NationStates Jolt Archive

Discuss.

Discuss.
Excellent idea. Then instead of using France as a conduit to Berlin, the Red Army could have taken all of Germany and France and both, plus likely some neighbouring territories, and then they all could have fallen under the USSR.

Oh, it's not that we won't conquer France, it's that we won't Liberate. I.E: We shouldn't give it back to the French Government. We won it fair and square. We deserve it. We conquered it fair and square, not the French Government.

See, so technically, we should have made France part of the the U.S.A., and used it to attack onto Berlin.

The point is, that why do we feel a need to return the land to it's original government? They didn't win it, WE DID.

We were allied with the Free French forces.

Besides, do you think the French would like to be part of the USA?

Oh, it's not that we won't conquer France, it's that we won't Liberate. I.E: We shouldn't give it back to the French Government. We won it fair and square. We deserve it. We conquered it fair and square, not the French Government.

See, so technically, we should have made France part of the the U.S.A., and used it to attack onto Berlin.

The point is, that why do we feel a need to return the land to it's original government? They didn't win it, WE DID.

Given your aparent poor opinion of the French would you want them in the US? And aren't we supposed to value self rule and sovereignty in the US and to make them a territory of ours would violate that? Aren't we supposed to stand for freedom instead of imperialism? Liberty instead of conquest? I guess one reason would be we supposedly have principles.

Beyond that you have logistical difficulties and a preformed resistance who were fighting for french sovereignty who might take exception to that and cost more American lives.

Oh, it's not that we won't conquer France, it's that we won't Liberate. I.E: We shouldn't give it back to the French Government. We won it fair and square. We deserve it. We conquered it fair and square, not the French Government.

See, so technically, we should have made France part of the the U.S.A., and used it to attack onto Berlin.

The point is, that why do we feel a need to return the land to it's original government? They didn't win it, WE DID.
It'd be funny because you probably would have said this in French.

We were allied with the Free French forces.

Besides, do you think the French would like to be part of the USA?

And yes, the Free French Forces would be allied with us, and we would remain with them. They would be treated as a state, albiet a very large one, and possible with tons of electoral votes, and what not.

The point is, semi-soveriegnity, as well has making France answer to us, would let the French be tricked that they were "free", keeping dissent down, (at least when combined with American Propaganda), and, we could strengthen our country as well. Simple.

Given your aparent poor opinion of the French would you want them in the US? And aren't we supposed to value self rule and sovereignty in the US and to make them a territory of ours would violate that? Aren't we supposed to stand for freedom instead of imperialism? Liberty instead of conquest? I guess one reason would be we supposedly have principles.

Beyond that you have logistical difficulties and a preformed resistance who were fighting for french sovereignty who might take exception to that and cost more American lives.

1. I don't have a poor opinion of the French. I do have a poor opinion of the current French Government however.

2. We don't value Self-Rule and Soveriegnity, and rightfully so. Look at the Civil War.

3. Freedom and Imperialism are not exclusive.

4. Liberty and Conquest are not exclusive.

See, so technically, we should have made France part of the the U.S.A., and used it to attack onto Berlin.

The point is, that why do we feel a need to return the land to it's original government? They didn't win it, WE DID.

What's this 'we' business where you use 'we' to mean the USA alone? Shame on you. You are an insult to the Canadians, Poles, British, French, New Zealanders, Australians and Czechs that fought and died to liberate France.

And yes, the Free French Forces would be allied with us, and we would remain with them. They would be treated as a state, albiet a very large one, and possible with tons of electoral votes, and what not.

The point is, semi-soveriegnity, as well has making France answer to us, would let the French be tricked that they were "free", keeping dissent down, (at least when combined with American Propaganda), and, we could strengthen our country as well. Simple.

Do you think Americans would ever vote in a French president? Do you think any Frenchmen would sit on the supreme court? To you honestly think French senators and Congress men would be rendered useless when the Americans saw them as a threat? Do you think America could maintain such a seperate country on another continent? Don't you think they'd resent the occupation?

And theres always cross cultural issues...

And as Grampus pointed out, Canadians, Poles, British, French, New Zealanders, Australians and Czechs fought and died to liberate France. How do you think they'd react when the US said "Thanks for the help, but we are keeping France now." Or would you partition France between each of them?

Discuss.
Please don't be an ass.
I would agree we shouldn't have gotten involved in WW1, but this topic's purpose is pretty offensive.

1. I don't have a poor opinion of the French. I do have a poor opinion of the current French Government however. Okay. Would you want the people who selected that government in the US? Sounds good to me actually, provide some counterbalance to the extreme right.

2. We don't value Self-Rule and Soveriegnity, and rightfully so. Look at the Civil War. Yes we do. Look at the Declaration of Independence.

3. Freedom and Imperialism are not exclusive. Yes they are. One cannot be free under imperial rule.

4. Liberty and Conquest are not exclusive.
See above.

Oh, it's not that we won't conquer France, it's that we won't Liberate. I.E: We shouldn't give it back to the French Government. We won it fair and square. We deserve it. We conquered it fair and square, not the French Government.

See, so technically, we should have made France part of the the U.S.A., and used it to attack onto Berlin.

The point is, that why do we feel a need to return the land to it's original government? They didn't win it, WE DID.

And Britons, and Canadians, and Aussies, and Kiwis, and Italians, and French, and Czechs, and Poles...

America didn't win World War II, the Allies did.

And someone beat me to saying this. :(

Yes we do. Look at the Declaration of Independence.

Hey, wasn't that a result of the war you Americanos won because France helped you out in your time of need?

Do you think Americans would ever vote in a French president? Do you think any Frenchmen would sit on the supreme court? To you honestly think French senators and Congress men would be rendered useless when the Americans saw them as a threat? Do you think America could maintain such a seperate country on another continent? Don't you think they'd resent the occupation?

And theres always cross cultural issues...

And as Grampus pointed out, Canadians, Poles, British, French, New Zealanders, Australians and Czechs fought and died to liberate France. How do you think they'd react when the US said "Thanks for the help, but we are keeping France now." Or would you partition France between each of them?

Yeah, I'd partition it between each of them. And I'm hoping for a peaceful union, with a general set of laws.

The United States of America, is basically the UN, except we have the balls to back up what we say, to our members/states. I'm certain that it wouldn't really be more occupation, but more of peaceful cooperation, with the threat of occupation.

Also, France would be treated as several states, meaning there would be several Senators from France.

We were allied with the Free French forces.

Besides, do you think the French would like to be part of the USA?
More to the point, would Americans like the French to be part of the USA? They'd be sending a dozen representatives to both houses. :p

Hey, wasn't that a result of the war you Americanos won because France helped you out in your time of need? Yeah, and they gave us that statue of liberty thing that we like to pin our American Pride on but that is no reason to get in the way of condemning them.

Okay. Would you want the people who selected that government in the US? Sounds good to me actually, provide some counterbalance to the extreme right.
Yes we do. Look at the Declaration of Independence.
Yes they are. One cannot be free under imperial rule.

See above.
1. Extreme Right? Hardly. The Extreme Leftism in America is hardly doing us any good. As well as the Extreme Right. It's not going to counterbalance anything. America is hardly "extreme-rightist." If you wanted to see Extremist Right, look at North Korea.


2. We only value it only when we get Self-Rule and Soveriegnity. It may sound selfish, but in the end, it makes sense...sorta.

3. How can one not be free under Imperial Rule? It's not like the French won't be considered Citizens. They would be considered as American as any other citizens. It sounds like what the Confedarates said," OH,wE THE STATES CANNOT BE FREE UNDER THE AMERIKKKAN RULE!!!"

4. See above.

And this brings me to another point.

We should have brought China under our wing. We could have successfully stifled Communism, and helping end the Cold War that much earlier, as well as preventing the Korean War, and Communism in China. We could have stopped Communism in China right there, instead of in 1985 or something, when we saved China from Japan.

And plus, with 1 billion people, we could make ourselves a dominant world power.

If we also had Germany, we would have had the power to take over the world.

If you wanted to see Extremist Right, look at North Korea.

Stalinist communism = 'extreme right'? Uh-huh.

Which Brings me to another point, that we wouldn't REALLY be called the United States of America at that.

More like the Axis of EVIL, which is a really catchy name that I like.

More to the point, would Americans like the French to be part of the USA? They'd be sending a dozen representatives to both houses. :p

Meh. I'm sure any Chinese Representives could counter-balance that.

Stalinist communism = 'extreme right'? Uh-huh.

Yes. Exactly. Leftism seeks for more Civil Rights, at the threat of uh...a lot of other things.

Completely the opposite of Stalinist Communism.

Discuss.

Sigh. With all due respect I consider this topic lame. Your proposed course of action would have made us no different from the Communists. It would also have been the betrayal of an ally. There are many sound logistic, administrative, cultural, and political reason why this would have been a nonstarter from the getgo but the fact that it would have been utterly immoral is really reason enough. :mad: :headbang: :mad:

Yes. Exactly. Leftism seeks for more Civil Rights, at the threat of uh...a lot of other things.

Continue your trolling in peace, but be a darling and just answer me this: is there really meant to be an extraneous 'o' in you sig before the dash?

Yeah, I'd partition it between each of them. And I'm hoping for a peaceful union, with a general set of laws.

The United States of America, is basically the UN, except we have the balls to back up what we say, to our members/states. I'm certain that it wouldn't really be more occupation, but more of peaceful cooperation, with the threat of occupation.

Also, France would be treated as several states, meaning there would be several Senators from France.

Ok, why would the French want to become split like that? Why would they want to become part of the US?

Only two independent nations have ever joined the US- Texas and Hawaii.

Texas asked to join. Hawaii's government was overthrown and they were annexed. True, they did agree to become a state, but it was several decades later after the natives and the Americans had mixed. And the Americans had been there before the annexation.

Now do you think France would ever chose to give up its independence? They had been occupied for five years- they wanted to become independent not cecome a few more states.

You might ask "Why don't we just intermix with the French?" well if a bunch of Americans started arriving the French would see this as they were being occupied and Americanized. They would rather remain French.

So to conclude: France had its intendendence restored and they and the US are both better off because of it no matter how many disagreements the two governments might have.

More to the point, would Americans like the French to be part of the USA? They'd be sending a dozen representatives to both houses. :p

Also very true.

1. Extreme Right? Hardly. The Extreme Leftism in America is hardly doing us any good. As well as the Extreme Right. It's not going to counterbalance anything. America is hardly "extreme-rightist." If you wanted to see Extremist Right, look at North Korea.
I'll grant that they are more extreme right but that does not mean we are not still extreme right as well. A democratic Socialist may well be extreme left but at the same time a Socialist or Marxist Communist would be even further to the left would they not?

2. We only value it only when we get Self-Rule and Soveriegnity. It may sound selfish, but in the end, it makes sense...sorta. But at the same time the DoI makes it clear that self rule of the people is something we value.

3. How can one not be free under Imperial Rule? It's not like the French won't be considered Citizens. They would be considered as American as any other citizens. It sounds like what the Confedarates said," OH,wE THE STATES CANNOT BE FREE UNDER THE AMERIKKKAN RULE!!!" Because you are ineherently taking away their ability to govern themselves. If they had a representative democracy before, their representation per person would decrease by 5/6 for determining national policies.

Stalinist communism = 'extreme right'? Uh-huh.
Uh, yeah? Seeing as how any modern socialist or communist considers Stalinism to be nothing but fascism wrapped in Marxist rhetoric, I would say yes, communism in the Soviet sense is nothing if not right wing.

I'll grant that they are more extreme right but that does not mean we are not still extreme right as well. A democratic Socialist may well be extreme left but at the same time a Socialist or Marxist Communist would be even further to the left would they not?
But at the same time the DoI makes it clear that self rule of the people is something we value.
Because you are ineherently taking away their ability to govern themselves. If they had a representative democracy before, their representation per person would decrease by 5/6 for determining national policies.

1. True. But a Stalinist Communist/a Marxist communist.

2. True, but we've done the opposite before. Look at the Civil War. We did it once, we can do it again!

3. True, but when you enter a group, you can't only make decisions only for yourself, but when you are in a group, you must decide with your groupmates, whether to institute a group policy. Same with Nations.

Uh, yeah? Seeing as how any modern socialist or communist considers Stalinism to be nothing but fascism wrapped in Marxist rhetoric, I would say yes, communism in the Soviet sense is nothing if not right wing.

Authoritarian? Certainly.
Despicable? Definitely.
Monstrous? Absolutely.
Economically right wing? Nah.

as much as i dislike france, this probably wouldnt work out. It is funny when people claim we were allies with the french in ww2, considering they were conquered before we got involved, and fought us when we did. Yes, we did fight the french in africa after the puppet government was installed. However, then people would argue that we would need to keep belgium, the netherlands, greece, etc. And that many territories managed by a gov. seperated by the second largest ocean in the world. After all we all no how well occupation works.
:rolleyes:
Good idea, wouldnt work.

Oh, it's not that we won't conquer France, it's that we won't Liberate. I.E: We shouldn't give it back to the French Government. We won it fair and square. We deserve it. We conquered it fair and square, not the French Government.

See, so technically, we should have made France part of the the U.S.A., and used it to attack onto Berlin.

The point is, that why do we feel a need to return the land to it's original government? They didn't win it, WE DID.

Because we weren't the USSR. We were supposedly better then them; we returned territory we captured from Germany to rightful self-rule. We didn't create puppet states we could oppress easily. We held ourselves to a higher standard. If we'd just incorporated France into our territory, we'd have been no better than Germany OR the USSR.

1. True. But a Stalinist Communist/a Marxist communist. Right. I understand that. That was actually much of my point.

2. True, but we've done the opposite before. Look at the Civil War. We did it once, we can do it again! Admittedly true. At the same time having repeatedly violated our stated principles in the past does not make us less hypocritical for doing so again.

3. True, but when you enter a group, you can't only make decisions only for yourself, but when you are in a group, you must decide with your groupmates, whether to institute a group policy. Same with Nations.
Yes, but at the same time by increasing your population by 20% the individuals ability to directly influence decision making is reduced. Particularly so for the 20% being added.

Seeing as how any modern socialist or communist considers Stalinism to be nothing but fascism wrapped in Marxist rhetoric Well, socially and politically, one could conceivably consider them Fascist, but Stalinism and Maoism are about as left as you get economically.

thanks for mentionign the poles.

people fail to realize what our exiled government did. according to the french, poland provided a great deal of intelligence and resistance contacts.

Well, socially and politically, one could conceivably consider them Fascist, but Stalinism and Maoism are about as left as you get economically.
Possibly true but at the same time, that is only one dimension of a cube as you yourself mentioned.

We were allied with the Free French forces.

Besides, do you think the French would like to be part of the USA?

They'd certainly grow a set of balls.

Possibly true but at the same time, that is only one dimension of a cube as you yourself mentioned. Of course. I'm left-leaning myself, but that doesn't stop me from seeing that Bolshevism and Chinese Communism were/are evil systems that did nothing for the welfare of their people.

They'd certainly grow a set of balls.
Or America would grow a set of breasts. :D

Oh, it's not that we won't conquer France, it's that we won't Liberate. I.E: We shouldn't give it back to the French Government. We won it fair and square. We deserve it. We conquered it fair and square, not the French Government.

See, so technically, we should have made France part of the the U.S.A., and used it to attack onto Berlin.

The point is, that why do we feel a need to return the land to it's original government? They didn't win it, WE DID.

And the USA would still be British colony without the French coming over and helping the US rebels? Just chuck that Statue of Liberty into the river, it was French gift to the USA.

And this brings me to another point.

We should have brought China under our wing. We could have successfully stifled Communism, and helping end the Cold War that much earlier, as well as preventing the Korean War, and Communism in China. We could have stopped Communism in China right there, instead of in 1985 or something, when we saved China from Japan.

And plus, with 1 billion people, we could make ourselves a dominant world power.

If we also had Germany, we would have had the power to take over the world.interesting

Discuss.
It's daft. France would become a very large Quebec in the US, they'd whinge about everything and demand massive subsidies because of illusionary disadvantages, they'd vote for lefty crap all the time, they'd let all the terrorists in across their border and then the terrorists would be able to get in to mainland USA. In short, they'd just be a big drain on the US.

They'd certainly grow a set of balls.

Ah, standing up and refusing to go along with the dictates and spurious rationales for war of the world's remaining superpower is a sign to you of not having balls?

I repeat my suggestion that in absorbing France, America also grow a set of breasts. :D

That could get...interesting... :D

I repeat my suggestion that in absorbing France, America also grow a set of breasts. :D

That could get...interesting... :D

If the US grows breasts, then what does that make the Gulf of Mexico?

If the US grows breasts, then what does that make the Gulf of Mexico?
Well, the surplus of petroleum jelly it produces could come in useful. :eek:

Yes, lets "discuss"

French and the US- Allies from the revoltion till World war two. Exceptions are the close hostilities in the start of the 19th century, civil war, and operation torch. Operation torch being the only one that came to blows, and only for a number of days, until the French agreed to ally with the Americans, who had set no alliance with the French yet.(And the French were right to fight. The Germans said they had to defend their land, lest they would take French africa from what little autonomy it had).

The french fought with the americans from Torch on, fighting in Africa, Sicily, Italy, Back through france, and also in russia and other areas. Many french died in the allied effort against the Axis, taking a vital part in the Italian campaign, and important parts in taking back France.

America did not liberate France. The Allies worked together to kick the germans out of France, headed to germany. The americans went through, as an allied force, more as a border-permission than anything.

France was an occupied country, but that didnt make it open land. The land was rightfully French. If America claimed it was its land, it would be an act of war against the French.

I really wouldnt be surprised if the french went to the russians, and asked for some assistance. Or the russians just felt obligated to go in anyways. I doubt any of the other allies would help America occupy france.

That wouldnt be too fun for America. Tens of thousands of T-34's barrel down Alsace-lorraine, tens of millions of infantry, etc. Nukes wouldnt save the US, not that they had any ready right after ww2.

And for what? Occupying a nation that doesnt want you there? Becoming an international pariah? The USSR pulled it off, because it took places like Latvia and Ukraine. There is a difference in a nation like France, one with such a long history, culture, etc. There would be much more outrage.

And China? With as light-footed as America was in occupational wars, I think they would have flipped you off, imported russian arms, and had a field day.

What a redundant topic. It's like saying that the Chinese shouldn't have invented paper, printing, gunpowder, golf, kite-flying and a whole lot of other goodies just because it was going to be stolen by the Europeans. :rolleyes:

Oh, it's not that we won't conquer France, it's that we won't Liberate. I.E: We shouldn't give it back to the French Government. We won it fair and square. We deserve it. We conquered it fair and square, not the French Government.

See, so technically, we should have made France part of the the U.S.A., and used it to attack onto Berlin.

The point is, that why do we feel a need to return the land to it's original government? They didn't win it, WE DID.
If you think that the US singlehandedly liberated France then you are sadly mistaken. :eek:

the american atitude to france makes me laugh. have they no concept of history before the 20th century?

Dumbest thread ever.

the american atitude to france makes me laugh. have they no concept of history before the 20th century?

Some don't even have a concept of history IN the 20th century... :rolleyes:

We should have liberated France just so America, Britain or anyone else COULDNT have it any nation that added france to it would be to large and powerful. America would have too much say in European affairs (America would have to join the EU!) France would also declare its independance within years and America is too far away to deal with it effectivly and Britain would be called on to deal with the problem.

Britain would be total master of Europe, with a destroyed Germany and a huge amount of European poulaation would be under British rule.

Had you just left the Germans with it and signed peace there and then, Germany would be too dominant and would be more powerful than the USA, but this Greater Germany would collapse after a few decades because the people would have no use for a psychotic dictator in peace time.

Anyother country would be too small to consider running France as France is one of the largest European countries.

What we should NOT have done is let Charles De Gaulle drive into Paris looking a hero while it was the other countries armies that had done the real work and that day made it look like the French had liberated themselves.

A country that should have been divided like germany and ruled by several states was Italy, that could have done with the Foreign investment Germany received.

We as in......?

We as in......?

The Allied Forces

Im British by the way not American or European

We should have liberated France just so America, Britain or anyone else COULDNT have it any nation that added france to it would be to large and powerful. America would have too much say in European affairs (America would have to join the EU!) France would also declare its independance within years and America is too far away to deal with it effectivly and Britain would be called on to deal with the problem.

Britain would be total master of Europe, with a destroyed Germany and a huge amount of European poulaation would be under British rule.

Had you just left the Germans with it and signed peace there and then, Germany would be too dominant and would be more powerful than the USA, but this Greater Germany would collapse after a few decades because the people would have no use for a psychotic dictator in peace time.

Anyother country would be too small to consider running France as France is one of the largest European countries.

What we should NOT have done is let Charles De Gaulle drive into Paris looking a hero while it was the other countries armies that had done the real work and that day made it look like the French had liberated themselves.

A country that should have been divided like germany and ruled by several states was Italy, that could have done with the Foreign investment Germany received.

I'm not 100% certain, but still pretty sure that by the time the Allies reached Paris it had liberated itself from the Germans. Probably because they knew they'd have help, but the French weren't as helpless as you're trying to make them sound.

The Allied Forces

Im British by the way not American or European
British isn't European? :confused:

Anyway: It would make the allied forces the dicks of the world when they liberated all of Europe, but not France. So you should have done that

I'm not 100% certain, but still pretty sure that by the time the Allies reached Paris it had liberated itself from the Germans. Probably because they knew they'd have help, but the French weren't as helpless as you're trying to make them sound.

The Free French had fewer than 5000 soldiers. Britain America and the Poles had 100's of thosands and then the damn French took the credit for what we did.

I like or this "we shouldn't have gotten involved" you didn't get involved until all of western europe, excluding sweden (neutrally selling coal to the Nazis), switzerland (neutrally passing anti-semetic laws), Ireland (neutrally allowing U-boats to dock in their ports) and Britain, was fascist. IF Hitler hadn't have thought
"you know Eva, playing with the Luftwaffe is just not fun anymore, I hear Russia is nice this time of year"
there would be no hope of liberating Europe. You only got involved then because of the Japanese.

British isn't European? :confused:

Im one of those British people who does not consider themselves European, them over there are European THEM not US, quite a few BRits are like that you ask them in the street are you European and we go "well ummm... Sort of... well geographicly but..." :p

Im one of those British people who does not consider themselves European, them over there are European THEM not US, quite a few BRits are like that you ask them in the street are you European and we go "well ummm... Sort of... well geographicly but..." :p
So you just are the Continent of Britain? :rolleyes:

I'm not 100% certain, but still pretty sure that by the time the Allies reached Paris it had liberated itself from the Germans. Probably because they knew they'd have help, but the French weren't as helpless as you're trying to make them sound.

Apart form that the only reason there was a Paris to lliberate was because the Nazi Govenor of Paris didnt have the guts to carry out Hitlers emergency orders, which was in the event of Paris being taken he was to burn the whole city to the ground.

The Free French had fewer than 5000 soldiers. Britain America and the Poles had 100's of thosands and then the damn French took the credit for what we did.

You mean like how certain US'ians are trying to take credit for America "single-handedly" winning WWII?

So you just are the Continent of Britain? :rolleyes:

No. ITs just a mental thing. We know that sadly we are technicly European but in our heads we arnt. OVer there there they where funny cloths and eat frogs and too many sausages and listen to funny music (even though its Anglo-American music) they do other funny forigen things too. They celebrate Christmas differently dont have Guy Fawkes night.

They probably think the same about us.

But we are (probably) the most differnet European nation to all the others we have our own religion for a start. Also in the past we have been constantly at war with some Continental nation.

Then there is the Victorian phrase from the Front page of the Times at the turn of the 19th Century "Fog in the Channel, The continent cut off" and it always has and will be in a way.

Apart form that the only reason there was a Paris to lliberate was because the Nazi Govenor of Paris didnt have the guts to carry out Hitlers emergency orders, which was in the event of Paris being taken he was to burn the whole city to the ground.

Many Nazis didn't follow Hitler's insane orders towards the end of the war, I think that took more guts than razing a city...

You mean like how certain US'ians are trying to take credit for America "single-handedly" winning WWII?

Well yes the Allied forces single handedly liberated France. The Free French were one oth the smallest minority groups in that army.

No. ITs just a mental thing. We know that sadly we are technicly European but in our heads we arnt. OVer there there they where funny cloths and eat frogs and too many sausages and listen to funny music (even though its Anglo-American music) they do other funny forigen things too. They celebrate Christmas differently dont have Guy Fawkes night.

They probably think the same about us.

But we are (probably) the most differnet European nation to all the others we have our own religion for a start. Also in the past we have been constantly at war with some Continental nation.

Then there is the Victorian phrase from the Front page of the Times at the turn of the 19th Century "Fog in the Channel, The continent cut off" and it always has and will be in a way.
It's just rebelling. I doubt any other nation sees Britain as not-European

Not true a lot of french and germans see britain as not european, island nation mindset.

It's just rebelling. I doubt any other nation sees Britain as not-European

I beleive you. They probably think we are being stuck up blinkered bigoted prats, they probably think that we are being stupid by not willlingly signing our sovregnty away to Europe, and demanding a referendum on the whole consititution which other nations did and look where that got it. :)

Soory if this doesntt make sense but it does to me

Not true a lot of french and germans see britain as not european, island nation mindset.

This is true apparantly China does not see Japan as Asian. Same island nation mentality, to prove ourselves they conquered lots of asia, we conquered lots of the world in general.

Well yes the Allied forces single handedly liberated France. The Free French were one oth the smallest minority groups in that army.

Analysis: Attempted use of evasion.

Result: Failure.

Read my statement carefully.

You mean like how certain US'ians are trying to take credit for America "single-handedly" winning WWII?

Note the use of the term America expressly. There are those, who believe that America was the only one responsible for the current result at the end of the war. It was not.

Your attempt to deflect my line of inquiry by stating "Allied forces" means you spent no effort whatsoever to answer my question which drew a comparison.

Oh, and for your information, the French underground were part of that alliance as well, albeit on a more localized area of operations.

No. America did not win the war singlehandidly.

We didn't do much. The Allied Forces still would have won without us, because of Russia.

I'm not just saying that we weren't strong enough to defeat Germany, I'm saying that Russia did a lot of the work.

Anyways, Russia was just as bad as Germany.

The Stalin Purges, The Gulags, and the fact that Russian POW camps were some of the worst in WWII, right after the Japanese.

Honestly, I think we should have assassinated Stalin.

Comes over a diplomat meeting, and he's shot by a "rogue" Soldier, who we couldn't identify, and got away.

>_<

As a First-Generation Chinese Immigrant, I'm going to say that China would have been a lot better if we were part of America. We would have been free of the Great Leap Forward, The Cultural Revolution, Communism, the Korean War, etc. etc. etc.

Also, I'm going to say, a lot of the World would be better under the U.S. Government. Iraq, North Korea, Rwanda, etc. etc. etc.

Also, France would be asssimiliated easily. All Western Nations are the same, more, and less, and the difference from Western and Eastern nations are extremely marginal at best.

Because we weren't the USSR. We were supposedly better then them; we returned territory we captured from Germany to rightful self-rule. We didn't create puppet states we could oppress easily. We held ourselves to a higher standard. If we'd just incorporated France into our territory, we'd have been no better than Germany OR the USSR.

Just because you can opress someone, doesn't mean you will.

If we treated France as a state, or several states (which is a better idea, since it's pretty large, but then again, we'd only get a portion of France, but it's still large enough still.) we could opress it just as easily as the...well...states.

The Constitution still has to apply to France, obviously, just like any other member of the United States of America.

And honestly, Germany and the U.S.S.R. were nearly identifical, except the U.S.S.R. treated POWS worse then the Germans by far. Allied Soldiers (other then the Russians), in German Hands actually got enough to live by, unlike the Russians, who mostly killed POWs on the spot, or let them die.

Hell, they even did that after the war.

So I mantain Stalin needed to be assassinated. He wouldn't expect it. >_<

Also, we would be far better. 1. We wouldn't be opressign them.

2. We wouldn't be killing them left and right.

I really doubt that Americans would want to incorporate a conquered France into the USA, afterall France was strongest ally at one time. Besides, Americans would not want to be bilingual English-French any more than they would want to be bilingual English-Spanish today. If that had occured, America today might be all of North America instead of just the United States, and it would include an empire rivaling that of the British Commonwealth, assuming the US had imperial madness back then. France still had much of Africa and various other colonies in 1945, and they would become American spoils.

Besides, if America was wanting to occupy France, who says they would have stopped there. They could have nuked Moscow and took everything. :)

I really doubt that Americans would want to incorporate a conquered France into the USA, afterall France was strongest ally at one time. Besides, Americans would not want to be bilingual English-French any more than they would want to be bilingual English-Spanish today. If that had occured, America today might be all of North America instead of just the United States, and it would include an empire rivaling that of the British Commonwealth, assuming the US had imperial madness back then. France still had much of Africa and various other colonies in 1945, and they would become American spoils.

Besides, if America was wanting to occupy France, who says they would have stopped there. They could have nuked Moscow and took everything. :)

That's actually a pretty good idea. You know, except for the Conquering Canada Part. They're already a Puppet Government, or close enough to it anyway.s Conquering Canada would be a waste of time, manpower, and resources, as well as industry. >_<

Allied Soldiers (other then the Russians), in German Hands actually got enough to live by, unlike the Russians, who mostly killed POWs on the spot, or let them die.

And Russian troops in German hands often died of lead poisoning. You're point being? Both the Russians and Germans fought each other as viciously and as mercilessly as they could.


So I mantain Stalin needed to be assassinated. He wouldn't expect it. >_<


Actually, Stalin got to where he did by being very paranoid and doing away with those who he even thought were plotting against him. Those purges weren't just for frivolous purposes after all. You wouldn't be able to assassinate him that easily. Besides, if he gets killed in such a manner, the next guy to sieze power would probably have been Beria or maybe Zhukov. I doubt either of them would have cared for the distinction of "rogue" soldier who remains unidentified. They knew how the game is played.


Also, we would be far better. 1. We wouldn't be opressign them.


Noooo, of course not. We would only be appointing 3rd parties to do the oppressing. Like how history has proven ne?


2. We wouldn't be killing them left and right.

The My Lai Massacre proves that the army, regardless of whatever ideals spouting nation they come from, is capable and sometimes willing to perform indiscriminate slaughter. Whether that still happens is open to debate and presentation of evidence.

And Russian troops in German hands often died of lead poisoning. You're point being? Both the Russians and Germans fought each other as viciously and as mercilessly as they could.



Actually, Stalin got to where he did by being very paranoid and doing away with those who he even thought were plotting against him. Those purges weren't just for frivolous purposes after all. You wouldn't be able to assassinate him that easily. Besides, if he gets killed in such a manner, the next guy to sieze power would probably have been Beria or maybe Zhukov. I doubt either of them would have cared for the distinction of "rogue" soldier who remains unidentified. They knew how the game is played.



Noooo, of course not. We would only be appointing 3rd parties to do the oppressing. Like how history has proven ne?



The My Lai Massacre proves that the army, regardless of whatever ideals spouting nation they come from, is capable and sometimes willing to perform indiscriminate slaughter. Whether that still happens is open to debate and presentation of evidence.

1. You can't attribute that instantly to the Germans...

2. The U.S.S.R. would be much better under Zhukov, and Zhukov probably knew it.

3. Also, that's the point. We don't make 3rd parties. In every single annexation, the only party is the U.S. and the people about to become the U.S.

These massacres are because we aren't Imperialistic enough.

We give off countries to a third-party after we conquer them, and we don't annex them, which is a TERRIBLE IDEA.

We won Iraq, we won Afganistan, they should become part of us. Simple as that. That's how War is always played.

Good idea to not liberate franchies.
But care they 're dangeroue with their poisonous camembert "the Lafayette" named after an asshole who fighted english to get some savage country where to sale his nasty renault cars.

:fluffle:

1. You can't attribute that instantly to the Germans...

Attribute what? That each sides often didn't bother with prisoners?


2. The U.S.S.R. would be much better under Zhukov, and Zhukov probably knew it.

We don't really know that. Besides, if Stalin was done away with via assassination, there is an equal likelyhood that Zhukov would use the excuse to wrest Europe away from the US then. Assassinating heads of states usually leads to wars. That's how the first WW started after all.


3. Also, that's the point. We don't make 3rd parties. In every single annexation, the only party is the U.S. and the people about to become the U.S.

Ahh, so you want an empire? I doubt it would work very well. China alone is a good example. Constant strife. Besides, any attempt to impose Imperial rule, which is what you seem to be advocating, albeit hidden beneath the cover of a federation, would be seen through for what it is after the 1st or 2nd country to declare itself as a vassal for the US.


These massacres are because we aren't Imperialistic enough.


Imperialistic enough? And how do you factor that in? The massacre happened because whoever commanded that operation removed the distinction between "enemy combatant" and "unarmed civilian". Oh, and for your information, all of those involved got light sentences or were pardoned later. Would it have been different with an Imperial mindset? Hardly. You'd still have your massacres and the perps would get away scot free.


We give off countries to a third-party after we conquer them, and we don't annex them, which is a TERRIBLE IDEA.

Do you really believe that if the US had held onto that mindset just after WWII, the Soviets wouldn't have done the same? WWIX would probably have been done with by now if that mentality had persisted. Empires don't get along very well with other Empires.


We won Iraq, we won Afganistan, they should become part of us. Simple as that. That's how War is always played.

Let me put it this way. Everytime some lunatic got the idea to "take over the world", the rest of the world around him took it badly. What usually happened is that the rest of the world bands together and proceeds to pound the living daylights out of them. That's exactly what happened to Hitler.

Lets see what the USA can do against the combined might of China, Canada, Mexico, South America, Japan, Russia, the EU, India, Pakistan, a coalition of ME states and whoever else wished to join in. Heck, I doubt even Israel would look favorably on an Imperialistic US who wanted their neck of the woods.

Other than the glow in the dark scenario where everybody loses, the US would be buried by the sheer amount of force that would be arrayed against it.

Form my point of view, France and the USA have been allies since the same foundation of the USA, even the french navy helped the colonial troops to reject the british boats attack the rebellious settlements and disembark armies.

The USA returned the favour freeding France from the nazi boot.

But with the war on Iraq France selected not to join the invaders alliance, and it was like to pour cold water on the USA.

Now the situation is their characteristic indiference from the french part; and an enless anger from the north american part.

You shouldn't be so angered with your historical allies. You should allow their difference of opinion in that matter.

Being restless with europeans is no good for nobody, but you can't just expect to say "I'm encroaching 2 countries at the same time, follow me", and see the europeans follow you as sheeps.

My only problem with France is that their government does not seem to learn from past mistakes. Oh and the attitude of some of the people - hint, it's kind of rude to make fun of people who are making a sincere attempt to speak the language of your country while visiting there and the response of "for god's sake switch to english because you are butchering our beautiful french language" is just downright mean.

1. You can't attribute that instantly to the Germans...

2. The U.S.S.R. would be much better under Zhukov, and Zhukov probably knew it.

3. Also, that's the point. We don't make 3rd parties. In every single annexation, the only party is the U.S. and the people about to become the U.S.

These massacres are because we aren't Imperialistic enough.

We give off countries to a third-party after we conquer them, and we don't annex them, which is a TERRIBLE IDEA.

We won Iraq, we won Afganistan, they should become part of us. Simple as that. That's how War is always played.

... and look how Europe ended.

The World sees you as culturally imperialistic now. I don't recommend you to do it militarly.

Take for sure that annexing half a meter of useless sand of Afghanisthan will result in a World War. Will you blame the frenchies then?

My only problem with France is that their government does not seem to learn from past mistakes. Oh and the attitude of some of the people - hint, it's kind of rude to make fun of people who are making a sincere attempt to speak the language of your country while visiting there and the response of "for god's sake switch to english because you are butchering our beautiful french language" is just downright mean.

Hey, we the spaniards are historical enemies of the frenchies... but after all we're european and allies and must stay toghether, and work to end with our differences.

Also, France would be asssimiliated easily. All Western Nations are the same, more, and less, and the difference from Western and Eastern nations are extremely marginal at best.

Ah, so that's why Ireland was so quickly and successfully assimilated by the UK then?

The Free French had fewer than 5000 soldiers.

Really? They had about 10,000 troops by the summer of 1940, and about 400,000 by the summer of 1944 - roughly equivalent to the Poles in numerical strength.

We were allied with the Free French forces.

Besides, do you think the French would like to be part of the USA?

well the seceding states didin't want to re-join the union either, but we forced them.

I can't imagine why you would want to make Afghanistan and Iraq part of the USA because you beat them in war. The US has learnt from the British that administering empires is expensive and pointless. The US is an economic empire, and nothing else matters as long as a country lets in US corporations.

Oh, it's not that we won't conquer France, it's that we won't Liberate. I.E: We shouldn't give it back to the French Government. We won it fair and square. We deserve it. We conquered it fair and square, not the French Government.

See, so technically, we should have made France part of the the U.S.A., and used it to attack onto Berlin.

The point is, that why do we feel a need to return the land to it's original government? They didn't win it, WE DID.
And I guess if the US got conquered, you'd be a-ok with, say the UK, to rule it because they fought off the invaders?

Why am I feeling a sort of anti-Iraq war vibe from the very
title of this?

I can't imagine why you would want to make Afghanistan and Iraq part of the USA because you beat them in war. The US has learnt from the British that administering empires is expensive and pointless. The US is an economic empire, and nothing else matters as long as a country lets in US corporations.

Fine, make them puppet states. It doesn't matter. As long as they're under our jurisdiction. I hope that the "soveriegn" government in Iraq, will be a puppet state to America. That would be a pretty good idea. Same with Afganistan.

Fine, make them puppet states. It doesn't matter. As long as they're under our jurisdiction. I hope that the "soveriegn" government in Iraq, will be a puppet state to America. That would be a pretty good idea. Same with Afganistan.

Afghanistan would have to be a state before it could become a puppet state. It's basically the city-state of Kabul surrounded by warlords. And Iraq was the US's puppet state until the Gulf War...

Fine, make them puppet states. It doesn't matter. As long as they're under our jurisdiction. I hope that the "soveriegn" government in Iraq, will be a puppet state to America. That would be a pretty good idea. Same with Afganistan.

It is not a warranty of nothing, look Panama or Cuba. And if these little countries near your borders can't be controlled by your troops or CIA agents, how do you expect to annex Iraq? LOL.

Why am I feeling a sort of anti-Iraq war vibe from the very
title of this?
Now you've got me wondering where you got that idea from?? :confused:

<b> We shouldn't have Liberated France in World War II</b>

You're exactly right. We just couldn't resist sticking our nose into other people's business, just like every other war we've been in for the past 175 years.

For the past 100 years, the chance of a country successfully invading the US is approximately 0.001%. Isolationism is the solution to our current and future problems. Free trade and commerce with everyone, but foreign aid, military adventurism and our UN membership should be eliminated.

My only problem with France is that their government does not seem to learn from past mistakes. :confused: Oh and the attitude of some of the people - hint, it's kind of rude to make fun of people who are making a sincere attempt to speak the language of your country while visiting there and the response of "for god's sake switch to english because you are butchering our beautiful french language" is just downright mean.
I was several times in France and every single time the french were most kind and polite. I can't think the french are nicer towards germans than towards americans. I guess you was either overly sensitive or missbehaved yourself somehow.

Fine, make them puppet states. It doesn't matter. As long as they're under our jurisdiction. I hope that the "soveriegn" government in Iraq, will be a puppet state to America. That would be a pretty good idea. Same with Afganistan.

The US has been doing that ever since they figured out they could do that. Toppling democratic governments so US friendly dictators could come to power sound familiar to you?

And look how well that turned out.

The US has been doing that ever since they figured out they could do that. Toppling democratic governments so US friendly dictators could come to power sound familiar to you?

never heard of them toppling democratic one's dammit I need example's

never heard of them toppling democratic one's dammit I need example's
Chile, 1964, they assainated the demoracticly elected president, and installed general pinochet instead.

As for france? no, the americans coudent of done it then.

However, my country britain, the centre of imperialism, had the chance to annex france 3 times.


First, 100 years war, had it not of been for the pesky scottish (we're all one country now lads! :D ) we could of beaten the french, and annexed it 600 years ago.

im not sure about Blenheim , so, ill ignore that one.

1814, the first defeat of napoleon (who wasnt french ironicly) the allies (britian, austria, russia, prussia etc) could of divided up france but no, they had to reinstall the monarchy of france and give it independence.

Of course, this was the wrong course of action and 9 months later napoleon returned in 1815, and, with german help, the british slaughtered his grade armee at waterloo.

Then, france had no leader (we took napoleon to the atlantic island of St helena, which we still own actually....) and once again, reinstalled the monarchy.

Well, 3 golden oppertunities to get rid of france once and for all, blah, why didint we!?!?!? we would of saved ourselves so much bother, no whinging french in ww1, no colonial wars thoughout the 19th century, bliss.

ah well! theres allways the future to look forward to ;)

Well yes the Allied forces single handedly liberated France. The Free French were one oth the smallest minority groups in that army.

Well I am just glad that the US did get involved with the war out of the
goodness of their hearts.
Japan attacking them first and Germany declaring war on them when they
declared war on Japan in no way contributed to their generous decision.

well the seceding states didin't want to re-join the union either, but we forced them.

The Confederates were independent for four years. France was never part of America.

The Confederates were beaten by the US. The Free French were the US' allies.

The North and South were both Americans. The French and Americans were not.

The North and South were right next to one another and spoke the same laungadge. The US and France are a continent away and spoke diffrent langadges.

Bottem line: true the South didn't want to rejoin the Union but they had much more in common with the North then the French and Americans did.

The Confederates were independent for four years. France was never part of America.

The Confederates were beaten by the US. The Free French were the US' allies.

The North and South were both Americans. The French and Americans were not.

The North and South were right next to one another and spoke the same laungadge. The US and France are a continent away and spoke diffrent langadges.

Bottem line: true the South didn't want to rejoin the Union but they had much more in common with the North then the French and Americans did.

Right so, under your logic, it would be perfectly acceptable to annex canada? oh, and because some canadians speak french, hey why not go for france to?!

IT dosnt matter about the language, culture, location of the country you invaded, annexation is annexation, and the usa annexed the csa, and your justification was very poor.

D-Day was what ended the war in Europe because it diverted the massive German army to the Western borders. Otherwise, there'd be endless war in the East. I don't know who'd win, as Germany could've always made a comeback. But whoever did, it'd enslave millions, and may not completely destroy the opposing system, creating endless war.

D-Day was what ended the war in Europe because it diverted the massive German army to the Western borders. Otherwise, there'd be endless war in the East. I don't know who'd win, as Germany could've always made a comeback. But whoever did, it'd enslave millions, and may not completely destroy the opposing system, creating endless war.

I beleive, (and i may do a thread on this) that the germans lost the war in 1943, when they lost kursk, after that, whatever they did, they coudent hold the red army back.

D-day saved western europe from communism.

D-Day was what ended the war in Europe because it diverted the massive German army to the Western borders. Otherwise, there'd be endless war in the East. I don't know who'd win, as Germany could've always made a comeback. But whoever did, it'd enslave millions, and may not completely destroy the opposing system, creating endless war.


Like perhaps an open ended war on terrorism

gosh amighty

D-Day was what ended the war in Europe because it diverted the massive German army to the Western borders.

Nope. The (ahem) 'massive German army' was already losing ground on the Eastern Front by the time D-Day roled around, and there was no sign that the tide would turn in the Germans' favour even if D-Day had been cancelled.

Right so, under your logic, it would be perfectly acceptable to annex canada? oh, and because some canadians speak french, hey why not go for france to?!

IT dosnt matter about the language, culture, location of the country you invaded, annexation is annexation, and the usa annexed the csa, and your justification was very poor.

Canada might have also been a British colony, but it has never been part of the US. It would not be ok to annex Canada in less a vast majority of Canadian voters agreed to it, which probebly won't happen any time soon.

And you can't annex a region that is yours but in rebellion as the South was. Their seccesion was illegal for this reason:

In a democracy everyone in the nation must abide by decisions legally and lawfull made by the government. (The South had representitives in the government so it wasan't like the American Revoluton where the British just made decisions for the colonies with out giving them a say. Of course Britian wasan't a democracy then.)

If a decision is made to elect Lincoln it must be abided by. The people chose him, so he's president. You can't just walk out when you don't like a decision made by the majority of the democratic nation. By doing this you are hurting the nation you are leaving and their democracy.

America was the only major democracy in the world at the time and if it had lost the cival war it would have showed the North, South, and world democracy doesen't work. The war was in many ways one to save democracy.

If the Blue States had left after Bush was reelected it would have been anti-democratic as well. The majority made a decision and even though they weren't able to prevent it from being made they had a large say in it being made. I live in a Blue State and can't stand Bush but I acknowledge he was freely and lawfully elected.

Bottem line: democracies (And the South said they were one.) don't seceed when they don't like decision that was made. The Secession was illegal and the North was right to fight it.

Discuss.

Yep.

Nope. The (ahem) 'massive German army' was already losing ground on the Eastern Front by the time D-Day roled around, and there was no sign that the tide would turn in the Germans' favour even if D-Day had been cancelled.
But there was. Remember, at the last days of the war, there was a strong upsurge in German technology. And by the time the war ended, they came out with new U-boats, ships, and brand new jet planes. They may have even developed the bomb by year's end. The infusion of troops on the Western Front simply overwhelmed Germany.

I beleive, (and i may do a thread on this) that the germans lost the war in 1943, when they lost kursk, after that, whatever they did, they coudent hold the red army back.

They lost the battle for the Soviet Union. But it was always possible that they could hold ground in Central Europe. It may have even became a war of attrition along the lines of WWI. In addition, I don't think that if there was an end, it would be a negotiated peace. The Soviets, as potent as they were, were not strong enough to capture all of Nazi Europe. There'd be too much resistence, and probably local resistence like there was to the Nazis.

Like perhaps an open ended war on terrorism

gosh amighty
Does the War on Terror kills millions every few months and levels cities regularly? Or are you just saying this as you don't like me.

Fuck those americans that think they can own the world, they're goverment sucks.

French are not what you think, i do accept they are a bit arrogant, but that's that.

You americans don't remember when the french helped you during your independence, just remember that without the french you would have lasted more as a colony to GB.

Fuck those americans that think they can own the world, they're goverment sucks.

French are not what you think, i do accept they are a bit arrogant, but that's that.

You americans don't remember when the french helped you during your independence, just remember that without the french you would have lasted more as a colony to GB.Tone done the language a bit please...
Even if I'm not an American that thinks we own the world, I can still be offended...

Fuck those americans that think they can own the world, they're goverment sucks.

French are not what you think, i do accept they are a bit arrogant, but that's that.

You americans don't remember when the french helped you during your independence, just remember that without the french you would have lasted more as a colony to GB.

Yeah, like the French did anything in the American Revolution. Remember the second rule of French Warfare! France only wins when America does most of the work. >_<

And yes, we can own the world.

With our new Axis of Evil. (Germany, China, and the U.S.) We can own the world, quite simply.

Germany invents kickass millitary equipment and units.

The U.S. Makes tons of the.

China uses their huge manpower, to use that equipment.

World Domination. Simple as that. We can own the world. And we'll surely make an example of people who cannot use "their, and they're" correctly, as well as people who cannot use Puncuation, Capitalization, and correct Grammar.

But there was. Remember, at the last days of the war, there was a strong upsurge in German technology. And by the time the war ended, they came out with new U-boats, ships, and brand new jet planes. They may have even developed the bomb by year's end. The infusion of troops on the Western Front simply overwhelmed Germany.Ever tried to run a tank without gas? That's another thing that ended the Germans, other than Allied air superiority, artillery superiority, and logistical support. The Germans had lost all oil fields and couldn't train properly, leave alone attack, properly.

With our new Axis of Evil. (Germany, China, and the U.S.) We can own the world, quite simply.

Germany invents kickass millitary equipment and units.

The U.S. Makes tons of the.

China uses their huge manpower, to use that equipment.

World Domination. Simple as that. We can own the world. And we'll surely make an example of people who cannot use "their, and they're" correctly, as well as people who cannot use Puncuation, Capitalization, and correct Grammar.

I'm german, and in case you don't notice we hate your goverment.

China is likely to declare war on you.

Fuck those americans that think they can own the world, they're goverment sucks.

French are not what you think, i do accept they are a bit arrogant, but that's that.

You americans don't remember when the french helped you during your independence, just remember that without the french you would have lasted more as a colony to GB.

And plus, more or less, we already own the world.

I'm german, and in case you don't notice we hate your goverment.

China is likely to declare war on you.

Roflmao. Sino-American Relations have never been better. Trade is on the rise, open communications, as well as inward Cooperation.

What one Crazy European in Germany thinks, isn't representive of the rest of Germany. It was Fascist once, it can become Fascist again!

I'm german, and in case you don't notice we hate your goverment."We" do?

And plus, more or less, we already own the world.

Do you think that the german people is not angry?

Of course we are, we've been beaten twice, but not by the americans, russians, british, french and almost all the world fought against us, and yet if it wasn't for our great oil shortage we could have won, but what's done is done.

Do you think that the german people is not angry?

Of course we are, we've been beaten twice, but not by the americans, russians, british, french and almost all the world fought against us, and yet if it wasn't for our great oil shortage we could have won, but what's done is done.

No, you lost, because the Russians kept swarming millions of troops at you, and outnumbered you 6-1. That's why you lost. If not for the U.S. and Russia, Germany would have easily smashed the rest of the World.

Do you think that the german people is not angry?

Of course we are, we've been beaten twice, but not by the americans, russians, british, french and almost all the world fought against us, and yet if it wasn't for our great oil shortage we could have won, but what's done is done.Silly... It wasn't just the oil shortage. I doubt that even with enough oil, Germany would have won the war.

Silly... It wasn't just the oil shortage. I doubt that even with enough oil, Germany would have won the war.

Because the Russians ****ing outnumbered them 6-1. It's not possible to win at that point.

Because the Russians ****ing outnumbered them 6-1. It's not possible to win at that point.The Russians outnumbered us by a lot more before then. In fact, the body count for dead Russians was far higher than the German military thought there were Russians to kill...

Sure, we could have just started conquering foreign countries while we were over there trying to stop a madman from taking over Europe. I'm sure that would look REAL good on our resume.

:confused:
I was several times in France and every single time the french were most kind and polite. I can't think the french are nicer towards germans than towards americans. I guess you was either overly sensitive or missbehaved yourself somehow.

I asked a waiter where the bathroom was and I did it in French because as a visitor I considered it more reasonable for me to speak French than to expect the waiter to speak English. And I never misbehave in my own country or any other one - I am appalled at the behavior some of my countrymen show while abroad.

But there was. Remember, at the last days of the war, there was a strong upsurge in German technology. And by the time the war ended, they came out with new U-boats, ships, and brand new jet planes. They may have even developed the bomb by year's end. The infusion of troops on the Western Front simply overwhelmed Germany.

New U-boats aren't a great deal of use if you have already lost the Battle of the Atlantic, similarly for new ships, when the Allies still had fleet superiority, and as to new jet planes - these are the ones which were so starved of fuel (as was the rest of the German war machine) that they were taxied along their runways by teams of horses? The claim that they could go from their primitive experiments with bomb technology to actually possessing one by the end of '44 is quite simply flying in the face of the evidence - in another world the project might have garnered more support and been focused upon in the way that Project Manhattan was, but with the German prdeliction for every B-grade engineer or industrialist to push forward their own particular ideas and force them into production the whole idea was lost amongst a fluury of other needless pet projects. For example, look at the range of different types of tank destroyers that the Germans produed, and how many of these were actually successful fighting vehiciles: maybe two models stand out in my mind, and the rest just went to produce a logistical nightmare and eat away at the limited production capacities of Germany.

Nevermind the fact that most late-war Germany tehnology was repeatedly dogged by the problem that although it might look great on paper, when atually produced and fielded it was shown to be a white elephant* which was suitable only for the battlefield which existed in the minds of its designers,

It was not 'the infusion of troops on the Western Front' which signed Nazi Germany's death certificate, but rather the storm coming from the East and the rot which had long set in within Germany itself. Certainly D-Day and the western approach to the German heartland shortened the war, but Nazi flags would only have been flying over Western Europe for at most another two years or so without an actual Western assault.


* Or, indeed, Elefant.

Oh, it's not that we won't conquer France, it's that we won't Liberate. I.E: We shouldn't give it back to the French Government. We won it fair and square. We deserve it. We conquered it fair and square, not the French Government.

See, so technically, we should have made France part of the the U.S.A., and used it to attack onto Berlin.

The point is, that why do we feel a need to return the land to it's original government? They didn't win it, WE DID.

Like France should have made the rebelious states French colonies when they helped pay/arm/train/equip/command you liberating forces from the British.

I'm german, and in case you don't notice we hate your goverment.I'm also german and though I don't like the present amercian neocon goverment, I do by no means hate it. It's the elected goverment of a sovereign state. I guess many germans share my opinion.

China is likely to declare war on you.
I really hope not.

I asked a waiter where the bathroom was and I did it in French because as a visitor I considered it more reasonable for me to speak French than to expect the waiter to speak English. And I never misbehave in my own country or any other one - I am appalled at the behavior some of my countrymen show while abroad.
Maybe that waiter was an asshole. That doesn't mean that all french are. Assholes are present in every country.

Does the War on Terror kills millions every few months and levels cities regularly? Or are you just saying this as you don't like me.

You spoke of endless war.

There is no need for it to kill millions every few months for it to be an endless
war.
There were many months in the 2nd world war where millions were not killed
those periods were not peace.

An open ended war on terror is by definition an endless war.
Especially with the looseness of the definition of terrorism.

I don't know you but if it makes you feel better I probably wouldn't like you
if I met you.

I don't know you but if it makes you feel better I probably wouldn't like you
if I met you.

Maybe he would feel better; thinking he's true, thinking everybody near him is true; and thinking "yah, I dont know any discordant voice, but, since I dont know you, I think I'm right."

The differecen between him and us is that we have seen that all statements made by the american government are false or dangerous; but he stands on believing Bush without hearing other possibilities.

What's this 'we' business where you use 'we' to mean the USA alone? Shame on you. You are an insult to the Canadians, Poles, British, French, New Zealanders, Australians and Czechs that fought and died to liberate France.
Don't forget the thousands of Norwegian sailors who perished on the seas, bringing food, fuel, weapons, soldiers, etc to Britain and France during WW2. Or the many Norwegian fighter pilots that fought over France and who were killed in action.

Just had to say it.

wow, this topic is funny.

Allow me to add:

If the United States had taken power in France, we could have re-named it "New New England" or "New England 2" (as there already is a region in the US known as New England)

hehe

i'm sure the french would have loved that.

The point is, semi-soveriegnity, as well has making France answer to us, would let the French be tricked that they were "free", keeping dissent down, (at least when combined with American Propaganda), and, we could strengthen our country as well. Simple.

Whatever would make you think that the French people would want to be part of the United States? And if you think that any normal person would be tricked by American propaganda, you might consider reading the press of other nations.

On the other hand, if France had become a state of the USA, then French would have equal status with English (as would normally happen in a democratic country), and only those people who knew both languages would be able to campaign for the Congress. Just think of it, you would actually have educated people making laws in the USA.

And soccer would become a national sport of the USA instead of baseball. And American cooking would finally become cuisine. Wow! this opens tons of wonderful possibilities! Just imagine, American trains would not be a national disgrace; Americans would finally obtain a national health insurance; American education would be free and open to all qualified students.

Oh, why didn't it happen as you imagine? It might have turned the USA into the promised land.
:)

Oh, it's not that we won't conquer France, it's that we won't Liberate. I.E: We shouldn't give it back to the French Government. We won it fair and square. We deserve it. We conquered it fair and square, not the French Government.

See, so technically, we should have made France part of the the U.S.A., and used it to attack onto Berlin.

The point is, that why do we feel a need to return the land to it's original government? They didn't win it, WE DID.

I hope you're the only one in the world who thinks like that, because that would just plain suck. The US is not out to create an empire, the US is out do interact with the rest of the world.

Besides, we'd have to do that for most of Europe, including Italy, Belguim, half of Germany, most of the Pacific Islands, northern Africa, etc.

Trust me, the world would have been pissed had we had done that. Besides, we would have had to rebuild everything. It would have been waay to expensive.

Discuss.
Troll!!!!

What is really amazing in a number of threads
is the number of americans who do not have any belief in or allegiance to
the concepts of democracy, justice or rule of law.

One can only suppose that the "founding fathers" with the qualities
and principles we hear most commonly assigned to them by americans
would be spinning so fast in their graves that it would render
all other means of electricity production completely unnecessary.

One can only suppose that the "founding fathers" with the qualities
and principles we hear most commonly assigned to them by americans
would be spinning so fast in their graves that it would render
all other means of electricity production completely unnecessary.

Been there, done that. How do you think Enron made at least part of its fortune? ;)

All it proves is that a fair chunk of Americans are morally bankrupt. But then again, morals are something that aren't really very important to establishing power bases so I can assume it takes a back seat.

Yeah, I'd partition it between each of them. And I'm hoping for a peaceful union, with a general set of laws.

The United States of America, is basically the UN, except we have the balls to back up what we say, to our members/states. I'm certain that it wouldn't really be more occupation, but more of peaceful cooperation, with the threat of occupation.

Also, France would be treated as several states, meaning there would be several Senators from France.

1. We are not the UN. We are a single country. We do not have the balls to back up anything we say (See North Korea).

2. We already HAVE a peaceful cooperation with France.

3. France would need to be split up into about 10 or 15 states that it currently are in (15 provinces or so). Also, the entire world would be pissed off.

1. We are not the UN. We are a single country. We do not have the balls to back up anything we say (See North Korea).

2. We already HAVE a peaceful cooperation with France.

3. France would need to be split up into about 10 or 15 states that it currently are in (15 provinces or so). Also, the entire world would be pissed off.

1. That's because the Liberals don't want war.

2. So? Doesn't matter.

3. So what if the entire world is pissed off? Let them take swings at us. They'll be massacred.

1. That's because the Liberals don't want war.

2. So? Doesn't matter.

3. So what if the entire world is pissed off? Let them take swings at us. They'll be massacred.

1. I want war against North Korea. But Bush is too scared of nuclear weapons.

2. So your plan is worthless.

3. Dude, they wouldn't. The rest of the world's armies, navies, air force, nukes, and weapons all outnumber us. Hell, we didn't even invent the tank, jet, or aircraft carrier attack. Add to that that we've sold a lot of weapons, and that our economy is at the mercy of our national debt (and by relation, the World Bank), and we'd be dead in mere days.

1. That's because the Liberals don't want war.

Bah. The Liberals didn't want war in Iraq either. The only reason why Bush went there over NK was because he thought they were pushovers.


3. So what if the entire world is pissed off? Let them take swings at us. They'll be massacred.

As has been pointed out, the ones who would be massacred would be the US. Canada and Mexico might not have a very big army, but they make great land routes into the US. Russia and China alone would have enough tanks and troops moving through them to make it a two pronged fight. Furthermore, the British Navy (I can't imagine themselves supporting a bald faced annexation of a country or two), would help up tangle USN forces along with Russian forces. Given current research trends in Russian naval weaponry, expect lots of cruise missiles from outside aircraft range making hits. India and Pakistan would probably join forces for the time being as a matter of self preservation and send in their forces as well, threatening nuclear retaliation if struck with similar weapons.

End result: US goes the same way as Nazi Germany in 1944. Dogpiled to oblivion.

1. I want war against North Korea. But Bush is too scared of nuclear weapons.

2. So your plan is worthless.

3. Dude, they wouldn't. The rest of the world's armies, navies, air force, nukes, and weapons all outnumber us. Hell, we didn't even invent the tank, jet, or aircraft carrier attack. Add to that that we've sold a lot of weapons, and that our economy is at the mercy of our national debt (and by relation, the World Bank), and we'd be dead in mere days.

1. Using them, or other people using them?

2. How so?

3. We're 30 years ahead of anyone else in our navy. We're larger then anyone else's navy.

We have 12 god damn Supercarriers.

The rest of the world combined has 2.

Ever tried to run a tank without gas? That's another thing that ended the Germans, other than Allied air superiority, artillery superiority, and logistical support. The Germans had lost all oil fields and couldn't train properly, leave alone attack, properly.
They were making up for it with synthetic gas.They actually did a lot to get that industry going.

New U-boats aren't a great deal of use if you have already lost the Battle of the Atlantic, similarly for new ships, when the Allies still had fleet superiority, and as to new jet planes - these are the ones which were so starved of fuel (as was the rest of the German war machine) that they were taxied along their runways by teams of horses? The claim that they could go from their primitive experiments with bomb technology to actually possessing one by the end of '44 is quite simply flying in the face of the evidence - in another world the project might have garnered more support and been focused upon in the way that Project Manhattan was, but with the German prdeliction for every B-grade engineer or industrialist to push forward their own particular ideas and force them into production the whole idea was lost amongst a fluury of other needless pet projects. For example, look at the range of different types of tank destroyers that the Germans produed, and how many of these were actually successful fighting vehiciles: maybe two models stand out in my mind, and the rest just went to produce a logistical nightmare and eat away at the limited production capacities of Germany.

Nevermind the fact that most late-war Germany tehnology was repeatedly dogged by the problem that although it might look great on paper, when atually produced and fielded it was shown to be a white elephant* which was suitable only for the battlefield which existed in the minds of its designers,

It was not 'the infusion of troops on the Western Front' which signed Nazi Germany's death certificate, but rather the storm coming from the East and the rot which had long set in within Germany itself. Certainly D-Day and the western approach to the German heartland shortened the war, but Nazi flags would only have been flying over Western Europe for at most another two years or so without an actual Western assault.


* Or, indeed, Elefant.
I will tell you right now that I am no WWII expert. You may very well be right. However, there were millions of fresh troops that poured into France from all over the world. The Eastern Front was already a problem, but now Germany had to send millions of troops west. It is manageble to have one enemy on one end of the continent. That was the strategy devised by Otto von Bismarck. But at both ends of the continent, it is just too much. Remember, in WWI, Germany was poised to take Paris twice. Both times, it was not fighting Russia.
On another note, I seriously believe that Russia would make a separate peace with Germany based on ideaological grounds. Sure, they hated eachother. But there are two reasons why I believe this. One, the nature of dictatorships is very fiickle. They probably would fight again, but with one man controlling the governments of each nation, it'd be easy to negotiate something. And two, war supports dictatorships. If the war ever ends, people turn suspicious of their government. That's why some of Stalin's greatest purges were right after WWII. He may have allowed Germany to still exist to fight them in the future, and prayed that his demands for a Western Front was just a way to make his allies feel guilty. He probably felt (and rightly so) that his allies were too weak to launch a campaign on continental Europe, anyhow.