[b said:
Quote[/b] (chaco27saf @ June 23 2005,10:23)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (sufcintheprem @ June 23 2005,11:01)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (chaco27saf @ June 23 2005,10:55)]well over a hundred years later helped you win both World Wars.
Just highlighted a couple of words there.
Somehow I don't think Messrs Hitler, Hirohito and Mussolini would have been content to sit on their large empires with a considerable US thorn in their sides. Perhaps if there was American support from the beginning, many lives could have been saved...
I actually wasn't trying to start an argument here. Several months ago we actually had this debate about why the USA didn't enter either World War at their beginnings. So here are a few quick points hopefully so we can avoid a long debate on this (but if anyone wants to start arguing about this go ahead and start a new thread so he don't hijack this one, I'm bored and could use something to do.
)
-WWI was a European conflict that only started becuase of the network of alliances that had devolped throughout Europe. American justification for entering this war was always a bit sketchy. The only reason we entered the war was because our oldest ally (France) and one of our newest allies (Britain) needed our help to break the deadlock of the war.
-WWII was a very different situation from WWI, since this time there was definitely a good vs. evil situation. However, this was not known immediately in the states, and since WWI was still fresh in the memories of Americans, they wanted to avoid entering what was seen as another European conflict. Once the pure evil of Hitler became more apparent FDR did everything he could to support the allies, but the American population was still against entering another war. However, Pearl Harbor changed all of that.
Problem is, whilst its understandable America not wanting to get involved in a European War, they were quite happy to give us tanks at bankrupting rates which up and still a few years ago I believe we were still paying off, not very neighbourly considering we were meant to be fighting the 'axis of evil' and America looked at it as more of a way to make money and hold us over a barrel.
Oh and whilst we got the $%&* knocked out of us e.g. the Blitz, Coventry and all the other cities that were bombed relentlessly, America was never bombed, yet you do sometimes get the impression they had it worse off, I wonder if the shoe had been on the other foot how America would have acted, would they have stayed fighting, I dunno.
We came out of the war with nothing, no jobs, no money and no real gain. And a big pile of debt too boot.
America on the other hand came in, completely took over and acted like it was there war and they were the only people in it and then at the end decided to take what they want (still hasn't changed much to do this day) They came out of the war strong and firmly established as a super power.
Britain lives on Past Glories of course it does, and if it had not been for WW1/WW2 then we may still have some sort of Empire. Which whilst I understand countries wanting freedom, it’s a shame we don't still have a empire as it really is a marvel to see how we controlled so many countries 10x the size of ours and we flourished.
America owe us a great deal, we have stood by them always, found there land they call home and been there voice in Europe for years now. We fought alone in WW2 for quite sometime and I refuse to thank the Americans, they didn't do it to help us, they did it for themselves.
Please don't get me wrong Seth, I am not having a dig at the American people or you, just some of things that people say about the US winds me up at times because at the end of the day America’s foreign policy always thinks of Number 1.
P.S The Royals, are a pain in the arse but they are our history and are no doubt good for the country in general, I think £37m is a acceptable expense considering the millions wasted on red tape and in Europe etc.
