You could really use a history lesson before you open your mouth again and make an ass of yourself, again. Canada fought in WWII from the beginning. And the US did jack **** compared to Russia.SSV Enterprise wrote...
You mean World War II, where we came in and saved Britain and France's asses from the Germans and Italians? While Canada sat by and did largely nothing.
The democratic nations of Europe owe the United States a huge favor.
The humans in this series are like Americans in real ife
#51
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:31
#52
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:32
I sure doesn't want to live in a country where the president gets a lot of hate for a welfare measure, what is a basic thing in most countries, and the police raids your home in the middle of the night, shoots your dogs and trashes your place because you have 1 g of weed on you.
I'm happy for being a valuable citizen in a less fortunate country, thank you very much.
#53
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:33
Most likely, Hitler's chances of defeating the Soviet Union were about those of a snowball winning a wrestling match with Mike Tyson in hell.ReconTeam wrote...
You wouldn't have enjoyed living under Soviet rule much more than **** Germany. If the Soviets still managed to win without any US involvement or aid in Europe, Stalin would have had no problems pushing all the way to the French coast.
#54
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:34
SSV Enterprise wrote...
You mean World War II, where we came in and saved Britain and France's asses from the Germans and Italians? While Canada sat by and did largely nothing.
The democratic nations of Europe owe the United States a huge favor.
I was going to pass this thread by, but for your information, my grandfather served with the RCAF in Europe and saw a fair number of his squadron mates die fighting Germany. Despite what American movies might tell you, WW2 was not won by John Wayne alone. That's not to discount the sacrifice made by so many US soldiers, but they weren't the only ones.
#55
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:34
Show some love for America's head fringe.
#56
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:35
Eskimo9000 wrote...
Actually I don't wish you spent less, it saves us Canadians money. But yes you could definitely up the intellegence out there to prevent the bombings of Canadian patrols and iraqi wedding parties.
Considering how the USAF and USN provides a huge % of air support for all coalitions nations in the sandbox, I wouldn't complain. Perhaps your governement should pay up for some more aircraft if you think the fog and confusion of war is never a problem for Canadian pilots.
I don't mean any ill-will towards the Canadian armed forces, they do the best they can with the tools they are given, but perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to bash the American air support your troops do get.
#57
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:36
The Americans sat in Africa wasting time with French traitors and conscripts and Italians. While Russia took the full force of the **** SS elite soldiers and the well trained German army veterans.ReconTeam wrote...
Oh I suppose the USAAF bombing campaign and the millions of dollars worth of lend-lease given to the Soviets didn't help them at all either? Nor US actions in North Africa prior to Italy and Normandy.
You wouldn't have enjoyed living under Soviet rule much more than **** Germany. If the Soviets still managed to win without any US involvement or aid in Europe, Stalin would have had no problems pushing all the way to the French coast.
#58
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:36
#59
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:36
JohnnyBeGood2 wrote...
Yer, you're right, Bush making war with Iraq was the better way to go. He hated the UN too so he lied to them instead. (yes that's sarcasm)FoFoZem wrote...
I love this so much. I hate the UNJohnnyDollar wrote...
The Council must be equivalent to the U.N. then. Inept and useless.
Australia ain't jealous of the US... why? because we're not enjoying your downturn and astronomical debt.
I was criticizing the United Nations' inherent inability to stop conflicts. The purpose upon which the U.N. was founded was to prevent armed conflict. How many wars have they stopped since their inception?
None. Why? Because where one country wants to put pressure on a country, one of the super powers has a vested economic interest there (such as selling weapons to combatants [China + Rwanda anyone?]) and then nothing gets accomplished.
That has absolutely nothing to do with Bush. The U.N. was founded in 1946. George W. Bush was inaugurated as presiden on Jan. 20, 2001.
The U.S.A. is a sovereign nation and no foreign club house can tell any nation that is sovereign what to do and who not to go to war with. It's not Bush, it's the fact that America as a whole, as well as every other sovereign nation, has no legal obligation to uphold resolutions passed the United nations.
It has nothing to do with the Invasion of Iraq, or the War on Terror or Bush's idiocy; It's the innate hypocrisy of the organization itself.
Our economy will pick up. And the fact of the matter is that the United States leads the global economy. When we hurt, you do too. So, yes, you are enjoying a global recession.
#60
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:37
No way! I can't take another minute of ME1 vs ME2.Vhira wrote...
Bah, this thread isn't any fun anymore - can't you guys weave in Mass Effect somehow?
Show some love for America's head fringe.
#61
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:41
Actually the French had the biggest interest in preventing the UN from entering Rwanda. They even flew out many of the people who planned the Massacres.FoFoZem wrote...
I was criticizing the United Nations' inherent inability to stop conflicts. The purpose upon which the U.N. was founded was to prevent armed conflict. How many wars have they stopped since their inception?
None. Why? Because where one country wants to put pressure on a country, one of the super powers has a vested economic interest there (such as selling weapons to combatants [China + Rwanda anyone?]) and then nothing gets accomplished.
That has absolutely nothing to do with Bush. The U.N. was founded in 1946. George W. Bush was inaugurated as presiden on Jan. 20, 2001.
The U.S.A. is a sovereign nation and no foreign club house can tell any nation that is sovereign what to do and who not to go to war with. It's not Bush, it's the fact that America as a whole, as well as every other sovereign nation, has no legal obligation to uphold resolutions passed the United nations.
It has nothing to do with the Invasion of Iraq, or the War on Terror or Bush's idiocy; It's the innate hypocrisy of the organization itself.
Our economy will pick up. And the fact of the matter is that the United States leads the global economy. When we hurt, you do too. So, yes, you are enjoying a global recession.
Modifié par Eskimo9000, 11 juin 2010 - 04:43 .
#62
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:46
Eskimo9000 wrote...
The Americans sat in Africa wasting time with French traitors and conscripts and Italians. While Russia took the full force of the **** SS elite soldiers and the well trained German army veterans.
Allied efforts in North Africa tied up plenty of Axis manpower and material, much of which could have gone to the east. Same for the USAAF and RAF bombing campaigns but on a greater scale. Even though the Italians may not have had the best quality troops, the manpower alone would have helped. The Soviets have downplayed the role of lend-lease, but when Soviet factories were being relocated, and production was at it's lowest, Soviet troops certainly needed every American truck, aircraft, or tank they got.
You know, I find it amuzing your downplaying American involvement in the war, when the Russians themselves invited American, British, and other nation's forces to march in Red Square during their latest Victory Day parade. To highlight the joint effort between our nations.
#63
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:46
#64
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:49
Actually, really and truly, that just simply is not the case here in Australia.... times have changed in the last 5 years.FoFoZem wrote...
Our economy will pick up. And the fact of the matter is that the United States leads the global economy. When we hurt, you do too. So, yes, you are enjoying a global recession.
Very similar to the way the Batarians decoupled their embassy from the Citadel, Australian economy is no longer coupled to the American economy. (I'm try for a ME parrallel, **** attempt I know)
I probably don't need to say it but I will... I am still a big supporter of the American and European way of life and most Aussies are... while we are closely coupled to Asia by way of economy there are serious issues relating to how those countries are run that raise concerns for Aussies.
Modifié par JohnnyBeGood2, 11 juin 2010 - 04:54 .
#65
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:50
Eskimo9000 wrote...
Actually the French had the biggest interest in preventing the UN from entering Rwanda. They even flew out many of the people who planned the Massacres.
Most nation had done horrible things, no surprsie there. The legitimization of the current power structure is based on WW II, shame that the more important and more recent happenings are overshadowed by that, and mostly unknown to the public.
#66
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:52
I know. I wasn't arguing your point. Just saying the French had a big investment in supporting the Hutus. I actually lost alot of respect for a few countries after I learned exactly what happened there and why it was allowed to happen.FoFoZem wrote...
That still supports my point
#67
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:53
#68
Guest_JohnnyDollar_*
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:53
Guest_JohnnyDollar_*
Modifié par JohnnyDollar, 11 juin 2010 - 04:55 .
#69
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:54
Eskimo9000 wrote...
The Americans sat in Africa wasting time with French traitors and conscripts and Italians. While Russia took the full force of the **** SS elite soldiers and the well trained German army veterans.
It is entirely questionable if the Allied forces would have won World War II had America not become personally involved.
You cannot say Germany's most experienced troops fought Russia while America and everyone else got Delta Companies.
You have no evidence whatsoever to propobate such a claim. What kind of army throws all its best forces toward one front on a two-front war?
#70
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:55
Eskimo9000 wrote...
I know. I wasn't arguing your point. Just saying the French had a big investment in supporting the Hutus. I actually lost alot of respect for a few countries after I learned exactly what happened there and why it was allowed to happen.FoFoZem wrote...
That still supports my point
yeah it's brutal.
But anyway, Mass Effect
#71
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:56
JohnnyDollar wrote...
And the monthly troll award goes to none other than the OP. Masseffectfan00, you are successful.
LOL so true. I am not jelous of you guys, I am happy I don't live in a America.
#72
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:56
#73
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:56
And yet the whole time Russia was asking the Allies to invade France for years. But they waited until all that was left on the Western Front was young boys and old men. Then finally they decided to invade. Twenty-three million Russians died in that war.ReconTeam wrote...
Allied efforts in North Africa tied up plenty of Axis manpower and material, much of which could have gone to the east. Same for the USAAF and RAF bombing campaigns but on a greater scale. Even though the Italians may not have had the best quality troops, the manpower alone would have helped. The Soviets have downplayed the role of lend-lease, but when Soviet factories were being relocated, and production was at it's lowest, Soviet troops certainly needed every American truck, aircraft, or tank they got.
You know, I find it amuzing your downplaying American involvement in the war, when the Russians themselves invited American, British, and other nation's forces to march in Red Square during their latest Victory Day parade. To highlight the joint effort between our nations.
#74
Guest_JohnnyDollar_*
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 04:58
Guest_JohnnyDollar_*
Technically, if you live in Canada, you live in America.(North American Continent)kraidy1117 wrote...
JohnnyDollar wrote...
And the monthly troll award goes to none other than the OP. Masseffectfan00, you are successful.
LOL so true. I am not jelous of you guys, I am happy I don't live in a America.
Modifié par JohnnyDollar, 11 juin 2010 - 05:00 .
#75
Posté 11 juin 2010 - 05:00
JohnnyDollar wrote...
Technically, if you live in Canada, you live in America.kraidy1117 wrote...
JohnnyDollar wrote...
And the monthly troll award goes to none other than the OP. Masseffectfan00, you are successful.
LOL so true. I am not jelous of you guys, I am happy I don't live in a America.
Edit: United North American States sans one Statue of Liberty head.




Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut






