Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

---

At 12/8/06 07:30 AM, zzzzd wrote:

At 12/8/06 06:09 AM, CrimsonEdge wrote:

How pissed of with you if a British film was made with the royal marines raising a British flag at Iwo Jima??? you'd be pissed of.

Thats not comparable to having a movie of what US pilots did in the battle of Britain because US pilots ACTUALLY FOUGHT in the Battle of Britain.

No Brits were on Iwo Jima, let alone even in the fucking pacific.

And Cellardoor6 for fucks sake, your talkin bollocks again. Why are you so Biased towards other countries, Britian in paticular?

I'm not biased, I'm just indentifying things that aren't conventient to someone like you.

Why do you keep saying Britain is distorting history, coming from you who said The Sucess of WW2 was 80% american input. lol

Is it a distortion of reality that the US was the ONLY country to fight in EVERY theatre in WWII. Is it a distortion of history to say that the US supplied the VAST majority of war material, weapons, and equipment in WWII? Is it a distortion of history to say that the US contributed the most in terms of land liberated and enemy destroyed?

No thats not a distortion. Therefore it is completely reasonable to suggest the US contributed 80% of the allied military endeavors. And that is actually being generous to the rest of the allies who were COMPLETELY dependent on the US for fuel, vehicles, ammunition, clothes, food, and many other supplies that were essential to them surviving agains the Axis juggernaut.

The US DID do almost ALL of the work in WWII in absolute terms. I'm not saying that the US tried the hardest, I'm not saying that the other allies did NOTHING.

But I am saying what is the pure and simple truth that in REALITY, the US was the single largest factor to allied victory in WWII in every aspect. The US lead the allied advance in Europe and contributed the majority of troops on the western front. Ater the defeat of the Africa corps, the US contributed slightly more combat power in the mediteranean and in Italy as the rest of the allies.

Then the US single handedly liberated Asia and defeated the Japanese navy and army.

Meanwhile Russia only fought on the eastern front in Europe, didn't fight the Japanese or the Italians. And Britain only fought in the mediteranean, Africa, and Western Europe.

So compare that to the US who fought in EVERY theatre, and supplied the REST of the allies simultaneously.

Its simple logic. Its not politically correct or sensitive to British feelings but oh well.

What country doesnt have dark parts,
You keep saying Europe are scum with our imperialistic ways and our fighting with each other.
As soon as america became independent you had wars with your bordering countrys and started colonising smaller places. Anyway america is european

Yet Canada and Mexico exist today not from being able to defend themselves from the US, but because the US has mercy and isn't imperialistic. If the Britain of 1945 had the power and situation that the US of 1945 had, they would have inherently invaded, conquered, subjugated and opressed as they had in every similar circumstance in their national history.

And you are disrespecting British soldiers because you keep saying how shit they were an how shit they did.

British soldiers weren't shit, but their leaders and their countries ability to supply them and lead them was shit.

The Nazi's overwelmed the british forces in france,. It doesnt make them rubbish or inferior to American. I expect america would of been, I mean Hitler nearly managed to do it a second time to the allies. Once the Russians and Americans joined the war, The allies had more power. And could spread there forces.

Even though the US repelled 15 German Divisions at the Battle of the Bulge, which was more numerous than the Blitzkireig force that attacked both France, Poland, and Russia at earlier stage of the war.

And and British leaders werent imcopetent in WW2, they were in WW1 but in world war 2 they were actually tacticaly superior than americans it's just they didnt have the numbers.,

Thats a laugh. When Montgomery took command of British, French and US forces during Operation Market Garden it was a COMPLETE and utter failure. From there onward the allies agreed to keep US commanders in control to prevent such catastrophe form taking place again.

And form then onward every single major US-led operaton was a success? And you think that British commanders were superior? Hah!

But once america an russia joined the allies could use Sheer Brute force. And More american style tatctics of Crussing a Nut with a sledge hammer.

The Russians only fought (with American aide) on the easter front in Europe against the Germans ONLY . The US did the most in every theatre except North Africa, while simultaneously supplying the rest of the allies.

The US led the allies to victory, and rebuilt the allies and the Germans and Japanese afterward.

Therefore the US did the most, by a long shot. More than the rest of the allies combined not only in terms of numbers, but in terms of significance and scope of actually rebuilding the aggressor countries, and yet not taking them over but giving them democracy and forgiving their debts.

Hell, if the US didn't forgive your country's debt I read, that in modern USD after adjustment for inflation and factoring in interest, your country would owe the US tens of trillions of dollars. Many more times than your country's yearly income.

But hey, who can put a price on saving your country's ass? Right. Well the US decided to allow your country to live without debt, and now your country is prosperous due to the mercy of my country.

Then you have the audacity, after all things considered, to actually suggest the US didn't do the majority of the work in WWII and the events thereafter?

Typical living, breathing, contradiction to your own British existence.

Everyone in the world will tell you america distorts history more than anyother country, I expect some down to earth americans will tell you as well.

Thats a laugh. These are probably the same people who suggest the US is an evil, imperialistc, zionest-controlled nation hell bent on world domination. Even after the US had multiple opportunities to completely take over the world, to subjegate nations, yet never received a dime from any of those countries, gave them freedom, then only asked for a place to bury dead American soldiers in return.

Frankly I don't care what "the world" thinks about my country. Because I've been all around the world, and I've seen how their societies function, and such nonsense doesn't surprise me.

There is an irrational bias against the US in the world, stemming from jealousy, intimidation, and fear. I've had first hand experiences with blatant lies in media around the world. I went to france and saw a show on the news about US Apache helicopters supposedly shooting innocent men. But the french media intentionally left out the footage that showed those same men carrying RPGs and hiding them in a field.

They also left out the footage of US ground troops that moved in on the position after the insurgents were killed and found bomb making equipment, and videotapes of beheadings.

Such is the mainstay of the media of "the world" so for them to suggest that the US distorts history an our media...well thats called hypocrisy, and thats the reason why I don't give a FLYING FUCK about what "the world" thinks about my country.

---

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0891527/

It says in the plot summary:

"A platoon of U.S. soldiers are stationed in Afghanistan."

---

WWII REMIX!!! at least it's tom cruise,quit yer bitch'n

---

They did the same with the Enigma code breaking machine film too.

---

wth? wait...its battle of....britain....starring tom cruise who is...american.... double-you-tee-eff mate?

---

God Cellardoor6 is like some stuck record.

The film is not about war loans. It is about Tom Cruise and his merry American pilot buddies playing Hero in the Battle of Britain, in lets guess Spitfires or Hurricanes (UK planes) and shooting down Germans.

The fact that no American pilot had a confirmed kill in that battle doesn't bother you? I guess not. You'd rather link anything you can to your views, an example being war loans.

Well guess what I can play that game as well. You wouldn't even be a country without people like the UK kicking their own people out to send over there! pSHspshsh. Let's all link non relevant history in big long lines.

---

Oh and also your large post above. Knock the rubbish off, even me, a poor Chinese Educated idiot knows that although the US won the War in the Pacific and defeated Japan it was very very late in Europe and the UK was instrumental in keeping the German fleet stuck at port. It was also the UK if I remember who invented Sonar? I could be wrong on this, but didn't we invent the thing that allowed you guys to stop U-Boats as much.

Oh and congratulations for forgetting that the Nationalists and Communists in China united and stopped fighting each other. Then with US help they drove large swathes of Japanese back.

GOD. Leave history ALONE. Gah, one of my biggest hates, when my Government tries to re-write history. We're not taught the Nationalists helped us during WW2, but they DID.

---

Chinese killed the magority of Japanese and Russians killed the far far magority of axis.

I know kills aren't the most important factor, But it just shows how biased an wrong Cellardoor is.

As for Land gain.
Eastern Europe -russia
Western europe - mostly america although huge amounts from Britain an Canada. The western front really was an allied effort.
Africa - gained by mostly Britain
Middle east mostly Britain
Pacific Moslty american!

Control of the sea was equall britain an america, i'd probably say more britain but i'm not completely sure. allthough Pacific was mainly american.
Also Air forces played an absolutely crucial part of WW2, And the RAF were the Biggest an Best airforce in most theaters.

US were huge in the war. They were Crucial, but so was Russia an the UK.

The biggest thing the US did was supplying.
America put something like 250 Billion into the war, were as the UK and France each put 100billion. Americans put in about 20% of the allied costs.

You make me laugh cellardoor6, you call anyone from every other country who dont agree with you Biased anti-americans or idiots. and if one of your own countrymen disagree you tell them to fuck of to Canada.

---

Tom Cruise likes fucking with history.

Last Samurai.

---

At 12/8/06 10:10 AM, PinkBeer wrote: cellardoor6 is a prime example of what americans teach their children- utter BS.

Give him some credit, he's right that America financed WW2 and American convoys provided men and machines to the UK. The UK didn't finish war loan repayment to around 2000.

---

That is really fucking you off? It's gay?

---

Who cares. Two of the main characters in The Patriot were Australian, fighting as Americans in the Revolutionary War. Nobody cared.

---

Braveheart was even changed. I think the makers wanted to make it look better.

The Scots didn't moon the English. That would be suicide.
There was no blue and white facepaint.
It was filmed in Ireland for fuck sake >:(
The battle of Stirling should've had a bridge.

Damn Americans. Still though, before the film, loads of people didn't even know who William Wallace was.

---

At 12/8/06 08:13 AM, cellardoor6 wrote:

At 12/8/06 07:30 AM, zzzzd wrote:

At 12/8/06 06:09 AM, CrimsonEdge wrote:

How pissed of with you if a British film was made with the royal marines raising a British flag at Iwo Jima??? you'd be pissed of.

Thats not comparable to having a movie of what US pilots did in the battle of Britain because US pilots ACTUALLY FOUGHT in the Battle of Britain.

No Brits were on Iwo Jima, let alone even in the fucking pacific.

Alright then how about a handfull of super good guy Brits win the battle of the Bulge cause all the imcompetent americans are cowardling away. You'd be pissed of.
And there were alot more british at the Bulge than there were americans at the battle of britain.

Also about the war lend-lease watever. It was canceled at the end of the war. And all the european countries are still paying back for the US help in the rebuilding of europe.
I think Britain has just finished this year.

---

At 12/8/06 10:15 AM, SeaJeigh wrote: Who cares. Two of the main characters in The Patriot were Australian, fighting as Americans in the Revolutionary War. Nobody cared.

Yes But the Patriots based on an american victory even so that film was stupidy inaccurate.
The Red Coats were fuckin Scummy cunts but they never locked anyone up in a church an burnt it down. lol! . In many world war films America has actually rewritten history puttin americans in other peoples shoes.

---

At 12/8/06 10:18 AM, Krum wrote: Braveheart was even changed. I think the makers wanted to make it look better.

The Scots didn't moon the English. That would be suicide.
There was no blue and white facepaint.
It was filmed in Ireland for fuck sake >:(
The battle of Stirling should've had a bridge.

Damn Americans. Still though, before the film, loads of people didn't even know who William Wallace was.

now they know he was an aussie. lol

Also the Scots at that point were well organised armys, not barbarian rabbles.
and there were many more raids an rapings on england by scotland than vice versa. They also didnt point out very well that Scotland did actually win its independence in the end!
shit film apart from the battle scenes.

---

Wait, let me get this straight. Somebody is making a movie that's not 100% accurate? Impossible...

I'm more suprised that you guys are actualy upset about this. Seriously, you would think this is the first time anything like this has ever happened.

---

i think it'd be interesting to see a nazi victory. purely out of curiousity.

---

At 12/8/06 12:43 PM, Fyndir wrote: Well done, aren't you just special?

Now run along and enjoy stealing other people's history because you're just a kid of a country, the grown ups are talking.

Thanks for confirming the Sonar thing. Did the UK also invent Radar? *_*

---

Ah well. Up to 160,000 Irish men died fighting for Britian during World War one. Was a movie ever made about them?

---

England sucks anyway, get over it.

Also America, but at least it's fun to go on holiday there!

---

And judging by the brainwashed, media-ass-kissing children of today, they'll actually think it's what happened.

Why is it every WW2 movie follows the Americans? The British charged Normandy as well ffs!

---

Shut up the whole lot of you. Jesus fucking christ what a bunch of whiny cock sucking pieces of shit you all are.

"My country is better then yours" you say.... like a bunch of retarded school children arguing on the monkey bars about who's dad can kick who's dads ass. Fucking morons all of you. Fuck you guys make me want to vomit in a bucket of my own shit and drown myself in it.

You're political views mean shit. Half of you are too young to do anything about it and the rest of you are too stupid to realize that the entire United States isn't going to just magically change it's ways, impeach their president, and ask a forigne country their permission before making a harmless movie. Nothing you do or say here means shit to anyone so stop acting like anybody cares. I hope every single one become paralized

---

At 12/8/06 01:20 PM, simple-but-sandy wrote: accept
Domination and spelling are one and the same, you can't have one without the other.

Did you just correct me?

Head to Gitmo!

---

LOL silly americans.

I mean, you can give them some credit, but come on. Then again, you've got to remember, dear Uncle Sam has a very sensitive ego. Americans go ape shit every time we canadians dearly remind them that we (well, we were still British, I guess) RAPED their army that tried to invade Quebec during the revolution.

Over all, this is a sad move for hollywood. They are going to make is seem like the British are a bunch of dolts, (as well as the other commonwealth pilots) and that the americans saved the day...

---

At 12/8/06 12:56 PM, Fyndir wrote:

At 12/8/06 12:45 PM, HandsomeJake wrote: i think it'd be interesting to see a nazi victory. purely out of curiousity.

There's a Philip K. Dick book about just that.

Here it is.

It's a good book, well worth reading. =)

another book?!?! but i just read one 6 months ago... :/ ah, guess i'll look at my library

---

So what cellardoor is basically getting at is......
"We can make a film about the battle of britain being won by yankee supermen, because my country did more than yours in World War 2"

Sounds fair to me

---

I'm not wading through the best part of this thread...

Someone summarise what the general consensus is - Lying about history for the sake of appeasing a load of brain dead nationalists; Good or bad?

---

I agree with you 100%.
I'm from N.Ireland, and American movie makers thinks they can just make fucking films about the troubles.
Britain should make a film about how shit america was in vietnam.
(no offense to Americans in general, i know like 5 Americans decide to make these movies)

---

At 12/8/06 10:14 AM, Sarai wrote:

At 12/8/06 10:10 AM, PinkBeer wrote: cellardoor6 is a prime example of what americans teach their children- utter BS.

Give him some credit, he's right that America financed WW2 and American convoys provided men and machines to the UK. The UK didn't finish war loan repayment to around 2000.

People like cellar don't get enough credit, IMHO.

People (read: kids) attack him with foundations based on flawed facts, trollish opinions and general generic insults. Someone at least tease him on an intellectual level if you're gunna get your feet wet.

He's tired of people pissing on something he (rightfully) takes pride in. Can you, of all people, fault him for that?