NationStates Jolt Archive

......but Canada had one of the Beaches of Normandy on D-Day in World War II. You know, that little battle which people describe as The Longest Day and point to as the critical turning point in WWII

Not only that, but they have repelled invasions from the United States of America on many occasions. Yes, the U.S.A was beaten by Canada. Not just once, but many many times.

I see so many people talk about how Canada is a pansy country, but they always seem to forget a few things. Canada might not go around starting a war every year and annexing a country for absolutely no reason (Which, by the way, is a good thing to not do) but they are more than capable of doing so if necessary and have had their fare share of combat in the past.

Canada rocks, and you'd do well to remember that!

This message brought to you by a citizen of the United States of America

And apparently, some Canadians are trying to convince their government to give US soldiers who have fled to avoid Iraq service (Vietnam analogy, anyone?) political asylum. I hope they do it.

Agreed.

The only issue I have with the Canadian military right now is the faulty submarines we just bought from Britain

......but Canada had one of the Beaches of Normandy on D-Day in World War II. You know, that little battle which people describe as The Longest Day and point to as the critical turning point in WWII

Good to see the Canadians get it right that time after the whole farce at Dieppe. (No flame intended).

In Reply To #1

Thank you! I'm a proud Canadian and I get very tired of hearing about how Canada is a "pansy country." Just because we choose NOT to fight, doesn't mean we can't.

Also, you'll NEVER see Canada get invaded. Almost one-third of our houses has at least one rifle in it (something like that, pretty high number though). If any army were to try to step in, the citizens would be doing more damage then our army.

Canada truly is a fantastic country, a little slice of civilized humanity on a continent otherwise devoid of it.

i hear there's some good stuff in mexico

Canadians have more guns per capita than Americans. And we don't even have a 'right to bear arms'.

I'd love moving to Canade, actually. Seems so nice and calm over there =)

You have to remember that Canada was not a nation back in those days. You should say the English repelled our invasions.

Agreed.

The only issue I have with the Canadian military right now is the faulty submarines we just bought from Britain

Or the ironically-named "Sea King" helicopters.

It nice to know that there are other's out there, that realize this fact.

Thanks Klonor, for renewing my faith in people.

*sings* Blame Canada, Blame Canada*sings*

forget the rest of the words :(

obviously South Park dosent like it :p

*sings* Blame Canada, Blame Canada*sings*

forget the rest of the words :(

obviously South Park dosent like it :p

They were taking the piss out of the Americans who had a problem with the Terence and Philip film, not the Canadians (well, more than the Canadians anyway).

......but Canada had one of the Beaches of Normandy on D-Day in World War II. You know, that little battle which people describe as The Longest Day and point to as the critical turning point in WWII

Not only that, but they have repelled invasions from the United States of America on many occasions. Yes, the U.S.A was beaten by Canada. Not just once, but many many times.

Many americans know of Canada's contribution to D-Day.

Repelled invasions? Could you elaborate?

To be fair, Steph does point it out every single time D-day is mentioned.

......but Canada had one of the Beaches of Normandy on D-Day in World War II. You know, that little battle which people describe as The Longest Day and point to as the critical turning point in WWII

Not only that, but they have repelled invasions from the United States of America on many occasions. Yes, the U.S.A was beaten by Canada. Not just once, but many many times.

I see so many people talk about how Canada is a pansy country, but they always seem to forget a few things. Canada might not go around starting a war every year and annexing a country for absolutely no reason (Which, by the way, is a good thing to not do) but they are more than capable of doing so if necessary and have had their fare share of combat in the past.

Canada rocks, and you'd do well to remember that!

This message brought to you by a citizen of the United States of America

Yes, your grandfathers did well to stand for Western Civilization back in the 40's. Where are you today? We kinda miss you.

Many? What history book did you read?
Canada became a country in 1867... aside from some skirmishes in the French & Indian Wars and the American Revolution, I can't think of when the US and Canada ever fought...

Yeah... with your 32 million, you can trounce Denmark or Portugal any day of the week! :) (ducks!)

Canada is a great nation, no doubt. I'm an American, and I like Canada, you're one of our brother nations.

But Canada does have it's shortcomings, as all nations do:
* It lacks a population large enough to make it a superpower.
* It barely has its own culture/national identity -- if you guys stopped sewing those maple leaf flags on your bags while in Europe, you'd be taken for Americans. As a culture, Canada really isn't much more developed than Southern California, New York, or Texas regionalisms are for Americans.
* Sports-wise, 12 Olympic medals isn't a very impressive achievement, nor is losing the Expos. And why is there a CFL? I give props for hockey, of course, but the Eastern Euros in particular seem to be taking over the league these days. I think there may be more Slovaks than Canadians on the ice these days!!
* 90% of you live within 160km of the US border. Not a great use of all that land... :)
* Only 6% of you are not European in origin. Not very diverse, really except for part of British Columbia.
* You still have a Queen. I thought you were pro-Democracy. ;)

Repelled invasions? Could you elaborate?

War of 1812, wasn't it? - three attempts by the US to invade Canada were repelled, Canada wasn't technically the same country as today back then, still being under British rule.

You'll never hear me speak ill of Canada. Juno Beach, Molson Ice, Hockey, Mike Myers - all Canadian. BTW, the British planned the Dieppe raid and the Canadians paid the price. And let us not forget Black Devils - the best the US and Canada had to offer.

In Reply To #1

Thank you! I'm a proud Canadian and I get very tired of hearing about how Canada is a "pansy country." Just because we choose NOT to fight, doesn't mean we can't.

Also, you'll NEVER see Canada get invaded. Almost one-third of our houses has at least one rifle in it (something like that, pretty high number though). If any army were to try to step in, the citizens would be doing more damage then our army.

In the States, politicians are trying to take away our ability to defend ourselves. Canada apparently has the right idea here.

Canada did fight beside us in WW2. D-day America took two beaches, the Canadians and Britian one apiece.

*bold in the quote mine*

BTW, the British planned the Dieppe raid and the Canadians paid the price.

Yes, I was aware of this, and the fact that they were repulsed was not a failure in the whole operation - it was of the nature of a probing or exploratory raid in order to see how strong the defenses were and what armed response would be forthcoming, even if it did have other more concrete objectives on paper. That is why I added the 'not a flame' note.

Yes, I was aware of this, and the fact that they were repulsed was not a failure in the whole operation - it was of the nature of a probing or exploratory raid in order to see how strong the defenses were and what armed response would be forthcoming, even if it did have other more concrete objectives on paper. That is why I added the 'not a flame' note.

I'm not flaming. The operation was poorly planned and all those involved, Canadians, British and American (I believe 10 US Army Rangers in the Rangers' first combat action) paid a dear price.

I'm not flaming.

Ah, you misunderstood me - I was referring to my initial post concerning Dieppe which could have been construed as a flame, and thus had (No flame intended) or words to that effect as a coda to it.

Other great Canadian military moments of WWII: stopping Michael Wittmann in Normandy.

Ah, you misunderstood me - I was referring to my initial post concerning Dieppe which could have been construed as a flame, and thus had (No flame intended) or words to that effect as a coda to it.

Ahh ... gotcha. What's the latin translation of your signature? Just wondering.

Ahh ... gotcha. What's the latin translation of your signature? Just wondering.

We go round and round in circles and are consumed by the flames - it seemed rather appropriate for the General Forum's more entertaining moments. It is also a palindrome, in case that had escaped your notice.

We go round and round in circles and are consumed by the flames

cute.

you forgot "nightly"

We go round and round in circles and are consumed by the flames

cute.

you forgot "nightly"

Damn, so I did: We go round and round in circles in the night and are consumed by the flames.

Really it should be: We enter the circle in the night and are consumed by the flames, but I prefer the slightly looser version of the translation.

Interesting, I just did a Google search on it, and found a site which claims it to be a riddle refering to some kind of animal: that I didn't know...

It is also a palindrome, in case that had escaped your notice.[/QUOTE]

No, I hadn't noticed. But now that you pointed it out - very cool.

Interesting, I just did a Google search on it, and found a site which claims it to be a riddle refering to some kind of animal: that I didn't know...

Ah, I think I've twigged onto what creature it is talking about.


Anyhow: back to the matter at hand... anybody got anything to say about Wittmann?

Damn, so I did: We go round and round in circles in the night and are consumed by the flames.

Really it should be: We enter the circle in the night and are consumed by the flames, but I prefer the slightly looser version of the translation.

Interesting, I just did a Google search on it, and found a site which claims it to be a riddle refering to some kind of animal: that I didn't know...

the circle could be the ring of people round the campfire then.

Ah, I think I've twigged onto what creature it is talking about.

Anyhow: back to the matter at hand... anybody got anything to say about Wittmann?

do tell?

and i'm afraid i don't know Wittman from Schmittman

the circle could be the ring of people round the campfire then.

Yes, but they aren't consumed by the flames (barring spectacular ill-fortune).

Yes, but they aren't consumed by the flames (barring spectacular ill-fortune).

na i mean that the animal could enter the circle, ie walk through the ring of people, and then carry on into the fire to be consumed by the flames.

do tell?

and i'm afraid i don't know Wittman from Schmittman

The German tank ace of WWII - originally fought in a STUG on the eastern front and was then transfered to Normandy before D-Day where he was put in charge of a section of Tigers. He almost singlehandedly stopped the British advance to Villers-Bocage and routed an entire company, despite having his tank shot out from underhim, only to return again later. He is recorded as having 138 tank kills.

He finally met his match when he ran into the Canadians and a group of Shermans managed to flank and destroy his Tiger.

na i mean that the animal could enter the circle, ie walk through the ring of people, and then carry on into the fire to be consumed by the flames.

Ah, right, I follow you now - I'm thinking about a creature that itself circles the flames before it comes to close and is burnt.

SPOILER: a moth.

Agreed.

The only issue I have with the Canadian military right now is the faulty submarines we just bought from Britain

Sorry mate. C.O.D., All Sales Final. Check your change before leaving the shop. Caveat Emptor, etc etc.

Sorry mate. C.O.D., All Sales Final. Check your change before leaving the shop. Caveat Emptor, etc etc.

Next time, buy American. We might not be able to build a car but we can sure build a killing machine like an attack sub.

Sorry mate. C.O.D., All Sales Final. Check your change before leaving the shop. Caveat Emptor, etc etc.

Buy American! Our subs don't sink!

Next time, buy American. We might not be able to build a car but we can sure build a killing machine like an attack sub.

On a cold Wednesday morn
They put her her out to sea
When the waves they were nine feet high.
And they dove beneath the waves
And they dove to their graves
And they never said a last goodbye.
And its deeper and deeper
And deeper they dove
Just to see what their ship could stand.
But the hull gave a moan
And the hull gave a groan
And they plunged to the deepest darkest sand.

Now she lies in the depths
Of the darkened ocean floor
Covered by the waters cold and still.
Oh can't you see the wrong
She was a death ship all along
Died before she had a chance to kill.


Now what was that you were saying about US attack subs?

Buy American! Our subs don't sink!

Doesn't that make them pretty useless as submarines? :rolleyes:

Not only that, but they have repelled invasions from the United States of America on many occasions. Yes, the U.S.A was beaten by Canada. Not just once, but many many times.
Klonor, you choose to ignore the fact that Canada was still a colony of Great Britain each of the times the United States fought the British. And each time, the Canadians were facing a relatively ragtag armies of Americans commanded by idiots rather than well-equipped soldiers commanded by generals of competent caliber.

Canada is not a pansy country, no matter what people say. However, I find it slightly galling that you say Canadians "defeated" the Americans several times.

Anyways, economically, the Canadian economy is heavily dependent on the American one. When the American economy goes down the drain, so will the Canadian one, and the Mexican one...

Doesn't that make them pretty useless as submarines? :rolleyes:

No shit.
:headbang:

No shit.
:headbang:
He meant sink as in the vessel does not take in water when it dives...

Now what was that you were saying about US attack subs?

The US has lost 2 nuclear attack subs since the launching of the Nautilus. The Thresher and the Scorpion. Considering the number of subs that were commissioned during that time, I would say the US Navy and the contractors that build these boats (Electric Boat Co., etc.) have a solid reputation of safe and extremely effective submarines. Compare it to the Soviet Navy's track record with submarines. The Kursk, the K-19 and the Golf-class lost in the pacific that the CIA tried to raise come to mind right off the bat and there were many others.

Doesn't that make them pretty useless as submarines? :rolleyes:

Sinking and submerging are to different things.

He meant sink as in the vessel does not take in water when it dives...

No. I meant that they do not sink. I was being a smartass.

Meh, my humor is wasted on morons.

*edit* BTW subs have to take in water to dive.

The US has lost 2 nuclear attack subs since the launching of the Nautilus.

While I believe the British Navy have lost one sub since WWII - the Affray in 1951.

I don't want to turn this into a pissing match here, but I would be interested in working out what the relative percentages of submarines constructed/submarines lost for the two nations would be. I concede that the USSR/Russia seems to have a very bad track record, but I also wonder whether there were just fielding a larger fleet of submarines, and so actually running at more or less the same percentage (I however do expect it to be somewhat higher than for the UK/US).

While I believe the British Navy have lost one sub since WWII - the Affray in 1951.

I don't want to turn this into a pissing match here, but I would be interested in working out what the relative percentages of submarines constructed/submarines lost for the two nations would be. I concede that the USSR/Russia seems to have a very bad track record, but I also wonder whether there were just fielding a larger fleet of submarines, and so actually running at more or less the same percentage (I however do expect it to be somewhat higher than for the UK/US).

The Russians were playing catch up with the US when it came to nuclear boats. The emphasis was on getting the boats operational and out to sea rather than safety. The Russian fleet was probably the same size as the US.

Klonor, you choose to ignore the fact that Canada was still a colony of Great Britain each of the times the United States fought the British. And each time, the Canadians were facing a relatively ragtag armies of Americans commanded by idiots rather than well-equipped soldiers commanded by generals of competent caliber.

Canada is not a pansy country, no matter what people say. However, I find it slightly galling that you say Canadians "defeated" the Americans several times.

Not to start a pissing contest but the Canadian army was pretty much the same as you just described. Also, Great Britain did not lend a hand to help Canada, seeing as they were busy attacking places like Baltimore. Only the US see this as anything else than a Canadian victory.


Anyways, economically, the Canadian economy is heavily dependent on the American one. When the American economy goes down the drain, so will the Canadian one, and the Mexican one...
Same thing about the US economy. If the Canadian one goes down, yours follow. It's pretty much a symbiose, economically speaking. Which is why I wonder why the US is using protectionist mesures against it's greatest trading partner.

Actually the United States's biggest trading partners right now are Japan and China...

And anyways, I wasn't born in the United States, I'm Chinese. In addition, I never want to be a citizen of the United States.

......but Canada had one of the Beaches of Normandy on D-Day in World War II. You know, that little battle which people describe as The Longest Day and point to as the critical turning point in WWII

Not only that, but they have repelled invasions from the United States of America on many occasions. Yes, the U.S.A was beaten by Canada. Not just once, but many many times.

I see so many people talk about how Canada is a pansy country, but they always seem to forget a few things. Canada might not go around starting a war every year and annexing a country for absolutely no reason (Which, by the way, is a good thing to not do) but they are more than capable of doing so if necessary and have had their fare share of combat in the past.

Canada rocks, and you'd do well to remember that!

This message brought to you by a citizen of the United States of America
Canada is not as advanced as nor as powerful as the United States in military terms. Then again, they've never had to be. I don't think Canada has any enemies. But I might be wrong.
The threat of the US invading Canada, let alone anyone else (invading Canada), is basically nonexistant at this time. (Could change in the future if either side changes to dictatorship govt. but as long as both are pretty much democracies with common interests, that will never happen.)

Actually the United States's biggest trading partners right now are Japan and China...

I'm afraid you're wrong. According to the US census Bureau, it's Canada.

http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/toppartners.html

I do feel the need to point out a few things concerning the Canadians in Normandy though, but only becuase I think the Canadians did a huge number of far greater things, but for some reason they settle on Normandy. The Canadian beach was not strictly Canadian, half of the forces attacking that particular beach were in fact British. About Wittman, that really could have been any allied tank force of that size, he could not get away, or destroy them all like he did to the British.

I think the defense of Hong Kong (against far greater odds), the Canadian First Armies exploits in clearing the Scheldt and Channel Ports, and closing the Falaise Gap with the American Third at Trun and Chambois (admittedly, it was a Polish division that did it). As for Dieppe, while some Americans were present (49 Rangers), and some Commandos (British), they were small in number, and the operation can safely be called a Canadian exploit and disaster (but British planned). Going back to World War I, the Canadian Corps performed admirably, especially in the assault on Vimy Ridge, a position both the French, then British had assaulted several times and failed.

And to say the Canadians did not stop several American invasions is not fair to Canada. That would be like saying any American victory in the War of Independence was not American, it was English (The US Government would not exist until the AoC or Constitution was signed). Canada was very much a nation, and the people who populated it considered themselves Canadian, not British, they just were not an sovereign and independent one (until 1867 and 1933 respectively). It was Canadian militia that beat back the US Invasions in the War of 1812, apparently those lovely British were busy with this French Emperor.

About Wittman, that really could have been any allied tank force of that size, he could not get away, or destroy them all like he did to the British.

True, to a certain extent, but viewed on a smaller scale actually having that larger force present (if only by luck) still counts as a victory. One could equally well say that he should not have been able to get away from the centre of Villers-Bocage when he had his Tiger shot out from under him, but still he did... but, the real point here is that if we count Wittmann as actually being a skilled tank commander, rather than just racking up a ludicrously large number of kills by chance, then the Canadians do deserve some recognition for being the ones to stop him.


Sword and Sheild, while we're at it, do you know the name of the comander of that KV-1 that held off a German tank company for almost a day with his single tank? I've heard the story several times, but either his name hasn't been given, or I have just forgotten it.

Canada rocks. I think Canada, France, and Sweden are incredibly awesome.

Not to start a pissing contest but the Canadian army was pretty much the same as you just described. Also, Great Britain did not lend a hand to help Canada, seeing as they were busy attacking places like Baltimore. Only the US see this as anything else than a Canadian victory.



Same thing about the US economy. If the Canadian one goes down, yours follow. It's pretty much a symbiose, economically speaking. Which is why I wonder why the US is using protectionist mesures against it's greatest trading partner.
Interestingly enough, you are our greatest trading partner because cigarettes and beer are cheaper here. Less tax, you know.

Also, it was British armies that defeated the Americans, not Canadians. Not only that, but the Americans had to trek for weeks in freezing weather just to get to Canada. Hardly top condition. Plus the constant threat of Indian raids on expeditions. By the way, if you think there are a lot of guns in Canada, then you just think about what would happen to someone who invaded the southern half of the US. I'd put us against you any day ;) . And by the way, I'm not intending to be insulting there, I just think that your greates advantage lays in your shitty weather. Kind of like Russia.

I think Canada, France, and Sweden are incredibly awesome.
Yea... France is great...
$#!+, who the hell am I kidding.

i hear there's some good stuff in mexico
mexico rules. if the U>S could recruit mexicans to fight in Iraq, there would be no rebels there. They would be too afraid of the badass mexicans.

Interestingly enough, you are our greatest trading partner because cigarettes and beer are cheaper here. Less tax, you know.

Also, it was British armies that defeated the Americans, not Canadians. Not only that, but the Americans had to trek for weeks in freezing weather just to get to Canada. Hardly top condition. Plus the constant threat of Indian raids on expeditions. By the way, if you think there are a lot of guns in Canada, then you just think about what would happen to someone who invaded the southern half of the US. I'd put us against you any day ;) . And by the way, I'm not intending to be insulting there, I just think that your greates advantage lays in your shitty weather. Kind of like Russia.
well, I see a lack of guns as a good thing. Go canada.

This is great... I am a very proud Canadian, and it's wonderful to know that others realize this fact. Canada has a very long and diverse military history, we realize that when we have to fight, we can and will. But that the burdens and horrors we will carry will last longer then the fight. Hence our Peacekeeping roles. Why be feared and counter-attacked, when you can be loved and respected instead?
Also just on a side note, a Canadian soldier is better trained, and more heavily armed then our American counterparts. While our military equipment (planes, sub's etc) may not be appropriate for a country of our status, the fact that we have had to learn to rely on human skill, rather then on mechanical machinery, makes us more then suited for our jobs as soldiers or Peacekeepers.

Canada has a very long and diverse military history, we realize that when we have to fight, we can and will.

'A long and diverse military history'?

Do you really count 137 years as a long time?

Sometimes the lack of perspective of these New Worlders amazes me.

Interestingly enough, you are our greatest trading partner because cigarettes and beer are cheaper here. Less tax, you know..
I'm sorry but we trade in more than just booze and cigarettes. Just take eletricity for example. The amount of electricity both country trade back and forth is enormous. So much that when one power plant in Ohio is malfunctionning, there's no electricity from New York to north of Toronto.


Also, it was British armies that defeated the Americans, not Canadians. Not only that, but the Americans had to trek for weeks in freezing weather just to get to Canada. Hardly top condition. Plus the constant threat of Indian raids on expeditions. By the way, if you think there are a lot of guns in Canada, then you just think about what would happen to someone who invaded the southern half of the US. I'd put us against you any day ;) . And by the way, I'm not intending to be insulting there, I just think that your greates advantage lays in your shitty weather. Kind of like Russia.
Our history books (yours may vary) say that it was both British and Canadians that burned the white house. And the recent statistics say that there are more guns per person in Canada. Granted, there are more guns in the US period. And we gotta love that weather. It's one of our greatest defense (kind of like Russia).

'A long and diverse military history'?

Do you really count 137 years as a long time?

Sometimes the lack of perspective of these New Worlders amazes me.

Yes we New worlders haven't been around long, but who keeps saving the world?

Canadians and Americans: We are brothers in that we stole our nations from the indigenous populations. New zealand and australia want in on this? Wait....
:p

Good to see the Canadians get it right that time after the whole farce at Dieppe. (No flame intended).
September 3, 1939 In History

Britain declares war on Germany. France follows 6 hours later quickly joined by Australia, NZ, South Africa & Canada.

At least we didn't wait until Dec. 7, 1941 to get involved?

September 3, 1939 In History

Britain declares war on Germany. France follows 6 hours later quickly joined by Australia, NZ, South Africa & Canada.

At least we didn't wait until Dec. 7, 1941 to get involved?

We were not attacked until dec 7. We did support you until we were attacked.

Just as we did in the first world war.

The Canadians wanted to help the US after September 11th, so they agreed to deploy some troops to Afghanistan. The Canadians didn't have the correct colored uniforms for camo, so the US supplied them with uniforms. The Canadians didn't have enough working rifles, so the US provided extra M-16s. The Canadians didn't have transportation, so the US flew them. The Canadians didn't have field gear, so the US provided them with extra tents and the like. And then the Canadians got blown up by a US fighter pilot who thought they were enemy forces and now claims to have been high on speed.

Ladies and gentlemen, the power and prestige of the Canadian armed forces.

As for Dieppe, while some Americans were present (49 Rangers), and some Commandos (British), they were small in number, and the operation can safely be called a Canadian exploit and disaster (but British planned).
Dieppe sent shockwaves through the Empire/Commonwealth. A Canadian force was *stopped*. Unfortunately, the US didn't understand what this meant - if they had, you'd have had the 'funnies' at Omaha and Utah beaches.
Which would have saved how many lives?

BUt I said shockwaves. The thing is, Commonwealth troops tend to specialise, using our own unique strengths, so as to contribute to the whole. Aussies are unit killers, the Kiwis had the best flat tragectory artillery - and Canadian units just roll towards objectives, ignoring or trashing anything in their way. They could even get breakthroughs in WWI.
So if they couldn't breakout, we knew it was impossible.

Dieppe sent shockwaves through the Empire/Commonwealth. A Canadian force was *stopped*. Unfortunately, the US didn't understand what this meant - if they had, you'd have had the 'funnies' at Omaha and Utah beaches.
Which would have saved how many lives?

What history book have you been reading, there were "funnies" present at both Omaha and Utah, the ones at Omaha floundered however (poor planning and deployment in tides), while most of them got ashore at Utah. And to call Dieppe an aciton where the Canadians were "stopped" barely touches on the scale of the disaster, the only thing gleaned from it (there were early version of Funnies at Dieppe, Dieppe itself did not convince them of the need for them) was to further convince the Allies a direct assault on a port was suicidal, but that is a hell of a price to pay.

As for the KV-1 that held of a German tank force mentioned earlier, I know where it was, just outside of Ostrov (in the Baltic States), and a German tank army was delayed for three days by just a single KV-1, unfortunately I am not aware of the name of the commander/crew of the KV-1 in question.

Actually the United States's biggest trading partners right now are Japan and China...

And anyways, I wasn't born in the United States, I'm Chinese. In addition, I never want to be a citizen of the United States.

US
Exports - partners:
Canada 23.4%, Mexico 13.5%, Japan 7.2%, UK 4.7%, Germany 4% (2003 est.)
US
Imports - partners:
Canada 17.4%, China 12.5%, Mexico 10.7%, Japan 9.3%, Germany 5.3% (2003 est.)

http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html

Thanks. We don't want you either. ;)

September 3, 1939 In History

Britain declares war on Germany. France follows 6 hours later quickly joined by Australia, NZ, South Africa & Canada.

At least we didn't wait until Dec. 7, 1941 to get involved?

That Australia, NZ, SA & Canada are all part of that Commonwealth and that the US isn't?

Or will Great Britain be putting up a United States gate over at Buckingham Palace soon?

Repelled invasions? Could you elaborate? I remember at least one or two in the War of 1812. There may have been one or two in the Revolutionary War.

At least we didn't wait until Dec. 7, 1941 to get involved?

Well, despite their previous isolationist stance and official neutrality prior to that the USA were definitely on the allied side: the lend lease operation was going into action before Pearl Harbour and US Navy vessels were acting as escorts for the convoys off the eastern seaboard. Personally I remain surprised that it was Pearl Harbour that triggered the official entry into the war, rather than the sinking of a destroyer in October 1941 by a U-boat.


********
Tell me what were their names,
Tell me what were their names?
Did you have a friend on the good Reuben James?

Well, despite their previous isolationist stance and official neutrality prior to that the USA were definitely on the allied side: the lend lease operation was going into action before Pearl Harbour and US Navy vessels were acting as escorts for the convoys off the eastern seaboard. Personally I remain surprised that it was Pearl Harbour that triggered the official entry into the war, rather than the sinking of a destroyer in October 1941 by a U-boat.I'm surprised it wasn't Roosevelt's announcement of a "shoot on sight" order, essentially beginning a quasi war between the U.S. and the Axis Powers. Either way, the U.S. was neutral in name only.