France – What Can You Motherfuckers do?

france-what-can-you-motherfuckers-do.jpg

  • Leave a comment ?

    45 Responses to France – What Can You Motherfuckers do?

    1. The French belong in the kitchen!

      Reply

    2. Dondivad on October 25th, 2007 11:09 pm

      The women belong in the kitchen!

      Fixed for you.

      Reply

    3. A woman should be a cook in the kitchen, a maid in the living room, and an acrobat in the bedroom.

      Reply

    4. Make really good food.
      Build nuclear power plants.
      Accurately determine whether or not a country has WMDs.
      Anyone in the US better check to see who has the America’s Cup before making fun of other countries for losing at their own sport.

      Reply

    5. That’s really the best you can do, Reboot? The America’s Cup? If anything, that pretty much just proves the point.

      Reply

    6. The best I can do? How many races are there named after America? Most of you kids don’t remember, but the America’s Cup used to kind of a big deal that got media coverage. Until America started to lose frequently.
      Converse with Tour de France. 99% of Americans had never heard of the Tour de France until Lance Armstrong.
      So yeah, our country’s pretty awesome as long as we only pay attention to the things we’re awesome at and ignore the things we suck at. Fuck yeah!
      Besides there no point to be proved, we’ve just joking around about each other’s countries, right?

      Reply

    7. Build nuclear power plants. French President Nicolas Sarkozy denied France had planned to sell a latest generation nuclear reactor to Libya. But they did sell and or are building in: China, Iran, North Korea. They also like selling military hardware and weapons because they have no use for them.

      Reply

    8. what the hell? 99%? bad reboot, bad.

      Reply

    9. “They also like selling military hardware and weapons because they have no use for them.” -Necrocardium

      And we don’t, we gave Afghanistan weapons and equipment to fight the communists and helped support many countries by giving or selling our old crap. They also had a 80% turnout on their last election. They may have a crappy judicial system, but they aren’t total losers.

      BTW we need more nuclear power plants in this country, it would help a lot with our energy needs.

      Reply

    10. Sleep with your girlfriend on her European vacation.

      Reply

    11. Vietnam. Afghanistan. Iraq.

      American’s shouldn’t talk.

      Reply

    12. (Excuse the incorrect apostrophe.)

      Reply

    13. The European version of this silly image would read:

      1. Can handle your own freedom (PATRIOT act, election scandals)
      2. Can’t fight your own battles (Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq).
      3. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BALCO

      Reply

    14. Yeesh. We even put Saddam Hussein in power.

      What the…? How is it that Saddam Hussein checks out in my spellchecker but words like spellchecker don’t?

      Reply

    15. You should have put Landis in the photo instead of Armstrong.

      Reply

    16. They can’t even keep their part of the continent from drifting towards america.

      Fukken losers. Even in Tectonics.

      Reply

    17. You do realize that California, a single state in America, has a larger economy than all of France, right?

      You do realize that California is run inefficiently, the budget is late, the legislature are idiots, and our Governor has to work with a cabinet of people that hate him – – yet we still have a larger economy than France.

      Then again I’m being unfair. California has the 5th largest economy in the world as a state alone.

      Reply

    18. And they wonder why everybody hate America… 😀

      I don’t hate it personaly. At least, not in a daily level. Just at the weekends.

      Reply

    19. Distracted, I think you are wrong. GDP of France = $2.1 trillion. GDP of Cali = $1.62 trillion.
      As a stand alone California is 7th or 8th economy in the world. Dethklok is 12th.

      Reply

    20. 1) Can’t control your own people? WTF? So Nazi Germany was the shit then, right? Am I supposed to take this seriously? At least the French don’t bend over and smile when their government is trying to fuck them in the ass. Something I cannot claim for vast majority of our population.

      2) Can’t fight your own battles? WTF? And that’s a comment coming from America? France was kicking ass all over Europe for centuries before US was even formed. France really lost only WW2 – and frankly so would any country if it bordered Nazi Germany. UK was saved by the English Channel, US by Atlantic ocean, everyone was flattened until Soviet Russia came into play. US couldn’t even get independent without French (!) soldiers doing half the work for them. It’s easy to remain unconquered when your only neighbors are Canada and Mexico, and everyone else is separated from you by the thousands of miles of ocean. What wars can America be really proud of as their personal achievement? WW2 – was won by Russia, WW1 was won by an alliance, Vietnam – lost, Korea – stalemate, Iraq – loosing, oh yeah we did beat the shit of Granada in the 1980s… Now that’s an achievement.

      3) Can’t win your own races? Who gives a flying fuck?

      Reply

    21. Can take a joke.

      Whereas Americans tend to throw hissy fits like wee little girls when anyone says anything bad about their beloved country of hahafreedomhaha.

      Let’s all raise a glass of American beer flavoured water to conditioning!

      PS: never judge a country by it’s political actions. You wouldn’t want everyone judging you by yours now would you?

      Reply

    22. I dont think that it was russia that won ww2

      Reply

    23. Actually Russia did NOT win WWII. Without the US’s involvement the Russians would have been beaten as well. They were in pretty bad shape until the Germans were forced to pull back due to 1)the brutal Russian winter. (and if Napoleon couldn’t do it, what chance did the Nazis have?) and 2)the need to redeploy German forces due to the US attacks in Europe. That gave the Russians some desperately needed time to regroup and build up their forces again.
      As for WWI, the US wasn’t officially involved. There were supplies/volunteers/advisors from the US, but that was it. Trying to claim that the US had a pivotal role in the Great War is just ignorant.

      As for “France kicking ass for centuries in Europe”, well, you might want to reread your history before making such a sweeping statement. France lost it’s fair share of wars throughout history.

      I personally don’t have a problem with France. It’s a decent enough country in it’s own right with a rich culture. They’ve made many contributions to art, science, cuisine, diplomacy and entertainment. (though I’ll never forgive them for Gerard Depardieu, yes I know I probably misspelled his name, I hate him too much to care.) They have an unsavory reputation due to their behavior as a culture/nation over the last 50-60 years. With their new president, that reputation may start to change. Only time will tell.

      Up until recently, they WERE one of the few countries still using open air nuclear device detonations. Why they insisted on doing it I don’t know, since I think the planet had been poisoned enough with the testing that had already been done up to that point.

      Reply

    24. nnmnu, I am willing to make a slight correction – WW2 was won by allies. A part of WW2 – war against Nazi Germany was largely won by the Soviet Russia with assistance from the US and UK. My point however, is that Americans tend to count WW2 as their personal victory, while they really can only claim victory over Japan (which they did with the assistance of other allies).

      Reply

    25. no, actually they pretty much beat the Japanese on their own in the Pacific Front. russian forces did drive japan out of china, tho since that was their backyard, it was in their best interests to get japan out.

      The russian and uk forces were in a near shambles by the time the US finally joined the war. It was primarily the US that pushed the nazis back from the european front and into germany. The russians started their own retaliation on germany’s eastern front, but that front was largely abandoned by the nazis to fight the western campaign.

      Reply

    26. garbledxmission,

      See my reply to nnmnu above.
      Also, by the time of D-Day the Soviet Army had freed most of it’s territory and was on offensive in Eastern Europe (Romania, Hungary, etc.)
      D-Day helped and probably saved millions of Russians lives, but its role tends to be seriously overestimated by American historians, who also tend to underestimate Russian participation.

      To claim that US did not participate in WW1 IS ignorant. Over 100,000 American soldiers died, over 200,000 were wounded. Sure, they were not officially part of the “Allies”, but US “drafted four million men and by summer 1918 was sending 10,000 fresh soldiers to France every day.” Are you trying to say that all of them were volunteers and advisers? When accusing others of ignorance check your own facts first. Read some memoirs of people who were fighting in the war or something.

      Reply

    27. and here we go again. Maybe you should stop putting words in other people’s mouths and put the dick back in your own. If you could get off your Meme rant for half a moment and read my post i did NOT say the US did not participate in the war, i said
      “As for WWI, the US wasn’t officially involved. There were supplies/volunteers/advisors from the US, but that was it.”
      Yes, they intially had thousands of VOLUNTEERS involved in the war, but considering tens of MILLIONS were involved their role was not pivotal, which is what i actually said.
      The drafting of 4 million men by the US in ’18 (towards the END of the war) was a move made by a government that was attempting to make up for the fact that they had largly distanced themselves from the war in the first place. It took the sacrifice of thousands of US men of THEIR OWN VOLITION and political pressure from the Allies to finally get the US to commit serious resources/manpower.

      Maybe you should do some research that isn’t directly ripped off from Wiki, and isn’t as shallow as a kiddie toilet, you hack.

      Reply

    28. By the numbers:
      German military casualties in WW2: 5,533,000
      German military casualties on the Eastern Front alone:4,300,000
      UK, US, et al was a sideshow, the real war was fought and won by Russia. As b.schweik pointed out Russia was already advancing when D-Day took place. There is even the point of view that D-Day was staged not to defeat Germany, but to prevent Russia from just conquering all of the Europe.
      Love these off-topic threads.

      Reply

    29. You’re sooo right, the fact that germany had overrun most of europe to the atlantic and the channel was “a sideshow”. The only reason german casualties were so high on the eastern front was because they had overrun the rest of europe with relativly little resistance and losses WITH RUSSIA’S HELP, and that when then did turn on russia, they managed to time it to coicide with the onset of winter. Piss poor planning/hitler’s justified paranoia of his russian “allies”/whatever, it was fighting a battle in the middle of winter on the russian steppes that did so many of them in. Not russia’s superior battle skills. And they still managed to wipe out stalingrad and cause a massive famine in russia.

      Reply

    30. garbledxmission

      “Maybe you should do some research that isn’t directly ripped off from Wiki, and isn’t as shallow as a kiddie toilet, you hack.”

      So it is from Wiki – care to discredit this information? Attacking the source instead of the information itself, doesn’t necessarily make you a scholar. Neither do personal attacks.

      “The russian and uk forces were in a near shambles by the time the US finally joined the war. It was primarily the US that pushed the nazis back from the european front and into germany. The russians started their own retaliation on germany’s eastern front, but that front was largely abandoned by the nazis to fight the western campaign.”

      Here is another Wiki quote for you. Differences between Eastern and Western front.

      – Length of time. Western front was not continuous in time. With the fall of the French army and evacuation of Dankurk, the WF seized to exist between the 1940 and the 1944.
      – Geography. WF when present was far smaller in length then the EF.
      – Weather. Extreme seasonal flactuations typical for the EF were much less prominent in the WF. Men and equipment of the EF were exposed extreme cold of the Russian winters and the heat of the steppes in the southern flank of the EF. Autumn and spring “rasputitsa” (inpassable unpaved roads) contributed to seasonal fluctuations in activity.
      – Forces involved. From the day the EF conflict began on June 22, 1941 to the fall of Berlin, multi-million men strong armies were involvedfrom both sides of the EF. WF never experienced near the saturation levels of the EF, well over 70% of German losses occured in the EF. Towards the end of the war, each side held over 5,000,000 POWs each.
      – Brutality. While WF resembled more of “traditional” European war, the EF conflict showed new, unprecedented levels of brutality and inhumaty. Literally, millions of war crimes were commited by both major players. Nobody and nothing was safe from this war.”

      Care to argue with this information? Or would you like to point out that my quote doesn’t come from a scholastic source, while at the same time making questionable statements and not providing the source of your this information whatsoever?

      Reply

    31. garbledxmission,

      Oh, and as far as you blaming Russian winter for the high casualty rate among Nazi Germany on the Eastern front. – Here is a link to a month by month breakdown:
      www.feldgrau.com/stats.html

      If you were correct than the summer months would have a significant drop in casualties. However this is not the case. In fact it looks like July, August, and September were the bloodiest. Why would that be? Or is it the famous Russian “General Summer” with its notorious Russian heat?

      I am not saying that Russians did not use their geographical location to their advantage. Sure they did. But saying that winter won the war on the Eastern front is a cynical myth. WW2 was not the same as Napoleon invasion. The eastern front lasted for 4 brutal years (including summers), and the Germans were under equipped for winter only during the first winter.

      Reply

    32. The French version of this would read:

      Wish I knew who you were, Unknown guy, but I’d like to make an amendment:

      Can’t fight your own battles (Revolutionary War)

      Also, I hear the French women can do things that would make our prostitutes blush.

      I think that has to count for something.

      Reply

    33. Hmmm, let’s see….

      I stated that due to limited resistance, the western front fell to the Germans much more quickly than their attack on the Russians….you said the same thing in your counter post.

      I stated that the Germans were fighting their battles across the Russian steppes, which are much larger in area than the western front…you said the same thing in your counter post.

      I stated that the Germans made a huge tactical error in attacking during the Russian winter leading to massive casualties….you said the same thing in your counter post.

      As for forces involved, without the Russian involvement as their allies, Germany would have had a much more difficult time making the rapid gains in territory/victories that they did. Conversely, when they split as allies, it was those same Russian troops that accounted for the massive casualties against the Germans. By that point in the war, before the major US invasion, Russia was the only real threat facing the Germans, so OF COURSE they would account for the majority of German losses. My whole point was that without the US counterattack on the western front, the Germans would have had a massive base of resources/manpower/material from which to continue their advancement into Russian territory, while the Russians had scorched earth, limited resources/depleted troops and the Japanese at their backdoor occupying China. Add to that the fact that the Russians had a massive amount of territory to defend and proceeding from a defensive/siege style strategy is a losing one, the Russians would not have been able to maintain their hold against the Germans once the winter had ended IF THE US HAD NOT REOPENED THE WESTERN FRONT, splitting the German forces and, eventually, diverting the Japanese resources/troops as well, giving the Russians the breathing room on two fronts that they so desperately needed.

      Are you so blindly committed to your argument that you cannot admit that point? And make no mistake, this is an argument, not a debate. All you’ve done is parrot statistics from wiki, instead of going into the nuances/facets of the conflict itself. While I’m more than willing to concede that the Russians did massive damage to the Germans, my POINT is that the US invasion prevented the Germans from solidifying their hold on their European conquests, denying them much needed resources. Trying to make the argument that Russia could have beaten the Germans with the resources it had at hand without help from the US is specious at best.

      And whileI also agree that while the US holds a partially unjustified opinion of it’s importance in the war, it still deserves credit for its’ achievements in the European front and, more so, the pacific conflict.

      and for the record, I’ve previously stated on this site that I don’t think wiki is a consistent or entirely factual resource to use in any debate. They have a too long of a record of misinformation, pettiness, egoism and inaccuracy for myself or anyone to blindly accept what they say at face value. Also, using ANY resource as your sole source of info is foolish. Reboot and I have disagreed in the past and he consistently uses multiple sources for his counterpoints in our debates, something I wish more people would do, but don’t expect as it would involve too much effort.

      Reply

    34. The reason russian summers are so bad is because half their land turns into a quagmire during that part of the year…oh, and the fact that their summers are about 3 MONTHS LONG.

      Reply

    35. and wouldn’t those 3 months, july, august and september be the times when the germans would be pushing the hardest before the weather turned on them again, thereby pushing the casualty rates higher than in the winter months? And no, the russian winters affect on the conflict were no myth, as anyone who fought during it would tell you. (they have many first hand interviews on tape/video and print, feel free to check them out)
      The weather played brutal havoc on men, equipment, terrian and supply lines. Trying to minimize its’ effect is the cynical POV, not the reverse.

      Reply

    36. Russian and Germany were never “allies”. The Molotove-Ribbentrop Non-agression Pact was an agreement not to attack each and a partition of eastern europe. You almost seem to imply that Russian troops were fight along side the Germans, but I don’t want to put words in your mouth.

      My whole point was that without the US counterattack on the western front, the Germans would have had a massive base of resources/manpower/material from which to continue their advancement into Russian territory, while the Russians had scorched earth, limited resources/depleted troops and the Japanese at their backdoor occupying China. Add to that the fact that the Russians had a massive amount of territory to defend and proceeding from a defensive/siege style strategy is a losing one, the Russians would not have been able to maintain their hold against the Germans once the winter had ended IF THE US HAD NOT REOPENED THE WESTERN FRONT, splitting the German forces and, eventually, diverting the Japanese resources/troops as well, giving the Russians the breathing room on two fronts that they so desperately needed.

      D-Day was June 6, 1944 of course.
      1)German 6th Army surrender at Stalingrad on Feb. 2, 1943. Most historian consider this the turing point of the whole damn war. A year and half before D-Day.
      1) by the begining of 1944 Russian was advancing on all fronts. By the end of April 1944, there were no German troops in Russia and the front had moved into Ukraine,Belorussia and Poland.
      2)Russia was no longer defensive or siege style strategy by 1944.
      3)Why are talking about the US opening the Western Front in Winter???

      Reply

    37. Call it whatever you like, while they obviously weren’t fighting side by side, they sure as shit were making it easier for each other to make significant tactical advances. Split hairs over terminology all you like.
      While the DDay invasion did take place in June ’44, you seem to have forgotten that American troops/equipment/supplies had been going into the UK in April of ’42, REOPENING THE WESTERN FRONT. Combine that with the aerial bombing campaigns beginning in 39 by the RAF and the US in 42 that devastated the German munitions&equipment infrastructure and it’s no wonder that they couldn’t keep up their campaign against Russia effectively.
      And let’s not forget the African campaign of ’42 as well, which caused further strain upon the German war machine.
      All of that, along with their own strain of fighting on too many fronts, caused the Germans to finally start breaking, the first major sign of course being your aforementioned surrender of the 6th army in 43.
      DDay had originally been planned as early as late 42/early 43, but the African campaign took precedence due to pressure from the UK.

      I never said the US opened the front in winter, but that would be you trying to make implications again, despite the statement at the beginning of your post. They DID reopen the front in April of 42, AFTER THE WINTER, putting further strain on the Germans on yet another front, leading to their breaking in 43. DDay was simply the beginning of the coup de grace of the Germans. It certainly wasn’t the reopening of the WF that you seem to think I was referring to, nor did I set a specific date as to when the Russians went from a defensive to an offensive stance, but that didn’t stop you from intimating it.

      Are you both trying to say the Russian war machine WASN’T at its’ limit, as were the Germans? Are you trying to say the the Russian infrastructure wasn’t in near ruins from the air bombings and the land war? That many of Russia’s major cities hadn’t been reduced to rubble and their agricultural output not nearly obliterated from both the German advances and the Russians’ own scorched earth technique of destroying their crops to keep them out of the hands of the invaders?

      Reply

    38. I stated that the Germans made a huge tactical error in attacking during the Russian winter leading to massive casualties

      The mistake was that the Russian resistance unexpected. They attacked Russia in June (early summer) and did not think the war would last until winter. But as I have said before – geographical location DID play a role. My argument is simply that it was not THE major factor. 8-15 million Russian soldiers sacrificing their lives was the major factor.

      My whole point was that without the US counterattack on the western front, the Germans would have had a massive base of resources/manpower/material from which to continue their advancement into Russian territory, while the Russians had scorched earth, limited resources/depleted troops and the Japanese at their backdoor occupying China. Add to that the fact that the Russians had a massive amount of territory to defend and proceeding from a defensive/siege style strategy is a losing one, the Russians would not have been able to maintain their hold against the Germans once the winter had ended IF THE US HAD NOT REOPENED THE WESTERN FRONT, splitting the German forces and, eventually, diverting the Japanese resources/troops as well, giving the Russians the breathing room on two fronts that they so desperately needed.

      It is possible we simply don’t understand each other. I am reading your paragraph above and it feels like you think that the Western front was opened in 1941 or 1942… However this was not the case (as you probably know). Russia was defeating Germany and was on the offensive by summer 1944 when the western front finally opened, as reboot has pointed out as well.

      I do agree that opening (or re-opening if you wish) of the second front was extremely helpful for Russia. However, unlike you, I do not think that this was the deciding factor. And the fact that Germany has never allocated much troops (as compared to the EF) to the WF is the case in point.

      Trying to make the argument that Russia could have beaten the Germans with the resources it had at hand without help from the US is specious at best.

      I am not saying that it’s a clear case. I’ve read both opinions before. What IS a clear case, however, is that without Russia’s participation in WW2 we would be speaking German right now.

      and for the record, I’ve previously stated on this site that I don’t think wiki is a consistent or entirely factual resource to use in any debate. They have a too long of a record of misinformation, pettiness, egoism and inaccuracy for myself or anyone to blindly accept what they say at face value. Also, using ANY resource as your sole source of info is foolish.

      I was not aware of your personal pet peeves. I agree that Wiki is not 100% reliable, and is not suitable for a serious debate. However, this is not a scientific journal, and being at work I have limited access to historical literature. Since the Wiki data I have found agreed with everything I’ve read on the subject, I used it to illustrate my points.

      The reason russian summers are so bad is because half their land turns into a quagmire during that part of the year…oh, and the fact that their summers are about 3 MONTHS LONG.
      and wouldn’t those 3 months, july, august and september be the times when the germans would be pushing the hardest before the weather turned on them again, thereby pushing the casualty rates higher than in the winter months? And no, the russian winters affect on the conflict were no myth, as anyone who fought during it would tell you. (they have many first hand interviews on tape/video and print, feel free to check them out)

      Allow me to disagree. It is spring and autumn that turn the roads into quagmire. I’ve lived many years in Russia, and don’t need to watch documentaries to tell me about Russian winter. The 3 month long summer is also a pop culture crap that frankly I am tired of hearing. This is Russia we are talking about, not Greenland.
      I do agree that it is possible that Germans were pushing harder in summer, however isn’t it a direct contradiction to your own words “The only reason german casualties were so high on the eastern front was because they had overrun the rest of europe with relativly little resistance and losses WITH RUSSIA’S HELP, and that when then did turn on russia, they managed to time it to coicide with the onset of winter” or when you said that “They were in pretty bad shape until the Germans were forced to pull back due to 1)the brutal Russian winter. (and if Napoleon couldn’t do it, what chance did the Nazis have?) and 2)the need to redeploy German forces due to the US attacks in Europe. That gave the Russians some desperately needed time to regroup and build up their forces again.”

      From these statements it looks like the war took place exclusively in winters, Russian soldiers are just dying in packs, waiting for Germans to freeze, and finally the savior (convincingly portrayed by American soldiers) arrives and saves the day. I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but how else can one understand the statements quoted above.

      You see, it’s not that I think that winter did not play a role. What set me off in your argument is that you seem to seriously downplay the role of Russian soldiers, seemingly writing the victory on the EF on winter and American participation… Disregarding the fact that by the time US joined the war on Germany Russia was fighting Germans for 3 years and was in fact winning…

      Reply

    39. Let’s forget all our troubles with a big bowl of Strawberry ice cream.

      Reply

    40. garbledxmission,

      I just saw your reply to reboot…

      Rocky is fighting Apollo Creed.
      It’s 10th round.
      Both are bloody, but Rocky is winning, is on heavy offensive, and Apollo had a few knockdowns already.
      According to you the guy who wipes Rocky’s face and gives him fresh water in between rounds is “the second front.”

      The second front opened in June 1944. Period. Before that UK was trying to defend itself and US had some limited participation in a few places. Plus the supplies of course. But no second front.
      Look at the numbers, casualties, etc.
      Germans barely participated in Africa, Italy, etc.
      The truth is that UK is lucky Germany was tied up fighting Russians, not visa versa. And if UK fell, US wound stand a chance.

      Reply

    41. Fair enough.

      but, if you read my last post, the WF WAS reopened in 42, not 44. Do some more research.

      The last half of august and most of september are more autumn months than summer in russia. While I haven’t lived there for years on end, i have worked there on several occasions and have experienced various aspects of their weather. Plus the length of their summer would depend on which region we were referring to, wouldn’t it? Russia is a large country with a healthy range of seasonal differences depending on your location.

      The russians did give the germans far more of a fight than expected, but only because of germany’s arrogance underestimating the russians, as you stated, plus the russians’ willingness to spend millions of their troops lives holding off the germans.

      However, as i stated, the russians were in at least as bad a state as the germans by the time dday came. Had the US and allies not been fighting the germans in the UK and africa draining the nazis’ resources since 39 (RAF air bombings) and 42 (US air bombings and field incursions into the UK), the germans would have had more resources to field than the russians. That’s all i’ve been trying to say. Russia’s efforts, without a doubt, made a huge impact on the germans war machine, but at the cost of devastating their own. Had the Allies not been destroying the germans war capability, the germans would have been in a much better position to continue their attack of russia, which would have still have had significantly less infrastructure left for war due to the german attack. The russians certainly didn’t have the air bombing capability the germans had, and their mechanized infantry couldn’t stand up to german tanks. The russians did have manpower, which accounted for the millions of deaths they racked up.

      Sounds like your years in russia have colored your opinions past the point of objectivity. I.E. the following quote:

      “From these statements it looks like the war took place exclusively in winters, Russian soldiers are just dying in packs, waiting for Germans to freeze, and finally the savior (convincingly portrayed by American soldiers) arrives and saves the day. I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but how else can one understand the statements quoted above.”

      At what point did i say that they “arrived and saved the day”? I did bring up points about their bombing campaigns starting in 42, but explain to me how those bombings didn’t cripple the germans’ ablility to continue their war against the russians? When did I specifically state the “war was fought exclusively in winter”? The war between russia/germany lasted 3 years! I may have simplified the combat time frame for expediency in the debate, but i think we’ve already gone over, in detail, the importance or lack thereof depending on your opinion, of the russian winters.

      The real irony is your willingness to imply that i’ve somehow belittled the sacrifice of the russian troops I.E.:”you seem to seriously downplay the role of Russian soldiers”,and deified their “american saviors”, (where exactly in my posts did i say those things?), when all i’ve stated is the fact that without the help of the Allies, the russians would not have been able to continue their offensive attack of the germans. You have shown your bias for the russians coloring your arguments (due to your many years living there i’m guessing), and your antipathy towards the US, assuming that I am somehow giving them undue credit because i’m a US citizen, (which i’m not).

      Reply

    42. According to you the guy who wipes Rocky’s face and gives him fresh water in between rounds is “the second front.”
      So bombing the shit out of the german infrastructure for two years is “wiping someone’s face.”

      “The second front opened in June 1944. Period. ”
      Wrong. I’m going to say this again, do some more research. Your ability to downplay the aeral bombing campaigns is on a parity with your imagined perception of my downplaying of russian combat.

      “Germans barely participated in Africa, Italy, etc.”
      On the italian front i’ll agree with you, on the African front, well, i don’t know what you’ve been huffing, but the war in africa was anything but “barely”.

      “The truth is that UK is lucky Germany was tied up fighting Russians, not visa versa. And if UK fell, US wound stand a chance.”
      I agree, they were luck that Germany decided to attack Russia. UK was on the brink of losing all togther when germany opened up it’s russian front. I’m guessing you meant “if UK fell, US would NOT stand a chance.” By your own earlier post:
      “It’s easy to remain unconquered when your only neighbors are Canada and Mexico, and everyone else is separated from you by the thousands of miles of ocean.”

      So now you’re claiming the germans would have crossed the atlantic and defeated the US had they beaten the UK and Russia? Riiiight. You keep telling yourself that even though it goes against YOUR OWN STATEMENT FROM EARLIER. Add to that the fact that germany’s war machine would have been exhausted by conquering europe, while the US was just warming up. We won’t even mention the A Bomb, cause i’ve seen how riled up that gets people around here.

      Reply

    43. garbledxmission,

      We could continue our discussion, but frankly I do not have the time…

      Although I would love to continue the discussion especially about the second front opening before 1944 (the things you call “the second front” that is), it is obvious that our opinions will not change and that the argument is going into very subjective and strictly theoretical direction.

      I enjoyed the argument… I DO believe that US and UK helped Russia a lot, and hope that in the course of the argument I did not downplay the sacrifices of many American, British, Canadian, Australian, and other allies’ lives that took place.

      Reply

    44. And with that, i wish you all a great weekend. If you are partying for halloween, be safe and have fun.

      Reply

    Leave a Comment




    Advertisements Alcohol Animated Images Art Awesome Things Batman Cars Comic Books Computers Cosplay Cute As Hell Animals Dark Humor Donald Trump Fantasy - Science Fiction Fashion Food Forum Fodder Gaming Humor Interesting LOLcats Military Movie posters Movies Music Nature NeSFW Politics Religion Sad :( Science! Sexy Space Sports Star Trek Star Wars Technology Television Vertical Wallpaper Visual Tricks Wallpaper Weapons Women WTF X-Mas