THE F WORD IN HISTORY

[Brian Kirby]

knight of the road - 2009-08-26 10:14 AM America is not whiter than white and does not always wear the white hat of the goody, if America gives help to any other country there is a high price to pay, America will want to dominate that country. If the US was such a good friend of Britain and Europe why did the US come into the 1st world war at such a late stage? Prior to WW1, Germany was an industrial powerhouse dominating most of the world markets they had taken on the role of the workshop of the world far exceeding Britains output. America was an emerging industrial powerhouse and looked at the German world markets with envy, when Germany and Britain had fought themselves to a standstill they played their ace card by coming into the war pouring fresh young troops, money and arms into the fight, when the war ended Britain and Germany were broken leaving a clear field for the US to pick up the world markets. America was using its financial muscle to to dominate the world, so why did Japan attack Pearl Harbour? as retaliation for the treatment handed out by the US government in trying to stop Japanese business expansion? Nobody can tell me that the US did not know that Japan was planning to attack Pearl Harbour, I dont care what anyone says, America knew that attack was imminant and sacrificed the lives of all those Americans that were killed on that day. So why was there such a big US presence in that part of the world? If America did not want to get embroiled in another European war why were they there? as observers or just to antagonise the Japs into attacking the US? American big business is responsible for a lot of the worlds ills.

I think the above conflates WW1 and WW2.  Before WW1, Britain had the power, and the Empire.  Most of the above relates to the world prior to WW2.  America did come in late, in both cases: but why should that have come in at all?  There just seems to be a train of thought here that America, somehow, owed us instant involvement. 

At the time of WW1, which was just a messy European squabble representing exactly what many had emigrated to America to escape, there was great popular resistance to involvement.  There was a great feeling that it was a European fight, to which the Europeans were best left.  America suffered great casualties and although it benefited economically in the aftermath, was left deeply scarred.  So much so, that at the time of WW2, which grew directly from the failings of the WW1 settlements, there was an even stronger atmosphere to "leave them to it", coupled with a very strong, post WW1, "never again" sentiment. 

America was, one way and another, more or less allied to all the combatants in both wars, and had many emigrants from all.  So whose "side" should it take?  Ultimately, Roosevelt "conned" the American public, taking a huge political risk, to commit forces to the second war.

It must be remembered that America had no need to intervene on either occasion.  When it did, it had to show some advantage in the aftermath, in justification of the losses it had suffered.  That is real politic.  Whether you like it or not, it is one of the consequences of alliances.

A more pressing question for now would be, what is the advantage to Britain of our involvement in Afghanistan?  If you think the answer is none, or little, on not proven, then why are we there?  Then, translate those thoughts to America in 1914 or 1939.  If you had been American at those times, would have been in such a rush to across the Atlantic and get you head blown off?

[CliveH]

One thing that is always forgotten by those that criticise America is that whilst the system of government can, like any system, be flawed, it is remarkably free considering the size of the place.

 

Elections are free and the president can only serve two terms. So no dictatorship here by the back door.

 

America can seem trite when they pronounce it as being "the land of the free" but they do believe it and thank God they do. Because if they did not then they would not have sent their sons and daughters across the Atlantic to a foreign land to die in the fight for that same freedom in a land that was not their own.

 

And do note, they did this not once - but twice. As for the timescale and when the joined in, well anyone that adversely criticises the USA for coming in late just shows their ignorance of the facts of history. Because the USA could not have stepped into what was a European conflict at the outset without themselves being an invader/aggressor. What happened in reality was that as things progressed they were asked to take part or war was declared against them. To say or indicate otherwise is either true ignorance or a lie.

 

I for one know and appreciate the debt we owe the American nation. It saddens me that some are so ignorant of the true facts that they cannot see the truth. I think that ignorance is testament to the poor educational standards we have in this country now. These low standards are not helped by Politically Correct left wing numpty spin doctors who take delight in attacking a nation that has been far more of a friend to us here in the UK than even some of our closest European neighbours.

 

This is I would suggest the eleventh reason why the F word could be used to exemplify the frustration of having to deal with such ignorance :-S

[nightrider]

RupertGS - 2009-08-26 11:07 AM

What an ill-informed, unintelligent and objectionable person you are. What proof have you for yet another positively evil comment when you say that the U.S. knew that the Japan was about to attack Pearl Harbour? To state that they purposely allowed the attack, which cost both military and civilian lives and destroyed almost their entire Pacific fleet is not only reprehensible but downright stupid.

My advice to you is to stop making ill-informed comments on subjects of which you are completely ignorant and to stop visiting the anti-U.S.A. conspiracy sites that you appear to have been reading.

Your obvious antipathy to the U.S. is completely over-riding what little brain you have. Stop opening your mouth and putting your foot in it every time.

Now, give me a list of countries that America has helped and now, as you claim, totally dominates. Is it the U.K, France, Holland, Belgium, Vietnam or even Japan? On my last trip to the Hawaiian Islands the main thing that stood out from previous visits was the Japanese domination of the state, with vast amounts of real estate and companies now Japanese owned.

America is the biggest world power, but that's not because it wants hegemony over anyone. It's the biggest because it's the largest Western country and the most free. Compare the economy of the U.S. with that of Russia, which has no innovative industry whatsoever and whose only asset is its mineral reserves. You should thank God that the world's largest superpower is the U.S. It may not be perfect but it's better than most and anyway, why shouldn't it look after its own interests? Most countries do but some, like the U.S. and the other Western democracies do it responsibly.

Rupert,Dont tell me that American intelligence were not aware of an imminant Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour, and for your information I do not visit anti-American sites.

[RupertGS]

You're a total disgrace. Show me one shred of proof that the U.S. knew in advance of the attack on Pearl Harbour. What you are implying is reprehensible.

I ask again, show me one shred of proof. To state that the U.S. Government was, by default, complicit in this act of savagery is appalling and you have reached a new low on this site, and you've been very low previously!

For God's sake man, read some of the above posts, from others, as well as me, and stop digging your hole even deeper.

[foxy]

Well that past 20 mins, sat here in the pouring rain.

 

Dont you just love debate.

 

It started with the "F" word and ended with Americans involvement in two world wars.

 

 

[CliveH]

(lol) (lol) (lol)

 

agree - you have to laugh!

[Brian Kirby]

RupertGS - 2009-08-26 2:18 PM

You're a total disgrace. Show me one shred of proof that the U.S. knew in advance of the attack on Pearl Harbour. What you are implying is reprehensible..............

Calm down, Rupert!

There is a quite well established line of thinking, within the US, that the Pearl Harbour attack was picked up beforehand but, due to a number of mishaps and oversights, the alarm was never raised.  I think this is what KOTR has picked up, albeit a rather conspiratorial version.  The more balanced, to me, view, is that it was just cock-up, mixed with a bit of complacency, rather than conspiracy. 

Be that as it may, America is famously the home of conspiracy theories, from who shot JFK to extra terrestrials.  These theories exist, and it is as much use demanding proof positive as it is totally discounting them.  One day, the truth will out: until then we can all believe what we like - on the basis that belief is what we are left with in the absence of facts.

Roaring at people who have different beliefs to one's own is damaging in it's own right, it is how innumerable wars have started.  Beliefs, on the whole, are far more damaging than facts - always provided one can have confidence in the "facts"!  Much of what we learn in our youth turns out, in later life, to have been politically inspired hogwash, wishful thinking, or just plain wrong.  No one individual has a monopoly on being right, and we are all the victims of the information we have gained, and trusted, some of which will, inevitably, be wrong.  Peace, Man.  :-)

[RupertGS]

I'd just like to remind you what he said:

"... I dont care what anyone says, America knew that attack was imminant and sacrificed the lives of all those Americans that were killed on that day. "

Sacrificed the lives of all those killed! This quite clearly means that the U.S. had knowledge of the attack in advance and allowed it to happen. This is the raving of a near-lunatic! That the U.S. would allow its Pacific fleet to be destroyed and its citizens and military killed in large numbers. Why would they do that for God's sake? 

If the U.S. had designs on Japan and wanted to enter the war it seems rather foolish to allow its major fleet to be virtually destroyed.

Knight of the Road opens his mouth well before his brain is in gear and he's so anti-U.S.A. that he allows himself to pour out this nonsensical vitriol.

I have no problem with people who have different views from me. But I do object most strongly to outright lies spewing from nothing more than a twisted imagination. People who make statements such as the one listed above need slapping down and I'm pleased to see that I'm not the only one doing it, although I may be more vigorous than others!

[Brian Kirby]

Ah yes, but you see Rupert, you had already attacked KOTR in your previous posts.  When one provokes, one is liable to get intemperate replies!  You have denigrated KOTR in public, and he is offended.  You have sought to belittle him by parading your superior learning.  You have insulted him.  You have placed the most unfavourable interpretation possible on what he said.  Look at what you say above "This quite clearly means that the U.S. had knowledge of the attack in advance and allowed it to happen".  Ultimately, that is your (uncharitable) interpretation of his meaning, which, having run it up your flagpole, you then proceed to shoot down with further insult.

If you need the interpretation, it is only because what is stated is not totally clear, is it not?  That leaves you to interpret generously, vindictively, or seek clarification.  You choose vindictive, which is a shame, because the invective spoils what could be an interesting debate, if held at a lower temperature.  A little more enquiry would not come amiss, and would sweeten the atmosphere no end!  Just my opinion, mind.

[RupertGS]

You really should go back and read this thread from the beginning.

Someone posted a whole string of obscene jokes.

I posted that I thought that this was a new low for this site. I mentioned no one else and attacked no one.

Tracker seemed to agree with me but couldn't resist having a pop at me.

Later on KOTR, whom I'd never mentioned, had a go at me for attacking Tracker!

KOTR was made to look rather foolish by me and several others when he made another very disparaging and totally insulting comment about the Americans in Vietnam. This is the sole reason in my opinion that he chose to attack me.

The man is an idiot who gets involved in arguments, which by the way he always starts and then justs digs himself in even deeper.

Twice he has posted the most obnoxious comments which have resulted in such a strong response from other members (not me by the way) that he's told everyone that he's leaving the forum because we're all a bunch of unreasonable people. He goes off for a while but then creeps back again a couple of weeks later as though nothing has happened.

We'll agree to disagree about my method of dealing with him. I'm sick to death of his slanderous remarks about the U.S. which are based on no more than his personal prejudices and should he continue then so shall I.

[nightrider]

Rupert,

The vast majority of Americans did not want to get embroiled in another European war, senator Joe Kennedy was against it more than likely because of his intense dislike of the English.

Churchill was trying his utmost to get America involved, the US government wanted involvement but was fearful of the wrath of the people, the attack on Pearl Harbour was the trigger needed.

Eisenhower was made supreme allied commander why? just like the kid with the football who says its my ball so I am the boss, Britain was experienced in the war up to that point but America had the money and the clout so they called the shots.

Brian and a number of other members have joined in this thread but have not resorted to personal insults like you and that to me shows the kind of guy you are, Take Brians advice and calm down dear, think of your blood pressure.

Incidently, why have you such a dislike of Tracker? even to the extent of mocking the text he uses to end his posts, rather childish I think, did Tracker by chance send in a past post that you disagreed with? which sent you on a rant, if you dont like what I write then dont open my posts.

[CliveH]

Yes it does seem to be getting a bit out of hand and to add my bit about the conspiracy theory re Pearl Harbour - I read that we the Brits, Churchill in particular were told about the Japanese attack and that we decided not to warn the USA because we wanted them to come in to the conflict on our side.

 

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/220998.html

 

How true? - No idea.

 

What i do believe is that KOTR enjoys a wind up - nobody could seriously hold such views in reality.

 

(lol)

[RupertGS]

CliveH - 2009-08-26 6:11 PM Yes it does seem to be getting a bit out of hand and to add my bit about the conspiracy theory re Pearl Harbour - I read that we the Brits, Churchill in particular were told about the Japanese attack and that we decided not to warn the USA because we wanted them to come in to the conflict on our side. http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/220998.html How true? - No idea. What i do believe is that KOTR enjoys a wind up - nobody could seriously hold such views in reality. (lol)

Regretfully, in reality, he does hold these views I'm afraid.

[soarer]

(lol) (lol) (lol) (lol)

 

awsome thread, brilliant!! made my day. (lol) (lol)

[J9withdogs]

It must be a Man-thing *-)

[nightrider]

Desco,

Awfully sorry that your thread was taken over, please post somemore.

 

Rupert,

In your post number 4 you say and I quote, I love this forum, like many others its you I can't stand (tracker) and besides we need for a bit of controversy, its been as dead as a Dodo recently, end of quote.

That is exactly what you got from me, a CONTROVERSIAL post.

You also say that someone posted a whole string of obscene jokes, who might I ask complained? if they were so obscene why didn't the mods delete the post? I was prompted to make my posts after reading the joke of what the mayor of Hiroshima said when the atom bomb was dropped, obscenity, like beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

 

Clive,

Yes, KOTR does like to wind up certain individuals knowing full well that they will fall for it hook, line and sinker, and you might have noticed that I did not resort to hurling personal insults to Rupert.

I guess that is about as far as I will be going on this thread, rather than bore the pants off everyone else but if Rupert wants to carry it on he is quite at liberty to PM me.

[nightrider]

RupertGS - 2009-08-26 6:27 PM

CliveH - 2009-08-26 6:11 PM Yes it does seem to be getting a bit out of hand and to add my bit about the conspiracy theory re Pearl Harbour - I read that we the Brits, Churchill in particular were told about the Japanese attack and that we decided not to warn the USA because we wanted them to come in to the conflict on our side. http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/220998.html How true? - No idea. What i do believe is that KOTR enjoys a wind up - nobody could seriously hold such views in reality. (lol)

Regretfully, in reality, he does hold these views I'm afraid.

Clive,Nobody in this wide world can convince me that a super power like America with all her intelligence resources did not know of the impending Japanese attack on Pearl harbour, it is beyond belief.

[malc d]

knight of the road - 2009-08-26 8:29 PM

RupertGS - 2009-08-26 6:27 PM

CliveH - 2009-08-26 6:11 PM Yes it does seem to be getting a bit out of hand and to add my bit about the conspiracy theory re Pearl Harbour - I read that we the Brits, Churchill in particular were told about the Japanese attack and that we decided not to warn the USA because we wanted them to come in to the conflict on our side. http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/220998.html How true? - No idea. What i do believe is that KOTR enjoys a wind up - nobody could seriously hold such views in reality. (lol)

Regretfully, in reality, he does hold these views I'm afraid.

Clive,Nobody in this wide world can convince me that a super power like America with all her intelligence resources did not know of the impending Japanese attack on Pearl harbour, it is beyond belief.

....but then..."a super power like America with all her intelligence resources" thought that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.So who knows what they 'knew' around 1940, with none of the modern technology ?

[nowtelse2do]

Whoever controlled Pearl Harbour controlled the biggest part or the whole of the Pacific.

Dave

[nightrider]

malc d - 2009-08-26 8:34 PM

knight of the road - 2009-08-26 8:29 PM

RupertGS - 2009-08-26 6:27 PM

CliveH - 2009-08-26 6:11 PM Yes it does seem to be getting a bit out of hand and to add my bit about the conspiracy theory re Pearl Harbour - I read that we the Brits, Churchill in particular were told about the Japanese attack and that we decided not to warn the USA because we wanted them to come in to the conflict on our side. http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/220998.html How true? - No idea. What i do believe is that KOTR enjoys a wind up - nobody could seriously hold such views in reality. (lol)

Regretfully, in reality, he does hold these views I'm afraid.

Clive,Nobody in this wide world can convince me that a super power like America with all her intelligence resources did not know of the impending Japanese attack on Pearl harbour, it is beyond belief.

....but then..."a super power like America with all her intelligence resources" thought that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.So who knows what they 'knew' around 1940, with none of the modern technology ?

In those days they might not have had all the modern day technology but they had the "gumshoes" pounding the streets with their ears to the ground???

[nightrider]

nowtelse2do - 2009-08-26 8:41 PM

Whoever controlled Pearl Harbour controlled the biggest part or the whole of the Pacific.

Dave

So if America controlled Pearl Harbour they would control the biggest part of, or the whole of the Pacific??? was their own country not big enough for them? Like I have been trying to say, world domination by the back door using their muscle and finance, not all countries in this world want to kowtow to America, they might want to accept American aid but dont want to be owned by America.

[RupertGS]

Oh God, somebody send for the men with the padded van please!

[malc d]

knight of the road - 2009-08-26 8:54 PM

malc d - 2009-08-26 8:34 PM

knight of the road - 2009-08-26 8:29 PM

RupertGS - 2009-08-26 6:27 PM

CliveH - 2009-08-26 6:11 PM Yes it does seem to be getting a bit out of hand and to add my bit about the conspiracy theory re Pearl Harbour - I read that we the Brits, Churchill in particular were told about the Japanese attack and that we decided not to warn the USA because we wanted them to come in to the conflict on our side. http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/220998.html How true? - No idea. What i do believe is that KOTR enjoys a wind up - nobody could seriously hold such views in reality. (lol)

Regretfully, in reality, he does hold these views I'm afraid.

Clive,Nobody in this wide world can convince me that a super power like America with all her intelligence resources did not know of the impending Japanese attack on Pearl harbour, it is beyond belief.

....but then..."a super power like America with all her intelligence resources" thought that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.So who knows what they 'knew' around 1940, with none of the modern technology ?

In those days they might not have had all the modern day technology but they had the "gumshoes" pounding the streets with their ears to the ground???

(I don't know about " gumshoes" in 1940/41 as there was no CIA in those days).My take on this is as follows:When Japan invaded China in 1937 the USA 'sided' with China and restricted the supplies of essential war materials to Japan.Japan then went through a period of ' negotiations' with the USA to get the restrictions lifted, but as they thought they were getting nowhere, Japan attacked the US fleet at Pearl Harbour without warning in the hope of breaking the blockades.No doubt there were many people who had many ideas at the time about what Japan 'might' do, and maybe some even predicted the attack.But that is not the same as actually 'knowing' what was about to happen, and I certainly find it unbelievable that the US would deliberately allow its' fleet to be sunk !(How would that help them to maintain the blockade ?)(For anyone who is about to shoot me down on material facts - I stress this is my understanding of the period - it's not put forward as a factual account !) :-|

[nightrider]

I have read several newspaper articles that Churchill was aware of the impending attack on pearl Harbour, if he knew, surely the American high command would have known?

In war, there are times when men and arms are dispensible, the warships that were sunk could be replaced in no time at all and the men that were killed could be replaced in five minutes, a sad fact but true, after Pearl Harbour the American armed forces recruitment shot through the roof.

Despite what I have said in these posts I have the utmost admiration and gratitude for the bravery and sacrifices the ordinary GI Joe made in WW2.

[malc d]

knight of the road - 2009-08-26 9:38 PM

 

I have read several newspaper articles that Churchill was aware of the impending attack on pearl Harbour, if he knew, surely the American high command would have known?

In war, there are times when men and arms are dispensible, the warships that were sunk could be replaced in no time at all and the men that were killed could be replaced in five minutes, a sad fact but true, after Pearl Harbour the American armed forces recruitment shot through the roof.

Despite what I have said in these posts I have the utmost admiration and gratitude for the bravery and sacrifices the ordinary GI Joe made in WW2.

 

 

 

Oh well, if it comes down to what you read in 'newspaper' articles -

- I'm out of this discussion.

 

 

:-(