At 3/10/06 07:21 PM, DarkTails100 wrote: Im from England and alot of people on NG hate us,why?

Patriotism.
They think they're the best.
Rednecks. Ignore them.

At 4/1/06 04:23 AM, doug05257 wrote:
America did save your ass. I am concluding my second semester of World War 2 studies, and it is blatantly obvious that without American intervention in the form of materials, troops, and inventions, Britain would not have been able to repel the Nazis.

Britain was fighting a war on their own turf. Their country was being bombed day and night by the Luftwaffe, even though the RAF supposedly possessed greater might. Britain was on the defensive, not the offensive. Without the new, fresh ally of the United States, all of Britain would have been conquered along with the rest of Europe.

What would you describe the actions of America if America had joined the war in the very first beginning years? If you describe America as saving Britain's ass by coming in the war the last few years, would coming in during the beginning of the countrydescribe America as the most heroic country of the war?

You are just making America sound more glorious by saying that we just came in the last minute to save Britain's asses. Canadian troops fought in the war from near the beginning. What if Canada didn't fight until the last year or so and if America fought from the beginning, the aid from America was not enough. Would you say that Canada have saved Britain's asses?

America could have helped in the beginning, or at least try to do something to prevent the war in the first place (this responsibility does not fall solely on America of course, other countries could have done something too). Coming in at the last minute is the most minimal thing to do during the war.

Sure without America's help, Nazi Germany probably could have conquered Europe. But say if Britain was ignored by Nazi Germany and Britain did not care about what was going on in the rest of Europe, Europe would be under the control of Nazi Germany today, no matter how much help America would have given in the war.

At 4/1/06 04:23 AM, doug05257 wrote:

At 4/1/06 03:51 AM, Wombat333 wrote: You think you saved us in ww1 and 2 but you were only in it for two years at the begining. You just take all the credit.

Fuck you all.

America did save your ass. I am concluding my second semester of World War 2 studies, and it is blatantly obvious that without American intervention in the form of materials, troops, and inventions, Britain would not have been able to repel the Nazis.

Well actually the British would've been able to repel a German invasion. Any invasion wouldve been caught in between our defense forces and the Royal Navy and subsequently been eliminated. I conclude this after 4 semesters of talking about world war II

At 3/10/06 07:21 PM, DarkTails100 wrote: Im from England and alot of people on NG hate us,why?

I think American people are fascinated with England - why else would they spend so much time commandeering so much of English culture - eg: celebrities moving there; anyone with an English accent being swooned over; Harry Potter; etc. Look at advertising, TV, movies, and you will see that England is everywhere in America. So if imitation is the best form of flattery, I would say Americans are mad for England and anything English.

Why can't we all just get along?

Well actually the British would've been able to repel a German invasion. Any invasion wouldve been caught in between our defense forces and the Royal Navy and subsequently been eliminated. I conclude this after 4 semesters of talking about world war II

mmmmmmm not so sure, i mean germany was pretty tough and had just conquered like most of europe, but we probably would have beaten them, its just japan........... and also if america hadnt 'intervened' then germany would have won the race to create the atomic bomb. Ouch. I wouldnt have any hair.

At 3/10/06 07:21 PM, DarkTails100 wrote: Im from England and alot of people on NG hate us,why?

I don't think anyone here really hates you. Other nations may because of past actions by the British Empire but here in the US we use the British stereotypes as more of jokes and such.

What would you describe the actions of America if America had joined the war in the very first beginning years? If you describe America as saving Britain's ass by coming in the war the last few years, would coming in during the beginning of the countrydescribe America as the most heroic country of the war?

First of all, there's a huge difference between the truth about American support and the very subjective opinion about "heroics" in battle.

I've watched a TON of old war films, war movies, documentaries, and stuff on WWII veterans, and I've YET to hear one of them call themselves heroes.

It's usually the exact opposite. I think in Band of Brothers or a History Channel special on Big Easy says, "don't call us heroes. We did our jobs, nothing more. The real heroes were the ones who didn't come back."

It shouldn't even be debatable whether America was a major help or not during WWII. Fact is we were helping all the way through, from supplies to active military involvement. Heroism has nothing to do with that......

Canadian troops fought in the war from near the beginning.

Canada's involvement was important but not crucial. We gave them their own beach, and that's what they could do........ We had a FIVE million man army at the peak of WWII, are you serious in telling me Canada somehow was more involved?

America could have helped in the beginning, or at least try to do something to prevent the war in the first place

We did, we sent numerous supplies to Britain. And we did try to prevent it, and settled to stay the hell out of it instead. FRANCE could have done more to stop it, instead Rommel's "Ghost Division" took less than a month to ransack the whole place.......REAL effective they were at stopping Hitler. And once Hitler had France, you REALLY think he would have listened to a little US president bitching at him to stop? How would you propose we stop a man who just took Poland, Belgium, the Low Countries, France, and trashed a British army in less than a year? Ask him sternly over coffee and cake?

Your knowledge of history is really lacking here, stay in school.........

Well actually the British would've been able to repel a German invasion. Any invasion wouldve been caught in between our defense forces and the Royal Navy and subsequently been eliminated. I conclude this after 4 semesters of talking about world war II

The Royal Navy was only stopping the Germans from directly invading your shores. Without the Royal Navy, yeah, you'd really have gotten your asses kicked. Lucky for you, German troops were surprised at how easily they took France, and were not prepared to cross the Channel and take Britain at the most optimal point - right after France's defeat. However, repelling the invasion was out of the question. Your forces could barely hold the Germans at bay, no way in ten hells would they have actually been beaten back to Germany by Britain alone. (Oh yeah, and Canada's measly five million men. You happy now, shermanator?)
-------
What would you describe the actions of America if America had joined the war in the very first beginning years? ...would coming in during the beginning of the countrydescribe America as the most heroic country of the war?
-------

Of course, every country had its heroes. However, if America had ignored it's own wartime isolation policy (which is no longer in effect, by the way) and jumped right into the war, the entire war would have been much different. I'm not going to guess what would have happened then, because there are way too many variables to consider.

------
But say if Britain was ignored by Nazi Germany and Britain did not care about what was going on in the rest of Europe, Europe would be under the control of Nazi Germany today, no matter how much help America would have given in the war.
------
No way would Hitler just have ignored Britain. You are forgetting everything that he stood for.
Total. Aryan. Domination. Etcetera.

If Hitler had taken Britain, all that stood in his way of conquering the rest of the world was the Red army, had Japan not attacked America. And with a little more calculation and planning, Hitler could've won that battle as well. And then, what is left that could pose a serious threat to him? Only Australia and the US. Maybe China, if they were lucky.

Oh yeah. And canada's mighty military.

what about if you reverse it. do you think you could of won without britain?

At 4/3/06 02:24 AM, doug05257 wrote: The Royal Navy was only stopping the Germans from directly invading your shores. Without the Royal Navy, yeah, you'd really have gotten your asses kicked. Lucky for you, German troops were surprised at how easily they took France, and were not prepared to cross the Channel and take Britain at the most optimal point - right after France's defeat. However, repelling the invasion was out of the question. Your forces could barely hold the Germans at bay, no way in ten hells would they have actually been beaten back to Germany by Britain alone. (Oh yeah, and Canada's measly five million men. You happy now, shermanator?)

No the Royal Navy would've been able to help once the Germans had invaded. Invading Britain would've been no where near as easy as invading France. In a recent war games experiement, British forces crushed German invaders in between them and the Royal Navy on the shores 9 out of 10 times. Now I am not saying we could have won the war on our own, but I think you underestimate the strength we had at the time to defend ourselves.

Nothing can be prooved in any case, since we won the Battle of Britain and the invasion was cancelled.

At 4/3/06 09:26 AM, lenf wrote: what about if you reverse it. do you think you could of won without britain?

The US and Russia could've won it together

The US and Britain couldn't have won it without Russia

In my opinion, the US wouldn't have been able to win it on its own

At 4/2/06 10:41 PM, Imperator wrote: It's usually the exact opposite. I think in Band of Brothers or a History Channel special on Big Easy says, "don't call us heroes. We did our jobs, nothing more. The real heroes were the ones who didn't come back."

Band of Brothers was amazing, made better with the realisation that it was all true. The contribution of our American cousins in that war should be saluted forever, without question in my view. But for some of you its too hard to swallow your pride.

But for some of you its too hard to swallow your pride.

Correct.
It's good to have national pride and patriotism, it isn't good to have an ego and ignorance.....
Unfortunately that's 95% of posters thus far...........

I really don't see how people actually think in the ways they do.......

An island country badly shot up after WWI, barely scratching through and surviving, finally uttering a "we ain't done yet ASS!" at Germany during Battle of Britain. I just don't see how US help was somehow a non-factor, and how it can be even viewed that way.......

By 1945 we had a few MILLION in France and Germany, you people seriously think any other country, after taking a punding already, could seriously pick up that slack?

You can admit that the US helped your asses and STILL have national pride you know..........

After all, the Brits are world famous for rugged infantry tenacity..........

I am admitting the US helped and I know you're not saying this but, some people do think it was just america. All I'm saying is that there were other countries and you could say the same thing about them, ahd they not been there, then the war would be lost.

At 4/3/06 04:13 PM, lenf wrote: I am admitting the US helped and I know you're not saying this but, some people do think it was just america. All I'm saying is that there were other countries and you could say the same thing about them, ahd they not been there, then the war would be lost.

That's right, without the french Britain would have fallen. Fuck those Americans, they didn't do shit. God bless the froggies.

At 4/2/06 09:26 AM, The_Reveiw_man wrote:

At 4/1/06 03:51 AM, Wombat333 wrote: You think you saved us in ww1 and 2 but you were only in it for two years at the begining. You just take all the credit.

Fuck you all.

um...... well in ww1 The Americans didnt do much and we could have won easily

Hell no, with Russia suffering casualties and Nicholas eventually retreating from Russia. France was totally screwed over with the Schleiffer plan, Germany's attempt at crossing Belgium, at this the British entered the war, wanting to not lose its last European ally and trying to stop Germany's interference in a nuetral nation. This turned out to be a stalemate though as trench warfare caused only several mile gains in territory per battle. Eventually gas warfare was included but it wasn't until the arrival of the Americans with fresh equipment also, that boosted French and English moral and power, eventually Italy and Austro-Hungary had left and the last central power found it self fighting 3 super powers. So to conclude no, the Americans did do a lot and it would have taken lots of more years, if not lost that war.

At 4/3/06 05:13 PM, hungapoe wrote: Hell no, with Russia suffering casualties and Nicholas eventually retreating from Russia. France was totally screwed over with the Schleiffer plan, Germany's attempt at crossing Belgium, at this the British entered the war, wanting to not lose its last European ally and trying to stop Germany's interference in a nuetral nation. This turned out to be a stalemate though as trench warfare caused only several mile gains in territory per battle. Eventually gas warfare was included but it wasn't until the arrival of the Americans with fresh equipment also, that boosted French and English moral and power, eventually Italy and Austro-Hungary had left and the last central power found it self fighting 3 super powers. So to conclude no, the Americans did do a lot and it would have taken lots of more years, if not lost that war.

Thanks for the history lesson. No really thanks, I think a few people on here need to actually open a book and read up on this subject before letting their ego's talk instead of their brains.

WWI is not a subject that should be subjected to this sort of petty squabbling though. It was a horrific war that changed nothing and in the long term, meant nothing. A complete waste

WWI is not a subject that should be subjected to this sort of petty squabbling though. It was a horrific war that changed nothing and in the long term, meant nothing. A complete waste

Its WWII.And your right,WWII was a horrible war and did mean nothing.

At 4/4/06 07:34 AM, DarkTails100 wrote:

WWI is not a subject that should be subjected to this sort of petty squabbling though. It was a horrific war that changed nothing and in the long term, meant nothing. A complete waste

Its WWII.And your right,WWII was a horrible war and did mean nothing.

Wrong again, because you don't take time to read. We were just refering to WWI. WWII did mean something, and was not a waste. What the hell is wrong with you?

To be honest I don't really know why I hate America.
Except that they make fun of us all the time even though we are the only reason they're not still Indians eating mud off the floor.

i miss london :'(

i'm american. i like U.K. a bunches.
not all of us hate france. i don't. france just minds their own business and they have their own problems to deal with instead of worrying about everyone else. seriously this whole hate france crap is overrated and annoying.

At 4/2/06 10:41 PM, Imperator wrote:
First of all, there's a huge difference between the truth about American support and the very subjective opinion about "heroics" in battle.

I've watched a TON of old war films, war movies, documentaries, and stuff on WWII veterans, and I've YET to hear one of them call themselves heroes.

I'm most talking about the people today and on this forum, like the person I'm responding too going "OMG BRITAIN, WE SAVED YOUR ASSES!"

Obviously back then, America was not like "HA HA, WE'RE HEROES!" They focused more on just being glad that the war ended, not whether or not they are heroes.

You sure are a little dense in interpreting what I meant. If I was referring to the people and soldiers back then, then I would have specifically stated that.

"If you describe America as saving Britain's ass by coming in the war the last few years, would coming in during the beginning of the countrydescribe America as the most heroic country of the war?"

I was referring to the thoughts of the person who I was talking to. Sure the second part of the sentence may not specifically state it, but I'm pretty sure it's obvious I'm addressing the point of the thoughts of the person who I'm responding too, not Americans fighting in or lived during WWII.

It's usually the exact opposite. I think in Band of Brothers or a History Channel special on Big Easy says, "don't call us heroes. We did our jobs, nothing more. The real heroes were the ones who didn't come back."

You're annoying. I'm not addressing the people back then, goddamnit. You're very good on expanding about a point I was not addressing.

It shouldn't even be debatable whether America was a major help or not during WWII. Fact is we were helping all the way through, from supplies to active military involvement. Heroism has nothing to do with that......

I don't disagree. If America had not help, Germany could have conquered Britain and the rest of Europe.

About the supplies part, I knew America was sending supplies, but it would have been a bigger help if America joined the war earlier.

Like I said before, the heroism aspect I was referring to were people's opinions saying like "OMG AMERICA WON THE WAR NOT BRITAIN!"

Canada's involvement was important but not crucial. We gave them their own beach, and that's what they could do........ We had a FIVE million man army at the peak of WWII, are you serious in telling me Canada somehow was more involved?

I'm saying that Canada had the consideracy to actually help out a whole lot earlier than America. I'm not implying that Canada were a more powerful force than America.

"Canada's involvement was important but not crucial."

And like I said in the last part of the post, if Britain did not fight in the war (or at least have a powerful army to fight in it ), Germany wouild have conquered Europe completely, even with America's help. Sure, America was a crucial factor to winning the war, but definitely not as close to how crucial the involvement of Britain and Russia fighting in the war. Canada had a smaller significance than America of course, but still they helped out early.

What do I have to do, baby you by explaining every single thought that I have? Stop jumping into conclusions and making assumptions about thoughts that I'm not addressing.

We did, we sent numerous supplies to Britain.

By helped, I meant fought. Sorry for not making it more specific. I knew that America did send supplies. But they didn't send soldiers, battalions, navy, or an air force which were a much needed factor in the war.

And we did try to prevent it, and settled to stay the hell out of it instead.

Try to prevent it how? Americans were isolationists at that time.

FRANCE could have done more to stop it, instead Rommel's "Ghost Division" took less than a month to ransack the whole place.......REAL effective they were at stopping Hitler.

I love how you did not include the part in which I said that the responsibility did not fall solely on America.

"America could have helped in the beginning, or at least try to do something to prevent the war in the first place (this responsibility does not fall solely on America of course, other countries could have done something too)."

Way to manipulate my words, asshole.

And once Hitler had France, you REALLY think he would have listened to a little US president bitching at him to stop? How would you propose we stop a man who just took Poland, Belgium, the Low Countries, France, and trashed a British army in less than a year? Ask him sternly over coffee and cake?

What? What the hell is the point of this series of questions? It really sounds like you're implying that I think America should have stayed out of the war completely other than bitch at Hitler. I really don't know how to respond to this other than:

No we should have joined and fought in the war EARLIER and help out.

But it sounds like you believe that I think we should have contributed by bitching at Hitler. Obviously we both can agree on that will accomplish nothing.

Man you sure are delirious.

Your knowledge of history is really lacking here, stay in school.........

You're knowledge of interpretting what people meant is lacking. Stay out of politcal debates....

Oh yeah, get bent too.

At 4/5/06 04:05 PM, Hermannator wrote:
Like I said before, the heroism aspect I was referring to were people's opinions saying like "OMG AMERICA WON THE WAR NOT BRITAIN!"

I want to clear something up before presumptious assholes jump all over me going "WELL BRITAIN DIDN'T WIN THE WAR BY THEMSELVES" or "BRITAIN WOULD HAVE LOST WITHOUT THE U.S.!"

I meant that America could not win the war by themselves. But also, neither could Britain or Russia or any other country. Germany was too powerful to fight against solo. I'm just saying it's ignorant to assume that a single country, whether it would be assumed the Americans or British or whatever, was the sole factor to winning the war. Involvement of all the countries altogether was the factor to winning, not a single involvement.

Man, I can't really think of anything else to clear up before I am bombarded with paragraphs of annoying crap. (Not saying that any response to me will be, just ones that presume I am thinking one way when I'm not).

Yeesh, such sensitive people.

At 4/3/06 02:24 AM, doug05257 wrote:

Well actually the British would've been able to repel a German invasion. Any invasion wouldve been caught in between our defense forces and the Royal Navy and subsequently been eliminated. I conclude this after 4 semesters of talking about world war II

The Royal Navy was only stopping the Germans from directly invading your shores. Without the Royal Navy, yeah, you'd really have gotten your asses kicked. Lucky for you, German troops were surprised at how easily they took France, and were not prepared to cross the Channel and take Britain at the most optimal point - right after France's defeat. However, repelling the invasion was out of the question. Your forces could barely hold the Germans at bay, no way in ten hells would they have actually been beaten back to Germany by Britain alone.

I agree with this part. GASP! OMFG WHAT A SURPRISE!

I'm not saying that America was weak/Britain was superior to America/Britain did not need America.

I was just saying people should assume America was the sole reason of defeating the Nazis.

Now onto referring to the bullshit.

(Oh yeah, and Canada's measly five million men. You happy now, shermanator?)

This is why people hate Americans, because of the ego of some people and contempt towards people of other nations, dipshit05257.

-------
What would you describe the actions of America if America had joined the war in the very first beginning years? ...would coming in during the beginning of the countrydescribe America as the most heroic country of the war?
-------

Of course, every country had its heroes. However, if America had ignored it's own wartime isolation policy (which is no longer in effect, by the way) and jumped right into the war, the entire war would have been much different. I'm not going to guess what would have happened then, because there are way too many variables to consider.

Hmm, yeah. But it would most likely change the views of how people would view American involvement. It would be more respectable at least.

------
But say if Britain was ignored by Nazi Germany and Britain did not care about what was going on in the rest of Europe, Europe would be under the control of Nazi Germany today, no matter how much help America would have given in the war.
------
No way would Hitler just have ignored Britain. You are forgetting everything that he stood for.
Total. Aryan. Domination. Etcetera.

True that Hitler would have attacked anyway. Ok, I describe this situation to Imperator. What if Britain had a weak force, one that was significantly weaker than their actual army. Or what if Russia did not have such a numerous population and recruitment to fight off the Nazis too? America could not handle the Nazis without the involvement Britain and Russia has provided before America joined the war.

Sure the previous situation that I described was unlikely, but you have at least addressed the point still. Just because my hypothetical question was unlikely, it does not automatically mean I have a bad point.

Or maybe you did notice I had a good point and decided to only refer to the only bad part of my statement, which is the hypothetical question. Wow what an argument! No shit hypothetical questions are unlikely. The definition of hypothetical is not necessarily true or real.

What's your next comeback now, that hypothetical does not mean "completely false" or "definitely not true"?

If Hitler had taken Britain, all that stood in his way of conquering the rest of the world was the Red army, had Japan not attacked America. And with a little more calculation and planning, Hitler could've won that battle as well. And then, what is left that could pose a serious threat to him? Only Australia and the US. Maybe China, if they were lucky.

Probably, I don't agree or disagree with this paragraph. Who knows what could have happen.

But it's stupid for Americans to be like, "We were the reason we won the war! Not Britain or Russia or any other country that was involved!" The Allies as a whole won the war. America's help was needed but America's involvement was not the sole factor in defeating the Nazis

Oh yeah. And canada's mighty military.

And America's might mighty ego.

At 4/5/06 04:50 PM, Hermannator wrote:
I was just saying people should assume America was the sole reason of defeating the Nazis.

Sorry, I meant "should NOT assume".

I'm pretty it's obvious that the sentence had the mistake. I don't have that big of an ego.

I think what Hermanator is trying to say......and not in any rambling sort of way, is that its stupid to argue today these childish arguments over a war which really meant something important back then.

I sometimes envy the Allied soldiers who fought in that war (well not the dead ones). That Great War was the defining moment of their lives and their generation. They had taken part in something that they would forever onward dfine as the most important moment in their lives.

I still think America hates England.

Because Americans are stupid and think they are the greatest, just like middle class germans

because our president is george bush

Because you stinking Brits think "foorball" is pussy footing around with a ball with your feet.

Friggin Brits. . .