A final Publish and be Damned for 2004:
To end the year is a very Suzanne way, I decided to publish on this site, the recent email sent to me from the gentleman who wrote the Reply to the Open Letter to Europe.
Before I get to that, I must say, I have been quite surprised at some of the comments. It is very sad that some of you consider Europe to be a threat to us. I wonder, how many of you who wrote those comments have even visited Europe?
I am above all an American, I love my country. But, I am also a child of God, and of the entire Earth. Therefore, as America is my home, so is the World my playground.
Now, the following is not my words, but those of my friend. The only one who took the time to try and help me through a bad time in my life. All the way from across the pond.
__________________________________________________________________________________
A very happy new year to you, so far away, and with troubles lapping at your door
. I am aghast that some see you as the enemy (after all you have done for your country), but having read your website and some of the replies, it does not surprise me.
The Axis of Evil that surrounds your president leads to people being that intolerant, and forgetting that it is possible to disagree without being an opponent.
Oh well.
A final Publish and be Damned for 2004:
If it was not for us you would all be speaking German.
Apart from the historical error in this (not one of the countries Germany occupied before and during World War II were required to change their native language to German), we imagine that it is a metaphor for “America saved Europe from the nasty Nazis”.
Really?
When Germany started invading and occupying the different countries of Europe, did America stand in its way?
No.
When the last surviving opponent to Hitler was about to be invaded, was it America who stepped into the breach?
No.
It was the Battle of Britain (fought by the Brits and their European allies) who prevented it.
America only came into the war when its own ships were attacked, and even then it only declared war on Japan. It was the Germans who declared war against America, who then suffered eventually and were invaded by the Americans and the Brits, to bring the war in Europe to a close.
Let’s wind the clock back to 1588, when the Spanish (the dominant power in Europe, and main colonising power in the New World) tried to invade England. They were defeated, and as a result the naval power slipped from the Spanish to the English, and so it was English and not Spanish colonies that got established in America.
In other words, if it was not for us, you would be speaking Spanish.
Love and all from London
_______________________________________________________
Happy New Year to all of you
Suzanne
Sean Says: January 1st, 2005 at 9:08 am
HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL!!!
Concerned American Says: January 2nd, 2005 at 4:02 am
ok first off it would be great if this History Professor from London was man enough to put his name down so I would know what to call him, but whatever.
As far as the “If it was not for us you would all be speaking German.” remark, yes it is a metaphor for “America saved Europe from the nasty Nazis”. It is not a historical error. Face it until America entered the war the Allies were on their heels (any real WWII buff would know that) and had Russia not entered then who knows what would had happened. Just imagine if the U.S wasnt involved in WWII…. Think about it…. Yes the Allies may still have won since Russia joined in (just off their sheer numbers alone Russia could have taken Germany) but think of how diffrent it would have been. Thats right, it could be a very diffrent story without all of our brave men who fought and died for that cause. That was my point in saying “If it was not for us you would all be speaking German.” because if America didnt join in then the Allies would have lost. Even your home town of London was being bombed by Hitler and yet you still think that “Great Britian” had it under control right? Yea I bet old Churchill had things just like he wanted them huh?
And as far as your ancient refrence to 1588, how irrelevant is that? America didnt even exist then. At least the British existed when I made my “metaphor”. And lets jst act like we all spoke Spanish in WWII (not that it matters) fact is, is that the “Spanish Speaking Americans” still would have saved Europe from the wrath of Germany. Deny it all you want but even today who are you going to call when you need help? America. Enough said…
Suzanne Says: January 2nd, 2005 at 5:44 am
Thanks Sean
Suzanne
Sean Says: January 2nd, 2005 at 9:14 am
Concerned American,
You are absolutely right.
Suzanne Says: January 2nd, 2005 at 11:04 pm
VOID THIS ONE, GO TO NEXT ONE
Wow! Now, you have made my New Year, Thank you my friend, Sean.
I guess some people do know their History. And some are open minded enough to know when something is a fact or if something is just the opinion of someone else
The best to you Sean and thanks for all your comments to the Comments I have posted. Actually this is all new to me, I mean as to discussing Politics. But it is fun is it not?
Suzanne
Suzanne Says: January 2nd, 2005 at 11:11 pm
Well, I guess I jumped the gun, both of you that is if Sean was remarking to the number 2, go read your history books, then get back to me.
Why do I not give his name, because I have not asked his permission, and actually, is it so necessary to you to know the name, when your knowledge of History is so limited and confused that even reading something I found in my sixth grade history book to be a fact, grow up. I or he is not downgrading you or our country, only defending his country from the rather childish Open letter to Europe, and also to the comments some of you made to me when you read the original reply. Nothing more nothing less. So instead of trying to fight the facts, fact them and go on with life.
Suzanne
Still, think all of you are great, still think this is fun, and still wish all of you the best New Year and a year we can agree to disagree on this site, and anywhere in American because we are AMERICANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Suzanne
Sean Says: January 3rd, 2005 at 12:59 am
Which History books would those be Suzanne. The ones that have been re-written and dumbed down by the NEA? I’ve read my history books; did quite well in history as a matter of fact, even despite the teachings of the public schools. Are you sure you were reading the same history?
Concerned American Says: January 3rd, 2005 at 1:44 pm
Good Point Sean. Few understand how American School sytems have been dumbed down, and few also understand that 94% of the NEA is atheist… just a side note.
Suzanne Says: January 3rd, 2005 at 5:19 pm
Also, I do not read book that have been altered by the NEA and my education was and is still quite accurate.
Suzanne
I do not make statements lightly; I put a lot of research in anything before I post it.
Suzanne
Suzanne Says: January 3rd, 2005 at 5:21 pm
Also, I do not read book that have been altered by the NEA and my education was and is still quite accurate.
Suzanne
I do not make statements lightly; I put a lot of research in anything before I post it.
Suzanne Says: January 3rd, 2005 at 5:37 pm
JUST A QUOTE THOUGHT SOME OF YOU MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN READING:
“When the Nazis arrested the Communists,
I said nothing; after all, I was not a Communist.
When they locked up the Social Democrats,
I said nothing; after all, I was not a Social Democrat.
When they arrested the trade unionists,
I said nothing; after all, I was not a trade unionist.
When they arrested the Jews, I said nothing; after all, I was not a Jew.
When they arrested me, there was no longer anyone who could protest.”
-Martin Niemoller (1892-1984) Protestant Minister & Social Activist in Nazi Germany
To question the authority of a government which erodes our personal freedoms is not only the right, but the duty of every patriotic American!
______________________________________________
Suzanne
Serb Says: January 3rd, 2005 at 7:47 pm
Unless I’m wrong, Europe was on the run from Germany when America stepped in. Even perverted history books don’t bend the truth that much, Suz. Also, we were helping with the war effort long before we actually entered the war.
American policies during the time were isolationist, so the delayed joining of the war is understandable. Hindsight is 20/20.
Even though it took an act of war on Japan’s part like Pearl Harbor to bring us in, we got ourselves, and the rest of Europe, out.
Serb Says: January 3rd, 2005 at 7:50 pm
The American school system was developed to churn out middle-class workers. There are, however, specialty programs in existance for “gifted” children. These do not churn out middle-class desk-riders, these produce our future Bill Gates’, Presidents, diplomats, etc by encouraging creative thinking and worldly views. Do not make the mistake of thinking it is impossible to get a well-rounded and balanced education in the US.
Suzanne Says: January 3rd, 2005 at 9:56 pm
To your comment number 12, it was not stated otherwise, as to Europe’s situation when we did enter the war, so, you are correct, and that which I posted did not state otherwise.
As to you comment 13, I did not go to any gifted schools, I was not gifted. Not then anyway. It was above and beyond the Public School system, which is wonderful, my advantage in learning relates directly to my parents. Both who believe in honesty and values, making sure that all which I learned, I learned the entire story, not just that which is for children.
My education did not stop when I finished college, it has continued. Not only with additional classes which I take each quarter, but also with the travels I have done. There is something about going to different countries, (of course there are some I would not even think of visiting) that expands the mind. Then, whatever information one receives in this way, they must make sure that it is accurate. So, anything I learn, have learned or will learn in the future, before I believe it, I do research to make sure it is correct.
I did not have a life of the child of a diplomat, though my father was in the Air Force, and retired as a Major, this does not put me in any category other than the middle-class.
Learning, and keeping an open mind, is a not stop goal, everyone should have. As this world changes so fast, it is almost impossible to keep up with the constant flow of information.
So, it is very easy for one to think they are correct, (and I include myself) when in fact they are just a bit behind in current information.
Though, I do try to make sure anything I post, (that which is my words) is as accurate as possible. When reading the Publish and be Damned for 2004, please remember, those words were written by my friend in the UK. Although I will stand behind his words, as he is very much like me, in the point that before he would state facts these facts he has researched to make sure they are correct to the best of his knowledge.
Actually, that is all any of us can do. We read, we listen to the news, we research, we chat on this site, we learn. We exchange ideas, thoughts, and views. This site is a wonderful learning experience. I have learned a lot from reading everyone’s comments.
So, it is not just our formal education that give us knowledge, it is our continual learning, this is what keeps our knowledge current.
Thank you for your comments,
And Hi Serb, always nice to chat with you.
Suzanne
PS, why do people seem to think, I either had rich upbringing, or for some reason have some sort of “pull” as one person wrote as to the flu shot. I am just a woman who runs her own business, works hard, and does something for the government, but that is between me and my country.
Suzanne
gonna cry Says: January 3rd, 2005 at 9:59 pm
Suzanne, I think the USA declared war on Japan and Germany. I think I’ve even herd the radio address from the president. It’s really kind of famous he uses big words like infamy.
Also We being the USA where already providing much of the supplys needed for Briten to defend herself. I think you and your brit freand as smart as you are need to check your facts.
Concerned American Says: January 4th, 2005 at 3:58 am
Amen. It seems credit is never given to those who deserve it… especially if they are American…
Maverick Says: January 4th, 2005 at 4:07 am
Hey does anybody have a good idea for a Presidential Canidate for 2008, both Republican and democratic. I was just wondering what everbodies opinion is…..
Serb Says: January 4th, 2005 at 4:08 am
When the British won the Battle of Britian, they did so because of the geography of their island. And even though they “won” the Battle of Britian, which stopped a direct German blitzkrieg in Britian, they did not stop German attacks on their homeland.
Suzanne Says: January 4th, 2005 at 4:59 am
I don’t think I ever said we did not declare war on Japan or Germany, Just not in the begining.
Actually, I did not state anything, just posted from as you call him, my brit friend.
I actually think even a brit has the right to his thoughts, or is that un American?
Suzanne
rmcdouga Says: January 4th, 2005 at 6:36 am
Actually, germany declared war on the US first as part of an agreement that it had with Japan and Italyy (Tripartite Pact). The US declared war on Japan on December 9, 1941, then Germany declared war on the US on December 11, 1941. The US simply recognized that state of war on the same day. Most historians agree that if Germany had not declared war first, the US would not likely have entered the war: US companies were simply profiting too much by supplying arms to both sides. The German declaration forced the US to take a side.
Elise Says: January 4th, 2005 at 5:22 pm
Maverick,re #17, I would really like to see McCain in the Mix.And take Lieberman for VP? That would blow up everybodys skirt, wouldn’t it!!? Also would like to see Rudy in public office. Of course the way the press kept digging on his pal even after he withdrew from nomination of homeland security - don’t know if he could avoid the association or not. What do you think?
Serb Says: January 4th, 2005 at 8:30 pm
Lieberman is the last person I’d vote for. I have a personal grudge against the man because of his strong stance against video games. I am a long-time video gamer, and don’t agree with the man one bit. But that’s a personal vendetta I hold against the man.
Hillary Clinton will be the Dem’s first choice. Maybe they’ll run Edwards for President this time, even though he couldn’t carry his own homestate.
gonna cry Says: January 5th, 2005 at 12:01 am
suzanne,I didn,t call anyone un-Amarican but???????
Sean Says: January 5th, 2005 at 6:32 am
Serb,
I think we’ve found something to agree on! I wouldn’t vote for Lieberman; however, he’s one of the last Democrats that has not swung way out on the Left wing fringe. I also agree with you about his stance on video games. I’m a big gamer too. Hillary will definitely be the Dem’s first choice for ‘08; however, a lot of her support and message has faded since the 90’s, and they won’t have the liberal propaganda machine working full-throttle w/overdrive like they did in this last election (constant media skew, micheal moore, mtv rock the vote, etc.). As for Edwards, you pretty much summed it up when you said he couldn’t even win his own state, so that takes care of him.
However, I’m not so sure about your comment #13. Our schools were NEVER meant to “churn out”, as you put it, mediocre students. If you remember, the American school system (several years ago)used to put out students which ranked at the top of the world. In other words our children were educated at the #1 level, and they had the skills, knowledge, and creative thinking that you mentioned to enter the work force to be extremely successfull. However, the NEW school system has let our kids education slip to 13th in the world, and as Concerned American and Suzanne mentioned in comments 8 and 9 the NEA is at the head of the Education system (National Education association). In addition, the NEA is over 90% liberal. The highschool education has slipped and the curriculum has been vastly dumbed down from what it used to be. I do agree with you that there are special accelerated programs for bright, gifted children who are ahead of the pack. BUT, this never used to be necessary, because the highschools used to be advanced and challenging enough to properly and thoroughly educate the kids. Tell me what you think of this.
Elise Says: January 5th, 2005 at 3:45 pm
Do you get Dick Morris’ email that he sends out occassionally? He thinks Hillary has alread started moving to the center on some things preparing for ‘08.
Sean Says: January 5th, 2005 at 7:28 pm
Elise,
) she started to move to the center, or really almost to the right, on the War on Terror issues. She’s actually been ramping up, and laying the ground work for ‘08 since 2001. If you noticed, the Clintons were influencing the democratic primaries whenever one candidate, like Dean, gained any momentum hence the addition of Wesley Clark. They also attached a lot of their people to his Presidential Campaign like Paul Begala and James Carville, and don’t think that that didn’t cost Kerry dearly. They kept him left-wing and flip-flopping and that aided in his loss. You see if a Democrat won in 2004 then she couldn’t run in 2008 unless she decided to split the party. Think about it. 
Yes that’s true, and I had heard that about Hillary. If you noticed shortly after the election (and the crats crushing defeat
Elise Says: January 6th, 2005 at 12:17 am
Yep, I had heard (& I think again from a Dick Morris letter) that Begala and Carville, weren’t losing any sleep over getting Kerry elected. I really didn’t see them out too much stumping for Kerry. Otherwise she would have to wait until 2012 to run.
Serb Says: January 6th, 2005 at 1:11 am
Here’s to a winning, right team in ‘08.
What games, Sean?
Serb Says: January 6th, 2005 at 1:13 am
My mom and I were discussing my political views (she’s a liberal Democrat, makes me sick sometimes), and she asked me why I’d hate Lieberman so much just because he was against video games. I told her that anyone who is stupid enough to think that clicking a mouse button teaches you how to fire a gun and deal with the emotional repircussions as well should not be in elected office.
bonniem Says: January 6th, 2005 at 2:51 am
I am interested in feedback on the idea of putting a portion of Social Security deposit into the mutual funds, stockmarket, etc. And I am wondering why the AARP is so against it, since no one old enough to be a member of AARP would be affected by the move.
Serb Says: January 6th, 2005 at 3:03 pm
For certain students, the regular programs are not enough to challenge and educate them. These are the future of our country, the ones that won’t be flying desks. In order to give them an appropriate challenge and ensure they don’t languish in the public school system, these specialty centers must be around. The standardized tests put in place by the Government do not challenge students who have the mindset of progress - the ones that are going somewhere. These students do not do well when they are not challenged, which is why they would languish in the public school system.
Serb Says: January 6th, 2005 at 3:04 pm
I’m worried about this issue, because I definitely don’t want to be paying for my parents’ Social Security. Reformation is a MUST, its just how we should do it that is up in the air. I think that privatizing it is a good idea, but economists have to think of the best solution.
Who cares Says: January 6th, 2005 at 4:22 pm
It will banctrupt the system.
elise Says: January 6th, 2005 at 5:18 pm
I have mixed feelings. I know my parents couldn’t live on Social Security alone, even tho they have a home paid for and their vehicles are paid for. So I would think it would be benficial to have saving in addition. But who would adminster this program & what if we have another depression down the road.
Serb Says: January 6th, 2005 at 6:14 pm
No, what will bankrupt the system is if we keep it this way. Back in the early years of Social Security they didn’t develop it to be a long-term plan. At least this way the plan can stay afloat.
Sean Says: January 7th, 2005 at 6:51 am
Ahh Who cares. Apparently you DON’T care, or just don’t pay attention because the system is already bankrupt!! That’s why Bush is pushing for major reform. The only way to reform it is to get it out of the hands of the Government, the ones who have bankrupted the system, and put it in the hands of private citizens with private accounts in the market which will not only be each individuals OWN retirement, but it will also provide a much better return on the money than the Government system.
Now here are the facts. The Government run Social Security system only gives a retiree a 1% return on the amount of money they paid into the system their whole lives (and just so we don’t get confused the money they paid in went to support another retiree not into their own account, this is just further proof that the system can’t survive the way it is now). What Bush proposes, as one part of his plan, is for people starting in the work force NOW (hence this will not affect current or soon-to-be-retired retiree’s). With the personal retirement accounts a retiree who puts a PERCENTAGE, not all of their social security tax, will receive approximately a 3-4% return (and this is a conservative estimate, historically the stock market has grown at about 7%) on THEIR money. I emphasized their money, because that’s exactly what it would be. The money would be in their own personal accounts, and if a retiree died before they used all of their account then they could leave it to their children or other relatives.
Now as I’ve said, nobody is suggesting that we divert ALL money from the failed Social Security system and put all of a workers taxes into a PRA, and PRA’s are not the sole solution. There will have to be other reforms in the system, like how benefits are calculated, and what income level social security taxes should be based on. Right now a person making over 87,900 dollars annually (above 87,900 there is no increase in soc. sec. percentage tax) pays the same percentage to social security as someone making 80,000 dollars.
There needs to be a lot of social security reform and PRA’s are only one step, but they are a step in the right direction.
Serb, I enjoy lots of games many from playstation like Spiderman, Rival Schools, Grand Theft Auto, Grand Tourismo, and I also enjoy PC games, like Swat 3, Freelancer, Call of Duty, and many more.
Emory Says: January 7th, 2005 at 12:44 pm
I think if Lieberman ever tried the Half-Life series games, he’d see things differently. Gore kind of reminds me of the boss at the end of the original Doom.
Serb Says: January 7th, 2005 at 8:06 pm
Call of Duty is a great game.
Also, other genres of games (other than FPS’s) don’t have the same .. well, anything, as FPS’s.
Mike Says: January 7th, 2005 at 11:58 pm
I’m afraid your English friend is either the victim of revisionist indoctrination or consciously engages in historical revisionism due to his personal politics. Prior to formally entering the war. The US provided the lifeline across the Atlantic that kept the UK alive and in the fight. At great cost in lives, money and materiel, the US merchant marine armed, fed and fueled the British Isles. At one point the Germans were sinking so many ships in the convoys that England was literally weeks away from not having the fuel to fight and the food to feed itself.
The people on these transport ships were not military or conscripts. They were everyday working Americans who chose to risk their lives by crossing the Atlantic in order to bring food, fuel and materiel to England. So that country would not fall.
When one stops to consider that the attitude and ignorance displayed by the UK commenter is far from unique. But, in fact, is indicative of a prevailing British general attitude. One has to wonder if such sacrifice was actually worth it.
I’m leaning towards no. As is their nature, the Europeans will once again find themselves in a catastrophe of their own design. I suggest that at that time, when the plea’s come, we leave them to their own devices and demise. Maybe the Europe of the future, with its Muslim population and dominant culture will fare better.
M
rmcdouga Says: January 8th, 2005 at 4:07 am
Actually Mike, if you are referring to post #20, that was not Suzanne’s English friend, but me and I am from this side of the Atlantic (although if you track down the original response to Open letter to Europe - somewhere on this site - you will likely find similar sentiments).
I have never questioned the role the US eventually took in WWII (nor does Suzanne’s friend), I simply dispute the American mythology that somehow the US won the war for the world. The war was won by the Allies, one of which was the US, but many of the other Allies contributed in the aggregate more to winning the war - in terms of lives and resources - than the US. What makes the US contribution stand out is the timing - i.e. at the end, when the others were worn out.
As for your comments about merchant ships, that does not undermine my point about US commercial interests being in supplying both side of the war in the beginning - if anything it supports my point. What do you think “merchant” means, and certainly you don’t think the US was giving it away. That the germans were trying to stop the supplies from getting England doesn’t contradict my point either.
Suzanne Says: January 8th, 2005 at 11:28 pm
I had a long comment to write, but my mind is hazy today, so just want to say, on comment # 20 and #40, Thank you, someone who does know their history.
After reading all of the comments that have been posted on this subject,, I again went back and research all the Patrick wrote (yes that is his name, do not give the last because he is well know professionally in the UK) I researched all my books, and I have many, I researched archives, the internet, anything and everything I could get my hands on, I researched. Why Because I could not believe some of the comments that people where writing, I thought, have I made a mistake, did I not research enough? Too many comments that actually accused my friend of a lie. And see, I know better, he does not lie.
So, I thought , did he make a mistake, so the research, Then today, with my mind in a fog, I check my email and there is comment #40 stating he wrote #20 not I, and this is true he did.
And that which he wrote is also true, fact, history, and I thank him.
Oh, yes, after hours and hours of my research I came to the exact same facts.
For some reason some Americans, feel, that all that we do, as a nation we should wear on our shirts like the medals of war. We also tend to take credit for things we have not done.
We as a country have done so much, can we not accept the fact that there just might be a few other countries, which also have done good, fought hard, and are good people.
Or is it that we believe we are better then every one else? This is not a good thing to believe.
We have the Bill of Rights; instead of waving them like a flag on open sea - read them and follow them. Do not use them for your gain, and for the purpose of putting other countries, and other peoples down.
We do not own this planet, we are only visiting this earth, and depending upon your beliefs, when we die, we either go someplace else, 1- either Heaven or Hell, 2- to our next life - 3 - this is it, we go no where.
It is your right to believe any of the above, or anything else. It is also the right of each and every individual on the planet to also believe any of the above. It is not anyone’s right to state, that one belief is right and all others are wrong. Tell me, someone, who has actual proof as to which of these beliefs is in fact the truth. Those who believe in God may or may not believe in Jesus, and many believe in God, but use a different name.
Many use the bible, as the proof of Christian belief, that is fine, although I have a problem with this, as I have read the bible, and no where does it state that it was written by God, He is not listed as the Author, the publisher, nor the creator of the Bible, man wrote the Bible. The Bible has been translated many times, from many languages to other languages. Have any of you translated anything from one language to another, for if you have then you know that much is lost in the translation, the original meaning is no longer the same. I translate from French to English and English to French. That which I write in French, and translate into English, looses the real meaning of that which I wrote in French. The bible, was written in an ancient language, how accurate is this translation.
Please do not read me wrong, I am not putting down the bible or Christian belief. I am only giving words for you to think upon…
Before I would sentence someone to death, I would want to make sure the laws and rules I used in this process were accurate. If that person were you, would you not want the same thing?
Earth does not belong to you to me or to anyone walking on it. We are also not taking very good care of this place we live on.
So, with this hazy mind, and I have not made much reason, so read between the lines, just do one thing for you, remember;
You are only one of all who live on this Earth, your thoughts and beliefs are only but little to all the thoughts and beliefs of all who live on this earth. Each individual with his or her thoughts and beliefs, do so as strong as you do.
RESPECT THAT as if you do not you also do not respect yourself.
Just a thought from Suzanne’s hazy mind on a cold Saturday afternoon.
Concerned American Says: January 9th, 2005 at 2:03 am
Suzanne: Sorry to say but I dont know where to begin my reply to your above stament because there are just too many assertions/personal opinions and not enough facts. But I will attempt to tackle one question:
Just what do you and/or Patrick think that America has claimed credit for that we didnt deserve?????
Because my opinion is that America dosent get enough credit for all the good things that we do in this world so…. I would love to hear some areas where we take credit when we dont deserve it. Especially pertaining to WWII…
rmcdouga Says: January 9th, 2005 at 7:13 am
It is not a matter of the US not deserving credit, and not getting it. The US DOES deserve, and does receive credit for many things. It is simply that the rest of the world is tired of the US claiming credit for EVERYTHING - as if there is never anything good happening in the world that involves other countries. I don’t know whether it is insecurity that makes the US always have to stand up and say - we did that (whether they did or didn’t), or whether it is a simply a function of the ignorance of the average American about events and developments in other parts of the world, and the contributions to human progress of people from those parts of the world. Whatever it is, it really is a shame.
Suzanne Says: January 10th, 2005 at 2:54 am
Sorry Concerned American, I think you are too concerned, please read what rmcdouga (please let me know if I am writing that correct, it is bunched together)
The statement he made in #43 is so true, how much more credit do you want, do you want the world to come and kiss your feet.
Let’s all open our eyes and look around us.
We are not the only people in the world who do good, but sad as it is, I have not once seen on this site, anyone say anything about the good things other countries are doing. Why? Can not you be a star but share the stage with another star, or do you need to shine all by yourself.
Let me give you a little advise - take it or leave it -
It is nice to be a shinning star, but to be the only shinning star in the sky would be a very lonely and sad place to live.
Wake up America, for those of you who are still sleeping. We are on a road we do not want to be on. Isolation is not good. To inform all other countries, that only America is right, good, and has the love of God, and they are lesser than we are. Now, I wonder why there is so much hate out there. Hate to our government, not to all the American people, or I have not experience any, but then I do not go with my war medals of being an American shinning on my chest like the only star on the stage, No, I go just as one other human walking this earth, So I am loved where ever I go,
Now, I am assuming, that you can not give the UK any stars for what they did during WWII I bet you do not even care of the terrible suffering they endured. Not just the UK, but France, Italy, and so on and so on. We - America - did not accept nor admit to the killing of millions of Jewish people, even when the evidence was so clear, I wonder, how many died, because we just sat back for a bit too long before we entered the war. War is horrible, and if we wish to be the shinning star of the world, even a shinning star, has tarnished at times, and if this star is of the brave and free, then this star is not so stuck-up to admit to having made a few mistakes
VIETNAM THAT IS A GOOD ONE; SHINNING STAR? - MY A–
So please concerned American, while you are dancing on America’s good deeds, be careful as you just might fall on America’s mistakes, and break your sweet little neck.
Just a little quote from another dear Friend of mine,
“A closed mind is like a tangled parachute. All you’re going to get out of life is a crash landing!” - Stan
If you want more than I think you can take, give me about a week, as my entire site is undergoing it New Year change, and 2004 had its effect upon me. So if you are brave enough to read the truth, or at least read some things to make you think, give me a visit in about a week,
Here’s to your “crash landing”
Suzanne
Just a Flower Child from the 60’s who never forgot the ability to think!!!!!
zenarcher Says: January 10th, 2005 at 1:52 pm
While simplistic, I suppose, here is one example of America taking credit, where credit isn’t necessarily due. When playing soccer finals, teams play in the World Cup Soccer. Who has an opportunity to play? Teams from all over the world. The winner is certainly a “world” championship team. Now, let’s look at baseball. Here in America, we have the “World Series.” And, the winner is the “World” championship team. Have you ever seen a team outside the U.S. given an opportunity to compete? No. But, we proudly proclaim the winning team to be the “World” champion. Small world, isn’t it???
Serb Says: January 10th, 2005 at 2:49 pm
The Lend-Lease Program: we certainly we’re giving it away. HOWEVER! Without the industrial might of the US the ALLIES would not have had SUPPLIES to invade anywhere! Armies need logistics, and that is where the UNITED STATES won the war.
Rob Says: January 10th, 2005 at 6:23 pm
(Formerly rmcdouga - better to use my name than my email prefix).
Serb, it is all relative. Another way of expressing the relative contribution of the Allies to the war is perhaps that the Western European countries (i.e. France, UK, Belgium , etc.) saved the US during the war (and protected US industrial might) by having their own industrial might destroyed by the Germans, thereby using up German munitions and thus winning the war!
Why can’t we simply accept that the ALLIES won the war in a combined and coordinated effort, with each ally providing a contribution appropriate to the circumstances.
Serb Says: January 10th, 2005 at 8:00 pm
The German industrial homeland was not destroyed until late in the war. The Germans were producing more munitions and war supplies right up until the end. The even launched their V-2 Rockets from their factories and bases in the Rhineland while the Allies attempted to take the factories in Operation Market Garden.
Rob Says: January 10th, 2005 at 10:21 pm
But that wasn’t my point. My point was that the European Allies had THEIR industrial capacity wiped out by the Germans - which took tremendous German resources. Even if they managed to produce up until the end of the war, the expenditure of resources in destroying western European capacity drained the German army as mush as the later entry of the US into the war. As I said in an earlier post, what was remarkable about US entry into the war was its timing, not its aggregate contribution!
Serb Says: January 10th, 2005 at 11:27 pm
Germany was fully prepared before the war to wipe out the industrial capacity of the Western European nations. They had plenty of supplies when the Allies rolled through Germany - when the American troops rolled down the autobohns, the Germans (fully equipped and battle-ready, though beaten) walked on the other side because no one was stopping to for them to surrender to. They did not surrender because they were beaten economically. Germany’s last major offensive, in the Battle of the Bulge, was launched with full supplies, and only ended when the Allies cut off the German’s supply line. Patton did this with his tanks, breaking the siege of Bastogne.
rmcdouga Says: January 11th, 2005 at 5:31 am
We’re talking past each other, Serb. I am not denying US contribution, nor trying the re-write where and when US might was used. I am SIMPLY saying that most reasonable people accept that the ALLIES as a whole won the war.
(In many ways, it was Germany that lost the war on its own, by making the same mistake that many powerful military states do: it took on too many fronts and couldn’t sustain them. In that sense, the conclusion was a foregone conclusion half way through the war in that Germany would never have been able to sustain occupation of all the paces it was trying to occupy. As is often that case in occupied countries, the occupied people develop insurgencies that eventually grow and overwhelm the occupiers. Do you really think that the Belgians and French would have sat back forever and lived under occupation. No, they were already waging insurgencies and these would have grown sufficient to throw off the Germans over time.)
But back to the main point: even US official history recognizes that it made a ‘contribution’ to the Allied effort in winning the war. The only people that cling to some romantic notion of America “liberating” Europe are the insecure, the ignorant, the arrogant and the chauvinist. Which one of these are you?
Now, believe me, I don’t really care if you think that the US liberated Europe in 1945. I am only engaging in this discussion because I think it is symptomatic of why Americans have such a bad reputation in other western countries (not to mention in Islamic countries): This same insecurity, ignorance, arrogance and chauvinism manifests itself in many other areas of life where Americans simply have to feel like they are the embodiment of goodness and everyone else is either evil, or insignificant. As I said above: it is a shame, because Americans might actually be likeable if it were not for that.
Serb Says: January 11th, 2005 at 3:15 pm
I’m going to go with none of the above, mcdouga - I am part of yet another group - THE INFORMED. If Europe needs to cling to some fantasy that they liberated themselves that is fine, but if they wish to actually wish to know what really went on then that is also fine - in which case, they would find that they had little that they could do about liberation before the United States entered the war.
Also, let’s move on to another front, the one in the Pacific. Who was fighting the Japanese conquest of Machuria, China, Indonesia and other Asian countries? I can only think of one major country, and guess who that is? The good ol’ US of A.
Concerned American Says: January 11th, 2005 at 6:13 pm
Serbs right. And RMCDOUGA you are pathetic! Could you come up with any more “what if” scenarios? Just go off actual history and yes its obivous that the Allies defeated the Axis. BUT… who supplied the Allied effort? France right? No maybe Canada??? No really… Guess that would leave the strongest, most capable Nation in the world… America. But go ahead continue to deny it. Why not it makes for some more great “what if” theroies.
And as far as the U.S.A being ” insecure, the ignorant, the arrogant and the chauvinist” is just insane. Who supplies the majority of relief effort to every nation in need? America. Who overthrows dictators (that are murdering their own people) so that those people may have a chance at freedom? America. These are just some of the “good” things that this country does on a daily basis. And also Americans dont “HAVE” to feel like we are the “embodiment of goodness and everyone else is either evil, or insignificant”. You know why? Because first off Americans for the most part are pretty decent people and the majority of America dosent belive that everybody else is insignificant or evil. We do many great things to help the world and yet we are labeled as the bully of the world.
So to conclude: Americans are as not as bad and mean and ugly of a people as your are trying to make us out to be RMCDOUGA. Americans do many things on a daily basis that gets overlooked and deserves much more credit. For you to disagree with this means only one thing: That you live in America and think that America is bad (yet you wouldnt live anywhere else) and you are too spolied (or blind, however you want to say it) to see what good things America does everyday.
Rob Says: January 11th, 2005 at 6:42 pm
No contest from me that the US won the Pacific war. But then that was not part of liberating Europe…
In any event, I don’t think we disagree significantly about the European theatre, but I guess we will have to agree to disagree about the emphasis we each give…
Rob Says: January 11th, 2005 at 9:05 pm
I didn’t say the U.S.A. was insecure, ignorant, arrogant and chavinist, did I. I said most reasonable people, including in fact most Americans, don’t feel like they have to take credit for everything. I said those PEOPLE (that is, individual Americans) who can’t accept that there is a world outside the borders of the US are the ones who are either “insecure, ignorant, arrogant, or chauvinist”. Judging from what I see in most of your posts, you are all of them combined in one package!!
And I am not sure which “what if’s” you are talking about. I wasn’t presenting what if scenarios, I was presenting actual events according to alternative (non-US centric)perspectives, ones you might actually see if you weren’t so insecure and ignorant and arrogant and chauvinist…
Rob Says: January 11th, 2005 at 9:11 pm
And BTW, every reputable history book that I can get my hands on (in addition to first and foremost crediting the ALLIES collectively) gives primary credit for swaying the outcome of WWII to the USSR (you know the SOVIET UNION), for having destroyed most of Germany’s industrial capacity and having killed 2/3 of its elite forces and its heavy weaponry. In other words, WWII was fought and won on the eastern front.
Sean Says: January 13th, 2005 at 11:14 pm
Here’s the problem Rob. I think we could have a serious debate on exactly what is a reputable history book. History classes (if they even exist in schools) have been so ridiculously twisted by the left-wing National Education Association (which is over 90% liberal) are likely to tell you that the Soviet Union was a great and prosperous, compassionate nation which was brought down by the “evil” United States.
Now there is no doubt that the eastern front played a part in WWII; however, the United States was still the key to winning the war. You CANNOT deny that Europe was on the ropes ready for a knockout early in the fight when we entered the war. The Soviet Union was fighting Hitler, but they were also taking massive casualties and losing several conflicts with the Nazi troops.
In addition, I don’t quite know how you can separate the Pacific theatre, which as you said the U.S. clearly dominated, from liberating Europe and winning WWII, since Japan was part of the Axis of evil with France and Germany. You found no problem when you included the U.S. with the Allies, so as to downgrade and minimalize the U.S. contributions in the conflict. But somehow you claim that when the U.S. defeated Japan (who was part of the Axis) that had no effect in liberating Europe and bringing an end to the War. It just doesn’t make sense.
I really don’t see how you can rationalize an argument that states that the U.S. was not the primary reason for winning WWII. With Europe all but conquered except for Britian (lets not forget Britian was mostly reduced to rubble), the USSR taking large casualties, and Hitler and Japan showing no signs of slowing down or losing momentum.
Concerned American Says: January 14th, 2005 at 12:37 am
Well said Sean… expect denial from Rob.
rmcdouga Says: January 14th, 2005 at 3:45 am
Good point, Sean, about my distinction between the European and Pacific wars. I didn’t intend to minimize the US role by counting it as only PART of the Allied force and then exclude the Japanese from the Axis powers. My point was more that except for the US, almost all of the other parties to the war only fought in one theatre (although Canada and the UK were fighting Japan long before the US entered the war; and the Soviet declaration of war against the Japanese in 1945 ‘contributed’ to the Japanese surrender). For that reason, it is far from clear that the Japanese ever seriously threatened the liberty of Europe, nor whether there was any more than just political cooperation between the Pacific and European Axis powers (there are even different surrender dates). For that reason, the US victory over the Japanese in the Pacific theatre (while a clear demonstration of US fighting capacity to fight two fronts) says nothing about the original point of discussion here: which is whether the US liberated Europe.
On that point, I still don’t think we disagree in principle, just in matter of emphasis. Take your boxing analogy: if two guys box for four rounds, beating each other to a pulp, then in the fifth round a new guy jumps in the ring to support one side: if those two guys now deliver a blow that knocks the the other, weakened opponent out, it would be hard to say that the guy who joined in the fifth round won the fight. And you can’t even say that the first ally was on the ropes (remember, at D-day the UK landed 5 divisions, the US 4 and Canada 1, so the injured boxer was still very much in the match for the fifth round).
Therefore, in addition to what I have already said about the USSR contribution to wearing down the Germans on the Eastern front, I stand by my conclusion that while US contribution was essential to the Allied win, the US “DID NOT LIBERATE” Europe.
Call it “denial” if you want, Concerned American, but I have supported every conclusion with fact and argument. You, in the other hand, simply make assertions of superiority which you try to pass as historical fact. Sean at least makes an attempt to support his claims.
Concerned American Says: January 15th, 2005 at 12:06 am
Way to doge that one rob or rmcdouga whatever your name is, but I believe you missed the ORGINAL point of the discussion: that the Allies would not have won the war if the U.S had not entered when it did. No of course the US did not liberate Europe all by itself, but the majority of the stratgey and manpower was put out by the US. Yes it was a team effort, but we could have done it without some of the other Allies BUT they couldnt have done it without us. THAT was the original point.
And as far as the boxing analogy goes, you have it wrong. Think of it like this: 2 guys are in a ring and one guy beats the other guy to a pulp (hence Germany having their way with the rest of Europe) then another guy (America) jumps in the ring and supports the guy who is getting beat (the Allies) and then the 2 guys (Allies) join together to bring down the other guy (Germany). Now of course the Allies had absorbed alot of German artillery, bullets etc.. up to that point so I guess you could say the did their part in the war (while being over ran), so like I said before continue your denial with “your boxing analogies” because you arent getting anywhere my friend.
BTW feel free to ask any WWII veteran if what I stated above is an “assertion”. The reason I know that they arent assertions and personal opinions is because my Grandfather served in the War and he feels very underappreciated when he reads posts like yours. And yes my so called “assertions of superiority” are very correct, because we were a Super power during that time… Not even one as ignorant as you could argue that.
Serb Says: January 15th, 2005 at 6:50 am
Sure douga, the UK landed more divisions on the beaches than the United States, but what about paratroopers, supplies, airplanes, etc etc etc! I think you’ll find that, with Britian’s industry reduced to rubble, the US contributed more than men to the invasion.
As for the Pacific Front not mattering in Europe… I don’t believe that an enemy, anywhere on the Earth, doesn’t matter to someone who is trying to defeat that enemy.
The USSR did do a major part of the defeat OF GERMANY, but played little part in freeing the European nations on the western side of Germany. And, who was it that liberated Italy? Patton, you say? He was British, right?
Suzanne Says: January 19th, 2005 at 10:36 pm
I have been reading all the comments, and really enjoying everything. Serb, Concerned American, rmcdouga, Sean, Rob, zencher and all others.
I have kept copies and in order of this Commentary I wrote, or Patrick and I wrote, along with the Reply from Europe, which in case anyone is still interested is still up on my site.
I was going over the comments and as they finally started to show people where actually checking their history, and became more accurate, I became quite impressed and even more so with three of you, will not give names as I don’t want you feeling to smug.
But . . . .(and yes I know you do not start a new paragraph with But, but if you knew how many spelling errors I have corrected when putting all comments into word doc, then a little slip of structure, let it pass.)
But . . . the comments are going somewhere and it looks as if they are going to who or which country won the war.
Below, I have copied and pasted part of the main commentary, please reread.
Apart from the historical error in this (not one of the countries Germany occupied before and during World War II were required to change their native language to German), we imagine that it is a metaphor for “America saved Europe from the nasty Nazis”.
Really?
When Germany started invading and occupying the different countries of Europe, did America stand in its way?
No.
When the last surviving opponent to Hitler was about to be invaded, was it America who stepped into the breach?
No.
It was the Battle of Britain (fought by the Brits and their European allies) who prevented it.
America only came into the war when its own ships were attacked, and even then it only declared war on Japan. It was the Germans who declared war against America, who then suffered eventually and were invaded by the Americans and the Brits, to bring the war in Europe to a close.
Let us wind the clock back to 1588, when the Spanish (the dominant power in Europe, and main colonizing power in the New World) tried to invade England. They were defeated, and as a result the naval power slipped from the Spanish to the English, and so it was English and not Spanish colonies that got established in America.
In other words, if it was not for us, you would be speaking Spanish.
_______________________________________________
Now, as far as I understand what is stated above, nothing is written that states had the US not entered the war, the outcome would have been the same.
It only states specific events prior to American entering the war, along with how history was changed by these events; including America’s past, present and future history.
I think we should all agree that if America had not entered the war, the outcome would have been very different. It was a joint effort on the part of America and our Allies; these are the factors and facts that determined the final outcome of WWII.
Is not it amazing what can be accomplished when countries work together unified, and with one goal, together to fight for that which is right, and to destroy that which is evil?
Although, on the other hand, is it not amazing and sad, the complete upheaval when countries all pull is different directions; thus nothing is ever solved.
The commentary was not to belittle America, but to state that some of the events in the past have made a major difference in the present.
I wish more of you had read the Reply from Europe and for those of you who have, it is important, that you separate, the article from The Guardian - from the comments from Patrick. As The Article in The Guardian, may have statements that does not necessary reflect the views of either me or Patrick.
Now, because all of you seem like family, and because suddenly I have been thrown into doing a lot of research on politics, (a subject I have stayed away from) I have found lots of information I was never aware of; some good, lots bad.
I am putting together my next commentary, and it will do one of three things. 1 - Those who read it will not care and will not make comments. 2 - You will read it and disagree, and make comments 3- You will read it, and do something about it.
I am hoping dearly, that the number 3 will be the majority.
Keep it going, that is what this site is all about.
My site will be in two parts starting soon, my art part, and then a second site the political part, as somehow the two do not mix.
I want to thank all of you for the interest and time you have taken in your comments and by the way – this is the correct way to spell –Britain- not (Britian).
When our President made the speech with the word “infamy” – That speech was after Pearl Harbor was attacked by Japan, thus wars in both side of this country, Japan, and Europe. (The above is in reference to “gonna cry” comment 15.
If one really thinks about those years, and the unified America, all working towards the same goal, supporting our troops, the women working the factories,, and on and on.
I wonder, and this is in reference to “America Divided” should the same situation come about today, would America, and Americas, be today, as we were then?
Have we lost that special strength inside of ourselves, which allow the differences between people to be put aside, and work as one huge power to accomplish one single goal.
I wonder, as this is the base of the strength of America, Could we as a country do the same today?
I really wonder, as I watch the events of the world, and somehow I feel, we as Americans, are loosing the ability to become one nation, with one goal, and together as one power overcome any and all that which might threaten our freedom..
Suzanne
Anonymous Says: August 26th, 2005 at 5:04 am
I admire you on the willingness to share this info with others - good luck!
Mr. Jack Says: August 27th, 2005 at 9:17 pm
I find it amazing that a small country like Iraq or Vietnam, can divide the world and make common friends enemies, yet an ultra powerful nationalist state like Nazi Germany can bring arch enemies like The U.S.S.R communists, and The U.S.A capitalists together.