Repubs and warmongers, read and learn

[spongebob]

So you are also saying that because Britain traded with the US, buying your goods for the profit or your industries that you saved them?

If the US had remained outside the conflict then that doesn't mean Germany would have been victorious. It certainly would have changed the character of the war though.

You say I have belittled the sacrifices of American blood. Yet you have also ignored the role or other non-european allies in the war, implying that it is only the US which was decisive. You seem to ignore the role the European powers played in allowing the US to be where it is today. I frequently find it amusing when the Americans say that Europeans would be speaking German if it wasn't for them. Few Americans seem to consider the possibility that they too may be speaking German now also.

now follow very closely because this is getting redundant.
1. no i am not saying the US saved the british. again follow me. i explained to you that at the point when the US allowed the allies to "borrow" military and non-military supplies when they could no longer afford to pay. at this point, the germans were bombing the british nightly. now im asking you, do you think by allowing the british to "borrow" that this was a great contribution?
2. i never even discussed other countries involvement or contributions. so i wasnt ignoring them. you downplayed americans involvement and its preparedness, so i present some facts to counter your assertions. do you follow. the discussion was about america's role in the war.
3. these are the US's contributions. free military and non-military supplies in mar of 41. at this point there is still 4 more years of war. could britain have continued successfully? the US was the main supplier of oil to the allies. is this a contribution?

the end for me!

 

[spongebob]

"hans is ryanh you dumbfuck"

that was in my karma box. like i give a shit.

 

[HansNZ]

now follow very closely because this is getting redundant.
1. no i am not saying the US saved the british. again follow me. i explained to you that at the point when the US allowed the allies to "borrow" military and non-military supplies when they could no longer afford to pay. at this point, the germans were bombing the british nightly. now im asking you, do you think by allowing the british to "borrow" that this was a great contribution? 2. i never even discussed other countries involvement or contributions. so i wasnt ignoring them. you downplayed americans involvement and its preparedness, so i present some facts to counter your assertions. do you follow. the discussion was about america's role in the war. 3. these are the US's contributions. free military and non-military supplies in mar of 41. at this point there is still 4 more years of war. could britain have continued successfully? the US was the main supplier of oil to the allies. is this a contribution?

Allowing the British to borrow these supplies indeed kept them in the war. Without these supplies the British and Germans would most likely have agreed to end the war. At that point Britian would most likely have become a neutral country hostile to Germany, but no longer at war with it.

The war was won in the East. So whether or not Britain stayed in the war is unlikely to have changed Germany's eventual defeat at the hands of the USSR - a country far to big for Germany to defeat in anything more than a quick war.

The USA's involvement changed the character of WW2, it was not essential for Germany's defeat. Had Germany won then I wouldn't have wanted to be in the USA's position.

 

[HansNZ]

"hans is ryanh you dumbfuck"

that was in my karma box. like i give a shit.

Spongebob is not a dumbfuck because I am not RyanH. I am not quite sure why people would think that I was.