GIs overseas

Did mind the USA funding the Nazi war effort and providing war machines for it.

2nd time, oh yes the USA funded the German war effort in WW1 as well.

Both times just sat back got rich from both sides whilst they died.

How honourable.

Now that WAS an anti american statement, however being anti american does not make it untrue.

 

On my last trip to Europe, it's been a few years, but I had an opportunity to visit Normandy.  I'm not going to get into a big thing about wether or not what you've stated is true or not.

 

It isn't anti American, it's nonsense.  I would like to hear you state the same things, standing where I stood, looking at the thousands of white crosses most of them American.  Men who never came home.  Just so folks like you wouldn't have to speak German.

 

My Grandfather was a Marine, 4th Brigade,  1st Marine Expeditionary Force, 1918.  He was at Chateau Thiery/ Belleau Wood.  They were not "Untrained" they were untested.  His Co. went into the battle with 180+.  He was one of three that survived the fight.  Yes it was late in the war, but I don't think it mattered much to the 175 or so men in his company who didn't survive.  But I would bet it mattered a whole lot to the French whose butts the Marines saved when the Germans overran the French positions.

My Father was not in Europe in WWII, he was in the Pacific theater. 

 

As to the US sitting back and getting rich, first there were folks on both sides who profitted from the war.

The amount of treasure the US spent on the war, would, in todays money, be in the trillions.  Just the amount spent on the Manhatten project alone, would have been finacially beyond any other country.

Lend Lease to Brittain and Russia was in the Billions, much of it never repaid.

 

Being anti American has always been a popular indoor sport, I don't mind, as long as you get the reality right. 

The guys under the white crosses never say anything, so I don't know how they feel about it.

 

  

 

Of course, the UK and France were attacked, /in their treaty that Hitler broke, a broken treaty is a political attack/ and US was attacked before it entered the war. It was clear that Hittler will gobble up everything in Europe, and attack the UK and France physically too. So declaring war on Germany was an act of defence; and it could have been done earlier, during the Sudeten Crisis, instead of the politics of apeasment, and most probably then the Germans themselves would have get rid of Hitler, and WWII could be avoided. A country enters a war when it's personally threatened, and US did this in time when it was attacked; before this it wasn't threatened and didn't have the reason to do so.

 

Chemberlain sold the Check people to the Germans /the Munich Agreement/ and sat on his hands, while Nazies overran half Europe. France sold itself little later, directly, that's why they had Vichy, that was shamefully collaborating in hunting down the French Jews. The Bulgarian Tzar Boris begged England for help, and was refused such, while the Germans were about to occupy Bulgaria; so Bulgaria was forced to become a passive ally in order not to be smashed.

 

If it makes you feel better that US is a bad egg among noble others, go ahead. I can't do that, sorry. There is no nobleness in politics, in any politics, of any county, only interests /which is just darwinian, everyone is primarily interested in his/hers own survival/. Nobleness is found only in the souls of soldiers who died, for their country or other, and lost their chances to stay here and talk nice talks about who is what and why, drinking a cup ot something.

 

There are more than a few historians that look at WWI and II, the Korean Conflict and  the Cold War, as one continuous conflict, ending only with the collapse of the Soviet Union.

 

Azita, if you want a more ground level approach to the American psyche during the period 1918 to 1941, read "The Time Between Wars".   I forget the author's name but if you Google it should pop up. 

To fully understand much of what we are speaking of, you have to look at the political atmosphere in the US ca 1900 to 1915-16.  Also, remember that the US was not yet the industrial powerhouse it turned into during WWII.  A debtor nation before 1917-18?  I don't know about that one, hard to believe, knowing what I know about our resources at the time.  But I do know one thing, in 1941 Admiral Yamamoto got it right when he said "I fear all we have done is to wake a sleeping giant, and fill him with a terrible resolve".

 

To give you an idea of the raw industrial power of the US at that time, when the War Dept started planning for wartime production, it was estimated that it would take until 1965 to reach maximum mobilization.  That was the year I graduated from HS.

That means that when the war ended, the US was still 20 years from maxing out it's manpower and industrial might. Just a little staggering, when you think about it.

 

 

 

     

The Pacific theatre was Japan vs. US. 

The allies did not beat anyone on the Western front until near the end of the war

Most of WW2, in Europe, was Germany vs. Russia. Most of the German soldiers died battling against Russians.

 

It has nothing to do with the Way You See It.  Recorded History and fact go against everything you've posted.

In forum speak, your "Half Assing" it.  Google some of your ideas before you come on here.  We deal in facts and real history, not Nationalistic BS, or anti American bs, based on a distorted and biased view of History.

If you had, you would know the when and what, and you would know about things like the "Murmansk Run" and you wouldn't be making a fool of yourself.