"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Juan Jimenez" wrote:

yet you think the french could have driven the Germans out without US
help?

No

Then why did you claim that it might have happened without US help?

Because you can't prove otherwise. I can, however, prove beyond a shadow of
a doubt, from historical documentation, that without the help of the French
and particularly the help of the French resistance, not only would the US
not been able to get the Germans out of France, D-Day would have been a
disastrous massacre of biblical proportions.

That is why they were called ALLIES, and not "saviours".

Of course, you could also extend your argument to show that were it not for
the millions of russians, french, british, poles, czechs, danes, aussies and
other assorted nationalities, everyone from San Diego to Rhode Island would
be speaking German today, or perhaps Japanese....

Do you know the meaning of the word "allies"?

Do _you_ know the difference between "necessary" and "useful"?

Sure, this is an example that portion of revisionist history that appears to
be "necessary" to demonstrate how arrogantly ignorant some people can be.
This is "useful" precisely because it helps demonstrate the absurdity of
arrogant revisionist arguments such as the one that the only way for France
to be rid of the invading Germans was for the US to kick them out, and
without any help from the French at that.

If you need that in Spanish, let me know. g

BTW, is this almighty military of yours STILL looking for that one, single,
solitary six foot arab permanently tied to a dialysis machine? And does that
moron in the White House still claim "mission accomplished"?


*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***