Exactly when was America great?

[getupkid55]

Well Great Britain is great... I mean they even have the word great in there.

[Annoying]

What's the source for that?

HBO show called "The Newsroom".

[Mentia]

We were fighting the Japanese all over South East Asia from Thailand to Hong Kong, to Malaysia and Indonesia. It didn't exactly culminate in a string of victories, and there were some retreats yes, but we had far too many interests there to risk losing them all. But still, the main war was at home on our own soil and that took priority.

Let me ask you, if America didn't supply the USSR with supplies/intel and they continued their fall against the Nazi advance, how long would the British have lasted under Hitler's full gaze? Even with American supplies to help their war effort, I don't think Great Britain would have lasted a few months at that point in time.

[Poopymonster]

Should history classes also be edited so they don't say bad things about the country?

According to Texas, yes.

- - - Updated - - -

It never was. The degenerate British traitors that dared defy us stayed there and have grown to have a superiority complex that they believe their precious country is the centre of the Earth, not the core.

They were terrorists, but they won, so they were Freedom Fighters.

- - - Updated - - -

What exactly is everyones defination of being ''great''?

It's probably up there with "support our troops".

Has no definition, meaningless, but it gives you a freedom boner thinking how right it is.

[Linkedblade]

What's the source for that?

TV show called newsroom, pilot episode first scene. To bad that's the last good moment of the show.

- - - Updated - - -

America was great after the war that left Europe in ruins and debt, and we didn't have to rebuild anything here. From that point to the late 60s when are nation started war mongering.

[Everwake]

By this meticulous standard, nothing in the world has ever been great.

[Jessicka]

Let me ask you, if America didn't supply the USSR with supplies/intel and they continued their fall against the Nazi advance, how long would the British have lasted under Hitler's full gaze? Even with American supplies to help their war effort, I don't think Great Britain would have lasted a few months at that point in time.

Hitler had given up on Britain, we repelled his attacks in the Battle of Britain, retained air superiority and he decided he'd have more luck taking a ground invasion into the USSR than to try a sea-invasion to Britain which would have simply been sunk in the Channel (Hitler's army and Navy lacked any kind of sea-landing capability). Once he did that, we were also able to make reversals in North Africa, opening up potential for striking across Southern Europe, opening up a third front. Remember, the British military wasn't just our tiny Island we have now, it was an Empire, it included Indian, Australian, New Zealand and Canadian forces - it was vast.

It's hard to speculate; it would doubtless have taken a longer, and certainly cost more Russian and British Empire lives, but we were making those reversals before US forces really got involved. The USSR already had a Scorched Earth withdrawal battleplan, and had moved their heavy industry further East; it's hard to then say how far they could have even retreated and functionally overstretched the German army to a point that they could have still executed the outflanking they always had in mind - that Moscow never fell just shows you how much room they had spare. The further they drew the Germans East, the wider they'd have been left open from British Forces in the Mediterranean as well. The pivotal moment was the decision to leave Britain alone and go to Russia instead. If we'd lost the Battle of Britain, lost our air superiority, allowed an invasion, we'd have lost North Africa, leaving German forces free to go all out in Russia. And we'd have lost South East Asia, freeing up a lot more Japanese forces against the USA.

The real difference the USA made was in the Pacific; but then you could start to speculate then what if the Japanese never got started? Ultimately, yes, the USA played its part; but the very fact that it is open to debate as to how pivotal their intervention was demonstrates the margins of this, since many of the critical phases had already passed.

[Pengekaer]

Hitler had given up on Britain, we repelled his attacks in the Battle of Britain, retained air superiority and he decided he'd have more luck taking a ground invasion into the USSR than to try a sea-invasion to Britain which would have simply been sunk in the Channel (Hitler's army and Navy lacked any kind of sea-landing capability). Once he did that, we were also able to make reversals in North Africa, opening up potential for striking across Southern Europe, opening up a third front. Remember, the British military wasn't just our tiny Island we have now, it was an Empire, it included Indian, Australian, New Zealand and Canadian forces - it was vast.

It's hard to speculate; it would doubtless have taken a longer, and certainly cost more Russian and British Empire lives, but we were making those reversals before US forces really got involved. The USSR already had a Scorched Earth withdrawal battleplan, and had moved their heavy industry further East; it's hard to then say how far they could have even retreated and functionally overstretched the German army to a point that they could have still executed the outflanking they always had in mind - that Moscow never fell just shows you how much room they had spare. The further they drew the Germans East, the wider they'd have been left open from British Forces in the Mediterranean as well. The pivotal moment was the decision to leave Britain alone and go to Russia instead. If we'd lost the Battle of Britain, lost our air superiority, allowed an invasion, we'd have lost North Africa, leaving German forces free to go all out in Russia. And we'd have lost South East Asia, freeing up a lot more Japanese forces against the USA.

The real difference the USA made was in the Pacific; but then you could start to speculate then what if the Japanese never got started? Ultimately, yes, the USA played its part; but the very fact that it is open to debate as to how pivotal their intervention was demonstrates the margins of this, since many of the critical phases had already passed.

I completely a agree. Hitler scrapped Sea Lion. Britain wasn't going to get conquered.
But in all honestly, I believe the main contribution of America in WW2 was not in stopping Nazi Germany, but in halting the Red Army in Eastern Europe past 1945. Without the massive US force, what would have stopped the soviet hordes in Eastern Germany?

[Kellhound]

It was great to ensure that some of nature was protected, given that pretty much all that has not been protected gets degraded. And if you want to blame the loss of heavy industry on something, place the blame where it belongs: with the greedy assholes who worship free market liberalism and globalization.

"Protected" by people who do not usually ever see the outdoors, unless you count the local park "outdoors".

The blame also goes to the unions and environmentalists among others.

- - - Updated - - -

Something about American companies supplying the German army right up until the declaration, and British Empire troops from Australia, New Zealand, India and Malaysia fighting Japanese forces years before Pearl Harbour.

The Allies got FAR more from the US than the Axis did. The US supplied Russia with the weapons and supplies for 60 divisions through the Persian corridor alone.

Wrong, Japan attacked the US and British forces the same day.

- - - Updated - - -

Yep, no trade restrictions were enacted, allowing the USA to profit from both factions in the European theatre.


Yeah, we withdrew them to fight a campaign in North Africa as the precursor to an invasion of Italy; that theatre was more important strategically, but not one the US was involved in.

The campaign in North Africa was to keep the Suez Canal in British hands more than anything else.

- - - Updated - - -

I completely a agree. Hitler scrapped Sea Lion. Britain wasn't going to get conquered.
But in all honestly, I believe the main contribution of America in WW2 was not in stopping Nazi Germany, but in halting the Red Army in Eastern Europe past 1945. Without the massive US force, what would have stopped the soviet hordes in Eastern Germany?

Britain was just going to be starved to death.

[Deleted]

Britain was just going to be starved to death.

How the devil did you manage to reach that conclusion?

[Kellhound]

How the devil did you manage to reach that conclusion?

Britain required a million tons of imports a WEEK.

[Thepersona]

How the devil did you manage to reach that conclusion?

he just wants to further the cause that the US was the sole major contributor for turning the tide of WW2, listen to him!
(while he blatantly ignores the USSR and the eastern front, and stalingrad)

[Biged781]

Ship this stupid kid off to some war torn third world country for a few weeks and he'll be singing the Star-Spangled banner in no time.

[Kellhound]

he just wants to further the cause that the US was the sole major contributor for turning the tide of WW2, listen to him!
(while he blatantly ignores the USSR and the eastern front, and stalingrad)

I dont ignore the USSR, after all the US supplied over $11 billion in weapons and material to them and their ability to kill one German for every two Soviet casualties, to destroy one German tank for every 3 Soviet tanks destroyed, and shooting down 1 German aircraft for every 4 Soviet plane shot down was very helpful.