Wii Chat is the largest Unofficial Nintendo Wii community, with the latest Wii news and articles alongside upto the minute Wii gaming and hardware discussion.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, by joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), upload your own photos and access many other special features.
Analogy about WW2 and American perception that you "Saved" the British from the Nazis.
As hilarious as that analogy was (and true) I must point out that you should really stop using generalizations. Many Americans, myself included, agree with you that those were bad tactics and indeed do NOT believe we "saved" you. It was because of ALL the Allies (yes, even USSR) that we won the war, and while America is indeed the country that jumped in to "save the day" at the last second, that does NOT mean that it's any more important than the other countries...perhaps even less as we suffered fewer casualties. However, the point being made when some people say that we "saved" the British is that the war would not have been won if America hadn't stepped in...Britain was holding it's own but was running out of fuel. The other factor was Hitler invading the USSR; if either of those events had NOT occured then it seems Hitler would have won. This is, again, NOT degrading the countries that were in the fight from the beginning.
As for the "Forgotten War" I know very little...but I must again state that it makes no difference to me whether the British were fighting the enemy before the Americans because they deserve at least as much credit if not more whether or not they fought in Japan first. I do have a lot of pride in my country, but that's not to say it hasn't done really stupid things, and the delayed invasion (or any invasion...if they were going to stay out of it like they said then they should've just stayed out of it, but they were supplying weapons as you earlier said and therefore made the battle longer and worse for everybody since they supplied both sides) is included.
Gah, I'm tired of debating History right now, I'd rather fight my congestion =P
__________________
~{PIKACHEESES R PIKACHEESY}~
Spoiler Alert!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leves
This pwnage is brought to you by S.S.
Pwnage isn't pwnage unless its S.S. pwnage.
...I hate the little bastard. He could win a debate that the world is flat. ;D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emma
Welcome aboard to the S.S. Awesome
Awesome list:
Leves, Axtlar, Steph, Marioman, Wario, D_L, icyloopia, Emaa, Wreked, Shoko, Cyan, and prolly some others
As hilarious as that analogy was (and true) I must point out that you should really stop using generalizations. Many Americans, myself included, agree with you that those were bad tactics and indeed do NOT believe we "saved" you. It was because of ALL the Allies (yes, even USSR) that we won the war, and while America is indeed the country that jumped in to "save the day" at the last second, that does NOT mean that it's any more important than the other countries...perhaps even less as we suffered fewer casualties.
You're the first American I've heard say that. Literally.
Quote:
However, the point being made when some people say that we "saved" the British is that the war would not have been won if America hadn't stepped in...Britain was holding it's own but was running out of fuel. The other factor was Hitler invading the USSR; if either of those events had NOT occured then it seems Hitler would have won. This is, again, NOT degrading the countries that were in the fight from the beginning.
Of course, we'll never know. It could have been bad for the allies. It could have been better. Imagine, if the US hadn't stepped in. Perhaps Palestine would not have been created. Or if the USSR hadn't have stormed Berlin. It's all what if's. What was created from that war, was an amazing amount of debt towards the US. Even the UK didn't finish paying that off until last decade.
Quote:
As for the "Forgotten War" I know very little...but I must again state that it makes no difference to me whether the British were fighting the enemy before the Americans because they deserve at least as much credit if not more whether or not they fought in Japan first. I do have a lot of pride in my country, but that's not to say it hasn't done really stupid things, and the delayed invasion (or any invasion...if they were going to stay out of it like they said then they should've just stayed out of it, but they were supplying weapons as you earlier said and therefore made the battle longer and worse for everybody since they supplied both sides) is included.
I agree. But one thing that doesn't get talked about was the strangulation of shipping lines and oil to Japan before they attacked. If one was paranoid, one would assume that some things had been left out of the history books to create nationalism and patriotism since.
Anyway, interesting speaking to an American that doesn't feel that the UK "owes" them for "saving our asses". I hope I meet more Americans with your ideology.
Of course, we'll never know. It could have been bad for the allies. It could have been better. Imagine, if the US hadn't stepped in. Perhaps Palestine would not have been created. Or if the USSR hadn't have stormed Berlin. It's all what if's. What was created from that war, was an amazing amount of debt towards the US. Even the UK didn't finish paying that off until last decade.
Well yes, it IS all what ifs...but my point was simply that if the war had continued with the same pattern then it would not have ended the same. That's not to say you could not have won without our help, just that the circumstances at the time suggested failure. Again, something could have happened to change the course of events, but if nothing else you suffered fewer casualties then you would have without our help, though still way more than you should have and we should have helped right from the start.
I'm amazed that you haven't met other Americans that agree with me...I have met very few who DO think the UK owes the US somehow. I apologize for any you have encountered with such an attitude.
__________________
~{PIKACHEESES R PIKACHEESY}~
Spoiler Alert!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leves
This pwnage is brought to you by S.S.
Pwnage isn't pwnage unless its S.S. pwnage.
...I hate the little bastard. He could win a debate that the world is flat. ;D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emma
Welcome aboard to the S.S. Awesome
Awesome list:
Leves, Axtlar, Steph, Marioman, Wario, D_L, icyloopia, Emaa, Wreked, Shoko, Cyan, and prolly some others
Well yes, it IS all what ifs...but my point was simply that if the war had continued with the same pattern then it would not have ended the same. That's not to say you could not have won without our help, just that the circumstances at the time suggested failure. Again, something could have happened to change the course of events, but if nothing else you suffered fewer casualties then you would have without our help, though still way more than you should have and we should have helped right from the start.
True, but then information was about that said that the Japanese were likely to surrender soon, when Truman dropped the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Sometimes, death counts don't mean squat to some people, they're in it for the power.
Quote:
A Secret Memorandum
It was only after the war that the American public learned about Japan's efforts to bring the conflict to an end. Chicago Tribune reporter Walter Trohan, for example, was obliged by wartime censorship to withhold for seven months one of the most important stories of the war.
In an article that finally appeared August 19, 1945, on the front pages of the Chicago Tribune and the Washington Times-Herald, Trohan revealed that on January 20, 1945, two days prior to his departure for the Yalta meeting with Stalin and Churchill, President Roosevelt received a 40-page memorandum from General Douglas MacArthur outlining five separate surrender overtures from high-level Japanese officials. (The complete text of Trohan's article is in the Winter 1985-86 Journal, pp. 508-512.)
This memo showed that the Japanese were offering surrender terms virtually identical to the ones ultimately accepted by the Americans at the formal surrender ceremony on September 2 -- that is, complete surrender of everything but the person of the Emperor. Specifically, the terms of these peace overtures included:
Complete surrender of all Japanese forces and arms, at home, on island possessions, and in occupied countries.
Occupation of Japan and its possessions by Allied troops under American direction.
Japanese relinquishment of all territory seized during the war, as well as Manchuria, Korea and Taiwan.
Regulation of Japanese industry to halt production of any weapons and other tools of war.
Release of all prisoners of war and internees.
Surrender of designated war criminals.
I'm amazed that you haven't met other Americans that agree with me...I have met very few who DO think the UK owes the US somehow. I apologize for any you have encountered with such an attitude.
No need to apologise, it's just a refreshing stance on the issue.
True, but then information was about that said that the Japanese were likely to surrender soon, when Truman dropped the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Sometimes, death counts don't mean squat to some people, they're in it for the power.
Very true...also because if we were counting deaths then the USSR wins (well, loses, but has the highest score =P)
__________________
~{PIKACHEESES R PIKACHEESY}~
Spoiler Alert!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leves
This pwnage is brought to you by S.S.
Pwnage isn't pwnage unless its S.S. pwnage.
...I hate the little bastard. He could win a debate that the world is flat. ;D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emma
Welcome aboard to the S.S. Awesome
Awesome list:
Leves, Axtlar, Steph, Marioman, Wario, D_L, icyloopia, Emaa, Wreked, Shoko, Cyan, and prolly some others
As far as the thread goes i am voting for Mccain without a doubt unless he dies b4 then. Not to be mean but he is on up there in age. Health seems to be good though. Primaries I voted for Romney though.
__________________
Highly anticipating The Conduit
"There is nothing FAIR about the (Fairness Doctrine). Stop Socialism in America"
I am well educated and i study politics about three hours a day. I don't like Obama for the fact of his Universal Healthcare policies. That is a horrible idea no matter how you try it. It has failed in Canada and will fail in America. If you need supporting facts look at the social security situation. I am only voting for McCain as he is towards the middle and is willing to stay in Iraq. Pulling out will be devestating as history has shown us. (WWII)
__________________
Highly anticipating The Conduit
"There is nothing FAIR about the (Fairness Doctrine). Stop Socialism in America"
I am well educated and i study politics about three hours a day. I don't like Obama for the fact of his Universal Healthcare policies. That is a horrible idea no matter how you try it.
What do you mean by that? And how is this bad?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama
“We now face an opportunity — and an obligation — to turn the page on the failed politics of yesterday's health care debates… My plan begins by covering every American. If you already have health insurance, the only thing that will change for you under this plan is the amount of money you will spend on premiums. That will be less. If you are one of the 45 million Americans who don't have health insurance, you will have it after this plan becomes law. No one will be turned away because of a preexisting condition or illness.”
— Barack Obama, Speech in Iowa City, IA, May 29, 2007
How has it failed in Canada? What about other countries that have social healthcare? The UK has the NHS. Is that bad? Had it failed? Should health only be for those that can a, afford to be healthy and b, are already healthy and as such can get health insurance?
Quote:
If you need supporting facts look at the social security situation.
What part of the "situation" are you refering to?
Quote:
I am only voting for McCain as he is towards the middle and is willing to stay in Iraq. Pulling out will be devestating as history has shown us. (WWII)
McCain towards the middle? Hahahahahahaha. I would actually say that Obama is more towards the middle here. But then America has always had a skewed version of politics anyways, so I won't hold it against you. Oh, and if you don't pull out, in fear of Iraq being devestated, exactly how is Iraq going to be? Will Iraq become a lookout post into Iran? Will Iraq suddenly become a neo-colony of some sort? How are things going to change? When all the insurgents are dead? How would you know?
Linear Mode
