[Shaved Monkey]

A must see dissection of US foreign policy from WW11 till now,the carving up of global resources,coups etc etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBZ-NvbZWH8&

[Fishman]

Ah yes those nasty Americans. Saving Europe from destroying itself, time and time again. Building up those that have fought against those mean Americans, where others in the past have annialated their opponents. Seeking and encouraging countries that rule at the consent of their people, never perfectly, but at least attempting. Have those Americans taken resources and encouraged tyrants, certainly. But in comparison, far less than any people in history.
Shaved, enjoy your chinese overlords, they are so kind.

[Shaved Monkey]

Have those Americans taken resources and encouraged tyrants, certainly. But in comparison, far less than any people in history.

I think the evidence suggests you are massively wrong

Shaved, enjoy your chinese overlords, they are so kind.

The King is dead long live the King.
Hope you enjoy them too....

[Oneaboveall]

WW11 I saw that same error on a district test a few years back.

[rangerone314]

Ah yes those nasty Americans. Saving Europe from destroying itself, time and time again. Building up those that have fought against those mean Americans, where others in the past have annialated their opponents. Seeking and encouraging countries that rule at the consent of their people, never perfectly, but at least attempting. Have those Americans taken resources and encouraged tyrants, certainly. But in comparison, far less than any people in history.
Shaved, enjoy your chinese overlords, they are so kind.

I think we only built up Germany and Japan because we were afraid of Big Bad Russia taking over in the chaos. We only got involved in WWII because we got sucker punched by the Japanese. (Gee after Port Arthur, who knew they would do that?)

Henry Ford, IBM (punchcards to keep track of the Jews) and Prescott Bush weren't exactly enemies of the Nazis. And in fairness, the Nazis got most of their early Eugenics concepts from programs in the US, like in California and Virginia.

The Germans were a little more efficient at mass extermination though, using Zykon-B instead of smallpox-infected blankets or killing buffalo, but in fairness to the Americans, the Americans used what they had at hand at the time.

[sjn]

I was a little surprised to hear the apparent cognitive dissonance at the end when he was asked about the risk of collapse of the Euro and US$. He strongly asserted growth (or a Keynesian style policy of growth) in the West would take care of the debt problems; this conflicting with his introduction, where he laid out the case for the unsustainability of Capitalism giving the well known externalities of climate-change, eco-destruction, resource depletion etc, and subsequent risk of (nuclear) conflict to maintain hegemony over the remaining resources. I can't fathom how both positions can be simultaneously held unless he doesn't see systemic links between finance, economics, the sociopolitical world order, and physical reality.

[efarmer]

Well any damn fool knows WW11 should be written as WWII+9, hell, I learnt that in
my 6th year of high school I do believe. I am filing this whole thread and meme in my
"When you are ignorant, you're whole body suffers for it" folder.

We are people and people are fallible and ignorant and greedy and wonderful and
loving and giving and just. I have not seen any purebreds in my time, just mongrels
like myself whom are a mixed bag.

Don Lancaster said it best: "Greed and Ignorance are Universal Constants" the good stuff
is more rare, you either think and provide yourself a modicum of it, or get rich and buy
it from people who think. The real conundrum is that America has more rich people than
people who think, and this makes people who think unable to keep up with the outrageous
demands of those whom can pay for it. Fortunately, when this drives the price up, rich people
will pay top dollar for pure nonsense. We have a whole city in America that runs the world
market in this racket and it is called Washington D.C.

[Keith_McClary]

Have those Americans taken resources and encouraged tyrants, certainly. But in comparison, far less than any people in history.

They may not be as bad as the Mongols or Huns, but in recent supposedly enlightened times there aren't many worse.

[Loki]

Have those Americans taken resources and encouraged tyrants, certainly. But in comparison, far less than any people in history.

They may not be as bad as the Mongols or Huns, but in recent supposedly enlightened times there aren't many worse.

Canada is next, prepare for liberation. 54-40 or Fight! Too bad Polk didn't keep his campaign promise

No comment on the video since I can't watch it. I'm assuming it outlines our sordid history of empire. Seems to run in the Anglo bloodstream, unfortunately.

Shaved, how's them Abbos doing down in your neck of the woods?

[rangerone314]

No comment on the video since I can't watch it. I'm assuming it outlines our sordid history of empire. Seems to run in the Anglo bloodstream, unfortunately.

Shaved, how's them Abbos doing down in your neck of the woods?

The desire to loot and burn and rape and conquer probably was raped into the Anglos, from the Celts who raped the indigenous islanders, to the Romans who raped the Celts, to the Saxons who raped the Britons, to the Normans who raped the Saxons.

To be honest, most people on the Earth are like that, the Brits are just better at it than most.

[careinke]

Have those Americans taken resources and encouraged tyrants, certainly. But in comparison, far less than any people in history.

They may not be as bad as the Mongols or Huns, but in recent supposedly enlightened times there aren't many worse.

You forgot:

Germans
Cambodians
Serbs
Stalin's Russia
Japanese
and
Brittons

[rangerone314]

Wasn't the US foreign policy against Native Americans continually pushing the border West and genociding them essentially the American version of Hitler's desire for Lebensraum and pushing East?

[dorlomin]

Ah yes those nasty Americans. Saving Europe from destroying itself, time and time again. Building up those that have fought against those mean Americans, where others in the past have annialated their opponents.

First up US contributions to WWI were minimal. Operation Michael proved that the Germans did not have the logistics tale to support a prolonged thrust even when they made a break through. And when they did move forward they abandoned the deep defenses they had built in the previous years. The hundred day advance showed that the UK had finally gotten combined arms mechised warfare right. US troops only made up about 10% of the forces. Us involvement was useful but hardly decisive.

As for WWII about the only thing the US did was ensure that the Soviets did not roll all the way down to the Straights of Gibralter. German chances in WWII died when Zhukov was given command around Moscow and Stalin brought his far eastern division west.

[KingM]

Ah yes those nasty Americans. Saving Europe from destroying itself, time and time again. Building up those that have fought against those mean Americans, where others in the past have annialated their opponents.

First up US contributions to WWI were minimal. Operation Michael proved that the Germans did not have the logistics tale to support a prolonged thrust even when they made a break through. And when they did move forward they abandoned the deep defenses they had built in the previous years. The hundred day advance showed that the UK had finally gotten combined arms mechised warfare right. US troops only made up about 10% of the forces. Us involvement was useful but hardly decisive.

As for WWII about the only thing the US did was ensure that the Soviets did not roll all the way down to the Straights of Gibralter. German chances in WWII died when Zhukov was given command around Moscow and Stalin brought his far eastern division west.

Right. The massive aid of food and material to the Soviets didn't help much. Neither did the tens of thousands of bombing runs or the invasions of North Africa, Sicily, Italy, and Normandy. Also, have you heard of this little country called Japan?

You can't summarize WWII (or is it WW Eleven??) in a paragraph, but it's safe to say that western theater was won with American industry, Soviet manpower, and a combination of British and American air and naval power. Take away one of those three elements and you have a very different war.

The Pacific War was one by the United States.

[SeaGypsy]

Australia entered World War II shortly after the invasion of Poland, declaring war on Germany on 3 September 1939. By the end of the war, almost a million Australians had served in the armed forces, whose military units fought primarily in the European theatre, North African campaign, and the South West Pacific theatre. In addition, Australia came under direct attack for the first time in its history; its casualties from enemy action during the war were 27,073 killed and 23,477 wounded.[1]

In effect, Australia fought two wars between 1939 and 1945[2] – one against Germany and Italy as part of the British Commonwealth's war effort and the other against Japan in alliance with the United States and Britain. While most Australian forces were withdrawn from the Mediterranean following the outbreak of war in the Pacific, they continued to take part in large numbers in the air offensive against Germany. From 1942 until early 1944, Australian forces played a key role in the Pacific War, making up the majority of Allied strength in the South West Pacific. The military was largely relegated to subsidiary fronts from mid-1944, but continued offensive operations against the Japanese until the war ended.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_h ... rld_War_II
Please mind your manners.

Just under 29,000 Australians were taken prisoner by the Axis during the war. Only 14,000 of the 21,467 Australian prisoners taken by the Japanese survived captivity. The majority of the deaths in captivity were due to malnutrition and disease.

[dorlomin]

Right. The massive aid of food and material to the Soviets didn't help much.

but it's safe to say that western theater was won with American industry, Soviet manpower,

America built the 65 000 T34? Or the 36 000 sturmviks?

As I said

As for WWII about the only thing the US did was ensure that the Soviets did not roll all the way down to the Straights of Gibralter.

Army groups South and Center were smashed before the US had any real involvement in the war. The Nazi lacked the logistics to realistically move much beyond the Ukraine. They simply lacked the trucks needed to keep an army fully supplied. Was the T34s were being produced in numbers it was all going to be a matter of time. US aid and the invasion bought it a place at the table carving up post war Europe.

The Pacific War was one by the United States.

China lost 1.7 million troops in the Sino Japanese war and was fighting 4 million Japanese troops. The Pacific theater was a series of skirmishes so America could get an island close enough to Japan to fly their nuclear bomb from.

The Japanese Army was mostly deployed against the Chinese and China may* have inflicted 4 times the millitary casualties as the US.

I am sure the Chinese are deeply grateful that the US bombing of Japan brought the war to a close but as I said it was skirmishes compared to where the real war was going on.

*Estimates vary quite dramatically as to the casualties Japan suffered in the Second Sino Japanese war.

[dorlomin]

And in the Pacific the Soviets crushed the Japanese army before WWII.
Khalkhin Gol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Khalkhin_Gol

This is why Stalin had 40 divisions to spare after Barbarossa wiped out his western armies, the best troops were still in the Eastern USSR.