Isn't it a shame that war is so difficult these days?

[Trente]

As a side note: I heard Britain and Frace invited the German chancellor to take part in D-Day 60 year anniversary.

 

Amused, yes they were, they were hell bent on leather on taking over the entire world along with Japan.

If they (the Germans) had defeated England, the next step the Japanese would have made would have been Australia, then we would have had no allies what so ever, then we would have been invaded, did you know that we had German submarines off our east coast during the war ?

How? They had no means to mount an effective attack on the US mainland. They had not attacked us before. They posed no immediate threat to us.

Once our allies were defeated, they would have the resources to do so.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Roger
Amused, yes they were, they were hell bent on leather on taking over the entire world along with Japan.

If they had defeated England, the next step the Japanese would have made would have been Australia, then we would have had no allies what so ever, then we would have been invaded, did you know that we had German submarines off our east coast during the war ?

Can German subs mount an effective attack? Nope. And the subs didn't appear until after we entered the war.

Rememeber, if you want to discuss entering the war, you cannot use events that happened after we entered the war.

Germany had not attacked us, nor had the ability to attack us.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Roger
Amused, yes they were, they were hell bent on leather on taking over the entire world along with Japan.

If they (the Germans) had defeated England, the next step the Japanese would have made would have been Australia, then we would have had no allies what so ever, then we would have been invaded, did you know that we had German submarines off our east coast during the war ?

How? They had no means to mount an effective attack on the US mainland. They had not attacked us before. They posed no immediate threat to us.

Once our allies were defeated, they would have the resources to do so.

Ah, so we were fighting because we didn't want a nation to become strong enough to attack us? Or were we fighting because our world trade partners were invaded, or in danger of being invaded?

 

They would have had the ability to attack us if they had defeated England, we were next, do you hoenstly think they would have stopped after taking over Europe ?

You are sadly mistaken if you think so.

The goal of Hitler was to create the master race, he could not do so with all the immigrants in the US, he would have invaded us for sure, remember thier mindset.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Skoorb
I was reading the latest time about D-Day and it got me thinking. When the Allies schooled Germany in WWII, there wasn't a long drawn out occupation with years of guerilla fighting afterwards. You went in, kicked some ass, and then the war is over. People KNEW when the war was over, and the rebuilding could commence. There hasn't been a conflict like that in a long time (except for the first Gulf War I suppose when Kuwait was freed). Will we even know when the Iraq war has been won?

Back in the day you had a frontline. If you moved it 3 miles, that was 3 miles you'd won. Nowadays you come in, take everything over, and then there is no frontline, because guerillas and insurgents will crop up anywhere at any time. What a pain in the ass it all is.

I'm not saying war was ever easy, but it was must have been nice knowing that when it came to an end, it really came to an end. Your enemy was in front of you and after one of you beats the other, that's it.

PS - 60 year anniversary coming up for D-Day. If you've not seen Band of Brothers yet, go rent it or buy it already!

WWII lasted for five years and tens of millions of lives. We targeted the entire population of Germany and decimated their young male population. Germany was not surrounded by terrorist nations nor was nazism supported by any (surviving) terrorist organizations.

In other words, we beat the fight out of them and they had no allies left to fight for them.

Let's put it this way, were WWII to happen today, our population would call for us to pull out after the losses in North Africa. We never would have made it to Italy, much less D-Day. There would be no support for a war against Germany, and withering support for a war against Japan.

I doubt it, we were fighting for our survival as a free country.

Germany posed no real threat to us, and had never attacked us. There would be people protesting in the streets and riots over the draft. Banners would read "THIS IS NOT OUR WAR."

Japan did attack us, however, in today's climate, the population would be calling for an end to the war after the first 1000 or so flag drapped coffins came in on a C140 and pictured in the newspapers.

Let's face it, no matter how much we are attacked, we do not have the same stomach we had back then to take casualties. We are not the same people.

I disagree. We don't have the stomach to fight wars for pure political reasons but when our survival as a country is at stake Americans will do what it takes.

Germany was not a direct threat to our survival.

Yes they were

How? They had no means to mount an effective attack on the US mainland. They had not attacked us before. They posed no immediate threat to us.

First of all after defeating the English and her allies Germany would be able to conduct an effective Blockade on our shipping.

Secondly after defeating the English and her Commonwealth they'd be able to mass troops on our Northern Border in Canana because if England and Canada were defeated Cananda would be under their rule.
Third, without the Russians and the English to worry about what would prevent them from invading Mexico (who wasn't all the unfriendly with the Nazi's) and creating a second front using Mexicans under the Command of Gerrman Generals?
Fourth with Russia under he thumb the Germans would be able to concript a Russian Army and invade our hemisphere from the Siberia

And Lastly but not least let's not forget about the Japanese. They could very well possible succeded in the Pacific with the help of Germany and launched and invasion on our West Coast.

Amused, I bet you suck at the game of Risk!

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Skoorb
I was reading the latest time about D-Day and it got me thinking. When the Allies schooled Germany in WWII, there wasn't a long drawn out occupation with years of guerilla fighting afterwards. You went in, kicked some ass, and then the war is over. People KNEW when the war was over, and the rebuilding could commence. There hasn't been a conflict like that in a long time (except for the first Gulf War I suppose when Kuwait was freed). Will we even know when the Iraq war has been won?

Back in the day you had a frontline. If you moved it 3 miles, that was 3 miles you'd won. Nowadays you come in, take everything over, and then there is no frontline, because guerillas and insurgents will crop up anywhere at any time. What a pain in the ass it all is.

I'm not saying war was ever easy, but it was must have been nice knowing that when it came to an end, it really came to an end. Your enemy was in front of you and after one of you beats the other, that's it.

PS - 60 year anniversary coming up for D-Day. If you've not seen Band of Brothers yet, go rent it or buy it already!

WWII lasted for five years and tens of millions of lives. We targeted the entire population of Germany and decimated their young male population. Germany was not surrounded by terrorist nations nor was nazism supported by any (surviving) terrorist organizations.

In other words, we beat the fight out of them and they had no allies left to fight for them.

Let's put it this way, were WWII to happen today, our population would call for us to pull out after the losses in North Africa. We never would have made it to Italy, much less D-Day. There would be no support for a war against Germany, and withering support for a war against Japan.

I doubt it, we were fighting for our survival as a free country.

Germany posed no real threat to us, and had never attacked us. There would be people protesting in the streets and riots over the draft. Banners would read "THIS IS NOT OUR WAR."

Japan did attack us, however, in today's climate, the population would be calling for an end to the war after the first 1000 or so flag drapped coffins came in on a C140 and pictured in the newspapers.

Let's face it, no matter how much we are attacked, we do not have the same stomach we had back then to take casualties. We are not the same people.

I disagree. We don't have the stomach to fight wars for pure political reasons but when our survival as a country is at stake Americans will do what it takes.

Germany was not a direct threat to our survival.

Yes they were

How? They had no means to mount an effective attack on the US mainland. They had not attacked us before. They posed no immediate threat to us.

First of all after defeating the English and her allies Germany would be able to conduct an effective Blockade on our shipping.

Secondly after defeating the English and his Commonwealth they'd be able to mass troops on our Northern Border in Canana because if England and Canada were defeated Cananda would be under their rule.
THirdly, without the Russians and the English to worry about what would prevent them from invading Mexico (who wasn't all the unfriendly with the Nazi's) and creating a second front using Mexicans under the Command of Gerrman Generals?

Canada would have simply looked to us for protection and severed ties to England if Germany had invaded England. Germany tried the Mexico thing both in WWI and II and failed both times. Mexico was not a threat.

So it boils down to our world trade was threatened. Our war with Germany was, essentially, NOT a fight for basic survival but a fight for economic interests.

 

So it boils down to our world trade was threatened. Our war with Germany was, essentially, NOT a fight for basic survival but a fight for economic interests.

So waht you are trying to tell me is that Germany would have stopped with England ?

Hitler was hell bent on taking over the world, why would he stop in Europe ?

 

[K1052]

So it boils down to our world trade was threatened. Our war with Germany was, essentially, NOT a fight for basic survival but a fight for economic interests.

Trade is every nation's lifeblood.

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Anyway, like you said they killed them all (well, most) so that was that. It's proving difficult to "kill them all" in the middle east

:disgust:

If we were to attack in Iraq like we did in WWII against germany, killing them all would be no problem. We have B-52's instead of B-17s and B-24s, and we also have overwhelming control of the airspace above Iraq. Even if we werent going all out (ie, not using nukes), a carpet bombing campaign with conventional weapons would for all intents and purposes level Najaf and Fallujah in DAYS. Lets not whitewash history. The Allies firebombing of cities killed more people than Little Boy and Fat Man killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Now, I'm not advocating that we start carpet bombing Iraq. But if we used the same strategies on Iraq as we used on Germany, but with current technology... you'd have a hard time finding an intact building in the country after 4 years of bombing.

As perspective on the effects of B-52's, let me just say that I was talking to a Vietnam vet about them, and he saw the impacts (he was on a hill) from a flight of B-52's hitting a section of the Ho Chi Minh trail. You want to talk about shock and awe... you could still hear that in his voice, 30 years later.

 

[Jzero]

I don't think being directly attacked should be the defining factor. Annexing half of Europe, on the other hand, while not a direct attack, seems like a good reason. There's a reason the US waited so long to jump in - it had to become clear that this more than some petty Eastern European squabble.

Saddam? Ho Chi Minh? Castro? Kim Il Song? These guys are/were isolationist whackos. They didn't have ostensible designs on world conquest, and even if they did they didn't have the resources to get far outside their own borders.

PS: STOP THE NESTED QUOTES! WORDS ARE BEING CUT OFF!

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Skoorb
I was reading the latest time about D-Day and it got me thinking. When the Allies schooled Germany in WWII, there wasn't a long drawn out occupation with years of guerilla fighting afterwards. You went in, kicked some ass, and then the war is over. People KNEW when the war was over, and the rebuilding could commence. There hasn't been a conflict like that in a long time (except for the first Gulf War I suppose when Kuwait was freed). Will we even know when the Iraq war has been won?

Back in the day you had a frontline. If you moved it 3 miles, that was 3 miles you'd won. Nowadays you come in, take everything over, and then there is no frontline, because guerillas and insurgents will crop up anywhere at any time. What a pain in the ass it all is.

I'm not saying war was ever easy, but it was must have been nice knowing that when it came to an end, it really came to an end. Your enemy was in front of you and after one of you beats the other, that's it.

PS - 60 year anniversary coming up for D-Day. If you've not seen Band of Brothers yet, go rent it or buy it already!

WWII lasted for five years and tens of millions of lives. We targeted the entire population of Germany and decimated their young male population. Germany was not surrounded by terrorist nations nor was nazism supported by any (surviving) terrorist organizations.

In other words, we beat the fight out of them and they had no allies left to fight for them.

Let's put it this way, were WWII to happen today, our population would call for us to pull out after the losses in North Africa. We never would have made it to Italy, much less D-Day. There would be no support for a war against Germany, and withering support for a war against Japan.

I doubt it, we were fighting for our survival as a free country.

Germany posed no real threat to us, and had never attacked us. There would be people protesting in the streets and riots over the draft. Banners would read "THIS IS NOT OUR WAR."

Japan did attack us, however, in today's climate, the population would be calling for an end to the war after the first 1000 or so flag drapped coffins came in on a C140 and pictured in the newspapers.

Let's face it, no matter how much we are attacked, we do not have the same stomach we had back then to take casualties. We are not the same people.

I disagree. We don't have the stomach to fight wars for pure political reasons but when our survival as a country is at stake Americans will do what it takes.

Germany was not a direct threat to our survival.

Yes they were

How? They had no means to mount an effective attack on the US mainland. They had not attacked us before. They posed no immediate threat to us.

First of all after defeating the English and her allies Germany would be able to conduct an effective Blockade on our shipping.

Secondly after defeating the English and his Commonwealth they'd be able to mass troops on our Northern Border in Canana because if England and Canada were defeated Cananda would be under their rule.
THirdly, without the Russians and the English to worry about what would prevent them from invading Mexico (who wasn't all the unfriendly with the Nazi's) and creating a second front using Mexicans under the Command of Gerrman Generals?

Canada would have simply looked to us for protection and severed ties to England if Germany had invaded England. Germany tried the Mexico thing both in WWI and II and failed both times. Mexico was not a threat.

So it boils down to our world trade was threatened. Our war with Germany was, essentially, NOT a fight for basic survival but a fight for economic interests.

LOL, How would we be able to defeat the Japanese if they were reinforced with German and Russians under the Command of Germany?

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Jzero
I don't think being directly attacked should be the defining factor. Annexing half of Europe, on the other hand, while not a direct attack, seems like a good reason. There's a reason the US waited so long to jump in - it had to become clear that this more than some petty Eastern European squabble.

Saddam? Ho Chi Minh? Castro? Kim Il Song? These guys are/were isolationist whackos. They didn't have ostensible designs on world conquest, and even if they did they didn't have the resources to get far outside their own borders.

All those men (Except Saddam) were fully supported by nations who DID have expansionist ideas.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Red DawnLOL, How would we be able to defeat the Japanese if they were reinforced with German and Russians under the Command of Germany?

You're putting the horse before the cart there, Red. In no way did that look likely at the time we entered the war.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jzero
I don't think being directly attacked should be the defining factor. Annexing half of Europe, on the other hand, while not a direct attack, seems like a good reason. There's a reason the US waited so long to jump in - it had to become clear that this more than some petty Eastern European squabble.

Saddam? Ho Chi Minh? Castro? Kim Il Song? These guys are/were isolationist whackos. They didn't have ostensible designs on world conquest, and even if they did they didn't have the resources to get far outside their own borders.

All those men (Except Saddam) were fully supported by nations who DID have expansionist ideas.

Isn't the Neocon's idea of Pax Americana an expansionist idea?

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jzero
I don't think being directly attacked should be the defining factor. Annexing half of Europe, on the other hand, while not a direct attack, seems like a good reason. There's a reason the US waited so long to jump in - it had to become clear that this more than some petty Eastern European squabble.

Saddam? Ho Chi Minh? Castro? Kim Il Song? These guys are/were isolationist whackos. They didn't have ostensible designs on world conquest, and even if they did they didn't have the resources to get far outside their own borders.

All those men (Except Saddam) were fully supported by nations who DID have expansionist ideas.

Isn't the Neocon's idea of Pax Americana an expansionist idea?

Exporting culture is expansionist?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Amused
You're putting the horse before the cart there, Red. In no way did that look likely at the time we entered the war.

Obviously it did because we stuck it out despite huge casuatlies.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jzero
I don't think being directly attacked should be the defining factor. Annexing half of Europe, on the other hand, while not a direct attack, seems like a good reason. There's a reason the US waited so long to jump in - it had to become clear that this more than some petty Eastern European squabble.

Saddam? Ho Chi Minh? Castro? Kim Il Song? These guys are/were isolationist whackos. They didn't have ostensible designs on world conquest, and even if they did they didn't have the resources to get far outside their own borders.

All those men (Except Saddam) were fully supported by nations who DID have expansionist ideas.

Isn't the Neocon's idea of Pax Americana an expansionist idea?

Exporting culture is expansionist?

At the point of a gun it is!

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Roger

So it boils down to our world trade was threatened. Our war with Germany was, essentially, NOT a fight for basic survival but a fight for economic interests.

So waht you are trying to tell me is that Germany would have stopped with England ?

Hitler was hell bent on taking over the world, why would he stop in Europe ?

So was the USSR. We stopped them with a cold war. The same would have happened with Germany because they had no means of launching an attack against the US. We could have had "Fortress America."

 

[sillymofo]

Here's some other wars that will never have an ending for America:

War on Terrorism
War on Drugs
War on Illiteracy
War on Chubbiness

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

You're putting the horse before the cart there, Red. In no way did that look likely at the time we entered the war.

Obviously it did because we stuck it out despite huge casuatlies.[/quote]

Yes, we did stick it out, but the reality at the time was much different. But my point is, could the same happen today against a country that had never attacked us and a draft in full force?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Roger

So it boils down to our world trade was threatened. Our war with Germany was, essentially, NOT a fight for basic survival but a fight for economic interests.

So waht you are trying to tell me is that Germany would have stopped with England ?

Hitler was hell bent on taking over the world, why would he stop in Europe ?

So was the USSR. We stopped them with a cold war. The same would have happened with Germany because they had no means of launching an attack against the US. We could have had "Fortress America."

Yeah under Marshal Law. There goes our existance as a free country!

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Roger

So it boils down to our world trade was threatened. Our war with Germany was, essentially, NOT a fight for basic survival but a fight for economic interests.

So waht you are trying to tell me is that Germany would have stopped with England ?

Hitler was hell bent on taking over the world, why would he stop in Europe ?

So was the USSR. We stopped them with a cold war. The same would have happened with Germany because they had no means of launching an attack against the US. We could have had "Fortress America."

Yeah under Marshal Law. There goes our existance as a free country!

Why is that? Was Western Europe under Marshal Law during the Cold War?

 

[Jzero]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jzero
I don't think being directly attacked should be the defining factor. Annexing half of Europe, on the other hand, while not a direct attack, seems like a good reason. There's a reason the US waited so long to jump in - it had to become clear that this more than some petty Eastern European squabble.

Saddam? Ho Chi Minh? Castro? Kim Il Song? These guys are/were isolationist whackos. They didn't have ostensible designs on world conquest, and even if they did they didn't have the resources to get far outside their own borders.

All those men (Except Saddam) were fully supported by nations who DID have expansionist ideas.

Isn't the Neocon's idea of Pax Americana an expansionist idea?

LOL.
I was going to jokingly point out that for awhile Saddam was also supported by a nation with expansionist ideas 😉

I think the difference between the above crowd and Hitler is that Hitler was actually making good on his plan to conquer the world. The others never got far enough to be perceived as a serious threat.

If Southeast Asia was allowed to fester into a communist stronghold and started to inch its way west, there would probably be strong support to stop the "red tide."

 

[Amused]

BTW, for those with small brains, I am arguing a point, not my beliefs. I fully support the fact that we defeated Germany in WWII.