Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He was referring to 2003 war.
Well, US just destroyed the country without any casus belli, then they left the country in prey of extremism and civil war.
US failed to contain the insurgency, to build a modern country, basically US just went there, destroyed everything (and by the way, it's like David VS Golia, so there isn't nothing to "boast") and then said bye bye.
Quote:
Vietnam - Sadly, this was a war the U.S. did not want to win. Vietnam was a poor 3rd world country. The U.S. had resources back then that Vietnam dosen't even have today. The U.S. hugely outnumbered Vietnam in everything.. from Weapons to troops.
Curiosity, weren't American young boys who refused to join the US Army in Vietnam cowards?
Quote:
Afghanistan - Again, how exactly did the U.S. not win ?
13 years of war and Talibans are all healthy and alive, isn't that enough?
Quote:
Syria - that's a civil war. Look up the definition. Also, I would like to know how the U.S. was involved in the Syrian civil war and lost. The U.S. didn't even start an intervention.
Like Russia they supplied weapons but I agree US didn't lose any war here.
Quote:
The Battle of France still serves as an example on what not to do in a war. You rolled out the red carpet to the Nazis. You even had enough Nazis fans in your own country so they could set up a puppet state.
If nobody had helped you, you'd now be département d'allemand. There are not many other examples in history of such a glory, quick and defenseless downfall.
Rockfeller funded SS until 1944, USA maintained diplomatic relationships with Vichy until 1944 and US had many Nazi sympathisers as well.
Then, "rolled out the red carpet to the Nazis"?"quick and defenseless downfall"?
Have you ever read a book about France campaign?
French resistance south of Lille allowed 334,000 British troops to flee from Dunkerque, most of German casualties were suffered against the disperate and stubborn French resistance during Fall Rot and Luftwaffe suffered highest losses.
92,000 French soldiers died in one month and half, it means 25 % of all American casualties.
Quote:
And I'm not even gonna go into the details of WW1, but there was an invasion of France in 1915, where France went down pretty quickly, too.
You had better not to go into details since you don't even know the basic facts. The "invasion" (i.e. the whole war) was in 1914 and France didn't go down at all, contrarily it was France the main winner of WWI, fighting a fiercest war on his territory and suffering 1,300,000 soldiers killed.
It means more or less like American Civil War, US intervention in WWI and WWII plus Vietnam put together.
Quote:
Won over 600 battles? Lol? It's funny you'd even cite this number. Care to provide proof? Care to consider that the U.S. has only 2 neighbors and was/is far away from war happy countries like Europe ? Your garden gnome wars don't count here.
Lol
France was a country when America hadn't even been discovered.
Just Napoleon alone achieved more than what US achieved in 250 years in terms of warfare, considering their superiority, advantages and numbers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annuvin
I see another history revisionist has crawled out of the woodwork.
If the U.S. had abstained from WWII, Europe would be living under swastika right now. End of story.
As for France, they rolled over and gave their country to Hitler without firing a single shot. I wouldn't call that "heroic" by any stretch of the imagination.
lol
When US happily landed in Algeria suffering several setbacks against Italo-German troops, Russians and Germans were fighting one of the fiercest battle in human history which saw more casualties than those of US in the whole war.
I repeat, when US will have fought and won a battle like Verdun, then they could label anyone else as cowards, otherwise shut up, it's better, trust me.
If you don't want the statue of liberty, give it back. The engraving on it about 'give us your poor...etc' is invalid now anyway. Might as well just have it removed.
4. I don't live in the US any more, I live in Scotland. I visit France often though and if Scotland votes to divorce the UK I will be moving to France.
BTW, it wasn't England's military in the wars, it was the British military which includes Scotland and Wales. Learn your geography and history.
Im curious why you'd leave if Scotland votes for independence.
Syria - that's a civil war. Look up the definition. Also, I would like to know how the U.S. was involved in the Syrian civil war and lost. The U.S. didn't even start an intervention.
You lost Syrian war because you did not interverne! Putin won vs US intentions.
Do not forget USA defeat at Quebec, during the 1812 war, during the 1814 war, in Long Island, in Philadelphia, in Camden, at Charleston, in Korea, in Somali civil war, in Nicaragua 1927 - 1933, in the 1950's you lost when you fought against the Hukbalahap uprising in the Philippines, and that is how they secured their independence from you...
USA lost against AL Kaeda (09/11 terrible but true exemple).
Infact USA lost all wars and they speak about "French surrendering". People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
USA is the only country which lost so many wars in so few battles.
PS : the Battle of Charleston still serves as an example on what not to do in a war
I would say the US won. We went in and completed our mission of toppling Saddam's regime. Sadly, we left the country in shambles afterward.
Quote:
Vietnam - Sadly, this was a war the U.S. did not want to win. Vietnam was a poor 3rd world country. The U.S. had resources back then that Vietnam dosen't even have today. The U.S. hugely outnumbered Vietnam in everything.. from Weapons to troops.
I agree with this.
Quote:
Afghanistan - Again, how exactly did the U.S. not win ?
I don't even think I'd consider this a war. More of a pointless mission that is just wasting taxpayer money. We need to just get out of this hell hole of a country and leave them be.
Quote:
Syria - that's a civil war. Look up the definition. Also, I would like to know how the U.S. was involved in the Syrian civil war and lost. The U.S. didn't even start an intervention.
True, the US never did anything in Syria other than supply Al Qaeda with guerrillas weapons. Other than that we are not "officially" involved in Syria.
Both Iraqi wars were won. Politically and economically the second was a big failure, but military the US won. Saddam regime and army had been destroyed.
Korea was a draw. But Vietnam was a defeat, whatever the reason, the US left the country in emergency - leaving behind Vietnamese allies and many of their military stuff - while the communist were invading the south. France lost the Algerian war for the same reason, French army were winning even more easily but politically, mainland French were mostly against the war.
Afghanistan is such a mess I can't say the US (and its allies, including France btw) won or lose. We'll just see what happen when the last troop will leave. If the Taliban take over the whole country, it could be considered as a loss because the main NATO mission would have failed.
The US (and all its allies) lost the battle of influence over Syria, but that's not military. They were diplomatically outsmart by Russia, but the story isn't over yet.
I often wonder, if Nazi Germany had a land border with the United States in 1940-1941, and invaded, how far would they have gone. Would our "Stalingrad" be St. Louis or New Orleans? Would the U.S. have fallen into chaos or split apart with the seizure of the large east coast cities? Of course this is impossible to imagine. The U.S. became such a strong nation is its lack of serious military rivals on its borders by the end of the nineteenth century.
He was referring to 2003 war.
Well, US just destroyed the country without any casus belli, then they left the country in prey of extremism and civil war.
US failed to contain the insurgency, to build a modern country, basically US just went there, destroyed everything (and by the way, it's like David VS Golia, so there isn't nothing to "boast") and then said bye bye.
The U.S. just was going at war with extremists there. Nobody annexed it. I can name dozens of sovereign countries that have major rouge criminal organizations. "Losing" a war is something else.
Curiosity, weren't American young boys who refused to join the US Army in Vietnam cowards?
Huh ?How does this comment relate to what I said?
13 years of war and Talibans are all healthy and alive, isn't that enough?
They're not "healthy", but that's not "losing" a war.
Rockfeller funded SS until 1944, USA maintained diplomatic relationships with Vichy until 1944 and US had many Nazi sympathisers as well.
Dosen't relate to my comment.
Then, "rolled out the red carpet to the Nazis"?"quick and defenseless downfall"?
Have you ever read a book about France campaign?
France had hardly anything to counter. Outdated army. Used many couriers to communicate etc. The Nazis came, France was gone. Were caught by surprise, didn't expect Germans, thought their "Maginot line" was the ultimate defense when you could just walk around it, and so on. And once they were in, they could just easily and conveniently set up a puppet government.
The French brought a knife to a gun
French resistance south of Lille allowed 334,000 British troops to flee from Dunkerque, most of German casualties were suffered against the disperate and stubborn French resistance during Fall Rot and Luftwaffe suffered highest losses.
92,000 French soldiers died in one month and half, it means 25 % of all American casualties.
Of course. The U.S. actually fought a war. France watched. They let others come to the recuse.
You had better not to go into details since you don't even know the basic facts. The "invasion" (i.e. the whole war) was in 1914 and France didn't go down at all, contrarily it was France the main winner of WWI, fighting a fiercest war on his territory and suffering 1,300,000 soldiers killed.
It means more or less like American Civil War, US intervention in WWI and WWII plus Vietnam put together.
Ah. Germans invaded, gained control of important regions is what you call a "winner"? You've got to be French. They couldn't even do anything without British help.
Lol
France was a country when America hadn't even been discovered.
Just Napoleon alone achieved more than what US achieved in 250 years in terms of warfare, considering their superiority, advantages and numbers.
I'm glad you noticed this. So any number of "battles" fought would be, of course, higher. 600 says who ? Proof, please.
What exactly did Napoleon achieve ? He conquered a lot of land and completely lost it all. The U.S. dramatically expanded its territory and still got it.
I repeat, when US will have fought and won a battle like Verdun, then they could label anyone else as cowards, otherwise shut up, it's better, trust me.
So let me get this straight. You're all proud because France didn't lose a battle on its own soil, while the U.S. had to ship millions of men and equipment over the ocean, thousands of miles, and still won a world war and rescued France? LOL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by amaroW
You lost Syrian war because you did not interverne! Putin won vs US intentions.
You can't lose a war when there's no war.
Do not forget USA defeat at Quebec, during the 1812 war, during the 1814 war, in Long Island, in Philadelphia, in Camden, at Charleston, in Korea, in Somali civil war, in Nicaragua 1927 - 1933, in the 1950's you lost when you fought against the Hukbalahap uprising in the Philippines, and that is how they secured their independence from you...
USA lost against AL Kaeda (09/11 terrible but true exemple).
France has AZF andother terror groups, and Marseille. They have Al-Qaeda, which isn't even on U.S. soil.
Infact USA lost all wars and they speak about "French surrendering". People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
Lost ? Exactly how ? WW1 ? WW2 ?
USA is the only country which lost so many wars in so few battles.
That hardly compares to your performance - 2 world wars where the whole world had to come to your rescue to defeat your neighbor.
PS : the Battle of Charleston still serves as an example on what not to do in a war
And yet, the U.S. still won. They did hold out 6 weeks, though. Longer than France ever lasted.
I must say though that I don't understand the headline of this thread. "coward" isn't the right word.
I often wonder, if Nazi Germany had a land border with the United States in 1940-1941, and invaded, how far would they have gone. Would our "Stalingrad" be St. Louis or New Orleans? Would the U.S. have fallen into chaos or split apart with the seizure of the large east coast cities?
Very interesting question! I often wonder about how the US and its people would have handled that one. Come to think of it I'd have no doubt the scenario would be somewhat like France, Holland, Scandanavia and all those overrun and occupied by Wehrmacht and Nazis, i.e. some 'for' the occupiers, some 'against' and some who would not let a seeming an advantage escape..they go with the flow! I'd like to think we'd go down fighting and done to the death before we'd let the Nazis into our Capitol. But hey you never know on this what-if.
The U.S. just was going at war with extremists there. Nobody annexed it. I can name dozens of sovereign countries that have major rouge criminal organizations. "Losing" a war is something else.
US magnificently defeated a corrupted,inefficient,ill-equipped and ill-trained army, then despite the enormous superiority in every fields, they failed to secure the country, they failed to defeat the insurgency and, in the end, abandoned the country they had invaded without any justification.
Quote:
Huh ?How does this comment relate to what I said?
In the meaning of how Americans easily label "Coward" others.
Now, if you don't label French cowards there's no problem, otherwise, answer the question.
Quote:
They're not "healthy", but that's not "losing" a war.
Wow, so invading Afghanistan with the most powerful armed forces in the world, basically bringing to the stone-age and, despite the overwhelming superiority in every field, failing to definitively defeat the Talibans is a victory?
Quote:
Dosen't relate to my comment
It just showed that US weren't the "champion of freedom and democracy" faultless and pure as many Americans seem to believe.
Quote:
France had hardly anything to counter. Outdated army. Used many couriers to communicate etc. The Nazis came, France was gone. Were caught by surprise, didn't expect Germans, thought their "Maginot line" was the ultimate defense when you could just walk around it, and so on. And once they were in, they could just easily and conveniently set up a puppet government.
The French brought a knife to a gun
lol
French Army was well equipped and trained, it simply lacked good generals and idea (and good ideas were thwarthed at that time in the UK as well).
Plus, it would be nice to what would have done the US being invaded, easy to talk when there's an ocean between you and the enemy.
Quote:
Of course. The U.S. actually fought a war. France watched. They let others come to the recuse.
Yes, yes. Typically American, I'm wondering whether you understand English or not.
France watched? 400,000 French soldiers died, the same of US.
I repeat, read some history books, then you could learn.
Plus, USSR fought the war in Europe, the US happily came in 1944 if we want to be brutally honest.
Quote:
Ah. Germans invaded, gained control of important regions is what you call a "winner"? You've got to be French. They couldn't even do anything without British help.
lol
I'm not French, I just know history,it's different.
Do anything? France stopped Germans at the Marne (lol 500,000 French casualties vs 10,000 British one and "they couldn't do anything" lol), France was the one who sustained the role of attacked when British were building their armies, French resistance allowed BEF to resist, French resistance allowed Russia not to collapse before.
France was the main winner of WWI, that's undeniable.
By the way, France was the biggest industrial producer in WWI, they even supplied cannons, guns and airplanes to Americans when they arrived in late 1918 to claim "they won the war".
Quote:
I'm glad you noticed this. So any number of "battles" fought would be, of course, higher. 600 says who ? Proof, please.
What exactly did Napoleon achieve ? He conquered a lot of land and completely lost it all. The U.S. dramatically expanded its territory and still got it.
It's not that hard: open an history book and study.
France the main European military power from late XVII century up to 1870.
US "dramatically expanded its territory and still got it"?
Wow, it must have been hard to genocide millions of Indians with the modern industrial power.
Look at the positive side: for once US fought a primitive enemy and was capable of winning
Quote:
So let me get this straight. You're all proud because France didn't lose a battle on its own soil, while the U.S. had to ship millions of men and equipment over the ocean, thousands of miles, and still won a world war and rescued France? LOL.
Well, basically it's among the biggest battle in history (it totalized almost the double of casualties of the whole American Civil War by the way) and you really really need reading an account of what it was before dismissing it "not losing a battle".
Do you know "Guadalcanal,Iwo Jima, Okinawa or Gettysburg"?
Do you know how much they are mythized? Well, just be aware that they are a mere joke compared to Verdun.
Then, if in your opinion defeating and holding out against the most modern Army in the world, suffering unimaginable casualties (more or less 100 times the American casualties in 14 years long War on Terror, more or less like American casualties in ACW+WWI and WWII altogether), isn't worthy of being proud.
Then I think that the whole American military history, considering the enormous advantages it always had, is a laugh.
Plus, "won world war II" do you mean defeating a rough 30% of an under-strength, ill-equipped and totally overwhelmed in terms of numbers German Army by suffering huge losses and using 1 year?
Do you mean needing 4 years to defeat two nations despite having 40 % of the Global GDP and being far from any war theather? Do you mean employing 4 years to defeat Japan despite outnumbering it in all possible categories and being forced to nuke it?
Do you mean claiming of winning the war when USSR inflicten upon Germany the 80 % of its casualties?
Do you mean bombing the whole Europe but seeing that in 1944 the German industrial output was the highest in the war?
Do you mean coming in WWI, suffering more casualties from Spanish flu, fighting some mediocre battles and then claiming to win WWI?
Geez, dude I don't know what they teach in US history class but it's evident you didn't take enough of them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
