What are the best friends of your country?

Discussion in 'General Chat' started by ernest, Feb 21, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. drizzt3117

    drizzt3117 Senior member

    Messages:
    13,141
    Likes Received:
    10
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    I'm not downplaying the importance of the Russians, but they wouldn't have succeded without US assistance, that much is certain.
     


  2. nightowl6261a

    nightowl6261a Senior member

    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Location:
    Atlanta
    Bravo, nothing is better than the overview of things, thanks Drizzz, will be visiting the hallowed grounds in Sept.
     


  3. ernest

    ernest Senior member

    Messages:
    2,564
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Location:
    PARIS
    (ernest @ Feb. 25 2005,14:27) They prefer bombing from boats 5000km away from their enemy like in Serbia.... Less spooky. Â Of course, a real war (face to face on the ground) would make more deads than 2 buildings crashed in NYC... And what to say about bombing Japan with a A bomb? Is it a fair way of making war?
    ernest, Â Ever hear the expression all is fair in love and war? Â To say bombing countries from cruise ships is unfair is ridiculous. Â Why is it not fair, because the country we are fighting does not have the same technology? Â You fight a war to win and you use the arsenal you have to accomplish that.
    I just think that an army which is used to fight against : - enemy from the third world (VIETNAM, IRAq) - enemy which have 25 time less people (Serbia, Cuba) - enemy on which they use an A bomb (Japan) In all cases, enemies which are 7000 km from its own country. A current army composed of Blacks/mexicans teenagers who are only considered as american during war (because whites don't need money and so don't join the army). An army who killed/injured more civilians than soldiers in his history (Indians, Japanese, Vietnam...) This type of army can not be considered as a reference in the art of war IMO. May be you consider that droping napalm bomb and A bombs from plans is something one could be proud? I do not.
     


  4. Manton

    Manton RINO Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    41,574
    Likes Received:
    2,814
    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2002
    Location:
    In Hiding
    It is, in many respects, much harder to fight an enemy so far away than it is to fight one next door.
     


  5. drizzt3117

    drizzt3117 Senior member

    Messages:
    13,141
    Likes Received:
    10
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    Oh, come off the high horse. That's as hypocritical as it gets. The US obviously didn't target the civilians that were killed, and this coming from a country that deported ITS OWN CITIZENS to death camps. Obviously collateral damage was lower by French forces because for the last 200 years (outside of Algeria and the Suez affair) all of their wars were fought on their own territory) and it wouldn't do to kill their own citizens (unless they were Jewish)
     


  6. ernest

    ernest Senior member

    Messages:
    2,564
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Location:
    PARIS
    You are in fact . As you sumps up the war to the US troops which arrived 4 years later everybody in Europe.......

    It is easy to make bomb, tanks and training of soldiers for
    4 years when other are fighting 6000km away and arrived to finish the work against an injured enemy like Germany.

    And even when they arrived, US were not alone to fight, French, UK, Serbians, Russians, who started 4 years later, were still going on fighting....

    The only Nations which really could give lessons for WW2 = UK, Russia and Serbia.
     


  7. nightowl6261a

    nightowl6261a Senior member

    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Location:
    Atlanta
    and further more ernest, as you are finger pointing at the US for killing inocent citizens, what exactly would you call what the Germans did, were the jews not citizens, our bombs did not kill 6 million jews, 2 million catholics and gypsies, what is your argument?
     


  8. Manton

    Manton RINO Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    41,574
    Likes Received:
    2,814
    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2002
    Location:
    In Hiding
    Ernest, if American participation in the war was inconsequential to the Russians, then why was Stalin's #1 preoccupation, from 1942 through D-Day, the opening of a second front in the west?
     


  9. ernest

    ernest Senior member

    Messages:
    2,564
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Location:
    PARIS
    (ernest @ Feb. 25 2005,15:33) US arrived at the end of the war and didn't lost many soldiers in this war.
    The United States lost 496,000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines in the war. Â How many did France lose?
    French didn't fight so much. This is a fact. But war didn't sum up to US and France... Serbia lost more soldiers than US . I don't even talk about Russia, you would be too ridiculious.
     


  10. drizzt3117

    drizzt3117 Senior member

    Messages:
    13,141
    Likes Received:
    10
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    I will agree with the UK and Russia, they were major players, but they still would have lost the war if it weren't for American intervention, and no argument you can ever make will change this fact. Serbia/Yugoslavia was incidental to the war.
     


  11. Manton

    Manton RINO Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    41,574
    Likes Received:
    2,814
    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2002
    Location:
    In Hiding
    Another question, Ernest (just curious.): do you think Europre would have been better off -- do you think France would have been better off -- had the Red Army "liberated" Europe from the Vistula all the way to the Bay of Biscay?
     


  12. ernest

    ernest Senior member

    Messages:
    2,564
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Location:
    PARIS
    (ernest @ Feb. 25 2005,15:58) In all cases, enemies which are 7000 km from its own country.
    It is, in many respects, much harder to fight an enemy so far away than it is to fight one next door.
    I think it is more easy to fight Vietnam than Germany. If US have had a border with Germany, they would have been invaded like all european countries did...
     


  13. nightowl6261a

    nightowl6261a Senior member

    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Location:
    Atlanta
    (Manton @ Feb. 25 2005,22:00)
    In all cases, enemies which are 7000 km from its own country.
    It is, in many respects, much harder to fight an enemy so far away than it is to fight one next door.
    I think it is more easy to fight Vietnam than Germany. If US have had a border with Germany, they would have been invaded like all european countries did...
    Say what?
     


  14. Manton

    Manton RINO Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    41,574
    Likes Received:
    2,814
    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2002
    Location:
    In Hiding
    And yet we lost in Vietnam, but we beat Germany.

    (Lest anyone think I am denigrating the performance of the US Armed forces in Vietnam, I assure you that I am not. Let's just say that I have my differences with the Johnson and Nixon Adminstrations.)
     


  15. drizzt3117

    drizzt3117 Senior member

    Messages:
    13,141
    Likes Received:
    10
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    Also, if you look at the history books:

    German declaration of war against United States, including unrestricted submarine warfare: December 11, 1941

    Start of Operation Barbarossa: June 22, 1941

    Russia was fighting against Germany a whole five months longer than the US was.
     


Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by