If Obama topples Bashar Al Assad...

[Tommy Knocks]

now I wish we'd have not entered the war, or at least kept it one front. apparently our assistance was not appreciated abroad.

I also wonder how the UK would have dealt with the Soviets IF they'd defeated Germany. A war torn UK vs a refreshened proud Soviet front. lol.

Nobody likes to admit they need us, but everyone needs us.

 

[Tommy Knocks]

So? The average Syrian doesn't give a fukk about blacks. They haven't given a fukk for 5000 years. Black people are servant and whores in Saudi Arabia. A Saudi told me so.

What does Saudi Arabia have to do with Syria. You just went from Syria to Saudi Arabia in one sentence.

There are no black servants or whores in Syria, only refugees who the Syrians are helping.

 

[theworldismine13]

Read my first post, the RAF defeated the 1st wave of the German invasion, seriously hurting Germany's plans, after that Hitler dropped the plans for invasion, America had no impact whatsoever on the Battle of Britain, shyt, even Poland helped us more then you

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Britain

and yes Germany, if invaded could and probably would have took Britain, but you can't take credit for Hitler's mistakes



you say supplying, others would say selling with interest added, hardly some kind of good will


The Supreme commander was General Eisenhower but he had had three deputy commanders: FM Montgomery-land forces; Admiral Sir Bertram Ramsay-naval forces; Air Marshal Sir Trafford Leigh-Mallory-air forces, All British.

The Marshall plans admitted primary function was to prevent the spread of Communism, Hardly the most altruistic deed



Germany called off the Invasion in Nov'40 after failing to win air superiority over Britian




I couldn't give a shiny shyte about Japan, how were they a threat to Britain? but yeah, if America hadn't embargoed Japan then that might have allowed Japan the freedom of taking more of China or even attacking USSR from the east.

The Embargo forced Japan south to take the oil fields of Dutch East Indies, saving Russia to fight on one front only.

This and selling Britain supplies are Americas biggest contributions to the Allied victory in Europe.

Plus Russia's role in Japan's surrender is notoriously understated
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet–Japanese_War_(1945)



errm in 1939 we had 200,000 Indian forces, by 1945 it was up to 2.5m. But your right, the Indians were the most useless forces we had.




After all that, I'm not diminishing the role the US played in WW2 but the rah-rah superman saved the world bullshyt your forced-fed, especially in Europe and the UK in particular, just doesnt stand up to facts.


If any of you are interested in WW2 I suggest checking out 'the world at war' Documentary series, I dont know if its ever been shown in the US, but its pretty all encompassing and narrated by Lawrence Olivier

back to topic, Go SAA, smash the alNusra rats

we already had this argument when motherfukers were trying to give the russians credit for wwii

but anyways like i pointed out i that other thread after dunkirk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dunkirk: the british had no offensive capability whatsoever, there is no scenario under which britian could have defeated hitler without the americans coming in to rescue them

the battle of britain was a defensive air battle for britain that brought them some time until the americans came

 

[88m3]

Arguing Britain could have fought WWII themselves


I'm a fan but honestly they lost on every front from the start of the war.

What was the game plan for all the guys they left in the Pacific after the Fall of Singapore?

 

[Julius Skrrvin]

Arguing Britain could have fought WWII themselves


I'm a fan but honestly they lost on every front from the start of the war.

What was the game plan for all the guys they left in the Pacific after the Fall of Singapore?

I'm sure they were fine with losing Hong Kong, Burma, Singapore, and maybe eventually India

flesh wound

 

[Broke Wave]

The Russians are largely responsible for the defeat of the Germans in WW2 but their victory was contingent on U.S. support. The North Atlantic trade routes to the UK is the only reason they survived, and Germany could have STILL invaded and crushed the UK in 1940 however Hitler was getting antsy and wanted to gear up to fight the Russians.

Overall our British friend has a very poor reading of history.

Back to the matter at hand, the clock is ticking on Assad, that piece of shyt


To anyone who says that the gas attack is a false flag, 9/11 is an inside job.

You want proof? fukk off.

 

[88m3]

The Russians are largely responsible for the defeat of the Germans in WW2 but their victory was contingent on U.S. support. The North Atlantic trade routes to the UK is the only reason they survived, and Germany could have STILL invaded and crushed the UK in 1940 however Hitler was getting antsy and wanted to gear up to fight the Russians.

Overall our British friend has a very poor reading of history.

Back to the matter at hand, the clock is ticking on Assad, that piece of shyt


To anyone who says that the gas attack is a false flag, 9/11 is an inside job.

You want proof? fukk off.

Kerry issued a statement earlier today, not sure if he would do that unless they planned on doing something.


Assad might play a one sided game of catch with a jdam tonight.

 

[Resident Geordie]

we already had this argument when motherfukers were trying to give the russians credit for wwii :heh

but anyways like i pointed out i that other thread after dunkirk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dunkirk: the british had no offensive capability whatsoever, there is no scenario under which britian could have defeated hitler without the americans coming in to rescue them

the battle of britain was a defensive air battle for britain that brought them some time until the americans came

Wow, you don't think Russia played the biggest part of beating Germany? the Battle of Kursk was almost as big as the whole western campaign by itself. Germany had 3 times as many units on the eastern front. Do you believe the US took Berlin?

After Dunkirk, Britain still had the strongest Navy in the world, which kept open supply lines in the Atlantic, the Med and Arctic, and also a capable Air force (which along with you yanks, bombed Germany through out the war). To say they had no offensive capability is almost as ridiculous as saying Russia didn't deserve credit for winning ww2.

Not to mention the Americans wanted to invade France first rather then Italy, if we listened to you, the western front would have been a disaster.

Arguing Britain could have fought WWII themselves


I'm a fan but honestly they lost on every front from the start of the war.

What was the game plan for all the guys they left in the Pacific after the Fall of Singapore?

Reading comprehension fail no2 for the day, 88

no-where is it suggested that Britain could have fought WWII themselves and I've said Britain would have falling to Germany if invaded
but the US gets no credit for the fact that we weren't invaded

Them in Singapore were fukked but that's down to the failings of imperialism

 

[Broke Wave]

Kerry issued a statement earlier today, not sure if he would do that unless they planned on doing something.


Assad might play a one sided game of catch with a jdam tonight.

 

[theworldismine13]

Wow, you don't think Russia played the biggest part of beating Germany? the Battle of Kursk was almost as big as the whole western campaign by itself. Germany had 3 times as many units on the eastern front. Do you believe the US took Berlin?

After Dunkirk, Britain still had the strongest Navy in the world, which kept open supply lines in the Atlantic, the Med and Arctic, and also a capable Air force (which along with you yanks, bombed Germany through out the war). To say they had no offensive capability is almost as ridiculous as saying Russia didn't deserve credit for winning ww2.

Not to mention the Americans wanted to invade France first rather then Italy, if we listened to you, the western front would have been a disaster.

i think there is no way the russians would have made it berlin without america coming in to the war

yeah the uk navy kept the supply lines open...................to america dummy and it wasnt necessarily due to power of the uk navy, it was the convoy system that made it somewhat safe (it was a system under which they literally left men to die that got hit by german subs and kept it moving), and the lanes did not come clear from german submarines until the american naval and air power got involved

at dunkirk the uk had lost all land offensive capability and had few planes left, the air war over germany was dominated by american planes, the british planes which were built after the defeat at dunkirk were built with american money and american material

why would italy have been disaster?

 

[Resident Geordie]

The Russians are largely responsible for the defeat of the Germans in WW2 but their victory was contingent on U.S. support. The North Atlantic trade routes to the UK is the only reason they survived, and Germany could have STILL invaded and crushed the UK in 1940 however Hitler was getting antsy and wanted to gear up to fight the Russians.

I agree with all of this, could you possibly quote me where I've contradicted any of this? I've actually mentioned at least twice Britain, if invaded would have fell to Germany, I also mentioned US Support was one of biggest contributions to the Allied victory in Europe.

Overall our British friend has a very poor reading of history.

Back to the matter at hand, the clock is ticking on Assad, that piece of shyt


lol, I've heard this for 2.5 years now, and you Takfiris still couldn't do it without Great Satan's help, ask Gaddaffi

 

[Resident Geordie]

i think there is no way the russians would have made it berlin without america coming in to the war

yeah the uk navy kept the supply lines open...................to america dummy and it wasnt necessarily due to power of the uk navy, it was the convoy system that made it somewhat safe (it was a system under which they literally left men to die that got hit by german subs and kept it moving), and the lanes did not come clear from german submarines until the american naval and air power got involved

at dunkirk the uk had lost all land offensive capability and had few planes left, the air war over germany was dominated by american planes, the british planes which were built after the defeat at dunkirk were built with american money and american material

why would italy have been disaster?

Again, selling Britain supplies was one Americas biggest contributions to the Allied victory in Europe, but the fact we payed you back to the penny with interest negates any credit for America "saving us"

Nah, the Invasion of France without taking Italy out of the war would have been a disaster.

 

[theworldismine13]

Again, selling Britain supplies was one Americas biggest contributions to the Allied victory in Europe, but the fact we payed you back to the penny with interest negates any credit for America "saving us"

Nah, the Invasion of France without taking Italy out of the war would have been a disaster.

again, the british had no offensive capability after dunkirk and america did way more than lend money, there would have been no western front without america getting involved, the US did save the UK, there isnt any honest reading of history other than that

you are just repeating your statement, but i still dont get why you say it would have been a disaster to go through italy, thats an honest question, i think it would have been clusterfuk either way

 

[88m3]

Again, selling Britain supplies was one Americas biggest contributions to the Allied victory in Europe, but the fact we payed you back to the penny with interest negates any credit for America "saving us"

Nah, the Invasion of France without taking Italy out of the war would have been a disaster.

I mean yeah sort of, the alternative being you speaking German or if you were Jewish or Black, dead.





I agree with the later.

 

[88m3]

Reading comprehension fail no2 for the day, 88

no-where is it suggested that Britain could have fought WWII themselves and I've said Britain would have falling to Germany if invaded
but the US gets no credit for the fact that we weren't invaded

Them in Singapore were fukked but that's down to the failings of imperialism

It was implied

The Battle of Britain was brilliant, no one would deny that.


Without American supplies you would have been invaded. It is what it is.

So you're going to just write off the majority of your military(and Empire) to the failings of imperialism, like shrug?