Mid east

[Jinef 2]

Nah if you have two nations that hate each other - shoot both the leaders as it's their fault.

[PitViper 0]

Quote[/b] ]For fuck's sake it started in 1939! You were not alive. Nor was I. Why do Americans keep bringing it up?

Because we are still dumping billions of dollars into the U.S force structure in Europe that had to stick around, unfortunately, after the end of the war.  

Quote[/b] ]Is it because it was the only true victory that the Americans can claim?

huh?  Did you forget being chased off my continent twice?

Quote[/b] ]Do you feel you have to always slip in your endorsement of the US activity in WW2 whatever the conversation topic?

It's not an endorsement. I am saddled with the knowledge that we made the wrong decision to get involved in your "affairs".  I would have prefered we told you "good luck chaps" and that be the end of it for us.

[Hit_Sqd_Maximus 0]

I dont think you can just make a wall and keep them apart from each other....

[Longinius 1]

"It's not an endorsement. I am saddled with the knowledge that we made the wrong decision to get involved in your "affairs". I would have prefered we told you "good luck chaps" and that be the end of it for us."

Yes, it would have been the end for you. Because who do you think would be next on the list if Europe fell?

[Die Alive 0]

"It's not an endorsement. I am saddled with the knowledge that we made the wrong decision to get involved in your "affairs".  I would have prefered we told you "good luck chaps" and that be the end of it for us."

Yes, it would have been the end for you. Because who do you think would be next on the list if Europe fell?

Africa since the Nazis were on the continent already

[bn880 5]

I dont think you can just make a wall and keep them apart from each other....

I don't think this proposition is even an issue anymore, the borders have changed... besides, you can keep them appart without a wall, heck, they want to stay appart for the most part.

[PitViper 0]

Yes, it would have been the end for you. Because who do you think would be next on the list if Europe fell?

Somehow I highly doubt a heavily battle-beleaguered Third Reich would be able to overcome a few thousand kilometers worth of ocean.. and for what? some depression-affected farmers in the U.S?.  Don't taunt me with faux concern. The Nazis and their minions.. and the Communists and their own, would likely expend themselves decimating each other.. thus ending both diametrically opposed extremisms. No Cold War.. no U.S superpower... Well, that's my hypothesis .

[Crazysheep 1]

Quote[/b] ]Because we are still dumping billions of dollars into the U.S force structure in Europe that had to stick around, unfortunately, after the end of the war.

Heh. Actually, with Germanys stance on the Iraq war the USA threatened to withdraw its troops their for protection. Germany said "Hell yes, get the hell out" and then they quickly withdrew their threat. They are not needed there.....it's only building up Americas image as a militant nation, which it needs to get rid of if it wants to defend itself from terrorism. Isolated, the USA will lose its power.

Quote[/b] ]It's not an endorsement. I am saddled with the knowledge that we made the wrong decision to get involved in your "affairs". I would have prefered we told you "good luck chaps" and that be the end of it for us.

Bull. If the USA didn't join in the second world war, who knows how long it would have been in the great depression? It was the WWII that helped pull it out, remember?

[Crazysheep 1]

Quote[/b] ]Yes, it would have been the end for you. Because who do you think would be next on the list if Europe fell?

Russia and Asia. Hitler made no plans secret of his plans to expand eastwards, it was just western europe didn't hold out as long as Russia, and Germany couldn't expand with France, Britain, etc attacking it constantly. The USA would not have been attacked for sometime, I expect.

[PitViper 0]

Quote[/b] ]Because we are still dumping billions of dollars into the U.S force structure in Europe that had to stick around, unfortunately, after the end of the war.  

Heh. Actually, with Germanys stance on the Iraq war the USA threatened to withdraw its troops their for protection. Germany said "Hell yes, get the hell out" and then they quickly withdrew their threat.

I don't know where you heard that they "withdrew" it but the U.S is removing troops from Germany.

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]It's not an endorsement. I am saddled with the knowledge that we made the wrong decision to get involved in your "affairs".  I would have prefered we told you "good luck chaps" and that be the end of it for us.

Bull. If the USA didn't join in the second world war, who knows how long it would have been in the great depression? It was the WWII that helped pull it out, remember?

What?  go to war with a distant enemy to improve the economy!?!  Is that your recommendation?

[shrike 0]

Quote[/b] ]thus ending both diametrically opposed extremisms

Quote[/b] ]What?  go to war with a distant enemy to improve the economy!?!  Is that your recommendation?

Sorry, a bit OT...

Pitviper, I must say I am a bit deceived. Independently from our very opposed political stances (no, I am far from being a communist) I thought you always had some knowledge to prove your arguments. I was obviously mistaken.

First of all, Nazis and soviet communists at that time had a lot in common. Dictatorships, a totalitarian ideology and the goal to spread it all over the world, economies controlled by the administration, no personal freedom.

Both are totally opposed to the "western" principle of freedom and "capitalism". Quotation marks because I think all those worn out terms are soooooooo 20th centurish...time to approach new ways...

Anyway, your sarcastic question concerning WW2/economy boost is equally out of place. It's widely approved and totally obvious that WW2 gave the USA a massive economical overdrive. Apart from the US industry running at full throttle to deliver the masses of killing tools you secured a large, the largest market in the world from the grasp of one of the abovementioned totalitarian ideologies. Whether this was intentional or not, it's a fact.

As much as I am happy your grandfathers did that (being German/Italian) please stop bringing it up.

New times, new problems, new ideologies and please new approaches.

[PitViper 0]

Sorry, a bit OT...

Pitviper, I must say I am a bit deceived. Independently from our very opposed political stances (no, I am far from being a communist) I thought you always had some knowledge to prove your arguments. I was obviously mistaken.

First of all, Nazis and soviet communists at that time had a lot in common. Dictatorships, a totalitarian ideology and the goal to spread it all over the world, economies controlled by the administration, no personal freedom.

Both are totally opposed to the "western" principle of freedom and "capitalism".

I'm not sure what your point is.  Are you saying that nazi and communist dictatorships would tolerate each other in any eventuality because they had dictatorship in common?

[shrike 0]

Quote[/b] ]I'm not sure what your point is. Are you saying that nazi and communist dictatorships would tolerate each other in any eventuality because they had dictatorship in common?

No, just getting your facts straight. You say two diametrically opposed systems would have eradicated each other. That's wrong.

As I said it's OT but I think political discussions should be made with a maximum of accuracy.

[Bernadotte 0]

Are you saying that nazi and communist dictatorships would tolerate each other in any eventuality because they had dictatorship in common?

I would say that because it did happen exactly like that, for a brief period of time and not in "any eventuality."

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

"I think political discussions should be made with a maximum of accuracy."

Ok in that case...

PitViper -

Quote[/b] ]"huh?  Did you forget being chased off my continent twice?"

Twice? You refer perhaps to the piffling 1812 unpleasantness. Well its not your continent. INDEPENDANT Canada (sort of) is still there after being invaded by the treacherous American running dogs who were defeated by the brave Canadian and British defenders.

So chased off? hah! I laugh at your nations failure to beat Canada. Which country had to repaint its house white (probably with French funded paint) after getting a British toasting?

ok enough history (too much in the middle east in fact).

[Bernadotte 0]

To all those who think that terrorism leads nowhere please consider the following:

Quote[/b] ]Eighty-four thousand troops had proved insufficient to maintain law and order in the face of a campaign of terrorism waged by highly oraganised Jewish forces equipped with all the weapons of the modern infantryman.  Since the war 338 British subjects had been killed in Palestine, while the military forces there had cost the British taxpayer one hundred million sterling.  The declared intentions of Jewish extremists showed that the loss of further British lives was inevitable.

In these circumstances His Majesty's Government decided to bring to an end their mandate and to prepare for the earliest possible withdrawl from Palestine of all British forces.

-- British Foreign Office statement in the NY Times, 14 May 1948

...And thus was born the state of Israel, on 14 May 1948.

[Crazysheep 1]

Quote[/b] ]What? go to war with a distant enemy to improve the economy!?! Is that your recommendation?

No.....it was a response to your saying that the USA would be fine without helping in WWII.

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

"Since the war 338 British subjects had been killed in Palestine, while the military forces there had cost the British taxpayer one hundred million sterling. The declared intentions of Jewish extremists showed that the loss of further British lives was inevitable"

Wow 338, i didnt remember it as being as high as that. Its actually very sad when i think about it. Most of those guys had probably just fought through WW2 and survived only to be killed by some Arab or Jewish Palestinean gunman or terrorist bomb in a troubled land that has for centuries, and is still, leaching the blood of innocent Jews and Arabs (and others) today in another of histories senseless conflicts.

[SgtBarnes 0]

Somehow I highly doubt a heavily battle-beleaguered Third Reich would be able to overcome a few thousand kilometers worth of ocean.. and for what? some depression-affected farmers in the U.S?.  Don't taunt me with faux concern. The Nazis and their minions.. and the Communists and their own, would likely expend themselves decimating each other.. thus ending both diametrically opposed extremisms. No Cold War.. no U.S superpower... Well, that's my hypothesis .

Funny...the Secretary of the US Navy in 1941 disagreed with you....

"In public speeches I have warned the American people that if Britain is defeated, we ought then to be fully prepared to repel attempts by Germany to seize bases on this side of the Atlantic. Germany would use these bases either to attack us directly or else first to establish herself solidly in South America. Many of our people and many of the speakers who have opposed giving ample aid to Great Britain apparently believe it fantastic to think that there is any real danger of invasion. I disagree with such people and believe that a victorious Germany would move over to this hemisphere just as soon as she could accumulate the strength to do so, and certainly very soon unless we now take the steps to check her career of reckless aggression."     William Knox, 1941

[Bernadotte 0]

Wow 338, i didnt remember it as being as high as that.

Just one example:

Quote[/b] ]On July 26, 1946, members of the Jewish terrorist organization Irgun Tsvai-Leumi in the British Mandate of Palestine planted and exploded a bomb at Jerusalem's King David Hotel killing 91 people: 28 British, 41 Arab, 17 Jewish, and 5 other.  Around 45 people were injured.  The attack was ordered by David Ben Gurion and directed by Menachem Begin, both of whom would later become Israeli Prime Ministers.

By the way, the number of Arabs and Jews killed by British soldiers was much higher than 338.

[PitViper 0]

Somehow I highly doubt a heavily battle-beleaguered Third Reich would be able to overcome a few thousand kilometers worth of ocean.. and for what? some depression-affected farmers in the U.S?.  Don't taunt me with faux concern. The Nazis and their minions.. and the Communists and their own, would likely expend themselves decimating each other.. thus ending both diametrically opposed extremisms. No Cold War.. no U.S superpower... Well, that's my hypothesis .

Funny...the Secretary of the US Navy in 1941 disagreed with you....

"In public speeches I have warned the American people that if Britain is defeated, we ought then to be fully prepared to repel attempts by Germany to seize bases on this side of the Atlantic. Germany would use these bases either to attack us directly or else first to establish herself solidly in South America. Many of our people and many of the speakers who have opposed giving ample aid to Great Britain apparently believe it fantastic to think that there is any real danger of invasion. I disagree with such people and believe that a victorious Germany would move over to this hemisphere just as soon as she could accumulate the strength to do so, and certainly very soon unless we now take the steps to check her career of reckless aggression."     William Knox, 1941

I did not ever say anything about not keeping the Germans out of the western hemisphere. I fully support an active atlantic U.S fleet in accordance with the Monroe Doctrine.

Ok.. that's enough of my ME diversion for now

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

"By the way, the number of Arabs and Jews killed by British soldiers was much higher than 338."

That i was aware of . Its funny how the rulers change but many of the rules dont. Those with power seem to have rather limited compassion for those who have little/none

[Guest]

What the colonial powers did is no secret. I was however completely unaware of that there were significant jewish-extremist terrorist organizations that fought the British.

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

Oh yes, many of them became important and prominent members of the newly established state of Israel. Slightly ironic no?

[Bernadotte 0]

What the colonial powers did is no secret. I was however completely unaware of that there were significant jewish-extremist terrorist organizations that fought the British.  

The Jewish terrorist organisations mostly emerged in response to the 1939 British White Paper, which drastically limited Jewish immigration to Palestine and declared that the Mandate would be converted into the independent self-governing state of Palestine within 10 years.

Problem:  Arabs represented over 2/3 of the population of Palestine and would eventually lead such a new state if the British didn't let the Jewish population increase significantly through immigration.

Solution 1:  Smuggle Jews into the Mandate.

Solution 2:  Use terrorism to get rid of the British before they could implement their single-state democracy plan.

Solution 3:  Use terrorism to drive the Arabs out of towns and villages that separated large Jewish populations so that the population of what became the separate state of Israel would be majority Jewish.  Thus began the 750,000 Palestinian Arab refugee problem.  (Today we would have called that ethic cleansing.)