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.
A common refrain I often hear, regarding our participation in WWII is, "It's a good thing we went to Europe and defeated the National Socialists, or else we'd all be speaking German!"
As opposed to speaking non-Castilian Spanish? How is that any better? And how is it that being invaded by people from nations to the south any better than being invaded by Germans? Are Germans notorious for destroying health care systems, educational systems, public assistance programs, etc.?
The USA entered the war because they were attacked on that imfamous day of 7 December 1941. On 8 December they entered the war. They fought Germany because Hitler was trying to gain world domination.
The USA entered the war because they were attacked on that imfamous day of 7 December 1941. On 8 December they entered the war. They fought Germany because Hitler was trying to gain world domination.
No, an island 2,000 miles away that the US claimed was attacked. They fought Germany (over there) because they thought they could win (over there), with a great deal to gain. Everybody knew there weren't enough Aryan Germans to gain world domination, and probably not even enough to gain all of Europe west of the Urals.
No, an island 2,000 miles away that the US claimed was attacked. They fought Germany (over there) because they thought they could win (over there), with a great deal to gain. Everybody knew there weren't enough Aryan Germans to gain world domination, and probably not even enough to gain all of Europe west of the Urals.
Except at that point (12/41) the Germans were at the gates of Moscow, had surrounded Leningrad and were driving through the Caucasus. They were looking at England across the Channel and were systematically looting conquered Europe. It certainly looked at that time that Germany might be victorious. In fact it was dicey for a long time, Stalin could have signed a separate peace at any time and part of later US strategy was to keep the Soviet Union in the war, whatever the cost, thereby trading Russian casualties for US casualties. Stalin recognized this, of course.
And again, Germany declared war on the US, not the other way around. Have a couple of you been reading German general memoirs about WW II, the reasoning on the US motives is the type of logic you see displayed in those.
I rarely agree with rlchurch but in this thread I do.
Last edited by North Beach Person; 04-11-2009 at 07:00 PM..
Reason: spelling
They are both bureaucratically collectivized, centralized economic systems. Hitler's didn't have time to fail, the USSR's did. Moreover, eventually someone probably would been successful in assassinating the Fuehrer. Even if they hadn't, he'd be long dead now anyway.
What facts do you demand? Fascism was simply not going to conquer the world. They couldn't manage to cross the English Channel for god's sake.
What facts do you demand? Fascism was simply not going to conquer the world. They couldn't manage to cross the English Channel for god's sake.
Because Hitler lost interest, the General Staff hadn't war gamed the crossing, the KriegsMarine wasn't prepared, especially with surface ships. As it was the Germans made an effort to collect all manner of small boats for a crossing but they didn't have a landing craft program such as the US later developed. Hitler turned away and attacked the USSR, which was always his aim if Mein Kampf is to be believed.
As a note we barely made the Channel crossing. Luck and planning with emphasis on luck.
Because Hitler lost interest, the General Staff hadn't war gamed the crossing, the KriegsMarine wasn't prepared, especially with surface ships. As it was the Germans made an effort to collect all manner of small boats for a crossing but they didn't have a landing craft program such as the US later developed. Hitler turned away and attacked the USSR, which was always his aim if Mein Kampf is to be believed.
As a note we barely made the Channel crossing. Luck and planning with emphasis on luck.
Yes, we did it. They couldn't have pulled it off, at least not without great opportunity cost. The fact that Hitler mainly wanted to fight Russia and not Britain is true, but that's a point for me, not a point for you.
No, an island 2,000 miles away that the US claimed was attacked. They fought Germany (over there) because they thought they could win (over there), with a great deal to gain. Everybody knew there weren't enough Aryan Germans to gain world domination, and probably not even enough to gain all of Europe west of the Urals.
Absolute fabrication. Produce a list of world leaders who thought this.
Because Hitler lost interest, the General Staff hadn't war gamed the crossing, the KriegsMarine wasn't prepared, especially with surface ships. As it was the Germans made an effort to collect all manner of small boats for a crossing but they didn't have a landing craft program such as the US later developed. Hitler turned away and attacked the USSR, which was always his aim if Mein Kampf is to be believed.
As a note we barely made the Channel crossing. Luck and planning with emphasis on luck.
Britain certainly was worried about losing that fight. They shipped their gold bullion to Canada.
The US didn't jump into the war to defend freedom and democracy. Remember that Americans had no knowledge of the death camps until occupation of Germany. All they did know was that Jews were subject to discriminatory laws. But, hello, Jim Crow anybody? Internment? It wasn't anything that America of all places could turn its nose up at. Also, well over half of America opposed involvement in the war prior to Pear Harbour.
Not that involvement wasn't the right thing to do, or that America didn't get involved for a justifiable reason, but the romanticization of America jumping into war to annihilate fascism is just inaccurate.
Absolute fabrication. Produce a list of world leaders who thought this.
The president of every country in Latin America. And Franco and Salazar. I was going to add ":smack" to the end of this to incontestibly prove that I am right, , but that doesn't seem very grown up.
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.
