Israel forced to apologise over offensive Hiroshima comments

If America did not wait to use the bomb on Hiroshima, the English Empire and the German Nazi Empire would be the super powers today, but we strategically waited until they used all their resources to fight each other and become weaker and inferior than us economically, to strike and take sides with the lesser evil European country.

That is why America is the super power today economically, because of our Military moves.

 

Nonsense; Britain was bound by treaty to come to Poland's aid in the event of her being invaded. We did our best; however, logistically it was impossible at the time to have a physical presence in Poland hence the war dragged on until such time as we, with the assistance of Commonwealth and American military forces, were able to meet the Germans on the ground.

In many respects I have reluctantly to agree that, ultimately, we didn't do Poland any favours. Post-war, due to our not wishing to upset Stalin, Poland was divided with the Communists taking power and the nation coming within the Soviet sphere of influence. This treachery by the West was compounded by our government not allowing Poland's soldiers, airmen and sailors to take part in the V.E Day parade through London. Poland was Britain's most loyal and longest-standing ally during the war, and was the only nation invaded by Hitler to not surrender. Polish airmen who escaped Hitler and made their way to England made a huge contribution to the war effort. One Polish RAF squadron (303), shot down more Luftwaffe aircraft than any individual British or Commonwealth RAF unit by downing three times the average RAF score, while incurring one third casualties.

When Hitler invaded France the French had, at the time, Europe's largest standing army which was quite capable of stopping Germany in its tracks. However impotent and inept leadership, along with the obsessive conviction that Germany could be defeated in a static war of defence along the Maginot Line, led to France's demise.

 

Sir there is a British contingent on this very thread defending the actions of this uncrowned King, why is it not reasonable?

 

Interesting how you put that: Hitler "goes into" Poland, while France and Britain "Declares War" on Germany. So, did Hitler "declare war" on Poland?

Why, I totally agree with that logic. So following said logic, UK citizens are in no position to judge the validity of the US, it's society or decisions made by her because they do not know the US as anything other than what they see on the telly or read in the paper.

Yeah. Of course you have a link for that.

 

If there is, I am afraid I missed it. Would you do me the service of quoting that contingent, in order that I may show them the error of their ways? It is unreasonable because Edward was a weak, self-indulgent man, not fit for the lion's crown, and not represntative of the average Briton then or now.

 

Oh yes , those merchant navy ships which you couldn't sell to the Germans who obviously had no need of . It also proved to be a nice little earner for US shipyards . Helping to solve US post depression unemployment problems + FDR with his New deal . Helping yourselves at the same time + more than your govt was "helping" anyone else.
It was for MONEY nothing else .



German American Bund parade in New York City on East 86th St. Oct. 30, 1939




February 20, 1939: The German-American Bund, the most influential pro-Nazi movement in the US prior to World War II, holds a rally in New York City’s Madison Square Garden that attracts some 20,000 participants.

The rally is to protest for the rights of white Gentiles, whom the organization calls the “true patriots” of America. The Bund is led by Fritz Kuhn, an outspoken anti-Semite; at its height, the organization boasts some 25,000 members along with 8,000 “Storm Troopers.”

------

click this link :

http://www.politicalforum.com/lates...k-britain-bombing-raids-chemical-weapons.html

========

America planned for an attack on BRITAIN with bombing raids and chemical weapons

Invasion of Canada. Bombing raids on British industrial interests. Naval blockade. Chemical weapons. Six million troops fighting on the Eastern seaboard. This wasn't a crazy Nazi plan. It was the United States' strategy to destroy Britain as a world superpower.

It was very real. Its name was War Plan Red. Developed during the 1920s, it was approved by the US Secretary of War and the Secretary of Navy in May 1930. In fact, it was active until Hitler decided to invade Poland with his bloody pal Stalin. The plan wasn't declassified until 1974. Now, a new documentary by Channel 5 America's Planned War On Britain: Revealed, shows how this plan became to be alongside other plans that called for war against Mexico (War Plan Green), Japan (Orange), China (Yellow) and even domestic uprising (White).
In 1930, a mere nine years before the outbreak of World War Two, America drew up proposals specifically aimed at eliminating all British land forces in Canada and the North Atlantic, thus destroying Britain's trading ability and bringing the country to its knees.


Previously unparalleled troop movements were launched as an overture to an invasion of Canada, which was to include massive bombing raids on key industrial targets and the use of chemical weapons, the latter signed off at the highest level by none other than the legendary General Douglas MacArthur.


The plans, revealed in a Channel 5 documentary, were one of a number of military contingency plans drawn up against a number of potential enemies, including the Caribbean islands and China. There was even one to combat an internal uprising within the United States.

In the end there was no question of President Franklin D. Roosevelt subscribing to what was known as War Plan Red. Instead the two countries became the firmest of allies during WW2, an occasionally strained alliance that continues to this day.

Still, it is fascinating that there were enough people inside the American political and military establishment who thought that such a war was feasible.


While outside of America, both Churchill and Hitler also thought it a possibility during the 30s - a time of deep economic and political uncertainty.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ing-raids-chemical-weapons.html#ixzz2dMsnmvbK



....

 

Think , it had something to do with that American woman he was besotted with .

----

 

LOL, you are not wrong.

 

traitors. should have all been sent to internment camps.

 

Only innocent non-politicised harmless struggling Japanese families went there.

Reminds me of a song from musical - "South Pacific" :

":You've got to be taught
To hate and fear,
You've got to be taught
From year to year,
It's got to be drummed
In your dear little ear
You've got to be carefully taught.

You've got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made,

And people whose skin is a diff'rent shade,
You've got to be carefully taught.

You've got to be taught before it's too late,
Before you are six or seven or eight,
To hate all the people your relatives hate,
You've got to be carefully taught!
======

 

WRONG!!

we also sent traitorous Germans and Italians.

 

You can thank the Red Scare for that one.

 

A mere insignificant -token few , most managed to escape /get away - over to Germany + Italy via Mexico + other Sth American states . AFTER PEARL HARBOUR .

They wealthy ones who managed to bribe corrupt American authorities - GOT AWAY and did not go to internment camps.

..
...

 

BUT RIGHT...

Traitorous US citizens of German and Italian ancestry, so found by due process of law, went to prison, not camps.

Some German and Italian ENEMY ALIENS went to camps. But you can't call them traitorous, they had no duty of allegiance to the US, they weren't US citizens.

The interned American Citizens of Japanese ancestry were not traitors.

 

Canada treated the italian the same as the japanese. A whole bunch were deported to work camp from montreal. A whole bunch of nasty stuff happens in time of war, but you can't take any chances. Loose lips sink ships.

 

We break promises and treaties all the time. No one is bound by them.

You simplify the War Snake but even so ...................... nothing was gained by is all was lost by it. There somewhere I think we agree only that you still are romantic about our righteousness and the enemies wrongness, I am not nearly so certain.

 

I used invasion in another post, went in, invaded, I use different terms sometimes for the same happening. Are there rules as to how we write on here now too?

I have lived in the USA and I rarely comment about what you do within your own shores only about what you do outside your shores.

Yes I have a link .................

http://thoughtmaybe.com/the-century-of-the-self/

 

But not that Hitler went to war. Like I said, I find it interesting that you have no problem saying that France and Britain went to war, but seem oddly averse to saying Hitler went to war. Just an observation.

And for those of us who don't want to sit thru an hour show, at what point is said information, if it is there?

 

I the post before I said ....Hitlers' invasion of Poland ............ I get bored repeating myself so used another term.


It is an extremely interesting doco for the footage alone.............. I dunno not far in I think.

 

"You can't take any chances" justifies anything. You have to have better standards than that.

 

I would not do that service. Edward may or may not have been a Nazi sympathizer, but the point is his relationship with Hitler was revealed because of his relations with an American woman. The British people were not tolerant of one of their royalty with an American wife.

This all goes to show most of Britons at that time were not indifferent to Hitler, and shared Edwards feelings with Nazi German's, as friends.

 

Sorry but in time of war, survival and success trumps everything.

 

Now you have to be a bit more discerning than that. Given what Hitler had in mind for Poland, I think I'd agree with you in the Pole's case. They made a mistake in surrendering instead of fighting a total suicidal scorched-earth last stand.

On the other hand, fighting us, the Japanese, who were in suicidal-to-the-last mode, should have instead surrendered quickly.

But why is that true? Because we had advanced cultural morality. That is, standards. Like I said.

Oddly enough, the Germans did too, until the criminal Nazi regime corrupted them with brutality and propaganda.

 

Actually, you don't take any chances.
Now, don't go thinking that the treatment of the internee were on the same level as those who were interned in camp by the japanese and the germans. It just doesn't compare.
No one was starved, beaten or used as slaves until death here.

 

Might that be because you cannot do that service in the absence of any such material?

Edward most certainly was sympathetic to many Nazi aims (but not, I would suggest, things like the Holocaust). He was a vain and not very bright man who fell under the spell of an awful horse-faced woman (irrespective of her nationality).

Of course, the possibility of an American divorcee of very dubious reputation becoming Princess Consort was not welcomed by the British establishment - what else would you expect? But her nationality had little to do with it. Winston Churchill had an American mother, and he dined out on that connection.

Most Briton's were still very wary of Germany in the 1930s. Not only were Hitler's territorial claims alarming, but the memory of 1914 - 1918 was still relatively fresh.
Fascist sympathisers were thin on the ground in the UK, and I am afraid you have not the foggiest idea of what you are talking about in this instance.