20 Oct 06
Originally posted by chancremechanicactually canada was free to decide whether to go to war or not since 1931, although support for britain was still very strong and they declared war with germany on 10 sept after britain and france on the 3rd.
You need to shut-up and read some History. Canada only entered ther war because they were a protectorate "satellite" of GB and still considerd Her their "Mother' country. The US sent millions of tons of materiel and the American people didn't want to enter a war that they saw as a result of British and French pacifism/appeasement to Hitler. Rememb ...[text shortened]... have twisted the History books to reflect a minimal role of US involvement....right?
as to appeasement, the very reason you cite for delayed us involvement (although invaluable equipment was supplied to the allies from the start) is the very reason that war was tried to be avoided, namely the loss of a generation in the first war.
whilst hindsight shows that hitler couldn't be trusted, i think they were right to avoid the war, although perhaps not at all costs such as the betrayal of the czechs. however hindsight shows the same about supporting saddam against iraq, arming and training the taliban etc.
personally i'm grateful for the preceding generations for the sacrifices they made whether from commonwealth, us or other countries against nazism.
as for japan the commonwealth was against her at the same point the us was.
20 Oct 06
Originally posted by howardgeeThat point of the thread is not to discuss geography. I was taught that the were 7 continents and that every country belongs to at least one (Russia for instance is part of Asia and Europe).
Your slaphappiness knows no bounds.
Australia comprises of more than one island.
My bad.
20 Oct 06
Originally posted by amannionNot here to debate geography.
Why would it be more convenient?
That'd be like saying, let's just call the whoile area of which France is a part, France - that'll be more convenient.
Rather it makes things more confusing. Am I talking about the continent France or the country France? Likewise calling an entire region Australia - including New Zealand - would be completely confusing a ...[text shortened]... until today at least - heard New Zealand considered as part of some Australian continent.
My bad. (See above post.)
21 Oct 06
Originally posted by lordhighgusGood for you, but if it's treetalk just don't drop the soap; I'm sure he'll "wash" your back though,...carry on, mates....
You wouldnt understand it chancre, we Aussies and New Zealanders actually do like each other and look out for each other overall. We have a long history and shed some blood together on more than one occasion. I will take a Kiwi to watch my back over any other nation in the world.
21 Oct 06
Originally posted by JeeLiberal propaganda...in other words, Bovine caca.....🙄
The Bush family ties to the Nazi party are well known. In their 1994 Secret War Against the Jews, Mark Aarons and John Loftus use official US documents to establish that George Herbert Walker, George W. Bush's maternal great-grandfather, was one of Hitler's most important early backers. He funneled money to the rising young fascist through the Union Banking Corp ...[text shortened]... ://ecosyn.us/Bush-Hitler/Bush-Hitler.html
21 Oct 06
Originally posted by chancremechanicthe problem being that the bovine caca comes from your beloved government.
Liberal propaganda...in other words, Bovine caca.....🙄
A 1942 U.S. government investigative report that surfaced during 1945 Senate hearings found that the Union Bank, with Prescott Bush on the board, was an "interlocking concern" with the German Steel Trust that had produced:
50.8% of Nazi Germany's pig iron
41.4% of Nazi Germany's universal plate
36% of Nazi Germany's heavy plate
38.5% of Nazi Germany's galvanized sheet
45.5% of Nazi Germany's pipes and tubes
22.1% of Nazi Germany's wire
What amazed me is that I really thought you would be proud to have helped the nazis in their attempt to killed everything not catholic and not white...
22 Oct 06
Originally posted by Jeecertainly there seems to be evidence of small scale assistance to the nazis from america, there are always criminals around in every country.
...The bank helped Hitler rise to power. It also helped him wage war. As late as July 31, 1941---well after the Nazi invasion of Poland---the U.S. government froze $3 million in Union Banking assets linked to Fritz Thyssen. Thyssen was noted in the American press as a "German industrialist and original backer of Adolph Hitler."
Loftus writes that Thyssen's " ...[text shortened]... ation yielded a reported $750,000 apiece for Prescott Bush and George Herbert Walker. ...
but there is also evidence of assistance to those fighting the nazis:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend_lease
Lend-Lease came into existence with the passage of the Lend-Lease Act of March 11, 1941, which permitted the President of the United States to "sell, transfer title to, exchange, lease, lend, or otherwise dispose of, to any such government [whose defense the President deems vital to the defense of the United States] any defense article". Roosevelt approved US $1 billion in Lend-Lease aid to the Britain on October 30, 1941. Britain did not need to pay any money (it did pay for supplies in the pipeline when Lend-Lease was terminated in 1945).
the real questions is:
1/ which contributions were of the largest magnitude?
22 Oct 06
Originally posted by JeeStick to the facts. Hateful slander demeans you.
the problem being that the bovine caca comes from your beloved government.
A 1942 U.S. government investigative report that surfaced during 1945 Senate hearings found that the Union Bank, with Prescott Bush on the board, was an "interlocking concern" with the German Steel Trust that had produced:
50.8% of Nazi Germany's pig iron
41.4% of Nazi Germany's ...[text shortened]... ave helped the nazis in their attempt to killed everything not catholic and not white...
22 Oct 06
Originally posted by slappy115Errrr.... hello....?
and the Russians declared war on them (only after they were weeks away from surrender since they couldn't push them out of Manchuria by themselves).
That sounds like you're trying to place a blame of sorts on the Russians...
Don't you think they had enough troubles fighting Hitler (who got as far as 30km's from Moscow) as it was (also considering the Russians had the highest death toll during the whole war)?
22 Oct 06
7 edits
Originally posted by mancityboyhmm - these are claimed to be facts.
Stick to the facts. Hateful slander demeans you.
do you dispute them? - they seem to be verifiable by many fairly solid sources on the net.
what you should consider is: what they do mean ...
the union bank does not sound like an organisation with especially high morals; in addition to the above claims:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Banking_Corporation
Adolf Hitler's financiers, the CLN family, formed UBC to manage investments in America. The US congressional report described Union Bank as an "interlocking trust" with the German Steel Trust. UBC was also involved in raising funds for Germany and illegally transferring aviation fuel technology to the Luftwaffe.
.... and ....
Having gone through the books of the bank, further seizures were made against two affiliates, the Holland-American Trading Corporation (Vesting Order No. 261) and the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation (Vesting Order No. 259). By November, the Silesian-American Corporation, another of Prescott Bush's ventures, had also been seized. [1] The company allegedly profited from slave labor at Auschwitz via a partnership with IG Farben, Hitler's third major industrial patron and partner in the infrastructure of the Third Reich. [2] The Auschwitz slave labor camp did not exist until after the nationalization of the Bush-Harriman assets.
....
it seems to me to mean that: hitler had investments in the u.s., they were run by prescott bush, they were siezed by the Trading with the enemy act in october 1942. For some reason that I do not understand: Prescott was not only not arrested, he was also reimbursed after the war.
22 Oct 06
2 edits
Originally posted by mancityboy
Stick to the facts. Hateful slander demeans you.
Originally posted by flexmore
hmm - these are claimed to be facts.
Well that's how you know that somebody can't counter facts:
1) insult the person
2) claim that the person's facts are bovine caca
3) go off topic
And I agree that this has to be put in balance with the help that the US government sent to the Allied. Fair play to them and to whoever fought the Nazys.
My point being that nobody wants to open those dirty files and look at what has been the real damage or help from the US.
Still got a lot of respect for the boys who went to Normandie and got killed. I only feel that they have been killed for nothing, like the boys sent to Nam or Irak later on.
The fact that those dirty files of the past remain closed is due to the fact that the incriminated one are still in charge, or too powerfull to be harrased (Bush, Rockfeller,...).
The same happened in France. There was absolutely no way to speak about the french "collaboration" during WWII, untill after the Mitterand years. He was part of the Vichy regime, and protected people like Bousquet, Papon, close friends to him. Some days after he died, tons of book were published on the subject, and actually J. Chirac was the first one ever to appologize on behalve of France for the part it played during WWII. They still have the same problem about the Algerian War which is an absolute taboo debate there.
So yeah I aint claiming that US was all bad during WWII, I am just asking to look at the bigger picture.
22 Oct 06
1 edit
Originally posted by flexmoreWhy are you having a go at me Jee? I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm saying that you should't resort to hateful slander as it demeans you.
hmm - these are claimed to be facts.
do you dispute them? - they seem to be verifiable by many fairly solid sources on the net.
what you should consider is: what they do mean ...
the union bank does not sound like an organisation with especially high morals; in addition to the above claims:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Banking_Corporation
A o not understand: Prescott was not only not arrested, he was also reimbursed after the war.