jakee 1,595 #26 June 14, 2008 Quote So in Baker's parallel universe Neville Chamberlain didn't exist and it was Churchill who invaded Germany? Churchill was PM when the Allies invaded GermanyDo you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zep 0 #27 June 14, 2008 Quote And the Americans bombed Pearl Harbor No, but I'm shure some day history will prove that SOME Americans thought it was in their best interest, an did nothing to stop it. Churchill did not declare war on Germany. When Great Britain needed a warmonger they voted him in. The freeworld should be thankful that such men existed. Gone fishing Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tbrown 26 #28 June 14, 2008 These revisionist writers fall into one of two camps. Either they're Nazi apologists who think we should've joined forces with Hitler to defeat Stalinism, or else they're way way out pacifists on ecstasy who think a big group hug will solve all problems. World War II was unlike any other, in that it was a true fight for world domination and civilized values. And in order to win that war, we had to make some VERY nasty decisions. We decided to bomb - and fire bomb - many German and Japanese cities to break the will of their people. We had to make a deal with Stalin in order to defeat the Nazis - and without Stalin and a Soviet alliance, Hitler WOULD have won the war, make no mistake about that. And finally, we had to nuke two Japanese cities to avoid an invasion that would've cost millions of American AND JAPANESE lives. No doubt about it, war is a shitty business, "not helathy for children and other living things". But what if we hadn't made war with Hitler ? Does anyone think he would have stopped with all of Europe and North Africa under his thumb ? Britain would've been next. Hitler could've taken Britain anyway, if he hadn't stupidy invaded the USSR, and at the time the US would've been powerless to stop him. Are these authors suggesting we should have ignored an evil empire that already had its concentration camps for Jews and other minorities up and running ? As it is, there's still the moral question of whether we should've bombed Auschwitz, as we had plenty of air recon photos and intelligence reports about "something" going on there (and a lot of Auschwitz survivors insit they prayed for air raids and would've been willing to risk being directly bombed to their hellish daily existence). So do these authors think that systematically exterminating all of Europe's Jews, along with Gypsies, Slavs, Gays, and dissident Christians was an acceptable price for peace ? The Holocaust was very nearly a success even with vigorous prosecution of the war, without the war it would've gone world wide and been in full swing operation to this day against any group deemed "inferior" or even inconvenient. It's sill to even ask some of these questions, because some of these writers clearly aren't bothered by the extent of Nazi - or Japanese atrocities. World War II was like Star Wars in the real world. It had to be fought and had to be won by whatever means necessary, or we'd all be goose stepping today. Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,595 #29 June 14, 2008 QuoteAre these authors suggesting we should have ignored an evil empire that already had its concentration camps for Jews and other minorities up and running ? The holocaust was not a reason for the US declaring war on Germany, and as such this rational is quite irrelevant.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,595 #30 June 14, 2008 QuoteBut what if we hadn't made war with Hitler ? Does anyone think he would have stopped with all of Europe and North Africa under his thumb ? Britain would've been next. Hitler could've taken Britain anyway, if he hadn't stupidy invaded the USSR, and at the time the US would've been powerless to stop him. No it wouldn't. Russia was Hitler's number one priority. He actually tried to avoid war with Britain, and would certainly have preferred to be at peace with us while he launched the eastern offensive. Whether he would have attempted to invade us when/if he defeated Stalin is another question.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #31 June 14, 2008 QuoteQuoteAre these authors suggesting we should have ignored an evil empire that already had its concentration camps for Jews and other minorities up and running ? The holocaust was not a reason for the US declaring war on Germany, and as such this rational is quite irrelevant. The US did not declare war on Germany. Germany declared war on the US.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #32 June 14, 2008 QuoteQuoteBut what if we hadn't made war with Hitler ? Does anyone think he would have stopped with all of Europe and North Africa under his thumb ? Britain would've been next. Hitler could've taken Britain anyway, if he hadn't stupidy invaded the USSR, and at the time the US would've been powerless to stop him. No it wouldn't. Russia was Hitler's number one priority. He actually tried to avoid war with Britain, and would certainly have preferred to be at peace with us while he launched the eastern offensive. Whether he would have attempted to invade us when/if he defeated Stalin is another question. Hitler's 1940 attempt at invading Britain hadn't turned out too well! "As England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, still shows no willingness to come to terms, I have decided to prepare, and if necessary, to carry out, a landing operation against her. The aim of this operation is to eliminate the English mother country as a base from which the war against Germany can be continued, and, if it should be necessary, to occupy it completely." A. Hitler, directive to German High Command, July 16, 1940. A prerequisite for the invasion (code name Sea Lion) was air superiority over the Channel, since the Royal Navy was far superior the the Kriegsmarine. Operation Sea Lion was cancelled on Sept 15, 1940 when it became apparent that Germany could obtain neither air superioriy nor naval superiority over the English Channel.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,595 #33 June 14, 2008 QuoteGermany declared war on the US. Correct. QuoteThe US did not declare war on Germany. Incorrect! I'm disappointed in you Professor.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,595 #34 June 14, 2008 QuoteHitler's 1940 attempt at invading Britain hadn't turned out too well! "As England, in spite of her hopeless military situation, still shows no willingness to come to terms, I have decided to prepare, and if necessary, to carry out, a landing operation against her. The aim of this operation is to eliminate the English mother country as a base from which the war against Germany can be continued, and, if it should be necessary, to occupy it completely." A. Hitler, directive to German High Command, July 16, 1940. Yep, supports my point.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #35 June 14, 2008 QuoteQuoteGermany declared war on the US. Correct. QuoteThe US did not declare war on Germany. Incorrect! I'm disappointed in you Professor. Feel free. I would suggest it was more a recognition of reality. To the Congress of the United States: On the morning of Dec. 11 the Government of Germany, pursuing its course of world conquest, declared war against the United States. The long-known and the long-expected has thus taken place. The forces endeavoring to enslave the entire world now are moving toward this hemisphere. Never before has there been a greater challenge to life, liberty and civilization. Delay invites great danger. Rapid and united effort by all of the peoples of the world who are determined to remain free will insure a world victory of the forces of justice and of righteousness over the forces of savagery and of barbarism. Italy also has declared war against the United States. I therefore request the Congress to recognize a state of war between the United States and Germany, and between the United States and Italy. Franklin D. Roosevelt Declaring that a state of war exists between the Government of Germany and the government and the people of the United States and making provision to prosecute the same. Whereas the Government of Germany has formally declared war against the government and the people of the United States of America: Therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that the state of war between the United States and the Government of Germany which has thus been thrust upon the United States is hereby formally declared; and the President is hereby authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the government to carry on war against the Government of Germany; and to bring the conflict to a successful termination, all of the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,595 #36 June 14, 2008 QuoteI would suggest it was more a recognition of reality. Then why, in support of your claim that the US did not declare war on Germany have you quoted passages which include "Declaring that a state of war exists between the Government of Germany and the government and the people of the United States and making provision to prosecute the same." and "Therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that the state of war between the United States and the Government of Germany which has thus been thrust upon the United States is hereby formally declared"??? That Germany declared war first doesn't make America's response not a declaration of war also. The former does not preclude the latter and I can't for the life of me figure out why you're trying to argue that it does?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #37 June 14, 2008 QuoteQuoteI would suggest it was more a recognition of reality. Then why, in support of your claim that the US did not declare war on Germany have you quoted passages which include "Declaring that a state of war exists between the Government of Germany and the government and the people of the United States and making provision to prosecute the same." and "Therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that the state of war between the United States and the Government of Germany which has thus been thrust upon the United States is hereby formally declared"??? That Germany declared war first doesn't make America's response not a declaration of war also. The former does not preclude the latter and I can't for the life of me figure out why you're trying to argue that it does? Me Culpa. The US did indeed declare war - when forced into it by the other side.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #38 June 14, 2008 Quote Nothing in your comment invalidates anything that I wrote. There is a very strong tendency in the US to equate "the allies" with "the USA" and ignore the other members of the alliance; this was clearly evident in the post to which I responded. Understand, and don't dispute that point. Quote Oh, and 1st El Alamein, which halted the Afrika Korp's advance, started July 1, 1942 Just to be sure, we're on the same page, you're talking about the successful block of Rommel's advance, correct? The British Eighth Army opened an offensive at El Alamein on 23 October 1942.... and "Until August of 1942, the British had been defeated one battle after another by General Rommel and the Afrika Korps. But, in this month General Claude Auckinleck was replaced by General Bernard Law Montgomery as head of the eighth army. Montgomery immediately made plans for a massive counteroffensive. In September, 1942 Montgomery soon defeated Rommel at Alam el Halfa. Rommel and Montgomery continued preparations for a major confrontation and at El Alamein, on October 23, 1942 Montgomery launched his counteroffensive." Operation Torch officially began with the US landing in November.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #39 June 14, 2008 Quote his picture says it all. The title says it all. "unnecessary" dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #40 June 14, 2008 Quote Quote Nothing in your comment invalidates anything that I wrote. There is a very strong tendency in the US to equate "the allies" with "the USA" and ignore the other members of the alliance; this was clearly evident in the post to which I responded. Understand, and don't dispute that point. Quote Oh, and 1st El Alamein, which halted the Afrika Korp's advance, started July 1, 1942 Just to be sure, we're on the same page, you're talking about the successful block of Rommel's advance, correct? The British Eighth Army opened an offensive at El Alamein on 23 October 1942.... and "Until August of 1942, the British had been defeated one battle after another by General Rommel and the Afrika Korps. But, in this month General Claude Auckinleck was replaced by General Bernard Law Montgomery as head of the eighth army. Montgomery immediately made plans for a massive counteroffensive. In September, 1942 Montgomery soon defeated Rommel at Alam el Halfa. Rommel and Montgomery continued preparations for a major confrontation and at El Alamein, on October 23, 1942 Montgomery launched his counteroffensive." Operation Torch officially began with the US landing in November. Oh, I was under the impression Torch was an ALLIED operation. At the First Battle of El Alamein (July 1 – July 27, 1942) the advance of Axis troops on Alexandria was blunted by the Allies, when the German Panzers tried to outflank the allied position. At the Second Battle of El Alamein (October 23 – November 4, 1942) Allied forces broke the Axis line and forced them in a retreat that pushed them all the way back to Tunisia. Operation Torch (initially called Operation Gymnast) was the Anglo-American invasion of French North Africa in World War II during the North African Campaign, started November 8, 1942. From YOUR link: On 8 November 1942 the U.S. Navy put U.S. Army forces ashore near Casablanca, while the British Navy put other United States forces and contingents of British troops ashore near Oran and Algiers. The total invasion force comprised more than 400 ships, 1,000 planes, and some 107,000 men. ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #41 June 14, 2008 QuoteQuoteOperation Torch officially began with the US landing in November. Oh, I was under the impression Torch was an ALLIED operation. I never said it wasn't, "On November 8, 1942 operation Torch was launched with U.S. and British forces under command of General Dwight D. Eisenhower." It just so happens, that was the day that US troops landed... edit to clean up the formattingSo I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #42 June 14, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteOperation Torch officially began with the US landing in November. Oh, I was under the impression Torch was an ALLIED operation. I never said it wasn't, "On November 8, 1942 operation Torch was launched with U.S. and British forces under command of General Dwight D. Eisenhower." It just so happens, that was the day that US troops landed... So what day did the British and Free French land?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #43 June 14, 2008 QuoteSo what day did the British and Free French land? Who cares...that wasn't what I was talking about. The British Eighth Army was already there and the Free French starting fighting US forces.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,148 #44 June 15, 2008 QuoteQuoteSo what day did the British and Free French land? Who cares...that wasn't what I was talking about. The British Eighth Army was already there and the Free French starting fighting US forces. Oh, but it perfectly illustrates what I was writing about, the almost universal interpretation of "allies" to mean "US forces" by Americans. PS the Free French accompanied the Allies. The VICHY French fought the ALLIES. British forces landed on the SAME DAY the US forces landed.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #45 June 15, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteSo what day did the British and Free French land? Who cares...that wasn't what I was talking about. The British Eighth Army was already there and the Free French starting fighting US forces. Oh, but it perfectly illustrates what I was writing about, the almost universal interpretation of "allies" to mean "US forces" by Americans. PS the Free French accompanied the Allies. The VICHY French fought the ALLIES. British forces landed on the SAME DAY the US forces landed. I'll say for the second time: I do not dispute your assertion about the meaning of WWII "allies". British Eighth Army was already in North Africa when US forces landed in Morocco. Eighth Army had already been engaged with Rommel multiple times. There were other British forces inserted in a naval landing the same day as US I Armored Corps and US II Corps.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,148 #46 June 15, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSo what day did the British and Free French land? Who cares...that wasn't what I was talking about. The British Eighth Army was already there and the Free French starting fighting US forces. Oh, but it perfectly illustrates what I was writing about, the almost universal interpretation of "allies" to mean "US forces" by Americans. PS the Free French accompanied the Allies. The VICHY French fought the ALLIES. British forces landed on the SAME DAY the US forces landed. I'll say for the second time: I do not dispute your assertion about the meaning of WWII "allies". British Eighth Army was already in North Africa when US forces landed in Morocco. Eighth Army had already been engaged with Rommel multiple times. There were other British forces inserted in a naval landing the same day as US I Armored Corps and US II Corps. Thanks for confirming that what I wrote in post#12 of this thread is correct. www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3238268#3238268... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #47 June 16, 2008 man there's a lot of semantics based dick waving going on here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 2 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
Gawain 0 #43 June 14, 2008 QuoteSo what day did the British and Free French land? Who cares...that wasn't what I was talking about. The British Eighth Army was already there and the Free French starting fighting US forces.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #44 June 15, 2008 QuoteQuoteSo what day did the British and Free French land? Who cares...that wasn't what I was talking about. The British Eighth Army was already there and the Free French starting fighting US forces. Oh, but it perfectly illustrates what I was writing about, the almost universal interpretation of "allies" to mean "US forces" by Americans. PS the Free French accompanied the Allies. The VICHY French fought the ALLIES. British forces landed on the SAME DAY the US forces landed.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #45 June 15, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteSo what day did the British and Free French land? Who cares...that wasn't what I was talking about. The British Eighth Army was already there and the Free French starting fighting US forces. Oh, but it perfectly illustrates what I was writing about, the almost universal interpretation of "allies" to mean "US forces" by Americans. PS the Free French accompanied the Allies. The VICHY French fought the ALLIES. British forces landed on the SAME DAY the US forces landed. I'll say for the second time: I do not dispute your assertion about the meaning of WWII "allies". British Eighth Army was already in North Africa when US forces landed in Morocco. Eighth Army had already been engaged with Rommel multiple times. There were other British forces inserted in a naval landing the same day as US I Armored Corps and US II Corps.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #46 June 15, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSo what day did the British and Free French land? Who cares...that wasn't what I was talking about. The British Eighth Army was already there and the Free French starting fighting US forces. Oh, but it perfectly illustrates what I was writing about, the almost universal interpretation of "allies" to mean "US forces" by Americans. PS the Free French accompanied the Allies. The VICHY French fought the ALLIES. British forces landed on the SAME DAY the US forces landed. I'll say for the second time: I do not dispute your assertion about the meaning of WWII "allies". British Eighth Army was already in North Africa when US forces landed in Morocco. Eighth Army had already been engaged with Rommel multiple times. There were other British forces inserted in a naval landing the same day as US I Armored Corps and US II Corps. Thanks for confirming that what I wrote in post#12 of this thread is correct. www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3238268#3238268... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #47 June 16, 2008 man there's a lot of semantics based dick waving going on here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
