Later we sent hundreds of thousands of American boys to die on their soil so they could be free from the Germans and we did it twice. Never received so much as a thank you note and to make matters worse, we still have to pay rent on the land our boys are burried under in France! RENT!! They saved them from imperial domination and paid with their lives and WE HAVE TO PAY RENT!
If we didn’t go over there, you would not be posting on this board as you would be in Russia without the ability to immigrate over here. You better be more respectful of WWII and the American contribution instead of blind ignorant tirad’s against France.
If America didn’t go over there I’d still be here. Russia would have still won the war, but France would have been like Lithuania or Bylorussia, namely, a puppet government of the Socialists.
After all, who, exactly, was it that invaded Berlin? Oh yea! Stalin’s forces, that’s right. Who fought the German’s single handedly on his front? Oh yea, Stalin did! Who needed 3 countries to hold the Germans at bay long enough for Russia to win the war? Oh yea, France Brition and America….you see where I’m going with this right?
Although, I do believe General George S. Patton did have the right idea back in the 1940s. You should have removed Stalin from power and avoided the Cold War all together instead of having to wait for President Ronald Reagan to end it for you.
Later we sent hundreds of thousands of American boys to die on their soil so they could be free from the Germans and we did it twice. Never received so much as a thank you note
If you had ever seen footage from WW2 of the liberation of Paris, you’d know exactly how much crap this is. Nothing but verbal diarreah.
After all, who, exactly, was it that invaded Berlin?
If the US doesn’t enter the war, there is no one for Hitler to fight in the entire Euro theather, so put double as a real safe estimate of the number of German forces in the Battle of Stalingrad and you have Russia losing it instead of the turn of the tide of the war.
After all, who, exactly, was it that invaded Berlin? Oh yea! Stalin’s forces, that’s right. Who fought the German’s single handedly on his front? Oh yea, Stalin did! Who needed 3 countries to hold the Germans at bay long enough for Russia to win the war? Oh yea, France Brition and America….you see where I’m going with this right?
More crap. The allies agreed to let Stalin’s Russia take Berlin. Who was it that sent a massive amount of food, weapons and equipment to Russia so they could lay the hammer down on the Germans? oh ya the Allies.
I see where you going with this……right down the crapper.
…Do we have any interest (other than “humanitarian”) with these countries? No on both accounts, so screw em. Not our problem. These people are unappreciative at best, our enemies at worst and they are owed nothing from us.
Personally, I’d say stop sending the money. Wait for them to dare rip the carcases from the ground and then “nuke” the bastards into the stone age.
Yeah …
i know why there are so many “anti-american” people out there.
First off, the allies “let Stalin” take Berlin because they couldnt stop him. Patton tried his best and failed to get there. Monty tried his best and failed to get there.
Secondly, no US in WWII does not drop the entire front. What, is the US army the entirety of the war effort? I don’t think so. Germany would have had to keep almost as many men there to keep the territories conquered AND be ready to repell British invasions should they ever occur. All the US did was speed things up a little bit (maybe 3-5 years.)
Secondly, the French people were appreciative during the time of the liberation. Afterwards not so much. The government, on the other hand, never - to my knowledge, though maybe it was so trivial it wasn’t recorded anywhere - thanked us for liberating and restoring them. Nor did their infamous leader ever once show anything but hostility to Eisenhower and Churchill, again to my knowledge from books, documentaries and actual live footage shown to me.
http://www.ambafrance-us.org/news/statmnts/2000/ww2/index.asp
That took two seconds to look up on google and I am sure there are many more, but since they are not noteworthy I guess you don’t recognize them.
Remember we landed forces in France as Germany had rolled all the way over to the coast? If we don’t get involved Germany has alot more reasources available to work on the Eastern front. The US was not the only force present but if D-Day never happened and we never secured a way to get aground for the rest of the countries with that many troops, Russia falls sweety. To re-enforce this, and I apologize for using liberal media source:
http://www.486th.org/Photos/Misc/stats.htm
You figure we had probably 40% of our total troop count on the ground in Europe, so that is like what, 6 and a half million troops. Plus without the Normandy landing ( and I am not discrediting any nation here ) I dont’ think the pooled resources of the rest of the allied nations could have secured that or any other coastal landing point to begin a staging area.
http://www.ambafrance-us.org/news/statmnts/2000/ww2/index.asp
That took two seconds to look up on google and I am sure there are many more, but since they are not noteworthy I guess you don’t recognize them.
Remember we landed forces in France as Germany had rolled all the way over to the coast? If we don’t get involved Germany has alot more reasources available to work on the Eastern front. The US was not the only force present but if D-Day never happened and we never secured a way to get aground for the rest of the countries with that many troops, Russia falls sweety. To re-enforce this, and I apologize for using liberal media source:
http://www.486th.org/Photos/Misc/stats.htm
You figure we had probably 40% of our total troop count on the ground in Europe, so that is like what, 6 and a half million troops. Plus without the Normandy landing ( and I am not discrediting any nation here ) I dont’ think the pooled resources of the rest of the allied nations could have secured that or any other coastal landing point to begin a staging area.
I’m not argueing that the US forces had no hand in stopping Hitler. I’m saying that they were not needed for a victory, only to speed up the victory already fated to occur.
For instance, if Russia had not been involved but had remained neutral, do you think the British and Americans would have won world war 2? Not a matter of delayed victory, I’m talking victory at all.
Also, at the time of D-Day, I believe you yankees and limeys already had a European beach head called Italy. You could have invaded up from there instead of adding another beach head in France. AKA you did’nt NEED normandy, you WANTED normandy and it cost you a lot more lives then many other engagements have cost you in past, present and possibly future engagements.
I believe you yankees and limeys
So are you suddenly a Russian again?
I believe you yankees and limeys
So are you suddenly a Russian again?
you forgot about us canucks.
The government, on the other hand, never - to my knowledge, though maybe it was so trivial it wasn’t recorded anywhere - thanked us for liberating and restoring them. Nor did their infamous leader ever once show anything but hostility to Eisenhower and Churchill, again to my knowledge from books, documentaries and actual live footage shown to me.
It is funny that you also complained about selective memory.
I have looked around and found a nice webpage. Maybe you (US’ans) are not as bad as i thought (i looked around the page and saw some things where i judged your behavior from my german attitude and based my negative picture on this judgement) :
http://www.understandfrance.org/index.html
just be assured: the world is so “anti-american” that you really should start thinking what the billions of people do wrong that they can’t understand you.
@Mr:
Later we sent hundreds of thousands of American boys to die on their soil so they could be free from the Germans and we did it twice. Never received so much as a thank you note
If you had ever seen footage from WW2 of the liberation of Paris, you’d know exactly how much crap this is. Nothing but verbal diarreah.
That was right after the liberation. It didn’t even take a decade for Degaul to start being a horse’s ass. In recent years, they have found our cemetary over there desectated with feces.
@Mr:
After all, who, exactly, was it that invaded Berlin? Oh yea! Stalin’s forces, that’s right. Who fought the German’s single handedly on his front? Oh yea, Stalin did! Who needed 3 countries to hold the Germans at bay long enough for Russia to win the war? Oh yea, France Brition and America….you see where I’m going with this right?
More crap. The allies agreed to let Stalin’s Russia take Berlin. Who was it that sent a massive amount of food, weapons and equipment to Russia so they could lay the hammer down on the Germans? oh ya the Allies.
I see where you going with this……right down the crapper.
Sure, lend lease helped. But not so much as is illustrated in our history books. I have never, ever seen a picture of Russians using one of our shermans even though we sent 1000s to them. Why? Because the sherman was a piece of crap compared to a t34, and less than crap when compared to a tiger or panther tank. Same was true with a lot of equipment we sent to them (not so much the aircraft). And don’t forget, at the pivotal year of the war (42) lend lease convoys were being decimated by U-boats.
I think the Germans could have pulled it off if they only had to fight the Russians. There were 300,000 German troops in Norway alone that could have done wonders on the Russian front (imagine 300k troops defending the flanks at stalingrad instead of the crappy Rumanian troops that were there). But Jen is def right that the Russians did most of the fighting and dying. At the end of the war 8 out of 10 Germans killed were killed on the eastern front.
That was right after the liberation. It didn’t even take a decade for Degaul to start being a horse’s a**. In recent years, they have found our cemetary over there desectated with feces.
I saw a bum take a piss all over the place right outside the Ellipse, should we go to war here with the homeless people? Besides with people like you over here screaming “screw the French” every chance you get I wonder why they hate us and would do things like that.
I’m with Zooey…tear down the Statue of Liberty, raise the walls and let the world fend for itself man, cuz it’s not our problem.
:roll:
Raise the walls and shoot anyone trying to get in. I like the statue, it’s the only thing the French have ever given us outside of grief, death and war.
Well, look at it this way. All of the help we are getting from other countries probably does not add up to a 1/10 of what we have spent on Aid to other countries. Do I live in the devestated area? No, but I bet the 10 billion good ole bush spent in Africa for aids could have built some levies or even refineries don’t you? Or been a great deal of help as far as aid to the people now.
I am talking about a matter of policy. I care very little for this “world community” BS. We should take care of our own, and other countries should take care of thier own. In the end, we would be much better off. True allies I have no problem helping. But sending $ in aid to the middle east? Unless it is Isreal or Kuwait, not one dime. The vast majority of these people hate us, and we owe them nothing.
That was right after the liberation. It didn’t even take a decade for Degaul to start being a horse’s a**. In recent years, they have found our cemetary over there desectated with feces.
I saw a bum take a piss all over the place right outside the Ellipse, should we go to war here with the homeless people? Besides with people like you over here screaming “screw the French” every chance you get I wonder why they hate us and would do things like that.
Be nice if that was just a case study, but it’s not. A poll before the invasion of Iraq done in france showed that 1/3 of the country wanted us to lose the war. Not just “don’t attack”, actualy lose to the benevolant dictator Saddam. Agree or disagree with the war, that is ok. But 1/3 of the population was rooting for Saddam. That is truly screwed up.
That was right after the liberation. It didn’t even take a decade for Degaul to start being a horse’s a**. In recent years, they have found our cemetary over there desectated with feces.
I saw a bum take a piss all over the place right outside the Ellipse, should we go to war here with the homeless people? Besides with people like you over here screaming “screw the French” every chance you get I wonder why they hate us and would do things like that.
Be nice if that was just a case study, but it’s not. A poll before the invasion of Iraq done in france showed that 1/3 of the country wanted us to lose the war. Not just “don’t attack”, actualy lose to the benevolant dictator Saddam. Agree or disagree with the war, that is ok. But 1/3 of the population was rooting for Saddam. That is truly screwed up.
not if you consider that they are not Americans, that they heard the things that Americans were saying about them for not participating in the war, and that they (and much of the world) sees Bush in the same light as SH. Furthermore - much right-wing US rhetoric sounds very much like fanatical AQ rhetoric to anyone outside of the US.
For me - i didn’t care if the US won or lost - i just didn’t want to see civilians getting killed and the country getting terrorized.
Are you suggesting that the french were very pro american before the Iraq war? I won’t even bring out the list of crap they have done. I am sure you know it. And btw, no one in Eurupe likes the French. Its not just us.
And if you want to be specific on French complaceny (and the world for that matter) just look at WW2 and how they let Hitler run away with with murder b4 1939. The war could have been avoided when Hitler made his first move. Hugely unpopular to the rest of the world (US included) but it would have been the right thing to do. The world sides against us, yep. They don’t like our policies. But Chamberlain would have gone down in history as being a Hawk if he stopped hitler from the get go. I am sure the main stay of scholars would have said he should of negotiated and not start a war. If he had declared war, it would have either been settled in a few months (because germany was not strong when he had a chance to act) or Germany would have retreated like a dog with its tail between its legs. But historians would have remembered him as the man who started a war that killed thousands. Now he is remembered as the man who did nothing and let 10s of millions die.
You can’t prove a negative. We will never know if Bush’s plan is a good one. Maybe if he did things differently we would have world peace or something to that effect. But maybe if his policies were not followed than we would of had 10 more 911s now.
@cystic:
That was right after the liberation. It didn’t even take a decade for Degaul to start being a horse’s a**. In recent years, they have found our cemetary over there desectated with feces.
I saw a bum take a piss all over the place right outside the Ellipse, should we go to war here with the homeless people? Besides with people like you over here screaming “screw the French” every chance you get I wonder why they hate us and would do things like that.
Be nice if that was just a case study, but it’s not. A poll before the invasion of Iraq done in france showed that 1/3 of the country wanted us to lose the war. Not just “don’t attack”, actualy lose to the benevolant dictator Saddam. Agree or disagree with the war, that is ok. But 1/3 of the population was rooting for Saddam. That is truly screwed up.
not if you consider that they are not Americans, that they heard the things that Americans were saying about them for not participating in the war, and that they (and much of the world) sees Bush in the same light as SH. Furthermore - much right-wing US rhetoric sounds very much like fanatical AQ rhetoric to anyone outside of the US.
For me - i didn’t care if the US won or lost - i just didn’t want to see civilians getting killed and the country getting terrorized.
I wanted to add. People die in war. Civilian and military. More civilains died in WW2 than soldiers. Is that the condition you place on declaring a war? That there be no civilian loss of life? It does not work that way. We did not want to be in the middle east because of the problems we are having with Iraq now. If we wanted to be in Iraq we could of done it in 91. It was just a hop skip and a jump to baghdad. The situation sucks, I will not argue that point at all. You’re right.
But the right thing to do is not always (actualy seldomly) the easy thing to do. Should the rev. war not have been fought because our civilians died?
It is harsh, but you need to break eggs to make an omlet. I am sure if I was one of the eggs being broken my opinion would be different. But there is a greater good.
Fair enough I.L. My point is that i disagree that the greater good needed to be accomplished this way.
Or
The balance is off. There is/was more evil than good in the world done as a result of Bush’s actions in Iraq.
Now granted - i’ll never be able to proove this, just as i do not believe that the opposite can be proven simply due to the fact that a congruent measuring stick could not likely be agreed upon.
Also - i realize that in order to make an omelet some eggs must be broken. I considered this when Canadians went into Afghanistan, and i supported this mission. The thing about Iraq was that nothing about it was right. The optics were all wrong from the beginning, and they only got worse.
anyway, this is not what my thread was originally about. At the same time, i consider it interesting that in spite of the punishments received by Bush for not joining the coalition of the willing, and for being considered fair-weather-allies by many (including people of this board) and having our cars targeted by vandals in US shopping mall parking lots for not going into Iraq, we still top the list of countries who support the US right now. I am glad that we are doing it. It is the most humane and Christian response (returning good for evil) in this situation.
