Majority of Americans do not want this War with Iraq, so.....

[TheGeneral+]

That in itself shows how unfair the American democracy has become and manipulated. Bush terribly underestimated the price that would be paid for this war and while we pay 2k for an MRI or only $1400 (70%) if you can pay on spot . We have to be Glad our Govt can fork over the money to help the Iraq people, although we all know that is not the reason for our really being there, but cannot keep medical costs down for a broke unites states military veteran who has no criminal record and paid taxes for 20 years. Where did I go wrong? I should have been a crack addict on welfare. All would be paid a 100% then. You get my point. We are crushing the American dream fighting a war that cannot be won and throwing away the one resource that can truly assure the American dream. Take care of the American citizens all the way and if that is wrong and we pay a price for that, then so be it because it is the noble thing to do.

http://icasualties.org/oif/
<!-- / message -->

 

[charleslanger]

Instead of the latest pay raises instituted, i would've done free lifetime health care for self, immediate family, and any designated dependents of anyone who served x years, combat, etc....(even w/ a partail lifetime co-pay)

 

[DarrylParsons]

Good to see you posting on the political forum General...hope to see you more often here. War is expensive indeed and it looks like the cost for the US far outweighs the benefits. Can't say I disagree with what you're saying.

 

[GAMEFACE]

Most Americans did not want the Revolutionary war or WW2. I'd say history has proven both were necessary. War is never popular, political correctness has really hurt our efforts. Our own jackels in the media are the biggest problem. Panties gate ran for 40 days and 40 night and still no pictures of the lopped off heads.

 

[docmercer--banned]

Gameface:

Jackels in the Media? You are correct, sir!

I was gonna use some harsher language in describing Coutler, Hannity & Limbaugh but if you prefer that
terminology, good enough for me

 

[TheGeneral+]

Game, you are wrong for supporting this war. I wish I could change your beliefs, but you have a right.

This is a travesty for the United States.

 

[stacilu]

Most Americans did not want the Revolutionary war or WW2. I'd say history has proven both were necessary. War is never popular, political correctness has really hurt our efforts. Our own jackels in the media are the biggest problem. Panties gate ran for 40 days and 40 night and still no pictures of the lopped off heads.

"Most Americans did not want WW2." Typical, will use a half truth and
claim the whole truth. Before the attack on Pearl the nation was divided
about a war, very true. After the attack, the percentage of people in
favor of a war was much closer to 90% than it was to 50%. You are an
amazing person. Half-truth is worse than a lie. How can I expect anything else from your kind.

 

[GAMEFACE]

Staci,

Funny ****! WW2 was up and running and Hitler was conquering anyone in the way and had his eyes on America the whole way and Americans were against joining. Spin it how you wish but America was against fighting in WW2. So you're for 30% the Navy being wiped out before we can join a war? We should have help Europe before the attack on Pearl harbour, limp wristed apologist like yourself make it more difficult, end of story. We are damn lucky we won WW2 no thanks to liberals like yourself or you'd be speaking german today.

 

[Marco]

"We are damn lucky we won WW2 no thanks to liberals like yourself or you'd be speaking german today."

And if we didn't attack Germany they were just going to finish off the rest of Europe, while at the same time take on an expansive Russia and the frozen conditions, dominate Russia and then just march across an ocean and invade a foreign continent?

I seriously doubt they could have taken Russia.

 

[JinnRikki]

Marco, your absolutely right Hitler sealed his fate by attacking Russia before conquering the rest of Europe. The Russian winter had as much to do with the Nazis losing WWII as the U.S. did. Dumb bastitch should have read some history. Napolean was done in by Russian weather.

 

[Phaedrus]

I love hearing people talk about WWII as if it was this great, just thing. Save part of Europe and in the process empower the USSR to kill millions and subjugate tens of millions more into a life worse than slavery.

WWI was also a "great, just" war -- one that saved part of Europe and in the process gave rise to Hitler's power.

Maybe one day society will grow tired of these great, just wars.


Phaedrus

 

[eek.]

They couldn't have taken Russia.

Even If they had taken Moscow, I reckon it would just have been another Stalingrad.(Like with Napoleon- Battle of Borodino)

There just weren't enough German warm bodies, and kit, to finish the job.
Both Hitler and Napoleon were unable to grasp the logistics necessary to overrun the Russians.

The German army was the best in europe, and better than the allies, more professional etc.

But they were overwhelmed by sheer force and weight of numbers, mainly in Russia (definitely in Russia), and later on even against the allies.

 

[GAMEFACE]

Marco,

I seriously doubt you understand Hitlers objective. Hitler knew he had to conquer America before he took power. We would have been sitting ducks if not for the attack on Pearl Harbour. Hitler fukked up on moving into Russia during the bad weather. Americans would have been against WW2 as the Nazis were landing and then it would have been too late. Some times the people are dead wrong.

 

[eek.]

Game it was the Balkans that put back the invasion of Russia by about six weeks.

Those crazy Yugoslavs held up the Germans for far longer than anticipated.
That hold-up kept back the Barbarossa operation.

(Yugoslavia was the only place in Europe that the Germans never conquered throughout WW2.)

heh
Even Stalin pulled out of Yugoslavia after WW2 (pre-agreed with Tito)
Its not the kind of place you want to hang around in as an occupier.

Victory in WW2 was a joint effort.
It took most of the world to squish the Germans.

The biggest contribution came from the Russians.
The main US contribution was the production of amazing quantities of kit that could be used by allied forces and US forces.


...plus you guys got the bomb first, thank goodness.

 

[GAMEFACE]

eek,

Thank God or we'd all be speaking German today or we'd be lamp shades.

 

[GAMEFACE]

eek,

you accidently swerved into why we must take out Iraq, Iran and Nk now. We must stop them now, not after they get the BOMB. I know, thanks to clintoon we may be a little late on NK. Who knows no ones certain NK has the BOMB yet. That midget has be really quite after Bush won, look for him to run his head if a liberal ever wins in America. Those tyrants love weak kneed liberals.

 

[Phaedrus]

posted by GAMEFACE:

I seriously doubt you understand Hitlers objective. Hitler knew he had to conquer America before he took power.

Can you cite a single vaguely plausible source on this assertion? It is extremely doubtful that Hitler would have bothered with America had he succeeded in conquering most of Europe. For one thing, with the defeat by the Russians and the impasse with the Swiss he was being boxed in. For another he was expending resources at a vastly greater rate than he could replace them. If Europe could have been basically boxed in and settled by the Nazis it would have amounted to nothing more impressive than a Cold War with four key players instead of two: America, the USSR, whomever inherited the Hitler-Mussolini power structure after their deaths, and the Japanese Empire. Why, and for that matter how, would the European or Asian Axis powers launch any sort of meaningful attack on the US?

Pearl Harbour was a military strike on a military target of some significance, but its net effect on America as far as power structure goes was so close to zero as to be practically immeasurable. The only way for the Japanese to launch a real attack on America would have been to send boat after boat on a 6,000+ mile journey across the Pacific, and somehow reconcile the fact that they needed to land on our shores with the fact that we sank them a couple of hundred miles out and that they were all dead. We could have staved that off for as long as Japan could have produced warm bodies.

The Reich at least had some progess in missile tech, and it is not inconceivable that they might have had something by the late 50's that could have been launched from their base in Ireland to strike the U.S., but why would they have done this? With a vastly overstretched powerbase and an American public more or less ambivalent to the Nazi regime in Western Europe there would have been zero incentive for Hitler or a successor to launch an attack.

So -- logistically no threat from the Japanese, and logically no threat involving the German/Italian/maybe Spanish guys in control of this alternate universe Europe where Hitler won.

How, and why, would this attack you postulate have occurred?

We would have been sitting ducks if not for the attack on Pearl Harbour. ... Americans would have been against WW2 as the Nazis were landing and then it would have been too late. Some times the people are dead wrong.

Why would we have been sitting ducks until a German beachead? And even if we were, how can you seriously assert that a beachead crossing 3,500+ miles of Atlantic seas can somehow be in tiptop fighting shape against a massive, motivated, well-armed and well-financed fighting force on its own homeland?


Phaedrus

 

[Cujo]

I must disagree with the 90% figure given for the support of WWII. If such #'s were accurate, I don't think there would be much of a need for "Nipping the Nips" during that time to rally support. Even after Pearl Harbor there were still many pacifists deathly opposed to the war.

 

[Cujo]

After digging through several sites, I can't find any site that gives a specific # and its hard to equate strong support to a %.

 

[DarrylParsons]

I don't think posters like these would have been necessary had the public supported the war.

See the National Archives site for more:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibit_hall/powers_of_persuasion/powers_of_persuasion_intro.html