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.
It is ridiculous to think France tends to lose wars. In fact, someone did the research and France is one of the countries who won the most wars among European countries. Napoleon actually lost more wars than France's historical average.
America media joking about it? Really? They can't even control Syria and handed Crimea to Russia for free, and they are laughing at others?
Plus it is stupid to compare this way. Britain is an island while France is right next to Germany.
Additionally, without the US, the UK would have fallen to the same fate as France. There is no question about it. Churchill was basically begging the US for help. Conquering the UK is 5 times more difficult due to the water, but it is within reach of Nazi Germany.
Yeah, but Britain was not the major player in any of those wars, more like the tenacious banker. And ironically, the French did most of the job in both of those. And you forgot the Franco-Austrian war.
Plus it is stupid to compare this way. Britain is an island while France is right next to Germany.
Additionally, without the US, the UK would have fallen to the same fate as France. There is no question about it. Churchill was basically begging the US for help. Conquering the UK is 5 times more difficult due to the water, but it is within reach of Nazi Germany.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. There was no way Germany could have rolled over Britain the way they did France. And they'd already lost the Battle of Britain long before the US became actively involved. The best Hitler could have hoped for was for Britain to sue for peace after bombing its cities. He failed with that too.
Britain actually winning without the US is another matter, but it works the other way too.
Yeah, but Britain was not the major player in any of those wars, more like the tenacious banker. And ironically, the French did most of the job in both of those. And you forgot the Franco-Austrian war.
*crunch* *crunch* *crunch*
The families of the 450,000 killed would probably not agree with that.
Oh and for a time in WW2, Britain and its Commonwealth, was the only major player in WW2 against the Nazis. Without that fact, things would have been very different.
But i'll state this again, throughout history, the French can hardly be considered cowards!
Without the US, Russian tanks would have stopped in Lisbon and they would have invaded UK.
If the Germans couldn't invade how could the Russians exactly? And in your scenario, would the US have given aid to Russia too?
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.
