New Book of Rules
in [Design]
|
From: John Larkin on 3 Aug 2006 11:27 On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 13:32:13 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bruere(a)gmail.com> wrote: >Michael A. Terrell wrote: >> Eeyore wrote: >>> Don Bowey wrote: >>> >>>> On 8/2/06 10:02 PM, in article 44D1834D.314D1A6B(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com, >>>> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I'm wondering if it wouldn't have made more sense for Britain to have made >>>>> peace with Germany on the condition that France was un-occupied and >>>> the > 3 countries would rule a New >>>> Europe. >>>>> We could have quietly had Hitler assasinated so many of the Jews would have >>>>> lived and Russia would have quietly taken the hint and kept out of the way. >>>>> >>>>> Had we gone that way, I reckon it's likely that half the globe would be >>>>> 'European' now ( think of the combined overseas territories of the former >>>>> colonial powers ) and the USA would simply be a colony again ! >>>> >>>> Dream on. My only comment is that this would be a very different world had >>>> the US not entered into the war in Europe. >>> You're deluding yourself about possible scenarios. It was WW2 that made the USA a >>> world power. Without it you'd still be a backwater. >>> >>> Graahm >> >> >> England wouldn't exist. A "Backwater" country could not have >> converted all of its industry to war materials, food, and medical >> supplies, or supplied so many trained solders in several generations, >> you little brain dead rag doll. The US was already a power to be >> reckoned with, but we were minding our own business. When push came to >> shove, we shoved, and won. You can whine, lie and cry all you want, but >> the facts are the facts. You could not have produced the steel, >> aluminum, copper and other needed metals in large enough quantities in >> time to build anything on the scale needed to win a World War. > >What would likely have happened would be that the Germany would have >exhauseted itself beating the Russians. Without direct US aid, the UK would have lost the Battle of Britian - it was won by a razor-edge margin - and the invasion would have been on, and likely successful. Hitler only turned east when Goring couldn't subdue the RAF. >The British Empire would have had time to fully militarise, They were fully militarized early in the war. Their resources were very limited. John
From: Eeyore on 3 Aug 2006 12:22 Ken Smith wrote: > The US only sells the previous generation of hardware not the latest. The > US airforce spends the money for development of the new fighters not the > other countries they get sold to. Well..... Britain's getting some JSFs too. Graham
From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax on 3 Aug 2006 12:28 John Larkin wrote: > On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 13:32:13 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax > <dirk.bruere(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Michael A. Terrell wrote: >>> Eeyore wrote: >>>> Don Bowey wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 8/2/06 10:02 PM, in article 44D1834D.314D1A6B(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com, >>>>> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I'm wondering if it wouldn't have made more sense for Britain to have made >>>>>> peace with Germany on the condition that France was un-occupied and >>>>> the > 3 countries would rule a New >>>>> Europe. >>>>>> We could have quietly had Hitler assasinated so many of the Jews would have >>>>>> lived and Russia would have quietly taken the hint and kept out of the way. >>>>>> >>>>>> Had we gone that way, I reckon it's likely that half the globe would be >>>>>> 'European' now ( think of the combined overseas territories of the former >>>>>> colonial powers ) and the USA would simply be a colony again ! >>>>> Dream on. My only comment is that this would be a very different world had >>>>> the US not entered into the war in Europe. >>>> You're deluding yourself about possible scenarios. It was WW2 that made the USA a >>>> world power. Without it you'd still be a backwater. >>>> >>>> Graahm >>> >>> England wouldn't exist. A "Backwater" country could not have >>> converted all of its industry to war materials, food, and medical >>> supplies, or supplied so many trained solders in several generations, >>> you little brain dead rag doll. The US was already a power to be >>> reckoned with, but we were minding our own business. When push came to >>> shove, we shoved, and won. You can whine, lie and cry all you want, but >>> the facts are the facts. You could not have produced the steel, >>> aluminum, copper and other needed metals in large enough quantities in >>> time to build anything on the scale needed to win a World War. >> What would likely have happened would be that the Germany would have >> exhauseted itself beating the Russians. > > Without direct US aid, the UK would have lost the Battle of Britian - > it was won by a razor-edge margin - and the invasion would have been > on, and likely successful. Hitler only turned east when Goring > couldn't subdue the RAF. That would still have been the position if the US had stayed out of the European war. >> The British Empire would have had time to fully militarise, > > They were fully militarized early in the war. Their resources were > very limited. Not so. Britain was not 'up to speed' until 1943. The resources of the Empire would have taken longer to fully utilise for the war. India alone could have supplied men for an army of millions given time. Dirk
From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax on 3 Aug 2006 12:29 John Larkin wrote: > On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 13:29:21 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax > <dirk.bruere(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Eeyore wrote: >>> Don Bowey wrote: >>> >>>> On 8/2/06 8:39 PM, in article 44D16FE3.F09C46C3(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com, >>>> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Don Bowey wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I suppose England should fervently hope they are not caught up again in a >>>>>> debacle of their own. >>>>> England ? >>>>> >>>>> Graham >>>> Yes! You deaf? >>> Tell me more about this *England*. >>> >>> Does it have an English Army, an English Navy and an English Air Force ? >>> >>> Does it have a seat on the UN Security Council too ? >>> >>> Graham >>> >>> >> He's referring to the bit that owns Scotlandshire (Englands northernmost >> county) Walesborough (also known as West England) and Island. >> > > Ah, the mighty British Empire, on which the sun sometimes gets. Nothing compared to the American Empire, with its military stationed in over 130 nations. Dirk
From: John Larkin on 3 Aug 2006 13:33
On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 06:53:39 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: > > >Don Bowey wrote: > >> On 8/2/06 10:02 PM, in article 44D1834D.314D1A6B(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com, >> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> > I'm wondering if it wouldn't have made more sense for Britain to have made >> > peace with Germany on the condition that France was un-occupied and >> the > 3 countries would rule a New >> Europe. >> > >> > We could have quietly had Hitler assasinated so many of the Jews would have >> > lived and Russia would have quietly taken the hint and kept out of the way. >> > >> > Had we gone that way, I reckon it's likely that half the globe would be >> > 'European' now ( think of the combined overseas territories of the former >> > colonial powers ) and the USA would simply be a colony again ! >> >> >> Dream on. My only comment is that this would be a very different world had >> the US not entered into the war in Europe. > >You're deluding yourself about possible scenarios. It was WW2 that made the USA a >world power. Without it you'd still be a backwater. > That's mostly true. The US was always isolationalist, especially so after WWI. Being pulled into WWII built up the military, occupying and rebuilding Europe and Japan kept us involved, and taking over the defense of the West kept up the military investment. The Islamic confrontation is taking over, now that communism has mostly petered out. It's always something. John |