RE: Wanna buy a slave?

RE: Wanna buy a slave? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Zonie63 -> RE: Wanna buy a slave? (9/16/2014 6:27:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 Yes, but just because they're rich doesn't mean they're smart. There are a number of historical examples one could cite where rich people have had to flee their own countries with their tails between their legs because they ran their countries into the ground. These examples are few and far between. Perhaps the reason such examples are so few is because they've also been propped up by outside powers, which would make them well-pampered pets and puppets under the control of others, not strong or powerful in their own right. quote: quote: It seems to be the same old story, where the insular myopia of the ruling class eventually leads to overthrow from within or defeat from without. The ruling class in japan is the same as before the war. The ruling class in germany is the same as before. The rich get richer and the poor get pregnant The ruling classes in those countries were still at the mercy of their occupiers after the war, thus making them puppets who didn't "rule" over anything at all without permission from their masters. quote: quote: Tsar Nicholas II had a net worth equivalent to $300 billion today. A fat bank account didn't do much good for him. Yet many of the ruling class of imperial russia escaped with their fortunes in tact...nikki and his family were nothing but punks not even worth the skin. But they had to have some place to escape to, mainly the West. If the ruling class of the West can't hold it together and end up being hoisted by their own petard (as they're acting more and more like "Nicky" all the time), where are they gonna go? To the Cayman Islands? To the Bahamas? I don't think there will be very many safe places for them, and without their power to prop up all these other tinpot regimes around the world, those governments will also collapse.

thompsonx -> RE: Wanna buy a slave? (9/16/2014 9:01:20 AM)
ORIGINAL: Zonie63 I don't really want to derail this thread any further by quibbling over the definition of "embargo," The definition of embargo is not at question. What is at question is whether one existed or not? This is hardly a derail since the premise of selling slaves is made possible because those folks are getting tired of us being up their collective asses. They are doing just what we do. If you cant get your way diplomatically then strong arm tactics are always the bottom line. but if what happened between Oct. '73 and March '74 was not an "embargo," then what was it? A quick check of the record will show that the u.s. consumption of oil actually increased in 73-74 over previous years. True lybia did stop shipping the miniscule amount that they had been and instead diverted it to our ally italy. The artificially low price of about 3 dollars a barrel was pushed upward. I do remember the long gas lines, rationing, and countless gas stations with "no gas" signs in front. You say it was just a price increase, but it was obviously much more than that. The prices did increase significantly during the years which followed, but the gas lines and rationing ended. The rationing and long lines pushed .30 cent a gallon gas to about .70-.75 cents a gallon. Once the price stablized there the upward movement was a combination of inflation(taxation without representation) and speculation. Even if it was just a ploy by the oil companies and the government to screw the people, it was still rather short-sighted. How was it shortsighted? The rich got richer and the poor got pregnant. The oil companies pumping oil out of the ground in the u.s. charge the same price per barrel as the "evil opec". Can't you just feel the patriotism? They don't even own the land. It is leased from the govt/us and they gouge us while selling our own property back to us. If you are you that kinda sux but if you are standard oil that is pretty kewel.

Edwynn -> RE: Wanna buy a slave? (9/16/2014 9:26:28 AM)
Yup. *The Control of Oil* by John Malcolm Blair goes into all the details of that episode quite thoroughly. There was plenty of oil to be had before, during, and after the incidence of the ME having the temerity to go all capitalist on us and finally understand the basic economic concept of "rent seeking" the same way that Western powers had established many decades before.

thompsonx -> RE: Wanna buy a slave? (9/16/2014 9:30:05 AM)
ORIGINAL: Zonie63 Perhaps the reason such examples are so few is because they've also been propped up by outside powers, which would make them well-pampered pets and puppets under the control of others, not strong or powerful in their own right. Batista,samoza,pinochet,the shah...the list of punks is pretty long. If you lived under them then you might have felt differently. The ruling classes in those countries were still at the mercy of their occupiers after the war, thus making them puppets who didn't "rule" over anything at all without permission from their masters. Perhaps if you were to read about krupp. What he did before the war,durring the war and after the war. I once saw some pictures of his "jail cell" where he spent a few years after the war. Having a master who supplies me with good looking whores,fine wine and gourmet food is one many might find attractive. The door to his phoquing cell was not even locked. He had half a dozen telephones in his cell. He was an international bussinessman/manufacturer. His financial empire included half of what is now las vegas(the part with the water).When you are that powerful/rich his value to his new 'masters" was that he could control all of that and make a profit. Without him it not work as an organic whole. He was paid a royality for his fuse design which was used in every bomb that was dropped by both sides.(when you are so rich and powerful that all sides of a war pay you just because it is tuesday). Seldom do empires like that fall. Governments in the u.s. changed in 1789 but the powerful people did not. Japan lost a war but the poweful people of japan are still powerful people in japan. Germany lost the war but the powerful people of germany are still the powerful people of germany. But they had to have some place to escape to, mainly the West. Considering that much of russian nobility was related to western nobility that would seem logical. If the ruling class of the West can't hold it together and end up being hoisted by their own petard (as they're acting more and more like "Nicky" all the time), where are they gonna go? We are talking about gates, koch,turner, and the five or six million of the richest people in the u.s. To the Cayman Islands? To the Bahamas? I don't think there will be very many safe places for them, and without their power to prop up all these other tinpot regimes around the world, those governments will also collapse. They will hire blackwater to protect them and life will go on.

Zonie63 -> RE: Wanna buy a slave? (9/17/2014 7:54:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx How was it shortsighted? The rich got richer and the poor got pregnant. The oil companies pumping oil out of the ground in the u.s. charge the same price per barrel as the "evil opec". Can't you just feel the patriotism? They don't even own the land. It is leased from the govt/us and they gouge us while selling our own property back to us. If you are you that kinda sux but if you are standard oil that is pretty kewel. Yes, but as you said, the people over in the Middle East are getting tired of us being up their collective asses. It can't be much of an empire if they don't have the means or the foresight to keep it under long-term control. If they just wanted to take the money and run, that would be one thing, but they seem to want to maintain this world system for a while. quote: quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: Zonie63 Perhaps the reason such examples are so few is because they've also been propped up by outside powers, which would make them well-pampered pets and puppets under the control of others, not strong or powerful in their own right. Batista,samoza,pinochet,the shah...the list of punks is pretty long. If you lived under them then you might have felt differently. Yes, but look where these punks ended up. I'm sure they didn't plan for their retirement to be the way it turned out. I think those who lived under them knew where the real power behind these men was coming from. They certainly knew that in Iran when they overthrew the Shah. quote: quote: The ruling classes in those countries were still at the mercy of their occupiers after the war, thus making them puppets who didn't "rule" over anything at all without permission from their masters. Perhaps if you were to read about krupp. What he did before the war,durring the war and after the war. I once saw some pictures of his "jail cell" where he spent a few years after the war. Having a master who supplies me with good looking whores,fine wine and gourmet food is one many might find attractive. The door to his phoquing cell was not even locked. He had half a dozen telephones in his cell. He was an international bussinessman/manufacturer. His financial empire included half of what is now las vegas(the part with the water).When you are that powerful/rich his value to his new 'masters" was that he could control all of that and make a profit. Without him it not work as an organic whole. He was paid a royality for his fuse design which was used in every bomb that was dropped by both sides.(when you are so rich and powerful that all sides of a war pay you just because it is tuesday). Seldom do empires like that fall. Governments in the u.s. changed in 1789 but the powerful people did not. Japan lost a war but the poweful people of japan are still powerful people in japan. Germany lost the war but the powerful people of germany are still the powerful people of germany. Yes, I see your point, and I agree that a lot of folks like Krupp got off too easily. I would still wonder whether he was all that indispensable to the US ruling class, who could have taken his entire financial empire and hanged him at Nuremberg with the rest of the scum. You could be right that they made more money by keeping him and his financial empire intact, but the US ruling class could have made either choice and likely still be in the same position. After all, Germany and Japan would later become powerful competitors for the United States in the economic arena. It seems counterintuitive to the idea of imperialism to actively help those who could threaten that power. I agree that the US government was changed in 1789, but the ruling class at the time created that government. Considering what happened a mere 70 years later, they may have also been short-sighted. quote: quote: But they had to have some place to escape to, mainly the West. Considering that much of russian nobility was related to western nobility that would seem logical. Of course, but if the Western governments had been overthrown too, they would have been out of luck. quote: quote: If the ruling class of the West can't hold it together and end up being hoisted by their own petard (as they're acting more and more like "Nicky" all the time), where are they gonna go? We are talking about gates, koch,turner, and the five or six million of the richest people in the u.s. Yes, but we're talking about a geographical region representing the last bastion of the "empire." There's no other place to go if the West falls. quote: quote: To the Cayman Islands? To the Bahamas? I don't think there will be very many safe places for them, and without their power to prop up all these other tinpot regimes around the world, those governments will also collapse. They will hire blackwater to protect them and life will go on. I'm sure they'll try. I'm not sure how successful it will be in the long run, considering the large segments of the world's population they've managed to piss off.

thompsonx -> RE: Wanna buy a slave? (9/17/2014 10:27:15 AM)
ORIGINAL: Zonie63 Yes, but as you said, the people over in the Middle East are getting tired of us being up their collective asses. It can't be much of an empire if they don't have the means or the foresight to keep it under long-term control. If they just wanted to take the money and run, that would be one thing, but they seem to want to maintain this world system for a while. Isn't that the nature of empires? Yes, but look where these punks ended up. If I remember correctly they lived the good life till the end. Yes, I see your point, and I agree that a lot of folks like Krupp got off too easily. I would still wonder whether he was all that indispensable to the US ruling class, who could have taken his entire financial empire and hanged him at Nuremberg with the rest of the scum. How would he and spear differ from rockafella and ford? You could be right that they made more money by keeping him and his financial empire intact, but the US ruling class could have made either choice and likely still be in the same position. Why would they? He was one of them? After all, Germany and Japan would later become powerful competitors for the United States in the economic arena. Where do they compete? U.s. car companies are part and parcel of jap car companies. Optics and electronics same same. It seems counterintuitive to the idea of imperialism to actively help those who could threaten that power. Economic imperalism seeks the raw resources of the client country. Those might include a skilled labor force that will work for lunch money or natural resources like rivers, minerals etc. I agree that the US government was changed in 1789, Not changed...instituted. but the ruling class at the time created that government. Considering what happened a mere 70 years later, they may have also been short-sighted. The u.s. civil war was and continues to be a convoluted enterprise. The spirit of america was in conflict with the reality of amerika. Enough people felt that it was unimportant and thus ignored it...You might want to read up on the "gag rule" which enhanced this "if it aint broke dont fix it" mentality. Yes, but we're talking about a geographical region representing the last bastion of the "empire." There's no other place to go if the West falls. No matter who is in charge they need industry. They most likely would not kill off the chickens that lay golden eggs. Those chickens are not exactly stupid so would it not make sense that they will survive as a group? They have only done so for the past thousand years or so.

Zonie63 -> RE: Wanna buy a slave? (9/18/2014 7:52:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Isn't that the nature of empires? Yes, although empires do fall from time to time. quote: If I remember correctly they lived the good life till the end. Except for the Shah. He was sick and dying and was having trouble finding any country that would take him in, until the US government finally allowed him to come here. quote: How would he and spear differ from rockafella and ford? Not much, except that they were on opposite sides of the playing field. quote: quote: You could be right that they made more money by keeping him and his financial empire intact, but the US ruling class could have made either choice and likely still be in the same position. Why would they? He was one of them? Yes, that would make sense. Perhaps there was some vicarious sentimental bond between them which went beyond the scope of their business relationship. quote: Economic imperalism seeks the raw resources of the client country. Those might include a skilled labor force that will work for lunch money or natural resources like rivers, minerals etc. Yes, although in the past, the imperialists wanted to have direct control over those territories and resources (and generally doing so openly and even with a level of prideful boasting about the "glory" and "greatness" of the Empire). Nowadays, they seemingly operate in the shadows, afraid to show their faces, and utilizing proxies and puppets to carry out their agenda. That's where these little toads like Somoza, Pinochet, and the Shah come into the picture. The ruling class of the West seems not just interested in wealth, but also in maintaining a "clean reputation" as well, as if they're a bunch of mobsters trying to appear "legitimate." It ostensibly fools enough people into thinking that whatever wars they wish to fight are part of a continuing struggle of "good vs. evil."

NorthernGent -> RE: Wanna buy a slave? (9/20/2014 6:29:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: NorthernGent The Germans did declare war on the US, but I don't think it had anything to do with Japan. If one reads the declaration and the speech that accompanied it there can be no doubt that italy and germany declared war on the u.s. because of the u.s. declaration of war on japan. It was more that Hitler and associated odd-balls were a pack of lunatics, who, while deeply embroiled in attempting to conquer Russia; thought it would be a good idea to declare war on the United States at the same time. Hitler did not think it was a good idea but the treaty with japan obligated him to do so. Not true, Thompson. The Germans and Japanese did not have a treaty that obligated them to support one another against a foe. For example: the Germans hoped that the Japanese would lend them a hand against the Soviets, but the Japanese weren't interested.

NorthernGent -> RE: Wanna buy a slave? (9/20/2014 6:37:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent The Germans did declare war on the US, but I don't think it had anything to do with Japan. If one reads the declaration and the speech that accompanied it there can be no doubt that italy and germany declared war on the u.s. because of the u.s. declaration of war on japan. quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent It was more that Hitler and associated odd-balls were a pack of lunatics, who, while deeply embroiled in attempting to conquer Russia; thought it would be a good idea to declare war on the United States at the same time. Hitler did not think it was a good idea but the treaty with japan obligated him to do so. A couple of serious questions (as usual [:-] ) -- Didn't Hitler count on the support of German-American sympathizers to keep the U.S. out of WWII, or to somehow subvert us from mobilizing war efforts against the Nazi Axis in the European/Eurasian theatre? Knowing that invading Russia was a daunting undertaking, and wanting to avoid making the same mistakes Napoleon had made, do you believe Hitler was counting on his Japanese allies to eventually come to Germany's assistance if needed per Japan's occupation of conquered Asian & Pacific territories, specifically via China (and force Russia to fight on two fronts)? I think at the outset the Germans assumed it would take only a summer/autumn to conquer the Soviet Union and so no need for Japanese help. But, when the going got tough they certainly wanted the Japanese to lend them a hand, but their interests lay elsewhere. In terms of US support for Germany, I could be wrong here but my understanding is that there are more people of German descent than English descent in the US, and so of course the Germans would have found support in the US. Certainly during WW1 there was widespread anti-British feeling in the US, and it took a sustained propaganda campaign on the part of the British (most of which was lies, by the way) to cause some people who had been pro-German to think twice. Not sure about WW2.

Sanity -> RE: Wanna buy a slave? (9/20/2014 10:44:46 AM)
quote: Six Iranian Youth Sentenced to Jail, Lashes for Dancing to Pharrell's 'Happy' http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/6258790/iran-pharrell-happy-video-jail-sentence (All hail Islam)

BamaD -> RE: Wanna buy a slave? (9/20/2014 11:30:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent The Germans did declare war on the US, but I don't think it had anything to do with Japan. If one reads the declaration and the speech that accompanied it there can be no doubt that italy and germany declared war on the u.s. because of the u.s. declaration of war on japan. quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent It was more that Hitler and associated odd-balls were a pack of lunatics, who, while deeply embroiled in attempting to conquer Russia; thought it would be a good idea to declare war on the United States at the same time. Hitler did not think it was a good idea but the treaty with japan obligated him to do so. A couple of serious questions (as usual [:-] ) -- Didn't Hitler count on the support of German-American sympathizers to keep the U.S. out of WWII, or to somehow subvert us from mobilizing war efforts against the Nazi Axis in the European/Eurasian theatre? Knowing that invading Russia was a daunting undertaking, and wanting to avoid making the same mistakes Napoleon had made, do you believe Hitler was counting on his Japanese allies to eventually come to Germany's assistance if needed per Japan's occupation of conquered Asian & Pacific territories, specifically via China (and force Russia to fight on two fronts)? I think at the outset the Germans assumed it would take only a summer/autumn to conquer the Soviet Union and so no need for Japanese help. But, when the going got tough they certainly wanted the Japanese to lend them a hand, but their interests lay elsewhere. In terms of US support for Germany, I could be wrong here but my understanding is that there are more people of German descent than English descent in the US, and so of course the Germans would have found support in the US. Certainly during WW1 there was widespread anti-British feeling in the US, and it took a sustained propaganda campaign on the part of the British (most of which was lies, by the way) to cause some people who had been pro-German to think twice. Not sure about WW2. The German attack on Russia was delayed because they diverted and helped the Italians in Greece where they had gotten in over their heads. This meant that the attack on Russia was delayed 2 to 3 months, which in turn meant that the winter struck before the Germans could meet their goals. As for WWII it was hard to make the Nazis look worse than they were, and I think that Pearl might have had something to do with our entry. Yes there was a strong isolationist feeling in the U S combined with the return of the Klan made the Germans think that nothing would induce the U S to enter the war.

thompsonx -> RE: Wanna buy a slave? (9/20/2014 5:38:45 PM)
ORIGINAL: BamaD The German attack on Russia was delayed because they diverted and helped the Italians in Greece where they had gotten in over their heads. This meant that the attack on Russia was delayed 2 to 3 months, which in turn meant that the winter struck before the Germans could meet their goals. This guy says you are full of shit. He says that mid june was the earliest that barborosa could begin because of the spring rains making the ground too soft to move armor over it. Kershaw, Ian (2007). Fateful Choices: Ten Decisions that Changed the World, 1940–1941. Allen Lane. ISBN 978-0-7139-9712-5.

thompsonx -> RE: Wanna buy a slave? (9/20/2014 6:06:16 PM)
ORIGINAL: NorthernGent The Germans did declare war on the US, but I don't think it had anything to do with Japan. If one reads the declaration and the speech that accompanied it there can be no doubt that italy and germany declared war on the u.s. because of the u.s. declaration of war on japan. It was more that Hitler and associated odd-balls were a pack of lunatics, who, while deeply embroiled in attempting to conquer Russia; thought it would be a good idea to declare war on the United States at the same time. Hitler did not think it was a good idea but the treaty with japan obligated him to do so. Not true, Thompson. The Germans and Japanese did not have a treaty that obligated them to support one another against a foe. The Tripartite Pact between Japan, Germany, and Italy, 1940 The Governments of Japan, Germany, and Italy consider it as the condition precedent of any lasting peace that all nations in the world be given each its own proper place, have decided to stand by and co-operate with one another in their efforts in Greater East Asia and the regions of Europe respectively wherein it is their prime purpose to establish and maintain a new order of things, calculated to promote the mutual prosperity and welfare of the peoples concerned. It is, furthermore, the desire of the three Governments to extend cooperation to nations in other spheres of the world that are inclined to direct their efforts along lines similar to their own for the purpose of realizing their ultimate object, world peace. Accordingly, the Governments of Japan, Germany and Italy have agreed as follows:[4] ARTICLE 1. Japan recognizes and respects the leadership of Germany and Italy in the establishment of a new order in Europe. ARTICLE 2. Germany and Italy recognize and respect the leadership of Japan in the establishment of a new order in Greater East Asia. ARTICLE 3. Japan, Germany, and Italy agree to cooperate in their efforts on aforesaid lines. They further undertake to assist one another with all political, economic and military means if one of the Contracting Powers is attacked by a Power at present not involved in the European War or in the Japanese-Chinese conflict. ARTICLE 4. With a view to implementing the present pact, joint technical commissions, to be appointed by the respective Governments of Japan, Germany and Italy, will meet without delay. ARTICLE 5. Japan, Germany and Italy affirm that the above agreement affects in no way the political status existing at present between each of the three Contracting Powers and Soviet Russia. ARTICLE 6. The present pact shall become valid immediately upon signature and shall remain in force ten years from the date on which it becomes effective. In due time, before the expiration of said term, the High Contracting Parties shall, at the request of any one of them, enter into negotiations for its renewal. The Tripartite Treaty was immediately named by the Italian press Roberto based on the first syllables of Rome, Berlin and Tokyo.] For example: the Germans hoped that the Japanese would lend them a hand against the Soviets, but the Japanese weren't interested. PACT OF NEUTRALITY BETWEEN UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS AND JAPAN[2] The Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and His Majesty the Emperor of Japan, guided by a desire to strengthen peaceful and friendly relations between the two countries, have decided to conclude a pact on neutrality, for which purpose they have appointed as their Representatives: The Presidum of the Supreme Soviet of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics - Vyacheslav Mikhailovich Molotov, Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars and People's Commissar of Foreign Affairs of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics; His Majesty the Emperor of Japan - Yosuke Matsuoka, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Jusanmin, Cavalier of the Order of the Sacred Treasure of the First Class, and Yoshitsugu Tatekawa, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Lieutenant General, Jusanmin, Cavalier of the Order of the Rising Sun of the First Class and the Order of the Golden Kite of the Fourth Class, who, after an exchange of their credentials, which were found in due and proper form, have agreed on the following: Article one: Both Contracting Parties undertake to maintain peaceful and friendly relations between them and mutually respect the territorial integrity and inviolability of the other Contracting Party. Article two: Should one of the Contracting Parties become the object of hostilities on the part of one or several third powers, the other Contracting Party will observe neutrality throughout the duration of the conflict. Article three: The present Pact comes into force from the day of its ratification by both Contracting Parties and remains valid for five years. In case neither of the Contracting Parties denounces the Pact one year before the expiration of the term, it will be considered automatically prolonged for the next five years. Article four: The present Pact is subject to ratification as soon as possible. The instruments of ratification shall be exchanged in Tokyo, also as soon as possible. In confirmation whereof the above-named Representatives have signed the present Pact in two copies, drawn up in the Russian and Japanese languages, and affixed thereto their seals. Done in Moscow on April 13, 1941, which corresponds to the 13th day of the fourth month of the 16th year of Showa. V. Molotov; Yosuke Matsuoka; Yoshitsugu Tatekawa

NorthernGent -> RE: Wanna buy a slave? (9/21/2014 7:23:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent The Germans did declare war on the US, but I don't think it had anything to do with Japan. If one reads the declaration and the speech that accompanied it there can be no doubt that italy and germany declared war on the u.s. because of the u.s. declaration of war on japan. quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent It was more that Hitler and associated odd-balls were a pack of lunatics, who, while deeply embroiled in attempting to conquer Russia; thought it would be a good idea to declare war on the United States at the same time. Hitler did not think it was a good idea but the treaty with japan obligated him to do so. A couple of serious questions (as usual [:-] ) -- Didn't Hitler count on the support of German-American sympathizers to keep the U.S. out of WWII, or to somehow subvert us from mobilizing war efforts against the Nazi Axis in the European/Eurasian theatre? Knowing that invading Russia was a daunting undertaking, and wanting to avoid making the same mistakes Napoleon had made, do you believe Hitler was counting on his Japanese allies to eventually come to Germany's assistance if needed per Japan's occupation of conquered Asian & Pacific territories, specifically via China (and force Russia to fight on two fronts)? I think at the outset the Germans assumed it would take only a summer/autumn to conquer the Soviet Union and so no need for Japanese help. But, when the going got tough they certainly wanted the Japanese to lend them a hand, but their interests lay elsewhere. In terms of US support for Germany, I could be wrong here but my understanding is that there are more people of German descent than English descent in the US, and so of course the Germans would have found support in the US. Certainly during WW1 there was widespread anti-British feeling in the US, and it took a sustained propaganda campaign on the part of the British (most of which was lies, by the way) to cause some people who had been pro-German to think twice. Not sure about WW2. The German attack on Russia was delayed because they diverted and helped the Italians in Greece where they had gotten in over their heads. This meant that the attack on Russia was delayed 2 to 3 months, which in turn meant that the winter struck before the Germans could meet their goals. As for WWII it was hard to make the Nazis look worse than they were, and I think that Pearl might have had something to do with our entry. Yes there was a strong isolationist feeling in the U S combined with the return of the Klan made the Germans think that nothing would induce the U S to enter the war. It wasn't. It was delayed 6 weeks. The planned date was May; they invaded on the 22nd of June.

BamaD -> RE: Wanna buy a slave? (9/21/2014 12:02:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent The Germans did declare war on the US, but I don't think it had anything to do with Japan. If one reads the declaration and the speech that accompanied it there can be no doubt that italy and germany declared war on the u.s. because of the u.s. declaration of war on japan. quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent It was more that Hitler and associated odd-balls were a pack of lunatics, who, while deeply embroiled in attempting to conquer Russia; thought it would be a good idea to declare war on the United States at the same time. Hitler did not think it was a good idea but the treaty with japan obligated him to do so. A couple of serious questions (as usual [:-] ) -- Didn't Hitler count on the support of German-American sympathizers to keep the U.S. out of WWII, or to somehow subvert us from mobilizing war efforts against the Nazi Axis in the European/Eurasian theatre? Knowing that invading Russia was a daunting undertaking, and wanting to avoid making the same mistakes Napoleon had made, do you believe Hitler was counting on his Japanese allies to eventually come to Germany's assistance if needed per Japan's occupation of conquered Asian & Pacific territories, specifically via China (and force Russia to fight on two fronts)? I think at the outset the Germans assumed it would take only a summer/autumn to conquer the Soviet Union and so no need for Japanese help. But, when the going got tough they certainly wanted the Japanese to lend them a hand, but their interests lay elsewhere. In terms of US support for Germany, I could be wrong here but my understanding is that there are more people of German descent than English descent in the US, and so of course the Germans would have found support in the US. Certainly during WW1 there was widespread anti-British feeling in the US, and it took a sustained propaganda campaign on the part of the British (most of which was lies, by the way) to cause some people who had been pro-German to think twice. Not sure about WW2. The German attack on Russia was delayed because they diverted and helped the Italians in Greece where they had gotten in over their heads. This meant that the attack on Russia was delayed 2 to 3 months, which in turn meant that the winter struck before the Germans could meet their goals. As for WWII it was hard to make the Nazis look worse than they were, and I think that Pearl might have had something to do with our entry. Yes there was a strong isolationist feeling in the U S combined with the return of the Klan made the Germans think that nothing would induce the U S to enter the war. It wasn't. It was delayed 6 weeks. The planned date was May; they invaded on the 22nd of June. Oh God what an error, the delay was still critical.

thompsonx -> RE: Wanna buy a slave? (9/22/2014 7:09:54 AM)
ORIGINAL: BamaD The German attack on Russia was delayed because they diverted and helped the Italians in Greece where they had gotten in over their heads. This meant that the attack on Russia was delayed 2 to 3 months, which in turn meant that the winter struck before the Germans could meet their goals. ORIGINAL: Northern Gent It wasn't. It was delayed 6 weeks. The planned date was May; they invaded on the 22nd of June. ORIGINAL: BamaD Oh God what an error, the delay was still critical. This guy says you are full of shit. He says that mid june was the earliest that barborosa could begin because of the spring rains making the ground too soft to move armor over it. Kershaw, Ian (2007). Fateful Choices: Ten Decisions that Changed the World, 1940–1941. Allen Lane. ISBN 978-0-7139-9712-5.

Page: << < prev 11 12 13 14 [15]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625