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

[ElFenix]

the US was starting plans for intercontinental bombers in the middle point of the war. no doubt germany could have done and built the same, and then had the ability to reach us in the mid 40s, had the war gone their way.

 

[imprezawrxwagon]

Originally posted by: iliopsoas
No guerilla warfare back in World War II because the casualties were so high and there weren't many left alive to fight. By the end of the war, people were sick of fighting.

I really wish people did not speak at length and with aplomb about subjects they are not familiar with.

There WAS guerilla warfare for years after WWII.

 

[K1052]

Their subs were a threat only to our shipments to England and other allies. Appeasement would have stopped any attacks on US shipping.

American costal shipping suffered severe losses off the eastern seaboard and the gulf during the first half of 1942. Operation "Paukenschlag" (Drumbeat) nearly crippled American shipping. Dead sailors and oil slicks were washing up on the beaches regularly, people on shore watched as U-Boats shelled merchant shipping from the surface. If Donitz had more boats available to send, he would have acomplished his mission.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: K1052

Their subs were a threat only to our shipments to England and other allies. Appeasement would have stopped any attacks on US shipping.

American costal shipping suffered severe losses off the eastern seaboard and the gulf during the first half of 1942. Operation "Paukenschlag" (Drumbeat) nearly crippled American shipping. Dead sailors and oil slicks were washing up on the beaches regularly, people on shore watched as U-Boats shelled merchant shipping from the surface. If Donitz had more boats available to send, he would have acomplished his mission.

As I said, appeasment would have stopped the U-Boat attacks. They were attacking our shipping because of our supplying England and Russia. Stooping that supply would have stopped the attacks.

Hitler wasn't so stupid that he would have wasted resources where he didn't need them in such a fashion.

And, again, you are arguing from facts known after we entered the war. Before 1941 he did not attack US shipping close to US shores.

 

[jyates]

War has never been fought with such fervor as in WWII.

We could end the Iraqi problem quickly if we had the will to do so right now.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: K1052

Their subs were a threat only to our shipments to England and other allies. Appeasement would have stopped any attacks on US shipping.

American costal shipping suffered severe losses off the eastern seaboard and the gulf during the first half of 1942. Operation "Paukenschlag" (Drumbeat) nearly crippled American shipping. Dead sailors and oil slicks were washing up on the beaches regularly, people on shore watched as U-Boats shelled merchant shipping from the surface. If Donitz had more boats available to send, he would have acomplished his mission.

As I said, appeasment would have stopped the U-Boat attacks. They were attacking our shipping because of our supplying England and Russia. Stooping that supply would have stopped the attacks.

Hitler wasn't so stupid that he would have wasted resources where he didn't need them in such a fashion.

And, again, you are arguing from facts known after we entered the war. Before 1941 he did not attack US shipping close to US shores.

He did declare war on us not the other way around.

Going on past experience with, Checkoslavakia, Poland, most of Western europe, Africa, and various other places there was not credible indication that he would ever stop.

Edit: As far as Hitler's stupidity goes, attaking Russia was a wonderful strategy. Why didn't anyone think about doing that before?

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: 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.

This is probably exactly what the British thought initially as well. 'Oh, let them take Austria... they've been under the Versailles treaty for so long, they don't have the capability to do any real harm.'

 

[sharkeeper]

-clipboard anomaly-

 

[StormRider]

I like the war in Independence Day. Once we injected the virus into their system, we beat the crap out of the aliens. And it's cool how crop dusters can be taught to fly jets and stuff in a few hours and how our president also flies a jet to fight aliens.

 

[klah]

The authorization for use of force in Gulf War I barely made it through the Senate 52-47.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: imprezawrxwagon

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!

I don't mean to insult you (cause I'm referring to something you wrote and not you as a person), but what you wrote here is complete BS, has nothing to do with reality and shows that you know nothing on the subject.

I don't mean to insult you (cause I'm referring to something you wrote and not you as a person), but what you wrote here is completely useless, doesn't try to be informative and shows that you know nothing on the subject of intelligent discussion.

--

Amused is right that people learned after WWII that an enemy can go from weakness to strength quickly. Germany was a mess after WWI and recovered quickly. The same probably wouldn't have happened with Saddamn, because frankly he's an idiot (why he continued to resist inspectors when he didn't even have WMD on site - which _directly_ prompted this current war, is beyond me). Unfortunately the US is so powerful now that their victory in combat is bittersweet. I think a lot of the people in America think that America can take on anybody at any time. It's been no problem obliterating Iraq's army on both occasions, like a big huge training excercise (albeit with casualties). This invariably leads a lot of people to the conclusion that you can always wait until later. Wait until a threat is right in front of you and undeniably obvious, and you can still take care of it because your military is so powerful. Of course, you never know if Iraq would have risen to a powerful position or not, but with the advent of WMD a small comparitively weak country can become a major threat. Nukes are the great equilizer, so it's better safe than sorry and an ounce of prevention...

 

[imprezawrxwagon]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: imprezawrxwagon

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!

I don't mean to insult you (cause I'm referring to something you wrote and not you as a person), but what you wrote here is complete BS, has nothing to do with reality and shows that you know nothing on the subject.

I don't mean to insult you (cause I'm referring to something you wrote and not you as a person), but what you wrote here is completely useless, doesn't try to be informative and shows that you know nothing on the subject of intelligent discussion.

--

Wow, is that supposed to be a witty comeback? Ok, for those who have difficulty putting two and two together, as well as lack the ability to read my other post in this thread - here it is:

terrorist activity/guerilla war lasted for years after WWII. if you do not know this - it is your problem (due to your miseducation) , not mine, and learning about it is your responsibility, not mine. Use google, libraries, learn, stop posting complete and utter BS.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Amused
We had no idea they had any missile program in 1941.

Their subs were a threat only to our shipments to England and other allies. Appeasement would have stopped any attacks on US shipping.

The US also had no idea of Germany's Nuclear programs in 1941.

If you are going to argue reasons to enter into war with Germany in 1941, you must argue with what we knew in 1941.

All we had to know is that they were allies of a country who attacked us and if not defeated they would have conquered all of Germany. Your "Fortress America" theory is full of holes just as your justification for invading Iraq (how many UN Resolutions has Israel ignored?).


That said, I'm not for pulling out of Iraq now. We already screwed the pooch on this one and made that region unstable and made the world a more dangerous place. If we were to pull out without seeing this thing through it will only comound of fsck up.

What we do need to do now is let the Generals run this war and send the Neocons like Wolfowitz and Rummy packing, whether the Dub is re-elected or not.

 

[StageLeft]

Wow, is that supposed to be a witty comeback?

Only if you found it funny 🙂

terrorist activity/guerilla war lasted for years after WWII. if you do not know this - it is your problem (due to your miseducation) , not mine, and learning about it is your responsibility, not mine. Use google, libraries, learn, stop posting complete and utter BS.

Surely there was some insurgency here and there but to compare the current war in iraq with how things happened in WWII, at least in Europe, is misguided. The Iraq war, as with Vietnam, is really a guerilla war. That much is evidenced by the fact that more Americans have died in Iraq now since the end of the initial fighting phase than those who died during it. The entire bulk of WWII's death and combat revolved around the acquisition of land. You had a clearly definable frontline. No such thing exists in Iraq. Sure you've got cities that are more controlled or less controlled, but nothing you can put on a map and say "West of this line = good guys. East of it = bad guys". When WWII ended and newspapers had VICTORY planted on the headlines, that it was basically it. Allies win. There is no such thing for this current conflict, and there won't be, either. There will just be less insurgency, more stability, etc.

Now, if you're going to answer with another one or two liner, you'd do well to realize that people are better at consuming information when it's not spat at them, as you tend to do.

 

[freegeeks]

We had no idea they had any missile program in 1941.

Their subs were a threat only to our shipments to England and other allies. Appeasement would have stopped any attacks on US shipping.

The US also had no idea of Germany's Nuclear programs in 1941.

If you are going to argue reasons to enter into war with Germany in 1941, you must argue with what we knew in 1941.

Amused

My point is that the second Iraqi war was not necessary to contain Saddam. The prove is out there. Contrary to popular believe the UN inspections were very effective because Iraq wasn't able to make WMD for more then a decade.

The world is not a safer place because of this occupation IMHO. The world was a safer place after WWII

Anyway, these discussions are pointless. The US is in Iraq now and I hope you guys can clean up the mess you created.

good night :beer:

 

[Cashmoney995]

Yes wars of yesterday were more well defined.

Problem is that our enemies are defined yet clearly undefined as an army or as civilians.

My solution.

Teach, don't preach.
When people throw rocks, treat them as bullets and shoot back.
Teach again, tell them exactly what you are doing.
Teach english so they can understand you.
Use propaganda to your advantage and show who you are and what your doing and what you are against.

English is our way to solving our wars.

If you can communicate then they can understand.

First step?
Make English our national language and enforce it.
Anybody who lives in the United States and refuses to learn english therefore refuses any aid that the US provides to them, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Freedom is a toll way, pay your toll and you can get on your way.

 

[Red Dawn]

First step?
Make English our national language and enforce it.
Anybody who lives in the United States and refuses to learn english therefore refuses any aid that the US provides to them, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Freedom is a toll way, pay your toll and you can get on your way.

Yeah that should enable world peace:roll:

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Cashmoney995
Yes wars of yesterday were more well defined.

Problem is that our enemies are defined yet clearly undefined as an army or as civilians.

My solution.

Teach, don't preach.
When people throw rocks, treat them as bullets and shoot back.
Teach again, tell them exactly what you are doing.
Teach english so they can understand you.
Use propaganda to your advantage and show who you are and what your doing and what you are against.

English is our way to solving our wars.

If you can communicate then they can understand.

First step?
Make English our national language and enforce it.
Anybody who lives in the United States and refuses to learn english therefore refuses any aid that the US provides to them, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Freedom is a toll way, pay your toll and you can get on your way.

That sounds a little extreme, but if we do that can we have swastikas too?

 

[Ausm]

Guerilla Warfare was started by the confederates in the revolutionary War. That is where the "sniper" was created. The most feared and hated soldier in Warfare.


Sysadmin

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Sysadmin
Guerilla Warfare was started by the confederates in the revolutionary War. That is where the "sniper" was created. The most feared and hated soldier in Warfare.


Sysadmin

Confederates? I wasn't aware of any Militia during the Revolutionary war that went by that name

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Not to mention that WWII lasted for almost 5 years. We've been in Iraq what? One year now? The death toll in Iraq is in the thousands (counting both sides). WWII was in the millions.

We didn't exactly 'school' Germany. That was a long drawn out battle over many countries and it took years for the Allies to finally defeat Hitler's army.

I don't think war was ever easy.

I agree...If Hitler would have let his Generals run the war instead of himself they might have won it. The German's has the best and most well trained soldiers in the world at that time.


Sysadmin

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Sysadmin
Guerilla Warfare was started by the confederates in the revolutionary War. That is where the "sniper" was created. The most feared and hated soldier in Warfare.


Sysadmin

Confederates? I wasn't aware of any Militia during the Revolutionary war that went by that name

Sorry meant Civil war


sysadmin<---hiding in a corner

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Sysadmin

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Sysadmin
Guerilla Warfare was started by the confederates in the revolutionary War. That is where the "sniper" was created. The most feared and hated soldier in Warfare.


Sysadmin

Confederates? I wasn't aware of any Militia during the Revolutionary war that went by that name

Sorry meant Civil war


sysadmin<---hiding in a corner

How about the French and Indian War? I think that was mainly a guerilla war.

 

[Ausm]

Good Point...it was kind of hit and run fighting.


Sysadmin

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Sysadmin
Good Point...it was kind of hit and run fighting.


Sysadmin

That was also the first time anybody used germ warfare. The Brits gave some Indians blankets that were purposely infected with smallpox