Israel vs Iran

[Roamy]

Israel is drawing up plans to attack Iran's nuclear facilities and is prepared to launch a strike without backing from the U.S., an Israeli newspaper reported Thursday.

Officials in the Israeli Defense Ministry told The Jerusalem Post that while they prefer to act in consultation with the U.S., they are preparing plans that would allow them to act alone.

"It is always better to coordinate," a senior Defense Ministry official told the newspaper. "But we are also preparing options that do not include coordination."

It would be difficult, but not impossible, to launch a strike against Iran without permission from the U.S., as the American Air Force controls the Iraqi airspace Israel's jets would have to enter on a bombing mission.


I suspect Bush was so far under water that he didn't dare allow them airspace. I suspect that if we do it will probably be ok'd by Obama and blamed on Bush. One way or another I suspect this will happen soon and I seriously doubt if we will shoot down Israeli aircraft crossing Iran.

It appears to be coming and what say you Euros

[TOgoFASTER]

Sources?

[Tomi]

If it happens i guess it will be soon while the monkey still is your president.

[Roamy]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,461588,00.html

well no sh!t tomi you don't think they will wait for Obama do you.

[TOgoFASTER]

I found many other news sources for reports that have credibilty.
Middle Eastern saber rattling. Not the first time in the last year at least either.
They will be held in check by reality and the cost.
Maybe they should remove their Nuclear deterrents. As those deterrents don't seem to be working to prevent the motives for proliferation in the neighborhood.

[Eki]

Well, I think anyone who attacks another country should have their ass kicked. The same goes for Israel attacking Iran, Iran attacking Israel and the USA attacking Iran.

[Roamy]

well a couple things
apparently the US won't give them the code to fly across iraq.
but i guess the israelis feel that if iran gets the bomb they are gonners so they may as well bite the bullet now. So i guess it is up to iran. I would suspect that this is not saber rattling Now for the interesting point. I suspect the Saudies would be better off if Israel took out Iran. So if the Saudies allow Israel to cross and refuel this could put a whole new twist on things. Of course the saudies will deny.

[Eki]

but i guess the israelis feel that if iran gets the bomb they are gonners so they may as well bite the bullet now.
They should take a pill for their paranoia instead.

[SOD]

Fousto, if this happens, and I doubt it, you'll be feeling the effects of it in Iraq. of course not you, you won be in iraq, you'll tucked safely away thousands of miles from the area.

Israel had hundreds of nuclear weapons, the Israelis dont even deny it themselves. Its not a matter of "if" they have nukes, it's "where" they have the nukes.

[SOD]

I thought Israel already had plans drawn up ?????

btw, they couldn't do this without USA designed and built fighter jets.

[Roamy]

I thought Israel already had plans drawn up ?????

btw, they couldn't do this without USA designed and built fighter jets.

The are many countries selling fighter jets -

[Tazio]

Fousto you need to take a serious chill pill.
You give progressive Americans a REALLY bad name!
Your breed is on the way out! Thank God, and Praise allah!

[Eki]

The are many countries selling fighter jets -
From the top of my head: Russia, USA, France and Sweden.

[anthonyvop]

Well, I think anyone who attacks another country should have their ass kicked. The same goes for Israel attacking Iran, Iran attacking Israel and the USA attacking Iran.
Don't forget Finland Attacking the USSR!

Is everyone in Finland a wuss like you?
If you ran things 60 years ago you all would be speaking German.

[Tazio]

Don't forget Finland Attacking the USSR!

Is everyone in Finland a wuss like you?
If you ran things 60 years ago you all would be speaking German.You are an ill -informed jingoistic blowhard!
The USA Waited untill Germany had so many subs off the coast of New York
They were handicapping the Belmont Stakes.
Why don't you stick to your area of expertise.
Keeping your ignorant piehole shut!
"The Greatest American Generation"
Had No stomach for war and were in love with Hitler!
The adverage female Russian was twice the soldier than
the American G.I's in 1939!
Do tell us about your distinguished
military service record?

[Tazio]

http://www.actionext.com/names_j/jackson_browne_lyrics/casino_nation.html


Casino Nation

In a weapons producing nation under Jesus
In the fabled crucible of the free world
Camera crews search for clues amid the detritus
And entertainment shapes the land
The way the hammer shapes the hand

Gleaming faces in the checkout counter at the Church of Fame
The lucky winners cheer Casino Nation
All those not on TV only have themselves to blame
And don't quite seem to understand
The way the hammer shapes the hand

Out beyond the ethernet the spectrum spreads
DC to daylight, the cowboy mogul rides
Never worry where the gold for all this glory's gonna come from
Get along dogies, it's coming out of your hides

The intentional cultivation of a criminal class
The future lit by brightly burning bridges
Justice fully clothed to hide the heart of glass
That shatters in a thousand Ruby Ridges
And everywhere the good prepare for perpetual war
And let their weapons shape the plan
The way the hammer shapes the hand

[Daniel]

Don't forget Finland Attacking the USSR!

Is everyone in Finland a wuss like you?
If you ran things 60 years ago you all would be speaking German.

Nothing like making sweeping generalisations......

[Eki]

Don't forget Finland Attacking the USSR!
Finland got its ass kicked. And in hindsight many thought it was a bad idea to attack the USSR.


If you ran things 60 years ago you all would be speaking German.
Now we are speaking English instead. So I don't see much difference. Funnily, before WW2 they were teaching German as the first foreign language in Finnish schools, after WW2 they have been teaching English. If things have gone differently, I might be chatting now with some Anton from Manheim instead of Anthony from Miami.

[Daniel]

Now we are speaking English instead. So I don't see much difference. Funnily, before WW2 they were teaching German as the first foreign language in Finnish schools, after WW2 they have been teaching English. If things have gone differently, I might be chatting now with some Anton from Manheim instead of Anthony from Miami.

That sounds like Nazi talk........

[Eki]

That sounds like Nazi talk........
Not every German is a Nazi, and speaking German doesn't necessarily mean you're a Nazi. Although Anton in Mainheim might be, since Anthony in Miami is an American equivalent for a Nazi, i.e. jingoistic, USA uber alles kind of guy.

[Daniel]

Not every German is a Nazi, and speaking German doesn't necessarily mean you're a Nazi. Although Anton in Mainheim might be, since Anthony in Miami is an American equivalent for a Nazi, i.e. jingoistic, USA uber alles kind of guy.
*shoosh*

That's the sound of my comment passing well above your head.....

[Roamy]

The adverage female Russian was twice the soldier than
the American G.I's in 1939!

that is why we had to develop the bomb so we could be equal

Do tell us about your distinguished
military service recdor?

Well actually I was scared at hell most of the time but soldiered on. Was fortunate to get out in one piece. I contributed good service in the medical area.

How about your military record?

[Tazio]

Well actually I was scared at hell most of the time but soldiered on. Was fortunate to get out in one piece. I contributed good service in the medical area.

How about your military record?I left a testicle in Viet Nam!

[Roamy]

I left a testicle in Viet Nam!

well it could have been worse you know.

PS the Tide lost one today also

[Tazio]

well it could have been worse you know.

PS the Tide lost one today alsoTwo positves came out of that game for me
1)Having overacheived the entire season, they lost valiantly :)
2) I wasn't anywhere near a sportsbook, as I would have taken the 10 points :dozey:

[Roamy]

well i do have the highest regard for Sabin

[anthonyvop]

You are an ill -informed jingoistic blowhard!
The USA Waited untill Germany had so many subs off the coast of New York
They were handicapping the Belmont Stakes.
Why don't you stick to your area of expertise.
Keeping your ignorant piehole shut!
"The Greatest American Generation"
Had No stomach for war and were in love with Hitler!
The adverage female Russian was twice the soldier than
the American G.I's in 1939!
Do tell us about your distinguished
military service record?

You have no clue do you?

The US soldier was 10 times better than that Soviet Cannon Fodder.
The US fought a smart war of strategic planning and tactics while the Russians just sent wave after wave if poor saps who had no choice. Either die at the hands of the Germans or their own soviet leadership.


BTW. Speaking of ignorance.....
It was the Nazi's who declared war on the U.S.A. We didn't start the fight but we sured did finish it. And the Russian, French, British, Poles are shore lucky we did.

[Rollo]

BTW. Speaking of ignorance.....
It was the Nazi's who declared war on the U.S.A. We didn't start the fight but we sured did finish it. And the Russian, French, British, Poles are shore lucky we did.

1. It was the Nazi's who declared war on the U.S.A.?
LIE
The USA didn't enter the war until Dec 7, 1941 with the attack on Pearl Harbour. Although there was lend lease, the USA was isolationist in policy. The USA declared war on Japan and her allies, Nazi Germany did not declare war on the USA.

2. And the Russian, French, British, Poles are shore lucky we did.
LIE
At the time of the Battle of Britain or what Churchill described as "their finest hour" what exactly was the official American support? Bugger all. In fact unless you include the seven Americans who flew in RAF units, the USA had a decidedly disinterested view of the whole affair.
Britain was not "lucky". Britain held her own, without American support thank you very much. And when Churchill had the information that Pearl Harbour was going to be attacked, he showed precisely the same level of interest that had been shown to Britain.

Pooh to you with Brass Knobs on. Pooh again! :D

[Tazio]

You have no clue do you?

The US soldier was 10 times better than that Soviet Cannon Fodder.

Stick to the facts my man! I said "1939".
At that time the U.S, Military machine was rated between 15th, and 18th in the world!
I don't believe world history is one of your strong points!

[Eki]

*shoosh*

That's the sound of my comment passing well above your head.....

*hooh! aah!*

That's the sound of the men working on the chain gang

[Tazio]

Americans of your type are myopic when it comes to matters of war.
The reality is that contrary to popular myth The French with a lot of help from GB had strongly engaged the Blitz. DeGaule had lead a successful Tank counterattack against the Germans. Churchill had begged FDR to intervene. The help came way to late. The French Government capitulated(against strong opposition from DeGaule) while there was something left of their fighting force and their country. Here is a fact. More Free French resistance fighters died (after the capitulation) in the European theatre than all American Casualties in Africa, and Europe combined!

[chuck34]

Rollo,

You really need to go back and read up on some history. The US declared war on Japan only. Germany declared war on us. This was probably only a formality as FDR and Churchill had already worked out the strategy of "Europe First" earlier in their meeting on the HMS Prince of Whales. And if you really think "Britain held her own, without American support thank you very much.", then you may be too far gone for this discussion. Think Lend-Lease. Ask yourself how did Britain build all of those Huricane fighters?

[chuck34]

Tazio, I don't want to sound cold hearted or anything, but I'm sure I will.

I honor every Free French Fighter and all the sacrifices they made for their country and the free world, but what does their number of dead represent other than they weren't very good fighters? Because they had more casualties than Americans did, that somehow means that the American contribution ment nothing?

Again saying that Churchill begged FDR to intervene leaves the impression that FDR did nothing. This seriously underestimates the impact that Lend-Lease had on the war pre 1942.

And as far as your elevation of DeGaulle to some sort of God status and saying that the French capitulated despite his objections assumes that he was the leader of the French government. This is just not the actual case at the time. Sure DeGaulle was a highly influential French citizen, but he was not in a postion to dictate what the French did. And your own statement "while there was something left of their fighting force and their country." contridicts your own assertion. If they would have stood and fought, all signs point to them being completely crushed

[Eki]

Tazio, I don't want to sound cold hearted or anything, but I'm sure I will.

I honor every Free French Fighter and all the sacrifices they made for their country and the free world, but what does their number of dead represent other than they weren't very good fighters?
It could also mean that the French resistance didn't have as many bomber planes, tanks and heavy artillery as the US. The French had to look the Germans eye to eye while the Americans preferred to kill from 30,000 feet.

[Daniel]

2. And the Russian, French, British, Poles are shore lucky we did.
LIE
At the time of the Battle of Britain or what Churchill described as "their finest hour" what exactly was the official American support? Bugger all. In fact unless you include the seven Americans who flew in RAF units, the USA had a decidedly disinterested view of the whole affair.
Britain was not "lucky". Britain held her own, without American support thank you very much.

One of the most idiotic untruths ever perpetuated. Where did Britain's oil come from to power their war machine? Where did the raw materials for the steel and other metals needed for the war effort come from?

So Britain held off Germany in the Battle of Britain? With a great deal of help from the US...... What would have happened afterwards had the Americans not brought their B17's over and bombed the crap out of the heart of German industry. How long would Britain have held out considering Germany had more than enough resources to rebuild and then invade Britain.

[Tazio]

Tazio, I don't want to sound cold hearted or anything, but I'm sure I will.

I honor every Free French Fighter and all the sacrifices they made for their country and the free world, but what does their number of dead represent other than they weren't very good fighters? Because they had more casualties than Americans did, that somehow means that the American contribution ment nothing?

Again saying that Churchill begged FDR to intervene leaves the impression that FDR did nothing. This seriously underestimates the impact that Lend-Lease had on the war pre 1942.

And as far as your elevation of DeGaulle to some sort of God status and saying that the French capitulated despite his objections assumes that he was the leader of the French government. This is just not the actual case at the time. Sure DeGaulle was a highly influential French citizen, but he was not in a postion to dictate what the French did. And your own statement "while there was something left of their fighting force and their country." contridicts your own assertion. If they would have stood and fought, all signs point to them being completely crushed
I certainly don't mind your frankness in regard to the French military establishment. And you are correct DeGaulle was only a young talented French military officer. It is established history that The Military leaders in France were old and obsolete. They wanted to use ww1 tactics in ww2 DeGaulle was the one who elevated himself to God Status (He was very egotistical), and many rallied around him. The French resistance fought it's ass off. BTW many of their key operatives were Brits!

[chuck34]

Eki, so the Americans never had to look the Germans in they eye? That will come to a great shock to most of the men who fought in the war. It might come as a bit of relief to my grandfather who was literally "the Bulge". And is there something wrong with bombers now? I'm lost.

Tazio, no argument from me about DeGaulle being egotistical or the fact that many rallied around him (especially after the capitulation). You might even go as far as to say that France's fate may have been different if he was the leader at the time. That I won't argue either. However, you seem to have been implying that France could have withstood the Blitz if he was at the helm, or at least his advice was taken. And that I would argue.

As for the Resistance, I agree that they did fight their asses off. They did play a crutial role in the Allies winning the war, but they were no more crutial than the Americans, which is what you were saying in your original post.

We're way off the original topic now, sorry about that.

[Tazio]

Eki, so the Americans never had to look the Germans in they eye? That will come to a great shock to most of the men who fought in the war. It might come as a bit of relief to my grandfather who was literally "the Bulge". And is there something wrong with bombers now? I'm lost.

Tazio, no argument from me about DeGaulle being egotistical or the fact that many rallied around him (especially after the capitulation). You might even go as far as to say that France's fate may have been different if he was the leader at the time. That I won't argue either. However, you seem to have been implying that France could have withstood the Blitz if he was at the helm, or at least his advice was taken. And that I would argue.

As for the Resistance, I agree that they did fight their asses off. They did play a crutial role in the Allies winning the war, but they were no more crutial than the Americans, which is what you were saying in your original post.

We're way off the original topic now, sorry about that.In my zeal I overstated my point! France had resources to fight on but instead rolled-over A military commitment from us Yanks along with the resources of the entire commonwealth would have probably only delayed it at best.

[chuck34]

Tazio, you are correct. At that point France did have some resources to continue the fight. But it would have only delayed the inevitable (absorbsion of France into the Third Riech). Therefore surrender/capitulation forced those resources underground so that they could be used at a later date to great effect when merged into the US/British efforts.

Again sorry that this is so far off the Iran/Israel topic, WWII is a passion of mine

[Eki]

Eki, so the Americans never had to look the Germans in they eye?

I didn't say "never", I said "less often". And for a shorter time period. The French resistance lived next to Germans from June 1940 to May 1945, almost 5 years. The Americans didn't see many Germans before Normandy in June 1944 and the war was over in May 1945, which was just about one year.

[Eki]

I honor every Free French Fighter and all the sacrifices they made for their country and the free world,

BTW, how do you define "free world"? Yesterday I was watching a documentary on how in the 1980s the US blackmailed a Finnish ship-building company for not to deliver to the Soviet Union the deep sea submarines they had sold or they and the whole Finnish industry and economy would suffer. How would you feel if a foreign country dictated to whom you can sell your products and to whom you cannot? I felt bad.

[chuck34]

I didn't say "never", I said "less often". And for a shorter time period. The French resistance lived next to Germans from June 1940 to May 1945, almost 5 years. The Americans didn't see many Germans before Normandy in June 1944 and the war was over in May 1945, which was just about one year.

So I guess there were no Germans in North Africa? None in Italy? And tell me again how many Frenchmen were in the South Pacific, I know there were some in Indochina ;-)?

But I get your point. The French resistance fought for a long time and put up a great resistance. No one is disputing that. But you seem to be desputing the fact that they would not have beat back the Germans without the help of the US. Is that really what you are saying, or am I missing something?

[chuck34]

BTW, how do you define "free world"? Yesterday I was watching a documentary on how in the 1980s the US blackmailed a Finnish ship-building company for not to deliver to the Soviet Union the deep sea submarines they had sold or they and the whole Finnish industry and economy would suffer. How would you feel if a foreign country dictated to whom you can sell your products and to whom you cannot? I felt bad.

Before I go and appologize for the whole US, you are going to have to define "blackmailed". What you consider blackmail, I may consider negotiation. But having no knowlege of this "event" I really can't speak to it.

[Eki]

So I guess there were no Germans in North Africa? None in Italy? And tell me again how many Frenchmen were in the South Pacific, I know there were some in Indochina ;-)?

But I get your point. The French resistance fought for a long time and put up a great resistance. No one is disputing that. But you seem to be desputing the fact that they would not have beat back the Germans without the help of the US. Is that really what you are saying, or am I missing something?
No, that's not what I'm saying. I just disagreed with you claiming that so many of the French resistance died because they were not good fighters.

[Eki]

Before I go and appologize for the whole US, you are going to have to define "blackmailed". What you consider blackmail, I may consider negotiation. But having no knowlege of this "event" I really can't speak to it.
The CIA said they were going to bankrupt the company like they had bankrupted some other companies in other countries who had traded with the Soviets against the will of the CIA. The negotiations only started after that. The result was that the company was allowed to deliver the two submarines that were ready but had to stop their submarine business after that.

[janvanvurpa]

One of the most idiotic untruths ever perpetuated. Where did Britain's oil come from to power their war machine? Where did the raw materials for the steel and other metals needed for the war effort come from?

So Britain held off Germany in the Battle of Britain? With a great deal of help from the US...... What would have happened afterwards had the Americans not brought their B17's over and bombed the crap out of the heart of German industry. How long would Britain have held out considering Germany had more than enough resources to rebuild and then invade Britain.

Daniel,

can't answer where Britain's oil came from but considering that the Saudis and the Iraqis and the Iranians and the Venezuelans were all pumping oil there's a good chance some came from those places.

Aviation gasoline of the 100+ octane variety did come from USA.
Most of the Lend-lease stuff sent to Britain was useless for the intensity of combat in the ETO (European Theatre of Operations).
British, German and Russian aircraft were ALL faster and much heavier armed (usually with some MG but always with some 20mm cannons
In the case of aircraft and tanks you can't just say "its better than nothing" when you have to send crews out in slow, underarmed junk.

The famous "destroyer deal" was for WWI vintage junk.

We did sell you some reasonable good anti-submarine aircraft.

This idiotic assertion that jackasses bring up discounting the fighting abilities of the Soviets and say idiotic comments to explain their high casualty rates are usually people so stupid that they should be euthanized.
In their fantasy world, they seem to forget that
the fighting in the East was the biggest war the world has ever seen by orders of magnitude bigger than any of the fighting later in the West or in Africa.
To give an idea of the overblown sense of scale shown by some of these fools liook at the numbers involved when America finally meets the Germans and Italians for the first time in LATE FEB 1942 :
Date February 19 – February 25, 1943
Location Kasserine Pass, Tunisia
Result Decisive Axis victory
Belligerents
United States............................................ ...Germany
United Kingdom........................................... ...Italy
France
Commanders
Flag of the United States Lloyd Fredendall.................... Erwin Rommel
Strength
30,000 .................................................. ...............22,000
Casualties and losses
10,000 (including 6,500 Americans)*..............................2,000
183 tanks............................................. ...............34 tanks
706 trucks[1]
* approx 1000 US KIA

Note as well that in the Pacific the number of US KIAs on the long campaign on Guadalcanal from 7 August 42 to Feb 43 was just about 1500.

The arrogant fools who bray about the "USA winning the War" should know, were they not totally ignorant twits, that 1500 men KIA was about 36 hours worth of losses on the Germans side just within the city of Stalingrad, not in the whole operational area of the German 6th Army, just within the city itself.

The huge numbers of Russian and German dead reflects the intense scale of the fighting which involved, and cost the Germans 12-15 times the losses the US suffered.
Look at the numbers engaged in the general Stalingrad area: initially 270,000 Axis troops and 170,000 Russian rising to 870,000 at the time of the Russian counter-offensive by 1,700,000 Soviets. And this was just one sector on a front 1800 miles long. The Russian losses were huge partially from stupid doctrines of "Always Attack" and partially from the threat of interference from the Political Commissars.
It should be noted that one the Red Army was freed from the interference Commissars in late 1942, they lost no more battles.

And the silly sods seem to forget that clearing the Germans from the massive amount of territory, being on the offensive from December 1941 to May of 45---far longer and far harder foes than the US faced, will cost more than fighting bled white forces of Italy and Germany---and essentially abandoned , sick troops of the Japanese in the Pacific.

One particularly galling piece of bullsheeet thrown around now is that the Normandy landings were---and it never is qualified or the wording changed "The Largest Invasion in History". Just look at the numbers of virtually ALL the German invasions, and the scale again becomes obvious.
As does the scale of the ignorance of those who repeat nonsense like that.

And note:
The "effectiveness" of the US B17s, with appallingly small bomb load on missions into Germany is mostly a myth. Your Mosquitoes could carry as much, do it faster and with less cost to build and maintain, and with a 2 man crew, not 11.
Your British larger 4 engined bombers typically carried 4-5 times what the B17s carried and they were delivering more bombs onto German cities for most of the war---for all the good it did to kill 700,000 most elderly, women and children. (You can kill all those civilians but you still have to fight the soldiers of the other side.).

Do not believe the relentless propaganda, these loud mouth Americans of this generation need to build up to mythic scale the part America played in the fighting since we now know how small a role it was, how small all the fighting in the rest of the whole world was compared to the war in the Soviet Union.

[Eki]

The CIA said they were going to bankrupt the company like they had bankrupted some other companies in other countries who had traded with the Soviets against the will of the CIA. The negotiations only started after that. The result was that the company was allowed to deliver the two submarines that were ready but had to stop their submarine business after that.
Another company who suffered because the US hostility towards the US was Japanese Toshiba:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CoCom


CoCom is an acronym for Coordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls. CoCom was established in 1947, during the Cold War, to put an embargo on Western exports to East Bloc countries.

CoCom had 17 member states: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States.

In addition there were a number of cooperating countries, such as Austria, Finland, Ireland, New Zealand, Sweden and Switzerland.

It was revealed in 1987 that Japan's Toshiba Machine Company had supplied eight computer-guided propeller milling machines to the Soviet Union between 1982 and 1984, an action that violated the CoCom regulations. It was argued in the United States that this technology greatly improved the ability of Soviet submarines to evade detection, leading to a significant cost for the United States to improve its own technology once more. In 1988, Congress moved to sanction Toshiba and bar imports into the United States of Toshiba products.

CoCom ceased to function on March 31, 1994, and the then-current control list of embargoed goods was retained by the member nations until the successor, the Wassenaar Arrangement, was established.

I notice Finland is mentioned as a "cooperative country" of CoCom, but it doesn't say that Finland was extorted to cooperate.

[Camelopard]

Reading a book about Stalingrad at the moment, the Sherman tanks the yanks sent the Russians under the lend lease deal were crap and were easily picked off by German tanks.

The Germans on the other hand did like the Jeep when they captured some, much better than the Kubelwagon (sp?) that they had.

[Daniel]

The Germans on the other hand did like the Jeep when they captured some, much better than the Kubelwagon (sp?) that they had.

Kübelwagen :)

[Camelopard]

Kübelwagen :)

Vielen Dank! :)

[Daniel]

Daniel,

can't answer where Britain's oil came from but considering that the Saudis and the Iraqis and the Iranians and the Venezuelans were all pumping oil there's a good chance some came from those places.

Aviation gasoline of the 100+ octane variety did come from USA.
Most of the Lend-lease stuff sent to Britain was useless for the intensity of combat in the ETO (European Theatre of Operations).
British, German and Russian aircraft were ALL faster and much heavier armed (usually with some MG but always with some 20mm cannons
In the case of aircraft and tanks you can't just say "its better than nothing" when you have to send crews out in slow, underarmed junk.

The famous "destroyer deal" was for WWI vintage junk.

We did sell you some reasonable good anti-submarine aircraft.

This idiotic assertion that jackasses bring up discounting the fighting abilities of the Soviets and say idiotic comments to explain their high casualty rates are usually people so stupid that they should be euthanized.
In their fantasy world, they seem to forget that
the fighting in the East was the biggest war the world has ever seen by orders of magnitude bigger than any of the fighting later in the West or in Africa.
To give an idea of the overblown sense of scale shown by some of these fools liook at the numbers involved when America finally meets the Germans and Italians for the first time in LATE FEB 1942 :
Date February 19 – February 25, 1943
Location Kasserine Pass, Tunisia
Result Decisive Axis victory
Belligerents
United States............................................ ...Germany
United Kingdom........................................... ...Italy
France
Commanders
Flag of the United States Lloyd Fredendall.................... Erwin Rommel
Strength
30,000 .................................................. ...............22,000
Casualties and losses
10,000 (including 6,500 Americans)*..............................2,000
183 tanks............................................. ...............34 tanks
706 trucks[1]
* approx 1000 US KIA

Note as well that in the Pacific the number of US KIAs on the long campaign on Guadalcanal from 7 August 42 to Feb 43 was just about 1500.

The arrogant fools who bray about the "USA winning the War" should know, were they not totally ignorant twits, that 1500 men KIA was about 36 hours worth of losses on the Germans side just within the city of Stalingrad, not in the whole operational area of the German 6th Army, just within the city itself.

The huge numbers of Russian and German dead reflects the intense scale of the fighting which involved, and cost the Germans 12-15 times the losses the US suffered.
Look at the numbers engaged in the general Stalingrad area: initially 270,000 Axis troops and 170,000 Russian rising to 870,000 at the time of the Russian counter-offensive by 1,700,000 Soviets. And this was just one sector on a front 1800 miles long. The Russian losses were huge partially from stupid doctrines of "Always Attack" and partially from the threat of interference from the Political Commissars.
It should be noted that one the Red Army was freed from the interference Commissars in late 1942, they lost no more battles.

And the silly sods seem to forget that clearing the Germans from the massive amount of territory, being on the offensive from December 1941 to May of 45---far longer and far harder foes than the US faced, will cost more than fighting bled white forces of Italy and Germany---and essentially abandoned , sick troops of the Japanese in the Pacific.

One particularly galling piece of bullsheeet thrown around now is that the Normandy landings were---and it never is qualified or the wording changed "The Largest Invasion in History". Just look at the numbers of virtually ALL the German invasions, and the scale again becomes obvious.
As does the scale of the ignorance of those who repeat nonsense like that.

And note:
The "effectiveness" of the US B17s, with appallingly small bomb load on missions into Germany is mostly a myth. Your Mosquitoes could carry as much, do it faster and with less cost to build and maintain, and with a 2 man crew, not 11.
Your British larger 4 engined bombers typically carried 4-5 times what the B17s carried and they were delivering more bombs onto German cities for most of the war---for all the good it did to kill 700,000 most elderly, women and children. (You can kill all those civilians but you still have to fight the soldiers of the other side.).

Do not believe the relentless propaganda, these loud mouth Americans of this generation need to build up to mythic scale the part America played in the fighting since we now know how small a role it was, how small all the fighting in the rest of the whole world was compared to the war in the Soviet Union.

Your makes it sound like I'm British which I'm not :)

What you say is pretty much true but the Brits bombed at night and a good deal of their raids were against purely civilian targets so rather than crippling the German war machine all they did was commit mass murder with incendiary bombs.

The convoys were the lifeline to Britain and what they carried came largely from the US. That's what won the war for Britain.

You can talk about how many people died on what side but it's meaningless. Without a lot of the things that happened in WW2 from Stalingrad to D-Day to the Royal Navy keeping Germany's big battleships away from the convoys in the Atlantic then the outcome could have been very different. If you take Russia, Britain or the US out of the equation then I feel the Germans would have won. It's what's called a team effort.

[chuck34]

Daniel said it best, it was a team effort. I never wanted to disparage any one, any country, or any group that fought in WWII. We all played a part. We were all vital. Without any one piece it all fails. But some of you on this board are wanting to say that England and Russia could have won the war without the US. This is just insanity!!! If that is the case, why were Churchill and Uncle Joe both begging on bended knee for the Americans to get involved? Just how was the war going before early '42? Just peachy right?

Come on people it was a team effort.

If there would have been no French Resistance, the Normandy Landing wouldn't have been a success (and by the way, I have never heard that being called the largest invasion ever. I always hear it called the largest Amphibious Operation ever. Just to pick some nits).

If the Russians would have surrendered (FDR's fear during the entire war), the whole deal would have collapsed faster than you can say capitulation.

If the English would have surrendered in early 1940 (as most of the government wanted), the Western Front would have been non-existent, the Russians would have been over-run, then who knows what would have happend to America.

If the Isolationists would have won power in the US in the election of 1940, or if the Japs hadn't attacked Pearl Harbor the US would not have gotten involved and Britain probably wouldn't have been able to stand up.

To try and bring down the US because you don't like us now for whatever reason is to be blind to the facts of history. All the Allies played a crutial role. I happen to think that the US played a slightly more crutial role for a couple of reasons. The main reason is Eisenhower. Do you really think that the alliance could have held together with Monty, or DeGaulle at the head of it? Read a couple of books and get back to me on that one.

And yes I am jingoistic (sp?). You're d@mn skippy I am. American and proud. Just like you guys are for your country.

[Roamy]

Jesus H Christ - here come the historians again. Go start the history thread. This is about israel and iran - quit dragging rommel and hitler with you to every freaking thread.

[Rollo]

Think Lend-Lease. Ask yourself how did Britain build all of those Huricane fighters?

By her own effort.

Lend Lease didn't start until March of 1941, the Battle of Britain ended 5 months earlier in October of 1940. Britain built all those Hurricanes through it's own power. Not a single red cent came from the USA at all* in fact congress had prevented it with the Neutrality Act of 1939.

Germany and Italy declared war on the U.S. on 11 December 1941 and the U.S. responded with a declaration of war on the same day.

*Public Law 77-11, passed 19th Feb 1941.

[Daniel]

By her own effort.

Lend Lease didn't start until March of 1941, the Battle of Britain ended 5 months earlier in October of 1940. Britain built all those Hurricanes through it's own power. Not a single red cent came from the USA at all* in fact congress had prevented it with the Neutrality Act of 1939.

You can't build fighters out of money.

[chuck34]

By her own effort.

Lend Lease didn't start until March of 1941, the Battle of Britain ended 5 months earlier in October of 1940. Britain built all those Hurricanes through it's own power. Not a single red cent came from the USA at all* in fact congress had prevented it with the Neutrality Act of 1939.

Germany and Italy declared war on the U.S. on 11 December 1941 and the U.S. responded with a declaration of war on the same day.

*Public Law 77-11, passed 19th Feb 1941.

You got me. Lend-Lease had nothing to do with the fact that Britain was able to get more than their fair share of raw materials. That is a fact, Lend-Lease had nothing to do with that. I sort of lumped cash and carry into that.

Why don't you join us over in the other thread now.

[Roamy]

lets have a pool
what day do you think Israel will take out the irani's nuke site.
Jan 7 is my guess

[anthonyvop]

BTW, how do you define "free world"? Yesterday I was watching a documentary on how in the 1980s the US blackmailed a Finnish ship-building company for not to deliver to the Soviet Union the deep sea submarines they had sold or they and the whole Finnish industry and economy would suffer. How would you feel if a foreign country dictated to whom you can sell your products and to whom you cannot? I felt bad.


I never heard of that but my first reaction is......................COOL!!!

If Finland is a weak country and cannot stand up for itself it is the Finnish people's fault.

I expect my Government to act in the Best Interest of my country.

[TOgoFASTER]

I expect my Government to act in the Best Interest of my country.

Let us know when that happens, it's been quite awhile.

[BDunnell]

I never heard of that but my first reaction is......................COOL!!!

If Finland is a weak country and cannot stand up for itself it is the Finnish people's fault.

I expect my Government to act in the Best Interest of my country.

Sadly, the US government does not seem to have acted in the best interests of all its citizens in terms of educating them.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Daniel said it best, it was a team effort. I never wanted to disparage any one, any country, or any group that fought in WWII. We all played a part. We were all vital. Without any one piece it all fails. But some of you on this board are wanting to say that England and Russia could have won the war without the US. This is just insanity!!! If that is the case, why were Churchill and Uncle Joe both begging on bended knee for the Americans to get involved? Just how was the war going before early '42? Just peachy right?

Come on people it was a team effort.

If there would have been no French Resistance, the Normandy Landing wouldn't have been a success (and by the way, I have never heard that being called the largest invasion ever. I always hear it called the largest Amphibious Operation ever. Just to pick some nits).

If the Russians would have surrendered (FDR's fear during the entire war), the whole deal would have collapsed faster than you can say capitulation.

If the English would have surrendered in early 1940 (as most of the government wanted), the Western Front would have been non-existent, the Russians would have been over-run, then who knows what would have happend to America.

If the Isolationists would have won power in the US in the election of 1940, or if the Japs hadn't attacked Pearl Harbor the US would not have gotten involved and Britain probably wouldn't have been able to stand up.

To try and bring down the US because you don't like us now for whatever reason is to be blind to the facts of history. All the Allies played a crutial role. I happen to think that the US played a slightly more crutial role for a couple of reasons. The main reason is Eisenhower. Do you really think that the alliance could have held together with Monty, or DeGaulle at the head of it? Read a couple of books and get back to me on that one.

And yes I am jingoistic (sp?). You're d@mn skippy I am. American and proud. Just like you guys are for your country.

Please stop saying English! What about the Scottish and Welsh?? :p

[Camelopard]

Sadly, the US government does not seem to have acted in the best interests of all its citizens in terms of educating them.

You don't need an education to flip burgers, do you vop.

How's the macca's uniform vop? I still reckon it's the only uniform you have ever worn.

[chuck34]

Please stop saying English! What about the Scottish and Welsh?? :p

Sorry. Public education is a bad habit to break! :-)

[Roamy]

You don't need an education to flip burgers, do you vop.

How's the macca's uniform vop? I still reckon it's the only uniform you have ever worn.

'Hey you aren't trying to slam Tony are you??

[airshifter]

lets have a pool
what day do you think Israel will take out the irani's nuke site.
Jan 7 is my guess


New moon, you might have the prime pick on the date!

[A.F.F.]

I never heard of that but my first reaction is......................COOL!!!

If Finland is a weak country and cannot stand up for itself it is the Finnish people's fault.

I expect my Government to act in the Best Interest of my country.

Yes, please help us. No worry what Eki says. Please come and help us.

[markabilly]

Reading a book about Stalingrad at the moment, the Sherman tanks the yanks sent the Russians under the lend lease deal were crap and were easily picked off by German tanks.

The Germans on the other hand did like the Jeep when they captured some, much better than the Kubelwagon (sp?) that they had.


Had a relative who was a tank commander in WWII of a Sherman tank.

He would disagree. His first tank was so good, that when it was launched on D-Day to float to shore, it sank.

His next tank was so good, that the engine broke crossing a bridge and it took an hour for another tank to get it shoved off the bridge while a number of guys were shot trying to get it done.

The next tank was so good, it saved my relative's life. He was riding in the turret, when they confronted a Tiger and fired two shots at point blank range of about fifty yards that bounced off the turret and the tiger then fired once. The resultant explosion blew him completely out of the shatterred turret and shattered the back of his skull, but he lived whereas no one else in the tank did.

Or atleast that is what he was told, because he remembered nothing after the first shot....

So he would say that the Sherman was not just a mere piece of crap...

He also said that the movie Patton was so chilling, as it brought back his personal memories and the time he thought seriously of shooting the bloody after he had personally ordered his tank column up a road on the side of a mountain at the later stages of the battle of the bulge where american and german infantry had fought and left wounded and dead lying in the road.



He could not tell when a particular soldier was german or american, because when the wounded were were run over, the screams sounded the same

[Roamy]

dudes to to the old war thread with this crap.

[Eki]

I never heard of that but my first reaction is......................COOL!!!

If Finland is a weak country and cannot stand up for itself it is the Finnish people's fault.

I expect my Government to act in the Best Interest of my country.
So, what happened to the Jews in WW2 was also their own fault for being weak? Then stop using the Jews as an excuse for the US interfering with the European affairs in the 1940s or for aiding Israel. If the Israelis can't defend themselves on their own, don't they deserve to be destroyed? If the Tibetans are so weak they can't defend themselves against the Chinese, don't they deserve all they get?

[janvanvurpa]

So, what happened to the Jews in WW2 was also their own fault for being weak? Then stop using the Jews as an excuse for the US interfering with the European affairs in the 1940s or for aiding Israel. If the Israelis can't defend themselves on their own, don't they deserve to be destroyed? If the Tibetans are so weak they can't defend themselves against the Chinese, don't they deserve all they get?

If you were a real meanie you might suggest "If the Cubanos are too weak to do anything after all this time----except run away to Florida---then they all deserve to....."
Some people might suggest that would be making his absurdities too personal.

But then again, I know you're not a meanie, you're a sweet person!

[steve_spackman]

i am starting to think that all that is wrong in this world is the US and Isreal...take these two countries away and there would be more peace and less war and inocent people dying...

[Captain VXR]

i am starting to think that all that is wrong in this world is the US and Isreal...take these two countries away and there would be more peace and less war and inocent people dying...

So ther's nothing wrong with Zimbabwe eh?

[Roamy]

i am starting to think that all that is wrong in this world is the US and Isreal...take these two countries away and there would be more peace and less war and inocent people dying...

I agree and am trying to build a fence as fast as I can. As far as Israel goes you will need to check in with Iran in about a year but they are planning to implement your idea. Now if I can just get the INS to start sending some assholes back home!!

[airshifter]

lets have a pool
what day do you think Israel will take out the irani's nuke site.
Jan 7 is my guess

The airspace over Iraq is now in the hands of the Iraqi government, not the US. Combined with the new moon and recent developments, that might be a good date to keep an eye on the world news.

[SOD]

^ if you think the Iraqi government has full sovereign control over its airspace then I have a Florida condo to sell to you.

The evidence is that only defenseless countries get attacked, eg Iraq,Afghanistan and Palestine.

[anthonyvop]

So, what happened to the Jews in WW2 was also their own fault for being weak? Then stop using the Jews as an excuse for the US interfering with the European affairs in the 1940s or for aiding Israel. If the Israelis can't defend themselves on their own, don't they deserve to be destroyed? If the Tibetans are so weak they can't defend themselves against the Chinese, don't they deserve all they get?
I never used the Jews as an excuse for the US's entrance in the war in Europe.

If your limited education taught you anything then you know that it was GERMANY who declared war on the US.

And no it was the Jews fault for being weak. The Jews in Europe were not a nation.
The Finns are a nation and they allowed themselves to be weak.

[Camelopard]

The Finns are a nation and they allowed themselves to be weak.

Just like Batista was weak and allowed Castro to take over Cuba :) .

P.S. Say hello Orlando Bosch next time you see him. Have the US let Luis Posada Carriles out of jail yet? Bet he is pee'd off, a good friend of the US, doing their dirty work and they have the temerity to lock him up for a visa violation!

[SOD]

New moon, you might have the prime pick on the date!

easy to want it when ya dont have to fight it.

[Eki]

I agree and am trying to build a fence as fast as I can.
Why don't you just hire some coyotes to dig you a hole in the desert?

http://www.coyoteholeraceway.com/Portals/16/logo.jpg

[steve_spackman]

I agree and am trying to build a fence as fast as I can. As far as Israel goes you will need to check in with Iran in about a year but they are planning to implement your idea. Now if I can just get the INS to start sending some assholes back home!!

I think you really mis understood my post..

I meant that these two countries should keep themsleves to themselves...

Also you seem to be a very narrowminded guy who has no clue about the world apart from what your government wants you to hear...

[steve_spackman]

^ if you think the Iraqi government has full sovereign control over its airspace then I have a Florida condo to sell to you.

The evidence is that only defenseless countries get attacked, eg Iraq,Afghanistan and Palestine.

hence the term gunboat diplomacy, which the US and Israel use very well to get want the want

[TOgoFASTER]

Had a relative who was a tank commander in WWII of a Sherman tank.

He would disagree.


Seems more than a few in the tank corp disagreed.
Like a Ronson "lights first time, every time."

[Easy Drifter]

The Sherman's 75mm gun was a major drawback. It was not powerful enough.
The Firefly (a Sherman with a 17 Pdr. gun) was far more effective but just as likely to 'flame out'.

[airshifter]

^ if you think the Iraqi government has full sovereign control over its airspace then I have a Florida condo to sell to you.

The evidence is that only defenseless countries get attacked, eg Iraq,Afghanistan and Palestine.

Iraq controls all upper airspace as of Jan 1st. The evidence is in the new Status of Forces agreements. If Israeli jets couldn't reach those levels, then the US would control the issue of airspace.

It wouldn't be the first time Israel used airstrikes to take out nuclear facilities.

[Tomi]

Iraq controls all upper airspace as of Jan 1st. The evidence is in the new Status of Forces agreements. If Israeli jets couldn't reach those levels, then the US would control the issue of airspace.

It wouldn't be the first time Israel used airstrikes to take out nuclear facilities.

Are you talking about the same Iraq, who just a few weeks ago had to negotiate with the enemy when to get them out from their country?