US from '36 to now

[clownfish]

Has anyone noeiced that ever since the US started interfering with other countries the have made one mistake after another? Examples? The weakness of the American governement against Hitler, they allowed the Prague massacre(even though the Ruskis were also to blame), the Cuba embargo, Vietnam and Cambodja, arming guerilla armies several times in several cases... Please use real arguments, don't just say "you are an idiot, so you're wrong".

[lapslf]

Well, the problem is that the US has never learn't from it's mistakes. After they had a terrible war they fight another to prevent a possible war. They get more stupid with every year. Too bad, the US has it's good sides too, but not in politics.

[mysecondstar]

At 3/18/03 02:17 PM, clownfish wrote: Has anyone noeiced that ever since the US started interfering with other countries the have made one mistake after another? Examples? The weakness of the American governement against Hitler, they allowed the Prague massacre(even though the Ruskis were also to blame), the Cuba embargo, Vietnam and Cambodja, arming guerilla armies several times in several cases... Please use real arguments, don't just say "you are an idiot, so you're wrong".

elaborate your examples. and your Hitler example is poor. Hitler wasn't a US priority in WWII, Japan was. it was later when the US helped the UK fight off the Nazis. so elaborate on all of them, so i can actually make an intelligent argument instead of saying, "you're wrong, you friggin' idiot."

[clownfish]

Indeed, the order of American presidents is about like this: Republican who doesn't give a shit about economy, then a democrat that gets in some sort of scandal. Repeat, repeat, repeat. They have in many occasions supported dictators and have even once supported that which they now call the embodyment of evil itself... Maybe the US just has too much power? Do you think America is adding a mistake to that long list now?

[KrasnoZnamonec]

USA came to Europe to fight the nazis only after the Soviet's had started invading nazi teritory(ex.soviet invadet by nazis) (great batle of Stalingrad)

And Soviet's had to same USA's ass several times becous of crappy tactics

[TheEvilOne]

At 3/18/03 02:17 PM, clownfish wrote: Has anyone noeiced that ever since the US started interfering with other countries the have made one mistake after another? Examples? The weakness of the American governement against Hitler, they allowed the Prague massacre(even though the Ruskis were also to blame), the Cuba embargo, Vietnam and Cambodja, arming guerilla armies several times in several cases... Please use real arguments, don't just say "you are an idiot, so you're wrong".

I disagree with your Hitler comment. You could make that argument for before 1941, and you could argue that Japan was our main priority, but I think we did help out in the North Africa campaign. And of course, after 1944, after D-Day, US and British troops marched on Germany from the west, while the Russians advanced from the east. It was only a matter of who would get there first--either way, Hitler was fucked. So don't say we didn't do anything about Hitler.

After that, we made a few mistakes--Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, etc. I'm not real sure what you're trying to suggest. (Maybe that Iraq is a mistake? Just a theory, I don't know for sure.) But in any case, we shouldn't go where we don't have any business. I think we DO have business in Iraq, though.

[clownfish]

At 3/18/03 03:39 PM, mysecondstar wrote: elaborate your examples. and your Hitler example is poor. Hitler wasn't a US priority in WWII, Japan was. it was later when the US helped the UK fight off the Nazis. so elaborate on all of them, so i can actually make an intelligent argument instead of saying, "you're wrong, you friggin' idiot."

So Japan was the priority? In that case it must have been a big strategical miscalculation, because when Germany fell, Japan followed. And then why do some of you (Alakazam for instance) run around saying the US saved the world from Hitler? By the way, Hitler walked right into Austria, the Allies GAVE the bastard Czechoslovakia, and they didn't do dick until Germany took Polen. America WAS already one of the allies back then, and if Japan was the priority, why did it take the entire friggin' war to defeat them?
I will elaborate the points in my next post.

[KrasnoZnamonec]

btw japan wasn't taken only by USA. Again from other side there were russian invasion, but nobody talkes about it cous russians always didn't wanted poblisity to go for war

Think now USA is making beses where there never woud make any kind of Base for exmpl. ex.SU now GEORGIA a strategic point to defending russian border. Generals already gave a letter to Putin that it's a big mistake giving USA make it's bases near Russian borders

-ill wait till Generals start revolution and Soviet Union will born again-

[clownfish]

Elaboration:
point 1: Prague: When the Americans and Russians met in Germany, the war wasn't over yet. Prague and Pilsen were still under nazi occupation. The Americans could have liberated those cities in the first day, but they weren't in "their half of Europ" so the Czech had to wait three days for the Russians. About 300.000 deaths in those three days...

point 2: The Cuba embargo: Cuba was embargoed even before the Russians even set foot on it, because it was Communistic. This caused the economical circumstances in Cuba to become much worse, because their export consisted mainly of cigars to the US.

point 3: Vietnam and Cambodja: The Vietcong was a widely spread organization, with many farmers. The fact that the Americans couldn't know for sure who was Vietcong and who not caused them to murder out entire villages. The leader of suthern Nam was the dictator Diem, hated by more than half the population, he was still supported by the US.
In the war the Americans bombed eastern Cambodja heavily than any other country in the history of mankind, and that caused one quarter of the population to die.

point 4: Support of Guerilla: The most gruesome example is again that of Cambodja. Because the population hated the governement for allowing the bombardments, it was overthrown by the Red Khmer (ever hear of the killing fields?). Even though the conditions for everyone skyrocketed when the Red Khmer was beaten by the already unified Vietnam, the US kept supporting the Red Khmer. More examples are the obvious: Anti-Russian Guerilla's.

[NJDeadzone]

At 3/18/03 04:10 PM, clownfish wrote:

point 3: Vietnam and Cambodja: The Vietcong was a widely spread organization, with many farmers. The fact that the Americans couldn't know for sure who was Vietcong and who not caused them to murder out entire villages. The leader of suthern Nam was the dictator Diem, hated by more than half the population, he was still supported by the US.
In the war the Americans bombed eastern Cambodja heavily than any other country in the history of mankind, and that caused one quarter of the population to die.

Interesting parallel. You would have made a fantastic argument if you mentioned that Vietnam was Lyndon Baines Johnson's war, not the US's. LBJ played the game of manipulating Congress in order to force a war on the nation, not to mention having a hand in Kennedy's assassination(but that's another topic). The Tonkin Gulf Resolution was LBJ's masterpiece in forcing the worst military action the US has seen. This new Iraqi War is George W. Bush's War against the government of Iraq. Bush's influence on Congress is nowhere close to what LBJ's was, however, the war on terrorism gave him the edge and the theme he needed. I'm sure this will one day become a question in the history books of the future.