It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Passer By
If it wasn't for the American(And the European at the time) bully tatics on Germany and the Treaty of Verssiles(sp?) there wouldn't have been a second world war arguably.
Originally posted by Boatphone
Originally posted by CPYKOmega
Originally posted by edsinger
Sometimes I really wonder what would happen if the US just stayed out of everything?
Agreed! The world would probably be a lot better place, don't you think?? Government funded terrorism would probably not exist ......anymore.
If the U.S. had stayed out of everything, Nazis would be ruling the world!
Originally posted by the_oleneo
Originally posted by Passer By
If it wasn't for the American(And the European at the time) bully tatics on Germany and the Treaty of Verssiles(sp?) there wouldn't have been a second world war arguably.
That is completely inaccurate. The French and the British bore a greater responsibility for their revenge-minded bully tactics on Germany and the Versailles Treaty was their inflicted punishment on Germany of which led to the second World War.
The Big Three knew even before they met that they wanted to punish Germany. France wanted revenge, Britain wanted a relatively strong economically viable Germany as a counterweight to French dominance on Continental Europe, and the U.S. wanted the creation of a permanent peace as quickly as possible, as well as the destruction of the old Empires. The result was a compromise, which left nobody satisfied. Germany was neither crushed nor conciliated, which did not bode well for the future of Germany, Europe and the world as a whole. The Treaty of Versailles did cripple Germany's economy in the early 1920's and left it vulnerable to the equally devastating Great Depression of the early 1930's, which in turn paved the way for the Nazis, led by Adolf Hitler, to seize power. However, the reparations were a failure in retrospect as well from the view that Germany made money off the treaty, as she did not repay most of her foreign loans in the 20s and did not complete her indemnity payments.
Source: The Versailles Treaty
Please read the history in the above link. I do not know where did you get the basis of that absurd suggestion that the United States have to do with bullying Germany when President Woodrow Wilson struggled, unsuccessfully, in convincing the British and the French leaderships not to go too hard and far on Germany.
Originally posted by mrwupy
I too vote no in both cases. Here is why:
Iran.
Iran is going thru their own version of the dark ages where religion rules and tyranny is the result. Its not pretty but its also not something that can be defeated with force. They are at a time and place that they must come out of themselves. Any attack will only strengthen the Mullahs...
North Korea,
We need to ignore North Korea and tell South Korea, "You've had over half a century to learn how to defend yourself. If you can't by now then bygod you deserve to fall."
Harsh, I know. Still, just my humble opinion.
Wupy
Originally posted by Passer By
There is the gross, and there is the subtle. To the masses, the gross is the real and the subtle illusion. The reality IMO, is the reverse.
Originally posted by Passer By
The US has always had ties to Germany, and while I agree that they may not have been the ones to push for the harsher terms, they were they're helping the Germans, and it is that allaince that should really underline what you are seeing in America these days.
Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
As has been pointed out, "Ill Kim" has a population that is starving, but he is more concerned with having a large, standing army that is poised to move south at any time. On top of that, he wants a nuclear force. For what reason? Are, or have we ever, threatened to invade NK? Nope. Is there any reason? Nope. If he became a responsible little tyrant, took care of his people and became a honorable member of the world community, would things be better for his people and the world? Well, of course.
Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Do you think that the South Korean Government should attempt to outpace them in an arms race as we did the Soviets? If that be the case, who is going to get them up to speed in the nuclear department? Us? Sure, and then we'd hear all the whining about how we are engaging in nuclear proliferation as the countries many in this thread want to paint as being as decent of governments as ours is. Nope. WE pull out, how many months do you think would pass before the South was wiped out?
Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
I find it interesting that if a communistic regime attacks an country with a representative government and wins, then the representative government "deserves" it, but if psychotic despots are removed, we are out of control. I'm sure the irony is lost on some.
Originally posted by Moretti
The same could be said about Bush and the united states.
Originally posted by the_oleneo
That is completely inaccurate. The French and the British bore a greater responsibility for their revenge-minded bully tactics on Germany and the Versailles Treaty was their inflicted punishment on Germany of which led to the second World War.
The Big Three knew even before they met that they wanted to punish Germany. France wanted revenge, Britain wanted a relatively strong economically viable Germany as a counterweight to French dominance on Continental Europe, and the U.S. wanted the creation of a permanent peace as quickly as possible, as well as the destruction of the old Empires. The result was a compromise, which left nobody satisfied. Germany was neither crushed nor conciliated, which did not bode well for the future of Germany, Europe and the world as a whole. The Treaty of Versailles did cripple Germany's economy in the early 1920's and left it vulnerable to the equally devastating Great Depression of the early 1930's, which in turn paved the way for the Nazis, led by Adolf Hitler, to seize power. However, the reparations were a failure in retrospect as well from the view that Germany made money off the treaty, as she did not repay most of her foreign loans in the 20s and did not complete her indemnity payments.
Source: The Versailles Treaty
Please read the history in the above link. I do not know where did you get the basis of that absurd suggestion that the United States have to do with bullying Germany when President Woodrow Wilson struggled, unsuccessfully, in convincing the British and the French leaderships not to go too hard and far on Germany.
That was with negligable resistance from an organised army. North Korea in particular has a much larger and better equipped army than Iraq.
Originally posted by WeBDeviL
Oh, BTW:
To the punishment on Germany post WW1, the U.S. was not involved.
The Big Three at the time had opposing viewpoints. British and French diplomats wanted to punish Germany for their acts. However, the socialist/left government in the U.S. at the time wanted to rebuild rather than punish.
Those are the facts. Thank you.
-wD
Originally posted by centurion1211
Originally posted by LadyV
These silly "are you for or against" threads are pointless! We can be against it for forty forevers...and it will do nothing! We can be for and it will do nothing. The government will do exactly what it wants to do and doesn’t matter whether, we the people, agree or not!
Since you have appointed yourself overseer of whether or not threads are pointless, please save us all quite a bit of time by providing a list of acceptable topics.
Thank you.
[edit on 5/24/2005 by centurion1211]