Germany Lost the War... So What?

"t_mark" wrote in message news:LjUYb.27752$Zt4.9307@okepread01...

Wow, how underwhelming it all is. We seem to be able to pound into
submission any puny Third World nation without a significant AF. But
we don't dare strike Iran, N Korea, or China.

Probably because there's no need to, at least yet.

Here's 'underwhelming' for you in that same period of time.

1. US economy - 11 trillion
2. Japanese economy - 4.7 trillion
3. German economy 1.8 trillion
4 and on down - a bunch of smaller economies, including China at 1.3
trillion.

According to the World Almanac 2004:

1. US economy= 10.4 trillion
2. Japanese economy= 3.5 trillion
3. German economy= 2.2 trillion

Notice unfair comparison. US equivalent to EU.

01. Austria= 226 billion
02. Belgium= 298 billion
03. Denmark= 156 billion
04. Finland= 1.5 trillion
05. France= 1.5 trillion
06. Germany= 2.2 trillion
07. Greece= 201 billion
08. Ireland= 119 billion
09. Italy= 1.4 trillion
10. Luxembourg= 20 billion
11. Netherlands= 434 billion
12. Portugal= 182 billion
13. Spain= 828 billion
14. Sweden= 227 billion
15. UK= 1.5 trillion

That's a total of 11.091 trillion, more than the US economy.

The US may be the lone Superpower on paper but our track record
post-WW2 isn't that great.

Probably because everyone is too scared ****less to screw with us, you
ignorant clue****.

Uh, let's see. China ****ed with us over the air collision with their
fighter in 2001 not releasing the crew or plane immediately. China
openly threatens the US with nuclear cruise missiles in the event a
carrier battlegroup ever attempts to block an invasion of Taiwan by
China in the Taiwan Straight (but I guess you don't read the Asian
news, do you?). Iran threatened to shoot down any US or Israeli
aircraft that would attempt to bomb its reactor (but I guesss you
don't read the Mideast news either) and finally N. Korea threatened
all-out war over the US attempting any military attack against its
nuclear weapons program. The US did say it would not tolerate a N
Korean nuclear bomb but they just laughed in our faces and produced 8
more in addition to the 2 they already had. We did nothing and still
do nothing. Furthermore we are moving our troops in S Korea back from
the northern border since we know in the event of war N Korea will
barrage the south with massive artillery and missiles before
attempting to cross with their 1 million man army. Our plans- let the
South Korean soldiers bite it while we sit back further south an await
the order to strike back. Seoul, meanwhile, would be history.
You are the ignorant clue****.

Rob

From: (robert arndt)

Furthermore we are moving our troops in S Korea back from
the northern border since we know in the event of war N Korea will
barrage the south with massive artillery and missiles before
attempting to cross with their 1 million man army. Our plans- let the
South Korean soldiers bite it while we sit back further south an await
the order to strike back. Seoul, meanwhile, would be history.
You are the ignorant clue****.

Rob

Why do you say "our plans?" The Germans are not involved.

Go back to your UFOs. The Korean peninsula is a trigger point. If the North
invades or attacks the south the U.S. military doesn't have to wait for orders
from Washington.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
"robert arndt" wrote in message
m...
The US postwar history:


I could only wish that the political decision to change direction
eastward would have never come and Sea Lion would have happened. What
would have Britain defended itself with then- the Home Guard with
pitch forks and shotguns? You should thank God a lone German bomber
ditched its bombs on London and saved your nation. Germany could have
kept fighting and by the winter of 1940 you would have ran out of
pilots and planes- had the Germans not diverted to civilian targets
like London.


You really are ignorant of the situation in 1940 arent you.

The simple reality is that by the end of August 1940 the RAF were STRONGER
than at the beginning of the BOB. Quite simply they were building aircraft
and training pilots faster than the luftwaffe and more than replacing their
losses. Dowdings idea of readiness meant that each squadron should have
15 operational arcraft and twice that number of pilots. There were aircraft
to spare and while the pilot situation was tighter there were still around
20 piots per squadron

Conversely when Milch surveyed the Luftwaffe front line units at the
same time he found that most Luftwaffe units were between 25 and 30%
under strength. It was the Luftwaffe that was losing the battle of
attrition.
The Ju-87's had already been withdrawn and the Me-110's were now
having to be escorted by 109's

As for Sealion that would have been one of the biggest disasters
of German arms

Setting aside the fact that Britain had 13 combat ready divisions
available in the SE of England there's the little matter of the
Royal Navy. The Kriegsmarine could field 1 BB, 1 CA and 10 Destroyers
The RN had available 5 BB's , 11 Cruisers and 76 Destroyers.

Then of course the RAF has several hundred bomber
tasked with repelling the invasion ready for action

The Invasion fleet consisted of Rhine barges towed at 4 knots
that would have taken 30 hours to make the crossing and would
sink in anything much more than flat calm. They of course had no
LCT's so there chosen method of moving heavy weapons
was to blow off the bows of the barge with HE.

Meanwhile the defences of the target chose, Dover , consisted
of heavy coastal artillery (14",9.2" 8" and 6" guns) augmented by
Army artillery units firing from gun pits behind the town and
in and around it were 2 divisions of the Territorial army,
1 Indian Brigade, 1 New Zealan Division, 1 Armoured division
equipped with Matilda II tanks that were impervious to anything
short of an 88, 1 Canadian division and a further armoured brigde

Can you say glug - glug

Keith

In article LjUYb.27752$Zt4.9307@okepread01, says...
Wow, how underwhelming it all is. We seem to be able to pound into
submission any puny Third World nation without a significant AF. But
we don't dare strike Iran, N Korea, or China.

Probably because there's no need to, at least yet.


Actually in this, robert arndt is right. Its one thing to take on powers
like Iraq, Serbia and N Vietnam but its another to take on nuclear
powers. The situation with crazies like N Korea is very disturbing.

We have a situation now where there are countries that are safe to
attack and others where it is not.

--
How many public servants care enough about their department agenda that
they would be willing, if it received a budget cut to take a pay cut?

Observations of Bernard - No 46

In article ,
Keith Willshaw wrote:
equipped with Matilda II tanks that were impervious to anything
short of an 88, 1 Canadian division and a further armoured brigde

And unless they captured a port intact and could hold it then the
germans had no way of getting an 88 across the channel. And as they
had no way of holding the navy back (the luftwaffe couldn't even stop
the RN lifting troops off a beach at Dunkirk, so if they couldn;t
hit *stationary* ships often enough then they certainly wouldn't
stop destroyers carving into the invasion barges at 30+ knots,
nor the sloops from pouring 100+ shells a minute at the barges.
Oggle oggle.

--
Andy Breen ~ Interplanetary Scintillation Research Group
http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/
"Time has stopped, says the Black Lion clock
and eternity has begun" (Dylan Thomas)

"robert arndt" wrote in message
m...

Wars always have unintended consequences. Woodrow Wilson could have
let the idiotic Europeans exhaust themselves and make sense of their
own mess.

Germanys losses after WW2 were tragic for many people caught up in it
by being in the wrong place at the wrong time. The physical size of
the nation became smaller as lands were annexed and latter as tens of
millions of ethnic Germans who over 1000 years had built the cities of
Eastern Europe were killed, starved, expelled and exterminated from
places as far afield as Romania and Russia.

Wars are extensions of ideas.

Ideologically it is of course not only Germany that was defeated but
all people of European ancestry everywhere and any sense of their
right to exist and any sense of a right to ethnic self determination.

German culture and history is now discredited to such an extent that
many Germans hate themselves. The results can be seen in the low
birth rate and the indifference of the people to their certain
demographic annihilation within the next 3 generations (60 years)

The same thing is however happening to the UK and USA.

The Americans are caught between and imbecile of a president who is
further destroying the middle classes and is engineering yet another
amnesty of the illegal Aileen dross (which will be a failure as the
1986 amnesty was) that now infests the country and drains its welfare
and hospital systems and doubles its crime rate. (It even increases is
diverse and underage mother rate). Their only alternative is an even
more despicable and treasonous democrat party who specializes in
cultivating ethnic resentments and agglomerating them for electoral
gain.

European Americans are between a rock and a hard place and they are
effectively toast.

The same or worse situation persists in the UK where a party of
ethno-marxist Quislings called NuLabour is dismantling England and
clearing its great cities of the people that the Lufwaffe never
cleared. The British who are proud of their fighting spirit in WW2
are really taking pride in the even that is anhilating their
descendents. Hitler may have been many things but not even he would
have detroyed Englands people as its present Government of politically
correct commisars is doing.

Nothing will change this insanity because their will always be a
Goldberg, Chavez or a Spielberg coating their ethnophobia in love or
some other such lie to make sure the dunderheads embrace their own
disgrace.




The US postwar history:

Korea: stalemate
Cuban Missile Crisis: stalemate
Vietnam: LOST
Operation Eagle Claw (Iranian Hostage Rescue): Failure
Lebanon: Marines blown up- failure
Reagan-Bush years: a string of success shooting down a few Libyan
MiGs
and attacking small puny nations with no AF- Victory?
Gulf War I: had to raise a coalition to fight another Third World
nation, didn't finish the job which leads to Gulf War II. Kurds and
population suffer as a result.
The Balkans: another attack on an unworthy adversary. Serbs leave
with
their armor and military/police units intact. International force
needed.
Terrorist attack on the USS Cole: failed
9/11: could prevent terrorist attack, 3000 fatalities
Afghanistan: attack on another unworthy adversary. Taliban and Osama
escape into Pakistan. International force needed again. Failure.
Iraq prewar: Fires at US aircraft for 7 years, US retaliates in
1998,
Iraq resumes firing at US aircraft for 4 more years
Gulf War II: US goes it alone, captures Saddam but cannot get real
reconstruction support or troops needed to finish the job due to
isolating UN and certain European nations- failure

Wow, how underwhelming it all is. We seem to be able to pound into
submission any puny Third World nation without a significant AF. But
we don't dare strike Iran, N Korea, or China. In fact China openly
threatens the US over Taiwan and is militarily developing systems to
defeat our stealth, satellites, and to attack the US with missiles
in
the future. Iran has threatened the US over its nuclear reactor and
N
Korea has done the same over its nuclear program which we failed to
stop. BTW, try attacking the FSU even at its weakest... they have
twice the nukes we have and we all know the history of those that
invade Mother Russia. On their turf the US would lose, same in
China.
So I don't care how many time you say Germany lost. Germany is the
size of 1 US state and took on the world. It took everyone with
everything to beat them.
The US in Vietnam was a Superpower giant with the greatest
technology
on earth... and lost to peasants walking through the jungle at night
in pajamas armed with an AK-47, machetes, mines, grenades and RPGs.
The US may be the lone Superpower on paper but our track record
post-WW2 isn't that great.

Rob

"The Enlightenment" wrote in message
...

"robert arndt" wrote in message
m...

Wars always have unintended consequences. Woodrow Wilson could have
let the idiotic Europeans exhaust themselves and make sense of their
own mess.

Germanys losses after WW2 were tragic for many people caught up in it
by being in the wrong place at the wrong time. The physical size of
the nation became smaller as lands were annexed and latter as tens of
millions of ethnic Germans who over 1000 years had built the cities of
Eastern Europe were killed, starved, expelled and exterminated from
places as far afield as Romania and Russia.


Thats what tends to happen when you start a genocidal war
based on notions of racial superiority and then lose.

Wars are extensions of ideas.

Ideologically it is of course not only Germany that was defeated but
all people of European ancestry everywhere and any sense of their
right to exist and any sense of a right to ethnic self determination.


This is nonsense. The vast majority of Europeans were VERY
happy to see Germany lose.


German culture and history is now discredited to such an extent that
many Germans hate themselves. The results can be seen in the low
birth rate and the indifference of the people to their certain
demographic annihilation within the next 3 generations (60 years)

The same thing is however happening to the UK and USA.


And in Singapore , Japan and Taiwan. Its a function of the fact
that people no longer feel the need to have large families
to support them in their old age. In the period after the
war the German population boomed.

remainder of racist nonsense snipped

Keith

"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
"t_mark" wrote in message
news:LjUYb.27752$Zt4.9307@okepread01...

Wow, how underwhelming it all is. We seem to be able to pound into
submission any puny Third World nation without a significant AF. But
we don't dare strike Iran, N Korea, or China.

Probably because there's no need to, at least yet.

Here's 'underwhelming' for you in that same period of time.

1. US economy - 11 trillion
2. Japanese economy - 4.7 trillion
3. German economy 1.8 trillion
4 and on down - a bunch of smaller economies, including China at 1.3
trillion.

According to the World Almanac 2004:

1. US economy= 10.4 trillion
2. Japanese economy= 3.5 trillion
3. German economy= 2.2 trillion

Notice unfair comparison. US equivalent to EU.

01. Austria= 226 billion
02. Belgium= 298 billion
03. Denmark= 156 billion
04. Finland= 1.5 trillion
05. France= 1.5 trillion
06. Germany= 2.2 trillion
07. Greece= 201 billion
08. Ireland= 119 billion
09. Italy= 1.4 trillion
10. Luxembourg= 20 billion
11. Netherlands= 434 billion
12. Portugal= 182 billion
13. Spain= 828 billion
14. Sweden= 227 billion
15. UK= 1.5 trillion

That's a total of 11.091 trillion, more than the US economy.

Wow. And it only took how many soveriegn nations to total up to the US?
Fifteen? Yeah, that really makes the US look weak... Given that the combined
populations of those fifteen nations was some 385 million people in 2000,
versus the US population of around 280 million, what does that indicate in
regards to per capita productivity and income?



The US may be the lone Superpower on paper but our track record
post-WW2 isn't that great.

Probably because everyone is too scared ****less to screw with us, you
ignorant clue****.

Uh, let's see. China ****ed with us over the air collision with their
fighter in 2001 not releasing the crew or plane immediately.

Did you really think we were going to go to war over that one? Neihter did
the Chinese. Idiot.

China
openly threatens the US with nuclear cruise missiles in the event a
carrier battlegroup ever attempts to block an invasion of Taiwan by
China in the Taiwan Straight (but I guess you don't read the Asian
news, do you?)

And China still refrains from conducting such an invasion; they are at
present smart enough to realize that tangling with the US is not a smart
move.

Iran threatened to shoot down any US or Israeli
aircraft that would attempt to bomb its reactor (but I guesss you
don't read the Mideast news either)

Whoopie. So what's new?

and finally N. Korea threatened
all-out war over the US attempting any military attack against its
nuclear weapons program.

Uhmmm...one country conducting a military attack on another is usually
grounds for war, didn't ya know?

The US did say it would not tolerate a N
Korean nuclear bomb but they just laughed in our faces and produced 8
more in addition to the 2 they already had. We did nothing and still
do nothing.

So all of that diplomatic stuff (being conducted with the PRC's
participation) is "nothing", huh? Odd how you condemn the US for not
continuing to pursue other means in regards to Iraq, but seemingly think we
should be streaming across the 38th parallel at the drop of a hat...

Furthermore we are moving our troops in S Korea back from
the northern border since we know in the event of war N Korea will
barrage the south with massive artillery and missiles before
attempting to cross with their 1 million man army.

And because the ROK Army is judged to be capable of handling the DPRK ground
attacks in this modern era.

Our plans- let the
South Korean soldiers bite it while we sit back further south an await
the order to strike back. Seoul, meanwhile, would be history.
You are the ignorant clue****.

No, you have again demonstrated an acute lack of reasoning skills. Quickly
now--which has more combat power, the combined assets of FROKA, SROKA, and
TROKA, or the US 2nd ID(-)? As to the future of Seoul... I'll bet you money
Seoul will still be a prosperous city long after Pyongyang is a ghosttown
at the current pace of events.

Brooks


Rob

"Bernardz" wrote in message
news:MPG.1a9f38ff24421b1a98990a@news...
In article LjUYb.27752$Zt4.9307@okepread01, says...
Wow, how underwhelming it all is. We seem to be able to pound into
submission any puny Third World nation without a significant AF. But
we don't dare strike Iran, N Korea, or China.

Probably because there's no need to, at least yet.


Actually in this, robert arndt is right.

No, he is not.

Its one thing to take on powers
like Iraq, Serbia and N Vietnam but its another to take on nuclear
powers. The situation with crazies like N Korea is very disturbing.

We have a situation now where there are countries that are safe to
attack and others where it is not.

"Safe to attack"? Hardly. The US suffered more casualties on 9-11 to
improvised weapons than we have ever suffered to enemy nuclear attacks; any
number of nations could replicate or conduct a similar atrocity. Nuclear
weapons are as much an anchor around the owners' neck as they are an asset,
especially when dealing with a US that they can't reliably ensure their own
weapons can even reach. The key issue is the determination of the scope of
the threat, and its immediacy, versus our resources and constraints, and
with the diplomatic aspect tossed in as well. The US went into Afghanistan
and Iraq--and gee whiz, the Libyans and Iranians suddenly became amenable to
peaceful diplomatic solutions. The DPRK is still on the burner, but without
the support of either the CIS or the PRC it is only a matter of time before
we get what we want--so why start pounding the swords on the shields?

Brooks

Kevin Brooks wrote:

"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...

Korean nuclear bomb but they just laughed in our faces and produced 8
more in addition to the 2 they already had. We did nothing and still
do nothing.


So all of that diplomatic stuff (being conducted with the PRC's
participation) is "nothing", huh? Odd how you condemn the US for not
continuing to pursue other means in regards to Iraq, but seemingly think we
should be streaming across the 38th parallel at the drop of a hat...


Brooks, obvious that you just don't get it. Whatever the US does is
wrong. If we go to war, we shouldn't have. If we don't go to war, we
should have.

Please, do keep up. ;-)