Doppleganger said:
JEA said:
Of course this will win them the war, just like Vietnam, Grenada, Somalia etc. Oh, and don't forget, they "saved our asses" in WWII by beating the Nazi's single handed.
The Americans have a different way of doing some things and I'm not gonna go into the merits or lack thereof compared to what the British would do.
However, you would do well to remember that the Americans aided the Soviets hugely with the Lend-Lease program that literally allowed the Red Army to recover after 1941, not to mention the material they supplied to ourselves. It's gotta be pointed out that the US were not duty bound to get involved in the War in Europe in either World War but they did so recognising that the threat of Germany (especially in WW2) had to be stopped.
So while the Americans did not beat the Nazi's singlehandedly they did more to ensure that victory than any other country aside from the Soviet Union.
As far as the UK is concerned though they DID save our asses as by now we would be either speaking German or Russian.
Given that, would you rather they had just stayed on the North American continent and did nothing? :roll:
This is completely incorrect and unfortunately typical of USA lack of facts and understanding.
The Reds used less than 5% lend lease equipment, 95% their own manufacture. They destroyed over 75% of the total German forces.
Then after Berlin they were to turn East to Japan, fearing they were going toward the US Japan was hurriedly nuked, even though they were negotiating surrender and those in the know didn't want nukes used.
If you compare D-Day with the Russian advance in the East at around that time it makes D-Day look disorganised, petty and insignificant. Go on look it up compare the figures (enemy ratio, ground taken etc etc). The truth is the US only got more involved at this late stage to stop the Reds taking all of Europe.
If the Allies treated the Reds better there would have been nothing to fear. As you know the Allied Yalta agreements were repeatedly broken by the US, costing the Reds millions of lives, MILLIONS! The US president even said "the more of them that die the better", how do you think that'd make your signed 'ally' feel?
And they completely bodged the surrender terms leaving Japan unaccoutable for thousands of murders, rapes, tortures and indescribable acts. The US on behalf of the world accepted a whopping $20 compensation for the slave labourers, rape / comfort women etc etc. I am sure had the surrender been negotiated by an appropriate Allied grouping Japan would still be paying now, just like Germany.
Whenever the US is in charge the war is lost. Sure some battles may be won. This is of course excepting the Iraqis, 90% of which ran. Even gulf war 1 was a bitter victory with an inquiry held into the slaughter of the 5th column who had essentially surrendered and were driving home. Iraq is not won yet, being in the know you will realise this has all been done before in Iraq, dictator disposed etc (1921), within 20ish years it was back to 'tribal' dictatorship.
So far as I'm concerned the US should just keep away from international conflicts.
Lazza. :idea:
