requires you to denigrate others to feel good about yourself. Instead of trying to belittle others, why not focus on your own achievements. You come from a marvelous country and have had plenty of them. There really isn't any need for this kind of ignorant intollerance. Neither China nor Russia have to be bad bad places in order for the U.S. to be a good one. It doesn't work like that.
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.
Not only have I visited China I also have immigrant and domestic Chinese friends. I do not judge a country by it's relatively few exiles.
Lawlz.. few exiles. I judge a country by it's policies and the many that I've met here in America that came from China merely attested to the evil that is China's government.
China's government instills jingoism? What government doesn't. You do't really get anymore Jingoist the The U.S. with all that flag waving and talk of being the worlds only superpower, and saving Europe and without the U.S. I would be spreching Duetch etc etc etc. Hello?
Seriously, go to an American school some day: Children are taught tolerance, not that they are the best thing since sliced bread and that they deserve to militarily spread influence. I'm sorry, but preaching tolerance for other cultures is not equal to jingoism. Try again.
The Difference between Germans and Americans is not that they meet foreigners inside their own country, it's that they meet foreigners outside their own country, and the foreigners they meet are not only immigrants but also tourists. German History is intertwinned with the histories of scores of other cultures. Europeans don't just have a history of immigration, they have a history of invasion. Of being subsumed by a foreign culture entirely. Again and agian throughout history.
ROFL! Yeah, sure. America's never been invaded. Good one. We might not have been invaded as many times, but we're an infant nation.
An immigrant wishes to join your culture. He is not a nationalist. A tourist manitains his own love for his own culture first. Geographically Germany is close to 20 or thirty different cultures. Each with different governmental systems, religions, genetics, languages intrests hobbies and social orders. The U.S. is geographically close to 3. An American living in the mid west might never meet a foreigner let alone explore his culture.
... 3? Geographically, no. How can one tell? Look at the span of the land (hint hint!). Demographically? No. We have a microcosm of every culture on earth. I lived in Germany, so please don't feed me that BS. Besides a strong Islamic influence from the Turks, there is nothing else; there is neither a China town nor Japan town in Germany because there aren't enough of the latter people to populate it. I think the best way to tell how multicultural a nation is by the variety of it's food... and since you come from Germany you know what I'm talking about (if you have been to America).
An American friend of mine once said to me, he was not uncultured as he had been to Mexico. As it happened he was one of the more open minded Americans I have met.
. Hah! I've lived in Europe for almost 4 years, so much for uncultured and close-minded.
America's monoculturism is it's unifying strength. It is the reason why 300 million people can unite in a common cause work towards a single goal and create an enormous influence on the world. It is also the source of it's intolerance and lack of understanding.
.You have no idea, do you? There is no MONOCULTURE in America; it's analogous to how the new generation of Turks have integrated into Germany society, they retain their cultural identity and segregate it from the national culture. The same holds for America: You will find areas that are only populated by certain sub-cultures. It's not a melting-pot anymore, but a bunch of cultures that are intermeshed by economic needs.
For the record neither Chinese nor Russians are evil, they are all very nice people. The Russian Gulags were a lot nicer places that Guantanamo Bay or Belsen, and the U.S. (like every country) has had it's fair share of Genocides too. It's a pity that your own self image requires you to denigrate others to feel good about yourself. Instead of trying to belittle others, why not focus on your own achievements. You come from a marvelous country and have had plenty of them. There really isn't any need for this kind of ignorant intollerance. Neither China nor Russia have to be bad bad places in order for the U.S. to be a good one. It doesn't work like that.
Never said that the people are evil, but that their countries are. I'm sorry, but if you'd like China to come to power and have absolute impunity with it's actions then prepare for an invasion.
Genocides? Yes, name the many American genocides of it's own people. Please. Enumerate each and every one here.
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: 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.
Not only have I visited China I also have immigrant and domestic Chinese friends. I do not judge a country by it's relatively few exiles.
Lawlz.. few exiles. I judge a country by it's policies and the many that I've met here in America that came from China merely attested to the evil that is China's government.
Which is why you have such an intolerant opinion. You haven't met many Chinese people in America. Just a few. Not a representative number at all. OF all the 2 billion Chinese the only ones you have met are the dissadents. If you are judging your opinions solely on their 2nd hand knowledge you are liable to have a very warped picture indeed.
China's government instills jingoism? What government doesn't. You do't really get anymore Jingoist the The U.S. with all that flag waving and talk of being the worlds only superpower, and saving Europe and without the U.S. I would be spreching Duetch etc etc etc. Hello?
Seriously, go to an American school some day: Children are taught tolerance, not that they are the best thing since sliced bread and that they deserve to militarily spread influence. I'm sorry, but preaching tolerance for other cultures is not equal to jingoism. Try again.
And yet your remarks towards China demonstrate a complete lack of tolerance. The same for your remarks about Russia. And the root of these opinions comes from their percieved challenge to your nations military domination. Sorry but I don't see much sign of a culture of tolerance.
The Difference between Germans and Americans is not that they meet foreigners inside their own country, it's that they meet foreigners outside their own country, and the foreigners they meet are not only immigrants but also tourists. German History is intertwinned with the histories of scores of other cultures. Europeans don't just have a history of immigration, they have a history of invasion. Of being subsumed by a foreign culture entirely. Again and agian throughout history.
ROFL! Yeah, sure. America's never been invaded. Good one. We might not have been invaded as many times, but we're an infant nation.
You are an infant nation, and yes you haven't been invaded as many times.
An immigrant wishes to join your culture. He is not a nationalist. A tourist manitains his own love for his own culture first. Geographically Germany is close to 20 or thirty different cultures. Each with different governmental systems, religions, genetics, languages intrests hobbies and social orders. The U.S. is geographically close to 3. An American living in the mid west might never meet a foreigner let alone explore his culture.
... 3? Geographically, no. How can one tell? Look at the span of the land (hint hint!). Demographically? No. We have a microcosm of every culture on earth. I lived in Germany, so please don't feed me that BS. Besides a strong Islamic influence from the Turks, there is nothing else; there is neither a China town nor Japan town in Germany because there aren't enough of the latter people to populate it. I think the best way to tell how multicultural a nation is by the variety of it's food... and since you come from Germany you know what I'm talking about (if you have been to America).
Besides the Turks there is also France, Britain, Russia, Spain, Italy, Czecholavakia, America etc etc etc all have cultural influence in Germany. Any where in Germany I am never more than an hour from a completely different culture. German people are acclimatised to foreign culture. They have been directly exposed since birth. And by foreign culture, I do not mean assimilated culture, I mean alien.
An American friend of mine once said to me, he was not uncultured as he had been to Mexico. As it happened he was one of the more open minded Americans I have met.
. Hah! I've lived in Europe for almost 4 years, so much for uncultured and close-minded.
In a U.S. service base judging by your attitude.
America's monoculturism is it's unifying strength. It is the reason why 300 million people can unite in a common cause work towards a single goal and create an enormous influence on the world. It is also the source of it's intolerance and lack of understanding.
.You have no idea, do you? There is no MONOCULTURE in America; it's analogous to how the new generation of Turks have integrated into Germany society, they retain their cultural identity and segregate it from the national culture. The same holds for America: You will find areas that are only populated by certain sub-cultures. It's not a melting-pot anymore, but a bunch of cultures that are intermeshed by economic needs.
Didn't you say you lived in Europe? You are monocultural. You are all American. You speak the same language, are ruled by the same government, watch the same T.V. shows listen to the same music, watch the same films. Holiday in the same resorts. Carry the same passports live by the same tenets and laws. Yes you are an immigrant culture, but one culture all the same. Any one of Europes many nations can equally make all the same claims as you.
For the record neither Chinese nor Russians are evil, they are all very nice people. The Russian Gulags were a lot nicer places that Guantanamo Bay or Belsen, and the U.S. (like every country) has had it's fair share of Genocides too. It's a pity that your own self image requires you to denigrate others to feel good about yourself. Instead of trying to belittle others, why not focus on your own achievements. You come from a marvelous country and have had plenty of them. There really isn't any need for this kind of ignorant intollerance. Neither China nor Russia have to be bad bad places in order for the U.S. to be a good one. It doesn't work like that.
Never said that the people are evil, but that their countries are. I'm sorry, but if you'd like China to come to power and have absolute impunity with it's actions then prepare for an invasion.
Oh yes because in the 6,000 years of recorded human history China has invaded England soooo many times. America too. So you hate the world. Big deal. Neither the U.S. nor GB is under any threat of Chinese invasion. Never has been, never will be.
Genocides? Yes, name the many American genocides of it's own people. Please. Enumerate each and every one here.
Sioux, Arapahoe, Iroquois, Cheyenne. I'll let you complete the list.
Originally posted by //\//\oo 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
Oh you really do amuse me, your points really do hammer home what I was saying! Please don't be so petty and criticise my formatting, that is nothing to do with ignorance, computer literacy or sheer laziness at best but not ignorance
I must thank you for the wonderful link which gives me the opportunity to explain to you something about the world which you are obviously too naive to know or understand. Ever heard of the term propaganda? It's related to the media and the lesson is this. When you read something, please don't soak it up all as factual information, take it with a pinch of salt. Every article written has its own agenda, and this one is obviously to portray China in a bad light. I am not saying there isn't an ounce of truth in what it states, I am just saying there may be exxageration, bending of the truth or stating only some of the facts so you are not aware of the whole story. Baff really hit the nail on the head when he stated that America always needs to put other nations down to feel good about itself. He also had it right when he said the country was/is great but unfortunately if a significant proportion of the population think like you, you can kiss that goodbye! As for torture, I have heard on numerous occasions of US soldiers committing countless atrocities including torture so do not think you are better than everyone else. As for their policies, if you think it's ok to go invading other countries just because they are not like you, then I guess you would say they are perfect. The first Gulf War may have been justified as America was defending Kuwait from invasion, good for them. However the second war was a joke!! By the way, please tell me where all those weapons of mass destruction are
Now let me touch on your insanely stupid points! As it happens, I do know a Chinese person. Actually let me re-iterate. I know and am close friends with a lot of Chinese people (probably the reason why your ignorant comments annoy me so much ). And before you say anything, they were all born in China and spent almost their whole life there! In fact, I recently had the opportunity to spend some time with a Chinese family in China and experience their life style first hand. Let me just say I was a little surprised and very impressed with the life out there. I know they don't have it so good in the country, but in the cities I would wager it is far better than the US (yes I've been there too). In fact, unfortunately for you I have travelled extensively to many different cultures and been to many poor areas of the world so I have some experience of what I'm talking about. I would wager that you don't even know where China is, probably think it's just the other side of Mexico
Now your next point, "if China were to come to power". What the hell does that mean? What do you think they are, some state of Japan? They are a world superpower almost rivalling the US. If China really wanted to do anything it wants, who is going to stop them? The US? Don't make me laugh! The reason all these labor camps aren't appearing all over the place is because they don't actually have any, well not more than the US has people farming in the countryside! There are no labor camps and there is no indication of such nonsense anywhere. Get your facts straight before posting. Go to China and see for yourself, but please don't do the stupid American tourist act I have seen so often. And as for the racial cleansing, well that's just absurd. In case you didn't know, there are approximately 55 different ethnic minorities living together in China, and they are not in the process of being cleansed as you so put it. So just to summarise, China has no wishes of doing what you claim it does and even if it did, the US would not be able to do anything about it. To illustrate, America is busy invading wherever it wants in the Middle East, as long as they have no nuclear weapons. However, North Korea also on their Axis of Evil list it leaves well alone. I will let you add two and two together.
As I am not so aware of the situation in Russia, I will leave that well alone. However I am betting that you are also way off the mark there. You should learn by my post and not spout out nonsense of which you really have no clue. Go and educate yourself and expand your mind a little.
As a note to Baff, I am glad to see someone as level headed as you here.
Which is why you have such an intolerant opinion. You haven't met many Chinese people in America. Just a few. Not a representative number at all. OF all the 2 billion Chinese the only ones you have met are the dissadents. If you are judging your opinions solely on their 2nd hand knowledge you are liable to have a very warped picture indeed.
What is wrong with you people? Believe it or not, but the government does not represent it's entire population, or are you saying that the German people supported the Holocaust? The government is a proper subset of the people of a nation and it is their actions I decry (in China's case). I have nothing against Chinese people; in fact most of my friends were Chinese while I was growing up in America.
And yet your remarks towards China demonstrate a complete lack of tolerance. The same for your remarks about Russia. And the root of these opinions comes from their percieved challenge to your nations military domination. Sorry but I don't see much sign of a culture of tolerance.
You are right: I don't tolerate their GOVERNMENT. I have nothing against their culture as a whole, but their government. How is this so hard to understand? Do I have to outline everything for you? If China (and by China I mean its' government) were the most altruistic country in the world, I would cheer them on in their economic advances, but they have shown such cruelty (TO THEIR OWN PEOPLE) and disrespect for human rights.
Besides the Turks there is also France, Britain, Russia, Spain, Italy, Czecholavakia, America etc etc etc all have cultural influence in Germany. Any where in Germany I am never more than an hour from a completely different culture. German people are acclimatised to foreign culture. They have been directly exposed since birth. And by foreign culture, I do not mean assimilated culture, I mean alien.
ROFL, sure. The same influence also holds for small sections of America (i.e. the Irish/German sections of states). No, your culture is not so vastly different: In Austria, the culture is virtually identical to that of Germany; you speak the same language, you share television channels (Orf 1, usw.) and consume most of the same products. That is one of the "many" countries that you border. Switzerland? Tack on Italian, French and disjoint government policies and you're set.
That was a minimum, but you get the idea: European cultures do not vary as much with each other as cultures from other continents do. Compare the traditional American-European culture to the emerging Mexican culture: Not only do the languages vary, but work-ethic, mores and, most importantly, norms.
A good example would be the case of a Mexican carpenter that had been found to have sex with a "minor" within California: He was promptly sentenced to jail for a few years. However, the same relationship would have been tolerated in Mexico and ironically he ended up marrying the very girl that he had been charged with raping once he got out.
America doesn't have it's own culture: It's a collection of sub-cultures.
If I were to use the same trivial equivalence relation for cultures that you use, I could say that all 50 states were disjoint and that all sub-groups within the state were unique cultures, which would further trivialize your claim that Europeans are exposed to more cultures than Americans.
In a U.S. service base judging by your attitude.
Nope. I went to a German Gymnasium for a few years.
Didn't you say you lived in Europe? You are monocultural. You are all American. You speak the same language, are ruled by the same government, watch the same T.V. shows listen to the same music, watch the same films. Holiday in the same resorts. Carry the same passports live by the same tenets and laws. Yes you are an immigrant culture, but one culture all the same. Any one of Europes many nations can equally make all the same claims as you.
So abiding by the same laws is sufficient for cultural equivalence? No, NOT all Americans have the same tenets. You, obviously, have only visited America as a tourist, or you wouldn't make such ludicrous claims. The laws vary BY STATE in our country, so by virtue of that fact, your claim is invalid. So it's alright for Europeans to be ignorant about America, but not for Americans to be ignorant about Europe? Proscht! =>
Oh yes because in the 6,000 years of recorded human history China has invaded England soooo many times. America too. So you hate the world. Big deal. Neither the U.S. nor GB is under any threat of Chinese invasion. Never has been, never will be.
Unfortunately, 6000 years ago China didn't have the population problems it does now. Also, there is no causal relationship between the absence of historical events and government policies.
As for the Indian cultures that were exterminated: They weren't part of what is America today. In fact, America hadn't even been formed until the end of the civil war. All of those people are long dead and buried. We are talking about the past 80 years and the nation that is America today. Perhaps I should equate Germany to Germania?
I'm still waiting for your genocides.
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.
Originally posted by baff Originally posted by abbaba
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. Heavy water is a requisite for an Atom bomb. Atom bomb production was halted there. The Germans never tried to actually produce an atomic bomb, they never had the technical knowledge. And you specifically said nuclear research in your original post (I notice you've deleted that part). Heavy water production is not nuclear research.
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. Australia is not in America. Australia is not British. The statute of Westminster (1931) basically made Australia independent, though they were still militarily allied with GB. What about Operation Torch? Invasion of Sicily and Italy? Both were joint American/British efforts. Italy is not in Africa. Operation Torch WAS in Africa. 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. The British were fighting in the Atlantic the Mediterenean AND the Pacific. Europe, Asia AND Africa. A three front war. And they did it for twice as long as you. The second world War was an expensive war, it cost Britain it's empire. The British had total naval superiority (except for U-Boats hunting convoys) for the duration of the war. The battle of the Atlantic was US convoys with US, Canadian, and British escorts trying to keep the British from starving and running out of weapons. Neither the Germans nor the Italians could ever challenge British naval superiority - that's why there were no big Naval Battles in the European theatre of WW2. By the time the African campaign was started the blitzkrieg in France was complete and the British had been booted off the continent. By the time the Allies invaded in 1944 the war in Africa was long over. Most of our current territory was British prior to 1941? Like what, a few sandbars in the Pacific? Malaysia, the Carribean, Hong Kong, Burma the trade routes to Australia, India and New Zealand. Singapore etc etc etc. The "sandbars" so vital to naval domination that you now own, we used to. Without them the shipping lanes are just so much submarine bait. The only sandbar you had was Pearl. The US controls Malaysia, the Carribean, Hong Kong, etc.? Rofl, come on. The British Empire suffered from WW2, but most of it's former colonies are independant now. The US was not the vulture over the corpse of the British empire that you make it out to be. I suggest you look at a pre war map of the pacific. The US had far more than just Hawaii: Wake Island, Midway Island, Guam, Johnson Island, and others. Most of the contested area was either originally US (Phillipines, Wake, Guam, Midway, Hawaii) or Japanese (Iwo Jima, The Marshalls, the Carolines, Okinawa, Saipan). Granted the Soloman Islands were British, but the British still control that Island chain as a "commonwealth realm". I challenge you to find specific examples of territory that was British before WW2 and American after it. 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? While North Korea has more soldiers than the U.S., it, like you, pales in comparison to Russia. Throughout the Cold War Russia maintained an 8-1 military superiority over the combined forces of NATO. Now that the Cold War is over and we have all reduced our forces substantially, Russia still has the biggest flleet, tank force and airforce and a nuclear superiority of 3-2. They are an advanced technology military with stealth, satelittes, smart munitions, advanced tanks, missiles, carriers, WMD and all the rest. Quality over Quantity. That is the doctrine the US followed. The USSR had more but it wasn't as good - pay attention to more than just numbers. Most of the Russian military, tanks, ships, etc, are all outdated. Ever since the end of the Cold War the Russian military has not compared to the US. The Russian economy simply cannot support a military to rival the United States. What are they left with? Obsolete cold war leftovers. The Russian state could not afford a war like the US's Iraq war. Could the Russians steamroll some third rate military power like Iraq? Probably. Would they lose lots more people/equipment than the US? Yeah. Could they afford to stay for years like the US has done? No way. There is a reason that western nations are so afraid of their nukes falling into the wrong hands. A russian mobster even attempted to buy a Russian nuclear submarine to smuggle drugs in (foiled by US DEA). You may wish to believe you are number one, but you are not. (You are still much more powerful than my nation and your acheivements are not to be sniffed at).
What is wrong with you people? Believe it or not, but the government does not represent it's entire population, or are you saying that the German people supported the Holocaust? The government is a proper subset of the people of a nation and it is their actions I decry (in China's case). I have nothing against Chinese people; in fact most of my friends were Chinese while I was growing up in America.
You are right: I don't tolerate their GOVERNMENT. I have nothing against their culture as a whole, but their government. How is this so hard to understand? Do I have to outline everything for you? If China (and by China I mean its' government) were the most altruistic country in the world, I would cheer them on in their economic advances, but they have shown such cruelty (TO THEIR OWN PEOPLE) and disrespect for human rights.
There you go again with your intolernce. Most Chinese people are proud of their government. They believe it to be the most altruistic in the world.
Maybe they are correct. Who are we to judge? I prefer to think my own government is the most altruistic, but then again don't we all.
I understand that a government is not loved by all of it's people but I think a factor of a 40% would be reasonable to imagine. This seems to be the norm around the world. The chinese goverment came about as a peoples revolution very recently by my standards and perhaps is more loved by the people than older less recently validated governments such as my own.
The Idea that a government is evil, but the people who constitute that government are all good is just ludicrous. No government can stand without the support of it's people.
And yes the German people did support the Holocaust. (So did the U.S.) It was hardly a big secret. The whole world knew what was going on.
By and Large Governments do represent their people. You might not personally beleive in George Bush but you beleieve in the American system of government enough not to assasinate him personally. Whether you dislike Clinton or Bush, or whoever, you all support your government. Those that do not are either imprisoned, killed or emigrate. Same as every other country in the world.
Besides the Turks there is also France, Britain, Russia, Spain, Italy, Czecholavakia, America etc etc etc all have cultural influence in Germany. Any where in Germany I am never more than an hour from a completely different culture. German people are acclimatised to foreign culture. They have been directly exposed since birth. And by foreign culture, I do not mean assimilated culture, I mean alien.
ROFL, sure. The same influence also holds for small sections of America (i.e. the Irish/German sections of states). No, your culture is not so vastly different: In Austria, the culture is virtually identical to that of Germany; you speak the same language, you share television channels (Orf 1, usw.) and consume most of the same products. That is one of the "many" countries that you border. Switzerland? Tack on Italian, French and disjoint government policies and you're set.
That was a minimum, but you get the idea: European cultures do not vary as much with each other as cultures from other continents do. Compare the traditional American-European culture to the emerging Mexican culture: Not only do the languages vary, but work-ethic, mores and, most importantly, norms.
All European cultures vary with each other vastly more than the states of the U.S.
A good example would be the case of a Mexican carpenter that had been found to have sex with a "minor" within California: He was promptly sentenced to jail for a few years. However, the same relationship would have been tolerated in Mexico and ironically he ended up marrying the very girl that he had been charged with raping once he got out.
Right, what you have going on with Mexico, germany has going on with Turkey, AND France, AND Switzerland, AND Austria AND Poland, AND Czechoslavakia. You have the right idea but not the perspective.
America doesn't have it's own culture: It's a collection of sub-cultures.
That collection of sub-cultures makes up it's culture, all cultures are thus.
This is not where the U.S. differs from any other nation; except perhaps in the specific sub cultures that can be found there.
If I were to use the same trivial equivalence relation for cultures that you use, I could say that all 50 states were disjoint and that all sub-groups within the state were unique cultures, which would further trivialize your claim that Europeans are exposed to more cultures than Americans.
You could say that, but you would be incorrect, they all watch the same T.V. abide by the same laws have the same leaders forms of goverment, tastes in music clothing reading hobbies, drive the same cars etc etc etc. SPEAK THE SAME LANGUAGE. Sorry but it's a different ball park.
So abiding by the same laws is sufficient for cultural equivalence? No, NOT all Americans have the same tenets. You, obviously, have only visited America as a tourist, or you wouldn't make such ludicrous claims. The laws vary BY STATE in our country, so by virtue of that fact, your claim is invalid. So it's alright for Europeans to be ignorant about America, but not for Americans to be ignorant about Europe? Proscht! =>
Americans do have all the same tenets, you are a broadly monothesitic christian based society, your laws as well as state are federalised. You do not have the diversity of religion or genetics found in Europe, no significant Muslim population or Hindu. Laws isn't everything but it's a factor.
Oh yes because in the 6,000 years of recorded human history China has invaded England soooo many times. America too. So you hate the world. Big deal. Neither the U.S. nor GB is under any threat of Chinese invasion. Never has been, never will be.
Unfortunately, 6000 years ago China didn't have the population problems it does now. Also, there is no causal relationship between the absence of historical events and government policies.
There have been population problems historical events and governments aplenty in the last 6,000 of Chinese history. China still hasn't ever and won't ever invade the U.S. or the U.K. There is no getting round it, this is just utter nonsense.
As for the Indian cultures that were exterminated: They weren't part of what is America today. In fact, America hadn't even been formed until the end of the civil war. All of those people are long dead and buried. We are talking about the past 80 years and the nation that is America today. Perhaps I should equate Germany to Germania?
The Indian Cultures aren't part of America today because they are dead. A genocide is a genocide. It doesn't stop being one after X many years.
I'm still waiting for your genocides.
The same applies to Russian genocides all part of the formation of the country. By the way your civil war counts as killing your own people I believe.
Double standards don't cut it with me, either civil war is killing your own people or it isn't. If it's evil when the Russians or the Iraqi's do it, it's evil when the U.S. doew it too. It amazes me that you think foreigners are evil but domestics are good.
Human's are the same. By nature.
.
If you are unable to respect other peoples cultures and systems of government, how do you expect people to respect yours? Contempt breeds contempt. You aren't looking for friends, you are looking for enemies. As a nation I mean, not just personally and governmentally, but culturally.
The Germans never tried to actually produce an atomic bomb, they never had the technical knowledge. And you specifically said nuclear research in your original post (I notice you've deleted that part). Heavy water production is not nuclear research.
Whatever mate, your the one that brought it up. The Germans weren't going to nuke or atom bomb us. We had dealt with that little problem already. We were the ones making atom bombs, not them. (For what it's worth, there is nothing deleted in my post. If you check the time stamp you will see it remians unchanged since before your post).
Australia is not British. The statute of Westminster (1931) basically made Australia independent, though they were still militarily allied with GB.
And? how does Australia's involvement in the African Campaign mean that the U.S. saved everybody there before they even entered the war?
British troops fought at Tobruk Twice. They weren't the only ones, but no American's were involved. That campaign was won without your help. I suggest you look up the Desert Rats if you wish to find who the primary contributer of allied troops was in that campaign. God bless the Aussies.
The British had total naval superiority (except for U-Boats hunting convoys) for the duration of the war. The battle of the Atlantic was US convoys with US, Canadian, and British escorts trying to keep the British from starving and running out of weapons.
British convoys too. Nonetheless, the decisive battle was fought and won by the Canadians. It wasn't your victory don't bother trying to steal other peoples glory.
Neither the Germans nor the Italians could ever challenge British naval superiority - that's why there were no Naval Battles in the European theatre of WW2.
And yet somehow the British still managed to sink the French and the Italian Fleets not to mention plenty of Germans. That's why we controlled the Med. They challenged us alright, and we sunk them. Unlike the Japanese, who challenged us and sunk us.
The US controls Malaysia, the Carribean, Hong Kong, etc.? Rofl, come on. The British Empire suffered from WW2, but most of it's former colonies are independant now. The US was not the vulture over the corpse of the British empire that you make it out to be.
You are joking right? Where do you think all your money came from? Who controls Suez? The middle east? It's not just during WW2 that you superceded us but in the years after too while we were all still poor and starving.
I suggest you look at a pre war map of the pacific. The US had far more than just Hawaii: Wake Island, Midway Island, Guam, Johnson Island, and others. Most of the contested area was either originally US (Phillipines, Wake, Guam, Midway, Hawaii) or Japanese (Iwo Jima, The Marshalls, the Carolines, Okinawa, Saipan). Granted the Soloman Islands were British, but the British still control that Island chain as a "commonwealth realm". I challenge you to find specific examples of territory that was British before WW2 and American after it.
I already gave themn to you. The pacific trade routes. It's not the sandbars that are important it's what they protect.
As for Specific examples, how about Mildenhall and Brize Norton? Can't get more Ex British than mainland England.
Quality over Quantity. That is the doctrine the US followed. The USSR had more but it wasn't as good - pay attention to more than just numbers. Most of the Russian military, tanks, ships, etc, are all outdated. Ever since the end of the Cold War the Russian military has not compared to the US. The Russian economy simply cannot support a military to rival the United States. What are they left with? Obsolete cold war leftovers. The Russian state could not afford a war like the US's Iraq war. Could the Russians steamroll some third rate military power like Iraq? Probably. Would they lose lots more people/equipment than the US? Yeah. Could they afford to stay for years like the US has done? No way.
Except that the Russians have the best tanks, the best rifles the best missiles the best rockets the best submarines and the best planes, they won the space race and the arms race. The Russian state is perfectly capable of affording a war like the Iraq war. Cf. Grozny. It has plenty of it's own wars to keep busy with. The Russian economy was (and is) not only capable of rivaling the U.S. military but outshining it and all it's allies combined. It takes more than economics, it takes national will.
If you think all they are left with is obselete cold war leftovers, you should take a look at what you are fighting with. Russian arms are state of the art. Best sellers. It's us that have been fighting third world armies not them.
It's not a case of quality over quantity they have both. Did your government tell you they were utterly defeated and backed down in the face of your vast superioirity or something?
I suggest you take a good long look at Russia's current military capabilites.
There is a reason that western nations are so afraid of their nukes falling into the wrong hands. A russian mobster even attempted to buy a Russian nuclear submarine to smuggle drugs in (foiled by US DEA).
Hmm I think I saw a movie about that once, staring Bruce Willis! Edit, hmm thinking about it, maybe it was George Clooney!
I saw one with John Travolta too but that was an American nuke so it probably was just a movie. I wouldn't worry too much if I were you if it ever does happen there is always Steven Segal to sort it out.
Comically a london mobster sailed one down the Thames parked it outside parliament and opened it as a nightclub. They shut him down and made him move it.
The Germans never tried to actually produce an atomic bomb, they never had the technical knowledge. And you specifically said nuclear research in your original post (I notice you've deleted that part). Heavy water production is not nuclear research.
Whatever mate, your the one that brought it up. The Germans weren't going to nuke or atom bomb us. We had dealt with that little problem already. We were the ones making atom bombs, not them. (For what it's worth, there is nothing deleted in my post. If you check the time stamp you will see it remians unchanged since before your post).
I didn't mean you deleted it from your original post, I meant that you didn't include it in your quote of my post. Anyway, it doesn't matter.
Australia is not British. The statute of Westminster (1931) basically made Australia independent, though they were still militarily allied with GB.
And? how does Australia's involvement in the African Campaign mean that the U.S. saved everybody there before they even entered the war?
British troops fought at Tobruk Twice. They weren't the only ones, but no American's were involved. That campaign was won without your help. I suggest you look up the Desert Rats if you wish to find who the primary contributer of allied troops was in that campaign. God bless the Aussies.
Operation Torch: American/Free French/British Invasion of Western Africa. This sealed the fate of the Germans and Italians in Africa.
The British had total naval superiority (except for U-Boats hunting convoys) for the duration of the war. The battle of the Atlantic was US convoys with US, Canadian, and British escorts trying to keep the British from starving and running out of weapons.
British convoys too. Nonetheless, the decisive battle was fought and won by the Canadians. It wasn't your victory don't bother trying to steal other peoples glory.
Lol. Steal other people's glory? I specifically mentioned the US, British, and Canada. I'm giving credit where credit is due. If anyone isn't giving credit where it's due, it's you. You sound like the US stabbed GB in the back more than helping them - as if GB was doing just fine until the US came along and ruined things.
Neither the Germans nor the Italians could ever challenge British naval superiority - that's why there were no Naval Battles in the European theatre of WW2.
And yet somehow the British still managed to sink the French and the Italian Fleets not to mention plenty of Germans. That's why we controlled the Med. They challenged us alright, and we sunk them. Unlike the Japanese, who challenged us and sunk us.
The Italian fleet spent most of the war in port. The most significant "naval" battle against the Italians was an attack by British aircraft on the Italian fleet while it was in port. "Battles" with the German fleet were fought between German warships who were commerce raiding in ones and twos versus whole British fleets who were sent to chase them. The Bismark, the Scharnhorst, etc. The Germans knew they could never fight a set battle versus the British and they never tried. The Italians lost their confidence after a few losing skirmishes and spent the rest of the fleet in port.
The US controls Malaysia, the Carribean, Hong Kong, etc.? Rofl, come on. The British Empire suffered from WW2, but most of it's former colonies are independant now. The US was not the vulture over the corpse of the British empire that you make it out to be.
You are joking right? Where do you think all your money came from? Who controls Suez? The middle east? It's not just during WW2 that you superceded us but in the years after too while we were all still poor and starving.
Egypt controls the Suez Canal. All nations in the middle east (with the exception of Iraq, in the last few years) are indepenent, sovereign nations. The US does not have hegemony over former British colonies.
Let's see....WW2:
Egypt - British Controlled, now independent.
India - British Controlled, now independent.
Kuwait - British Controlled, now independent.
The Marshall plan was responsible for the rebuilding of Europe after WW2. Not only did the US help you win the war, it helped you rebuild afterwards. The US could have left Europe a bomb cratered hole but did it? Nope. Where would Germany be without US aid after WW2?
I suggest you look at a pre war map of the pacific. The US had far more than just Hawaii: Wake Island, Midway Island, Guam, Johnson Island, and others. Most of the contested area was either originally US (Phillipines, Wake, Guam, Midway, Hawaii) or Japanese (Iwo Jima, The Marshalls, the Carolines, Okinawa, Saipan). Granted the Soloman Islands were British, but the British still control that Island chain as a "commonwealth realm". I challenge you to find specific examples of territory that was British before WW2 and American after it.
I already gave themn to you. The pacific trade routes. It's not the sandbars that are important it's what they protect.
According to you, Great Britain used pacific islands it didn't control to protect trade routes? Lol.
This isn't the 17th century. Ships don't need to stop at every island to replenish supplies, patch their sails, and scrape the barnacles from their wooden hulls. Ships can travel wherever they want in international waters. What trade routes did the US usurp from GB?
Specific examples.
Quality over Quantity. That is the doctrine the US followed. The USSR had more but it wasn't as good - pay attention to more than just numbers. Most of the Russian military, tanks, ships, etc, are all outdated. Ever since the end of the Cold War the Russian military has not compared to the US. The Russian economy simply cannot support a military to rival the United States. What are they left with? Obsolete cold war leftovers. The Russian state could not afford a war like the US's Iraq war. Could the Russians steamroll some third rate military power like Iraq? Probably. Would they lose lots more people/equipment than the US? Yeah. Could they afford to stay for years like the US has done? No way.
Except that the Russians have the best tanks, the best rifles the best missiles the best rockets the best submarines and the best planes, they won the space race and the arms race. The Russian state is perfectly capable of affording a war like the Iraq war. Cf. Grozny. It has plenty of it's own wars to keep busy with. The Russian economy was (and is) not only capable of rivaling the U.S. military but outshining it and all it's allies combined. It takes more than economics, it takes national will.
If you think all they are left with is obselete cold war leftovers, you should take a look at what you are fighting with. Russian arms are state of the art. Best sellers. It's us that have been fighting third world armies not them.
It's not a case of quality over quantity they have both. Did your government tell you they were utterly defeated and backed down in the face of your vast superioirity or something?
I suggest you take a good long look at Russia's current military capabilites.
You speak as if the Soviet Union never fell. If Russia has such a superior economy and military, why did this happen? Don't tell me they were all scared out of their pants by Reagan's Star Wars Deathbeam. Militarily, modern Russia is a shadow of what the Soviet Union used to be. The United States is the only superpower left.
The Soviet Union exported such a large amount of military hardware because they had to. They had to make back of some of the money they spent on the military, and they were willing to sell it to whoever wanted to buy it.
The space race is largely irrelevant. First in space? Man on the Moon? No consequences other than "we did it" propaganda value. What is relevant is that the US got more out of it - namely, more satellites and better technology.
There is a reason that western nations are so afraid of their nukes falling into the wrong hands. A russian mobster even attempted to buy a Russian nuclear submarine to smuggle drugs in (foiled by US DEA).
Hmm I think I saw a movie about that once, staring Bruce Willis! Edit, hmm thinking about it, maybe it was George Clooney!
I saw one with John Travolta too but that was an American nuke so it probably was just a movie. I wouldn't worry too much if I were you if it ever does happen there is always Steven Segal to sort it out.
Comically a london mobster sailed one down the Thames parked it outside parliament and opened it as a nightclub. They shut him down and made him move it.
Very funny, but here is an article about the story I was referring to:
One of the most celebrated intersections of Russian and Colombian criminal interests also concerned a submarine. In 1997, Ludwig Fainberg, the Russian owner of a Miami strip club, was indicted for trying to negotiate the purchase of a Soviet-era Russian submarine and eight Mi-8 military helicopters on behalf of Colombian drug barons. According to an assistant United States attorney in Miami who developed the case, the submarine was going to travel to a point off the coast of the United States. Then drugs, packed into capsules attached to buoys, would be fired through the submarine's torpedo tubes and float at sea until speedboats made the pickup. Fainberg, who went by the nickname Tarzan, eventually pleaded guilty to racketeering.
Yep, actually happened. The Russian military is so corrupt that some of it's officers were/are willing to sell military hardware to drug smugglers and mobsters.
There you go again with your intolernce. Most Chinese people are proud of their government. They believe it to be the most altruistic in the world.
So you speak for all of the people in China? ROFL
I understand that a government is not loved by all of it's people but I think a factor of a 40% would be reasonable to imagine. This seems to be the norm around the world. The chinese goverment came about as a peoples revolution very recently by my standards and perhaps is more loved by the people than older less recently validated governments such as my own.
You know nothing: What about the civil rights movement that was thwarted by the military in China not so long ago? ROFLCAKES!
The Idea that a government is evil, but the people who constitute that government are all good is just ludicrous. No government can stand without the support of it's people.
And yes the German people did support the Holocaust. (So did the U.S.) It was hardly a big secret. The whole world knew what was going on.
By and Large Governments do represent their people. You might not personally beleive in George Bush but you beleieve in the American system of government enough not to assasinate him personally. Whether you dislike Clinton or Bush, or whoever, you all support your government. Those that do not are either imprisoned, killed or emigrate. Same as every other country in the world.
Oh noez! Have you ever heard of a totalitarian government? You know; the absence of democracy, the absence of the opinion of a majority? That is what China is, believe it or not. Don't believe me? Go do some research and prove me wrong.
Please, think before you post: So even though the majority of America was against the war in Iraq to begin with, you claim that the government represented the majority in their decision? No, not all of the Germans knew about the Holocaust (at least according to the American history books), nor did they support the decision to implement it.
Let's extend your logic: 40% of Americans were responsible for Vietnam.
Oh, but guess who declared war? The senate, not the populace. Remember the demonstrations in America over it? You don't? You wouldn't.
You are so full of **** it's getting ridiculous. It's obvious that you are indeed "baiting" me, since your replies do not logically refute my posts, but merely restate your opinions.
Nobody could be that stupid.. unless you are some kind of failed Nazi experiment.
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.
The Germans never tried to actually produce an atomic bomb, they never had the technical knowledge. And you specifically said nuclear research in your original post (I notice you've deleted that part). Heavy water production is not nuclear research.
Whatever mate, your the one that brought it up. The Germans weren't going to nuke or atom bomb us. We had dealt with that little problem already. We were the ones making atom bombs, not them. (For what it's worth, there is nothing deleted in my post. If you check the time stamp you will see it remians unchanged since before your post).
I didn't mean you deleted it from your original post, I meant that you didn't include it in your quote of my post. Anyway, it doesn't matter.
Australia is not British. The statute of Westminster (1931) basically made Australia independent, though they were still militarily allied with GB.
And? how does Australia's involvement in the African Campaign mean that the U.S. saved everybody there before they even entered the war?
British troops fought at Tobruk Twice. They weren't the only ones, but no American's were involved. That campaign was won without your help. I suggest you look up the Desert Rats if you wish to find who the primary contributer of allied troops was in that campaign. God bless the Aussies.
Operation Torch: American/Free French/British Invasion of Western Africa. This sealed the fate of the Germans and Italians in Africa.
Oh right. That's when you came and rescued us from our floundering African campaign wasn't it? Oh no wait a minute we wern't actually having any trouble in Africa without you after all now were we?
The British had total naval superiority (except for U-Boats hunting convoys) for the duration of the war. The battle of the Atlantic was US convoys with US, Canadian, and British escorts trying to keep the British from starving and running out of weapons.
British convoys too. Nonetheless, the decisive battle was fought and won by the Canadians. It wasn't your victory don't bother trying to steal other peoples glory.
Lol. Steal other people's glory? I specifically mentioned the US, British, and Canada. I'm giving credit where credit is due. If anyone isn't giving credit where it's due, it's you. You sound like the US stabbed GB in the back more than helping them - as if GB was doing just fine until the US came along and ruined things.
You right now are stabbing the memory of my war dead in the backs. It's disreputable. I have no bones about you inheriting our empire. That's history. What you are peddling, isn't. You want to sell the whole war as America saves all the little idiots, and that isn't what happened. every time you say it is I think about driving down to the local American cemetery and spray painting your name on a load of graves. Maybe when you see it in your newspapers you will get some idea of exactly how disgraceful these kind of comments are.
Neither the Germans nor the Italians could ever challenge British naval superiority - that's why there were no Naval Battles in the European theatre of WW2.
And yet somehow the British still managed to sink the French and the Italian Fleets not to mention plenty of Germans. That's why we controlled the Med. They challenged us alright, and we sunk them. Unlike the Japanese, who challenged us and sunk us.
The Italian fleet spent most of the war in port. The most significant "naval" battle against the Italians was an attack by British aircraft on the Italian fleet while it was in port.
So Pearl Harbour wasn't a "naval" battle then? The battle of Tarranto was the model for that attack. Once agaion you can do your best to belittle the achievements of other nations, but it doesn't make your own nations achievements any greater. Sorry there is no room in your mind for any non American heroes or successes, but there you are.
"Battles" with the German fleet were fought between German warships who were commerce raiding in ones and twos versus whole British fleets who were sent to chase them. The Bismark, the Scharnhorst, etc. The Germans knew they could never fight a set battle versus the British and they never tried. The Italians lost their confidence after a few losing skirmishes and spent the rest of the fleet in port.
The US controls Malaysia, the Carribean, Hong Kong, etc.? Rofl, come on. The British Empire suffered from WW2, but most of it's former colonies are independant now. The US was not the vulture over the corpse of the British empire that you make it out to be.
You are joking right? Where do you think all your money came from? Who controls Suez? The middle east? It's not just during WW2 that you superceded us but in the years after too while we were all still poor and starving.
Egypt controls the Suez Canal. All nations in the middle east (with the exception of Iraq, in the last few years) are indepenent, sovereign nations. The US does not have hegemony over former British colonies.
Let's see....WW2:
Egypt - British Controlled, now independent.
India - British Controlled, now independent.
Kuwait - British Controlled, now independent.
Israel and Kuwait American protectorates, Saudi and Egypt, preferred trading partners.
The Marshall plan was responsible for the rebuilding of Europe after WW2. Not only did the US help you win the war, it helped you rebuild afterwards. The US could have left Europe a bomb cratered hole but did it? Nope. Where would Germany be without US aid after WW2?
Actually, no it didn't. We helped the U.S. win the war. And we helped Europe rebuild. The U.S. did not help us rebuild. Once again you are desperate to take credit for things you weren't involved in. The British people remained on rations for until 1955 to pay for the reconstruction of Europe. Sticter rationing than in the actual wartime. You might wish to steal all that glory for yourself, but that's not what happened.
Once again this whole concept of how nice of you it was to rebuild Germany after the war keeps on coming up. Do you honestly expect Germany to thank you for your involvement in WW2? Have you even thought about what you are saying at all?
This isn't the 17th century. Ships don't need to stop at every island to replenish supplies, patch their sails, and scrape the barnacles from their wooden hulls. Ships can travel wherever they want in international waters. What trade routes did the US usurp from GB?
20th cetury ships like most 21st century ships need ports and naval bases. Not to mention airstrips.
Ships may be able to travel where ever they want, but they need to make port. If they wish to trade they must have also trade agreements with those ports. Similarly to Iraq, with the coalition in Iraq, Iraqi oil contracts will be going the way of the coalition. Just as Saudi's do. They won't be trading with any of our rivals.
You speak as if the Soviet Union never fell. If Russia has such a superior economy and military, why did this happen? Don't tell me they were all scared out of their pants by Reagan's Star Wars Deathbeam. Militarily, modern Russia is a shadow of what the Soviet Union used to be. The United States is the only superpower left.
You speak as if Nato didn't fall at exactly the sametime and speed. It's not just Russia that is a shadow of it's former military power. The U.S. is too.
Reagun was part of the disarmament process, he didn't escalate it. The Soviet Union collapsed because it could finally afford to. The Cold War was over. Maintaining an 8-1 military superiority over NATO was a very costly excersise for the Soviets. As I said, it's not just about economy, it's about national will. The U.S. and Nato never had the commitment to equal it.
It may be a comforting conceit to believe yourself to be the only super power left, but that's all it is. A conceit.
The Soviet Union exported such a large amount of military hardware because they had to. They had to make back of some of the money they spent on the military, and they were willing to sell it to whoever wanted to buy it.
And the same applies to the U.S. and Britain and all the other countries, only the Russians made more sales and could hence afford to upgrade their equipment more often. Plus with 8 times as large production runs they could better refine their designs and mass produce cheaper units.
The space race is largely irrelevant. First in space? Man on the Moon? No consequences other than "we did it" propaganda value. What is relevant is that the US got more out of it - namely, more satellites and better technology.
Or is that less satelittes and worse technology? In all honesty I couldn't say. I know NASA buys Russian rocket motors, and uses Russian rockets to launch it's satellittes but Russians don't buy any American space tech at all.
You know nothing: What about the civil rights movement that was thwarted by the military in China not so long ago? ROFLCAKES!
My mother was at tianemen square if that counts.
Oh noez! Have you ever heard of a totalitarian government?
I live under one. It's not all that bad really.
You know; the absence of democracy, the absence of the opinion of a majority? That is what China is, believe it or not. Don't believe me? Go do some research and prove me wrong.
Why would they want Democracy? They have Communism. Democracy empowers the individual, Communism empowers the collective. I thought you were into Chinese cultutre. Why would they prefer Democracy? How unChinese
Please, think before you post: So even though the majority of America was against the war in Iraq to begin with, you claim that the government represented the majority in their decision? No, not all of the Germans knew about the Holocaust (at least according to the American history books), nor did they support the decision to implement it.
Firstly, opinion polls don't back up your claims of most of America being anti Iraq war at the beginning.
Not making the decision to implement something, (we can't all be leaders) is quite different from allowing it to occour. The German people didn't storm the camps or hide all the Jews away from the evil government. Hitlers Government was one of the most democratic in histroy with it's frequent referendums. Germans like Americans could hardly have failed to notice all the slaves working amongst them and all the disappearances. No one else in the world did. Why would they be the only blind deaf and dumb people on the planet?
Of course afterwards they all said "no we didn't know about it", what did you expect them to say? I imagine your history books don't talk much about the Ford factories in Germany either. I don't have a lot of respect for your history books currently.
Let's extend your logic: 40% of Americans were responsible for Vietnam.
Not my logic. My logic is at least 40% of the people of America specifically voted for the government that sent troops to Vietnam. And not a large enough % of the people of America had any intrest in stopping it.
Oh, but guess who declared war? The senate, not the populace. Remember the demonstrations in America over it? You don't? You wouldn't.
I agree people don't get to vote, but the senate is made up of American people. The Army is made up of American people. The war was funded by the American people. And although the American People may not have cheered at the end of the Vietnam war, they all cheered at the beginning.
You live in America one of your greatest freedoms is the right to bear arms, if ever the government greatly acts agianst your wishes each and every one of you has the personal power to overthrow the state or kill your leaders.
I wish my country had this freedom.
Laughable for you to tell me your country acts without the consent of it's people. Utterly laughable.
Australia is not British. The statute of Westminster (1931) basically made Australia independent, though they were still militarily allied with GB.
And? how does Australia's involvement in the African Campaign mean that the U.S. saved everybody there before they even entered the war?
British troops fought at Tobruk Twice. They weren't the only ones, but no American's were involved. That campaign was won without your help. I suggest you look up the Desert Rats if you wish to find who the primary contributer of allied troops was in that campaign. God bless the Aussies.
Operation Torch: American/Free French/British Invasion of Western Africa. This sealed the fate of the Germans and Italians in Africa.
Oh right. That's when you came and rescued us from our floundering African campaign wasn't it? Oh no wait a minute we wern't actually having any trouble in Africa without you after all now were we?
I never said anything of the sort. What I am saying is that the African campaign was not solely a British effort.
The British had total naval superiority (except for U-Boats hunting convoys) for the duration of the war. The battle of the Atlantic was US convoys with US, Canadian, and British escorts trying to keep the British from starving and running out of weapons.
British convoys too. Nonetheless, the decisive battle was fought and won by the Canadians. It wasn't your victory don't bother trying to steal other peoples glory.
Lol. Steal other people's glory? I specifically mentioned the US, British, and Canada. I'm giving credit where credit is due. If anyone isn't giving credit where it's due, it's you. You sound like the US stabbed GB in the back more than helping them - as if GB was doing just fine until the US came along and ruined things.
You right now are stabbing the memory of my war dead in the backs. It's disreputable. I have no bones about you inheriting our empire. That's history. What you are peddling, isn't. You want to sell the whole war as America saves all the little idiots, and that isn't what happened. every time you say it is I think about driving down to the local American cemetery and spray painting your name on a load of graves. Maybe when you see it in your newspapers you will get some idea of exactly how disgraceful these kind of comments are.
What the hell is your problem? If you get so angry over an internet debate you've got problems man. If you don't agree with me that's fine, but accusing me of such things is just plain ridiculous.
Neither the Germans nor the Italians could ever challenge British naval superiority - that's why there were no Naval Battles in the European theatre of WW2.
And yet somehow the British still managed to sink the French and the Italian Fleets not to mention plenty of Germans. That's why we controlled the Med. They challenged us alright, and we sunk them. Unlike the Japanese, who challenged us and sunk us.
The Italian fleet spent most of the war in port. The most significant "naval" battle against the Italians was an attack by British aircraft on the Italian fleet while it was in port.
So Pearl Harbour wasn't a "naval" battle then? The battle of Tarranto was the model for that attack. Once agaion you can do your best to belittle the achievements of other nations, but it doesn't make your own nations achievements any greater. Sorry there is no room in your mind for any non American heroes or successes, but there you are.
Pearl Harbor was a raid and a sneak attack, but not a battle. And WTF is your problem? Throughout this entire thread I have highlighted successes of all the allies. Just because British victories weren't set peice battles doesn't mean they were insignificant. It was a team effort. Your anti-US bias is painfully visible.
"Battles" with the German fleet were fought between German warships who were commerce raiding in ones and twos versus whole British fleets who were sent to chase them. The Bismark, the Scharnhorst, etc. The Germans knew they could never fight a set battle versus the British and they never tried. The Italians lost their confidence after a few losing skirmishes and spent the rest of the fleet in port.
The US controls Malaysia, the Carribean, Hong Kong, etc.? Rofl, come on. The British Empire suffered from WW2, but most of it's former colonies are independant now. The US was not the vulture over the corpse of the British empire that you make it out to be.
You are joking right? Where do you think all your money came from? Who controls Suez? The middle east? It's not just during WW2 that you superceded us but in the years after too while we were all still poor and starving.
Egypt controls the Suez Canal. All nations in the middle east (with the exception of Iraq, in the last few years) are indepenent, sovereign nations. The US does not have hegemony over former British colonies.
Let's see....WW2:
Egypt - British Controlled, now independent.
India - British Controlled, now independent.
Kuwait - British Controlled, now independent.
Israel and Kuwait American protectorates, Saudi and Egypt, preferred trading partners.
The Marshall plan was responsible for the rebuilding of Europe after WW2. Not only did the US help you win the war, it helped you rebuild afterwards. The US could have left Europe a bomb cratered hole but did it? Nope. Where would Germany be without US aid after WW2?
Actually, no it didn't. We helped the U.S. win the war. And we helped Europe rebuild. The U.S. did not help us rebuild. Once again you are desperate to take credit for things you weren't involved in. The British people remained on rations for until 1955 to pay for the reconstruction of Europe. Sticter rationing than in the actual wartime. You might wish to steal all that glory for yourself, but that's not what happened.
Bullshit. Absolute Bullshit and I'm calling you on it. Great Britain was the single largest recipient of Marshall Plan aid, overTHREE BILLION DOLLARS between 1948 and 1952. I have facts. You have truly no idea wtf you are talking about. where did you get your education, Anti-American University? Cite some sources for your nutty claims.
Once again this whole concept of how nice of you it was to rebuild Germany after the war keeps on coming up. Do you honestly expect Germany to thank you for your involvement in WW2? Have you even thought about what you are saying at all?
They shouldn't thank the US For involvement in WW2 (after all, Germany declared war on the US) they should thank the US for rebuilding them afterwards. Two different things. Your argument is irrelevant.
This isn't the 17th century. Ships don't need to stop at every island to replenish supplies, patch their sails, and scrape the barnacles from their wooden hulls. Ships can travel wherever they want in international waters. What trade routes did the US usurp from GB?
20th cetury ships like most 21st century ships need ports and naval bases. Not to mention airstrips.
I've already proven that the US did not take over any of Great Britain's territories after WW2. I have asked you to give specific examples, but you have not.
Ships may be able to travel where ever they want, but they need to make port. If they wish to trade they must have also trade agreements with those ports. Similarly to Iraq, with the coalition in Iraq, Iraqi oil contracts will be going the way of the coalition. Just as Saudi's do. They won't be trading with any of our rivals.
And Great Britain is part of the coalition, isn't it? Just as they were part of the allies and NATO. US benefits, GB benefits too.
You speak as if the Soviet Union never fell. If Russia has such a superior economy and military, why did this happen? Don't tell me they were all scared out of their pants by Reagan's Star Wars Deathbeam. Militarily, modern Russia is a shadow of what the Soviet Union used to be. The United States is the only superpower left.
You speak as if Nato didn't fall at exactly the sametime and speed. It's not just Russia that is a shadow of it's former military power. The U.S. is too.
Reagun was part of the disarmament process, he didn't escalate it. The Soviet Union collapsed because it could finally afford to. The Cold War was over. Maintaining an 8-1 military superiority over NATO was a very costly excersise for the Soviets. As I said, it's not just about economy, it's about national will. The U.S. and Nato never had the commitment to equal it.
It may be a comforting conceit to believe yourself to be the only super power left, but that's all it is. A conceit.
The US won the cold war when the Soviet Union collapsed. With the Soviet union no longer an iminent enemy a massive military was no longer necessary. The modern US military is smaller than the cold war military, but still just as effective. The "National Will" in the USSR was that their people were sick of communism, sick of shortages in everything from cars to refrigerators, and wanted a better standard of living. America's free market economy could support a massive military AND a high standard of living, the USSR's economy could not.
I ask you this, what ended the cold war? The USSR just decided not to play anymore, and their government fell apart?
The Soviet Union exported such a large amount of military hardware because they had to. They had to make back of some of the money they spent on the military, and they were willing to sell it to whoever wanted to buy it.
And the same applies to the U.S. and Britain and all the other countries, only the Russians made more sales and could hence afford to upgrade their equipment more often. Plus with 8 times as large production runs they could better refine their designs and mass produce cheaper units.
The space race is largely irrelevant. First in space? Man on the Moon? No consequences other than "we did it" propaganda value. What is relevant is that the US got more out of it - namely, more satellites and better technology.
Or is that less satelittes and worse technology? In all honesty I couldn't say. I know NASA buys Russian rocket motors, and uses Russian rockets to launch it's satellittes but Russians don't buy any American space tech at all.
Of course they don't, the Russians can barely afford a space program as is. They were always behind on their parts of the International Space Station.
Russian federal space agency budget, 2006: 900 million USD
Comments
Britain didn't win BoB through anything other than Hitler's stupidity. Don't make them sound like heroes or anything.
They were heroes. When all other nations in the world bowed down they stood and fought.
Aside from Hitlers "stupidity" they had the technical advantage of Radar, advanced fighter aircraft and enough of them, bravery and strong leadership. These are the heroes of my nation. They fought and died.
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 don't deny the U.S. played a key part. As for "help", Brittain paid for those supplies. Canada (amongst other friends) sent them free and money besides.
And the U.S. didn't so much formaly declare war as have war formally declared against it. I hope you remember that up until this time you were also supplying Germany. Profitting from both sides.
Britain also lent lots of money for the reconstruction of Europe. I really don't want to dispute America's glorious contribution to that war. I would however like to have it taken in full perspective of all the other contributions made by all the other peoples of the world.
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.
No, you are not.
Not only have I visited China I also have immigrant and domestic Chinese friends.
I do not judge a country by it's relatively few exiles.
China's government instills jingoism? What government doesn't. You do't really get anymore Jingoist the The U.S. with all that flag waving and talk of being the worlds only superpower, and saving Europe and without the U.S. I would be spreching Duetch etc etc etc. Hello?
The Difference between Germans and Americans is not that they meet foreigners inside their own country, it's that they meet foreigners outside their own country, and the foreigners they meet are not only immigrants but also tourists. German History is intertwinned with the histories of scores of other cultures. Europeans don't just have a history of immigration, they have a history of invasion. Of being subsumed by a foreign culture entirely. Again and agian throughout history.
An immigrant wishes to join your culture. He is not a nationalist. A tourist manitains his own love for his own culture first. Geographically Germany is close to 20 or thirty different cultures. Each with different governmental systems, religions, genetics, languages intrests hobbies and social orders. The U.S. is geographically close to 3. An American living in the mid west might never meet a foreigner let alone explore his culture.
An American friend of mine once said to me, he was not uncultured as he had been to Mexico. As it happened he was one of the more open minded Americans I have met.
.
America's monoculturism is it's unifying strength. It is the reason why 300 million people can unite in a common cause work towards a single goal and create an enormous influence on the world. It is also the source of it's intolerance and lack of understanding.
.
For the record neither Chinese nor Russians are evil, they are all very nice people. The Russian Gulags were a lot nicer places that Guantanamo Bay or Belsen, and the U.S. (like every country) has had it's fair share of Genocides too. It's a pity that your own self image requires you to denigrate others to feel good about yourself. Instead of trying to belittle others, why not focus on your own achievements. You come from a marvelous country and have had plenty of them. There really isn't any need for this kind of ignorant intollerance. Neither China nor Russia have to be bad bad places in order for the U.S. to be a good one. It doesn't work like that.
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.
So the real question is who's Daddy can kick who's Daddy's butt. You 2 are in 2nd grade right?
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
Oh you really do amuse me, your points really do hammer home what I was saying! Please don't be so petty and criticise my formatting, that is nothing to do with ignorance, computer literacy or sheer laziness at best but not ignorance
I must thank you for the wonderful link which gives me the opportunity to explain to you something about the world which you are obviously too naive to know or understand. Ever heard of the term propaganda? It's related to the media and the lesson is this. When you read something, please don't soak it up all as factual information, take it with a pinch of salt. Every article written has its own agenda, and this one is obviously to portray China in a bad light. I am not saying there isn't an ounce of truth in what it states, I am just saying there may be exxageration, bending of the truth or stating only some of the facts so you are not aware of the whole story. Baff really hit the nail on the head when he stated that America always needs to put other nations down to feel good about itself. He also had it right when he said the country was/is great but unfortunately if a significant proportion of the population think like you, you can kiss that goodbye! As for torture, I have heard on numerous occasions of US soldiers committing countless atrocities including torture so do not think you are better than everyone else. As for their policies, if you think it's ok to go invading other countries just because they are not like you, then I guess you would say they are perfect. The first Gulf War may have been justified as America was defending Kuwait from invasion, good for them. However the second war was a joke!! By the way, please tell me where all those weapons of mass destruction are
Now let me touch on your insanely stupid points! As it happens, I do know a Chinese person. Actually let me re-iterate. I know and am close friends with a lot of Chinese people (probably the reason why your ignorant comments annoy me so much
). And before you say anything, they were all born in China and spent almost their whole life there! In fact, I recently had the opportunity to spend some time with a Chinese family in China and experience their life style first hand. Let me just say I was a little surprised and very impressed with the life out there. I know they don't have it so good in the country, but in the cities I would wager it is far better than the US (yes I've been there too). In fact, unfortunately for you I have travelled extensively to many different cultures and been to many poor areas of the world so I have some experience of what I'm talking about. I would wager that you don't even know where China is, probably think it's just the other side of Mexico 
Now your next point, "if China were to come to power". What the hell does that mean? What do you think they are, some state of Japan? They are a world superpower almost rivalling the US. If China really wanted to do anything it wants, who is going to stop them? The US? Don't make me laugh! The reason all these labor camps aren't appearing all over the place is because they don't actually have any, well not more than the US has people farming in the countryside! There are no labor camps and there is no indication of such nonsense anywhere. Get your facts straight before posting. Go to China and see for yourself, but please don't do the stupid American tourist act I have seen so often. And as for the racial cleansing, well that's just absurd. In case you didn't know, there are approximately 55 different ethnic minorities living together in China, and they are not in the process of being cleansed as you so put it. So just to summarise, China has no wishes of doing what you claim it does and even if it did, the US would not be able to do anything about it. To illustrate, America is busy invading wherever it wants in the Middle East, as long as they have no nuclear weapons. However, North Korea also on their Axis of Evil list it leaves well alone. I will let you add two and two together.
As I am not so aware of the situation in Russia, I will leave that well alone. However I am betting that you are also way off the mark there. You should learn by my post and not spout out nonsense of which you really have no clue. Go and educate yourself and expand your mind a little.
As a note to Baff, I am glad to see someone as level headed as you here.
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.
What is wrong with you people? Believe it or not, but the government does not represent it's entire population, or are you saying that the German people supported the Holocaust? The government is a proper subset of the people of a nation and it is their actions I decry (in China's case). I have nothing against Chinese people; in fact most of my friends were Chinese while I was growing up in America.
You are right: I don't tolerate their GOVERNMENT. I have nothing against their culture as a whole, but their government. How is this so hard to understand? Do I have to outline everything for you? If China (and by China I mean its' government) were the most altruistic country in the world, I would cheer them on in their economic advances, but they have shown such cruelty (TO THEIR OWN PEOPLE) and disrespect for human rights.
There you go again with your intolernce.
Most Chinese people are proud of their government. They believe it to be the most altruistic in the world.
Maybe they are correct. Who are we to judge? I prefer to think my own government is the most altruistic, but then again don't we all.
I understand that a government is not loved by all of it's people but I think a factor of a 40% would be reasonable to imagine. This seems to be the norm around the world. The chinese goverment came about as a peoples revolution very recently by my standards and perhaps is more loved by the people than older less recently validated governments such as my own.
The Idea that a government is evil, but the people who constitute that government are all good is just ludicrous. No government can stand without the support of it's people.
And yes the German people did support the Holocaust. (So did the U.S.) It was hardly a big secret. The whole world knew what was going on.
By and Large Governments do represent their people. You might not personally beleive in George Bush but you beleieve in the American system of government enough not to assasinate him personally. Whether you dislike Clinton or Bush, or whoever, you all support your government. Those that do not are either imprisoned, killed or emigrate. Same as every other country in the world.
Besides the Turks there is also France, Britain, Russia, Spain, Italy, Czecholavakia, America etc etc etc all have cultural influence in Germany. Any where in Germany I am never more than an hour from a completely different culture. German people are acclimatised to foreign culture. They have been directly exposed since birth. And by foreign culture, I do not mean assimilated culture, I mean alien.
ROFL, sure. The same influence also holds for small sections of America (i.e. the Irish/German sections of states). No, your culture is not so vastly different: In Austria, the culture is virtually identical to that of Germany; you speak the same language, you share television channels (Orf 1, usw.) and consume most of the same products. That is one of the "many" countries that you border. Switzerland? Tack on Italian, French and disjoint government policies and you're set.
That was a minimum, but you get the idea: European cultures do not vary as much with each other as cultures from other continents do. Compare the traditional American-European culture to the emerging Mexican culture: Not only do the languages vary, but work-ethic, mores and, most importantly, norms.
All European cultures vary with each other vastly more than the states of the U.S.
A good example would be the case of a Mexican carpenter that had been found to have sex with a "minor" within California: He was promptly sentenced to jail for a few years. However, the same relationship would have been tolerated in Mexico and ironically he ended up marrying the very girl that he had been charged with raping once he got out.
Right, what you have going on with Mexico, germany has going on with Turkey, AND France, AND Switzerland, AND Austria AND Poland, AND Czechoslavakia. You have the right idea but not the perspective.
America doesn't have it's own culture: It's a collection of sub-cultures.
That collection of sub-cultures makes up it's culture, all cultures are thus.
This is not where the U.S. differs from any other nation; except perhaps in the specific sub cultures that can be found there.
If I were to use the same trivial equivalence relation for cultures that you use, I could say that all 50 states were disjoint and that all sub-groups within the state were unique cultures, which would further trivialize your claim that Europeans are exposed to more cultures than Americans.
You could say that, but you would be incorrect, they all watch the same T.V. abide by the same laws have the same leaders forms of goverment, tastes in music clothing reading hobbies, drive the same cars etc etc etc. SPEAK THE SAME LANGUAGE. Sorry but it's a different ball park.
So abiding by the same laws is sufficient for cultural equivalence? No, NOT all Americans have the same tenets. You, obviously, have only visited America as a tourist, or you wouldn't make such ludicrous claims. The laws vary BY STATE in our country, so by virtue of that fact, your claim is invalid. So it's alright for Europeans to be ignorant about America, but not for Americans to be ignorant about Europe? Proscht! =>
Americans do have all the same tenets, you are a broadly monothesitic christian based society, your laws as well as state are federalised. You do not have the diversity of religion or genetics found in Europe, no significant Muslim population or Hindu. Laws isn't everything but it's a factor.
Oh yes because in the 6,000 years of recorded human history China has invaded England soooo many times. America too. So you hate the world. Big deal. Neither the U.S. nor GB is under any threat of Chinese invasion. Never has been, never will be.
Unfortunately, 6000 years ago China didn't have the population problems it does now. Also, there is no causal relationship between the absence of historical events and government policies.
There have been population problems historical events and governments aplenty in the last 6,000 of Chinese history. China still hasn't ever and won't ever invade the U.S. or the U.K. There is no getting round it, this is just utter nonsense.
As for the Indian cultures that were exterminated: They weren't part of what is America today. In fact, America hadn't even been formed until the end of the civil war. All of those people are long dead and buried. We are talking about the past 80 years and the nation that is America today. Perhaps I should equate Germany to Germania?
The Indian Cultures aren't part of America today because they are dead. A genocide is a genocide. It doesn't stop being one after X many years.
I'm still waiting for your genocides.
The same applies to Russian genocides all part of the formation of the country. By the way your civil war counts as killing your own people I believe.
Double standards don't cut it with me, either civil war is killing your own people or it isn't. If it's evil when the Russians or the Iraqi's do it, it's evil when the U.S. doew it too. It amazes me that you think foreigners are evil but domestics are good.
Human's are the same. By nature.
.
If you are unable to respect other peoples cultures and systems of government, how do you expect people to respect yours? Contempt breeds contempt. You aren't looking for friends, you are looking for enemies. As a nation I mean, not just personally and governmentally, but culturally.
The Germans never tried to actually produce an atomic bomb, they never had the technical knowledge. And you specifically said nuclear research in your original post (I notice you've deleted that part). Heavy water production is not nuclear research.
Whatever mate, your the one that brought it up. The Germans weren't going to nuke or atom bomb us. We had dealt with that little problem already. We were the ones making atom bombs, not them. (For what it's worth, there is nothing deleted in my post. If you check the time stamp you will see it remians unchanged since before your post).
Australia is not British. The statute of Westminster (1931) basically made Australia independent, though they were still militarily allied with GB.
And? how does Australia's involvement in the African Campaign mean that the U.S. saved everybody there before they even entered the war?
British troops fought at Tobruk Twice. They weren't the only ones, but no American's were involved. That campaign was won without your help. I suggest you look up the Desert Rats if you wish to find who the primary contributer of allied troops was in that campaign. God bless the Aussies.
The British had total naval superiority (except for U-Boats hunting convoys) for the duration of the war. The battle of the Atlantic was US convoys with US, Canadian, and British escorts trying to keep the British from starving and running out of weapons.
British convoys too. Nonetheless, the decisive battle was fought and won by the Canadians. It wasn't your victory don't bother trying to steal other peoples glory.
Neither the Germans nor the Italians could ever challenge British naval superiority - that's why there were no Naval Battles in the European theatre of WW2.
And yet somehow the British still managed to sink the French and the Italian Fleets not to mention plenty of Germans. That's why we controlled the Med. They challenged us alright, and we sunk them. Unlike the Japanese, who challenged us and sunk us.
The US controls Malaysia, the Carribean, Hong Kong, etc.? Rofl, come on. The British Empire suffered from WW2, but most of it's former colonies are independant now. The US was not the vulture over the corpse of the British empire that you make it out to be.
You are joking right? Where do you think all your money came from? Who controls Suez? The middle east? It's not just during WW2 that you superceded us but in the years after too while we were all still poor and starving.
I suggest you look at a pre war map of the pacific. The US had far more than just Hawaii: Wake Island, Midway Island, Guam, Johnson Island, and others. Most of the contested area was either originally US (Phillipines, Wake, Guam, Midway, Hawaii) or Japanese (Iwo Jima, The Marshalls, the Carolines, Okinawa, Saipan). Granted the Soloman Islands were British, but the British still control that Island chain as a "commonwealth realm". I challenge you to find specific examples of territory that was British before WW2 and American after it.
I already gave themn to you. The pacific trade routes. It's not the sandbars that are important it's what they protect.
As for Specific examples, how about Mildenhall and Brize Norton? Can't get more Ex British than mainland England.
Quality over Quantity. That is the doctrine the US followed. The USSR had more but it wasn't as good - pay attention to more than just numbers. Most of the Russian military, tanks, ships, etc, are all outdated. Ever since the end of the Cold War the Russian military has not compared to the US. The Russian economy simply cannot support a military to rival the United States. What are they left with? Obsolete cold war leftovers. The Russian state could not afford a war like the US's Iraq war. Could the Russians steamroll some third rate military power like Iraq? Probably. Would they lose lots more people/equipment than the US? Yeah. Could they afford to stay for years like the US has done? No way.
Except that the Russians have the best tanks, the best rifles the best missiles the best rockets the best submarines and the best planes, they won the space race and the arms race. The Russian state is perfectly capable of affording a war like the Iraq war. Cf. Grozny. It has plenty of it's own wars to keep busy with. The Russian economy was (and is) not only capable of rivaling the U.S. military but outshining it and all it's allies combined. It takes more than economics, it takes national will.
If you think all they are left with is obselete cold war leftovers, you should take a look at what you are fighting with. Russian arms are state of the art. Best sellers. It's us that have been fighting third world armies not them.
It's not a case of quality over quantity they have both. Did your government tell you they were utterly defeated and backed down in the face of your vast superioirity or something?
I suggest you take a good long look at Russia's current military capabilites.
There is a reason that western nations are so afraid of their nukes falling into the wrong hands. A russian mobster even attempted to buy a Russian nuclear submarine to smuggle drugs in (foiled by US DEA).
Hmm I think I saw a movie about that once, staring Bruce Willis! Edit, hmm thinking about it, maybe it was George Clooney!
I saw one with John Travolta too but that was an American nuke so it probably was just a movie. I wouldn't worry too much if I were you if it ever does happen there is always Steven Segal to sort it out.
Comically a london mobster sailed one down the Thames parked it outside parliament and opened it as a nightclub. They shut him down and made him move it.
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.
would be funny if they actually said "okay we'll do that" B&J supplies the oreos we'll bring the milk. lol
Ceasar
those BBs are complete lucany. You could fry the entire world with less that a handful.
Time to get off the crack US, I know if feels good, but c'mon! Just keep some medicine in the cabinet just in case.
-virtual tourist
want your game back?