Will Europe Help America In WW3? Should They?

reply to post by Germanicus

Like I said. You guys are to blame if America gets nuked. Not China or Russia. And you will have to thank them for it. A swift victory is a good one isnt it?

How does one figure? A nuke ever went off in this country you can rest assured that it will have been Russian and Chinese scientists and technicians that made that possible.

Sorry don't buy in to the America is evil line there are far more evil people in the world who would not hesitate to nuke Aus. if it suited them.

Are you pro-Dresden too? Not many people know about Dresden.

Seems that there are some who don't give a crap about the London BLitz and other bombing campaign's of the Third Reich that killed hundreds of thousands if not millions.

nstead, we can justify these acts because people like you guys have the guts to say you support them.

How does one come to that conclusion those choices were not made by any of us?

reply to post by neo96

Seems that there are some who don't give a crap about the London BLitz and other bombing campaign's of the Third Reich that killed hundreds of thousands if not millions.

Who are they?

Are you saying that I dont care?

Because I take great offence just so you know.

How does one figure? A nuke ever went off in this country you can rest assured that it will have been Russian and Chinese scientists and technicians that made that possible. Sorry don't buy in to the America is evil line there are far more evil people in the world who would not hesitate to nuke Aus. if it suited them.

Guys like you have allowed them to justify these demonic cowardly acts. Now China and Russia lnow that can justify sending a nuke to New York and LA. It is because of how people like you have allowed it to be written into history as if it was ok.

It was not.

And if a Western Nation gets nuked it is because America and many people justify what happened to the people of Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

And for that matter Dresden,which is disgusting.

reply to post by Germanicus


So you've made it abundantly clear that nuclear weapons are off limits in your eyes, and you condemn anyone who uses them... So you keep bringing up China using them on USA, would you condemn them too if they did it? Would you still want Australia to partner up with them? The fact remains that in times of war there isnt a "nice" way to kill someone, whether it be from a M-16, a drone, flamethrower, landmine, grenade, stabbing, etc. they all suck, they all cause pain to others and they are all wrong....

I'm not proud that my country used a nuclear weapon, but at the time I dont really think they understood what they were using (since it was never tested in a war)... Bad things happen in times of war but people learn and grow from these horrible situations... The world now understands the true consequences of using a nuclear weapon and becuase of that it would be very careless to use one today... The world saw the devastating affects of the Atomic Bomb and since then no one has dropped one on an opposing force (thank god)....

Originally posted by Germanicus
because we all know that Japan was goaded into the war by America.

As I stated earlier I saw a flaw in your logic and saw this argument coming from a mile away.

They had to attack Pearl Harbour didnt they?

Did they?
I wanna see how you justify their attack.

Originally posted by jhn7537
reply to post by Germanicus

 

So you've made it abundantly clear that nuclear weapons are off limits in your eyes, and you condemn anyone who uses them... So you keep bringing up China using them on USA, would you condemn them too if they did it? Would you still want Australia to partner up with them? The fact remains that in times of war there isnt a "nice" way to kill someone, whether it be from a M-16, a drone, flamethrower, landmine, grenade, stabbing, etc. they all suck, they all cause pain to others and they are all wrong....

I'm not proud that my country used a nuclear weapon, but at the time I dont really think they understood what they were using (since it was never tested in a war)... Bad things happen in times of war but people learn and grow from these horrible situations... The world now understands the true consequences of using a nuclear weapon and becuase of that it would be very careless to use one today... The world saw the devastating affects of the Atomic Bomb and since then no one has dropped one on an opposing force (thank god)....

yes,of course. Do you think I would do a happy dance?

But we live in a world now where the 'good guys' dropped nukes. It was not ok. You cannot explain it away. Nothing in that war was good. It was a horrible thing and that is how it should be remembered. there were no good guys,especially when the 'good guys' drop bombs on massive amounts of non-combatants, it should be condemned. Not justified.

America got away with it. Other nations now know they can drop a nuke and still be the good guys.

( and no I am not pro nazi/japan, I just find that it is hypocritical to talk about Pearl Harbour or other things and then in the next breath,say you are pro-Hiroshima,pro-Nagasaki, pro-Dresden )

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by Germanicus
because we all know that Japan was goaded into the war by America.

As I stated earlier I saw a flaw in your logic and saw this argument coming from a mile away.

They had to attack Pearl Harbour didnt they?

Did they?
I wanna see how you justify their attack.

Im not justifying it. You are. Keep up

And if you dont know about what your government was doing to Japan dont blame me. google it. And when you do, tell me what Japan was doing to America?

WWI US Military Statistics:

Total Number Army/Navy/Marines In Service: 4,734,991
Total Number Army/Navy/Marines Deaths: 116,516
Total Number Army/Navy/Marines Wounded: 204,002

WWII US Military Statistics:

Total Number Army/Navy/Marines In Service: 16,112,566
Total Number Army/Navy/Marines Deaths: 405,399
Total Number Army/Navy/Marines Wounded: 670,846

OP, I wish all of the above and their families were alive and gathered in a group so you could pose your ignoble question to them in person.

I actually disagree with the premise that any country will have to "help" the US is a WW3.
History will repeat itself. No one country, at least one that requires outside help, will attack the U.S. in the foreseeable future.
Much more likely, as the U.S. contracts militarily, the formula/ingredients the preceded WW2 will come into play. Multiple powers fairly evenly matched, reality or perception, will now,lacking a lone superpower, likely make a move somewhere other than against the U.S.
All kinds of scenarios out there just simmering.
Much more likely that the U.S. will be called upon, yet again, to help one or the other "participants".
Like it or not, the lone superpower status has provided stability to the world. When that's gone is when the trouble will start.
One last point, it certainly won't be a U.S. vs China scenario. China is not a military threat to the U.S. and won't be for a good twenty years, at least.
The Chinese know their history. the last attempt to create a "great new eastern power" was the Japanese, then labeled, I believe, "the all east-asian co-prosperity sphere". We all know how that ended up.... Too many similar issues between the two, nowhere near the strongest military and lacking "in-house" critical resources to name a few.
They won't make the same mistake, In my opinion. At least not for quite a while......

Originally posted by Outofcontrol
Well... we shouldnt.

We should watch from outside, and then go in when its over, deal with the left overs, save the day, and then make massive profits from rebuilding the nations involved and get ourselves into a golden age...

You know, pretty much what the US did in ww2...

We should've left you Euro's to fend for yourselves in WWII...I believe the outcome would've been much different

reply to post by Germanicus


Collateral damage happens in times of war, I'm not saying its ok, but its just a fact that its going to happen... The casualty count in a war will never consist of just soldiers..... Whether its 1 unarmed citizen or 1000000 unarmed citizens its never ok to kill someone who isnt in the fight, but to think any nation will ever go through a war without killing an innocent bystander is fooling themselves....These things happen and they will continue to happen as long as wars happens...

reply to post by Germanicus


You seem to be mentioning Dresden quite a lot yet consistently refuse to condemn The Blitz.

Without wanting to diminish the effort and role Australia played in WWII but around 43,000 civilians died as a direct result of German bombing of London and other UK cities during The Blitz, that's slightly more than the total amount of Australians, military and civilians, who paid the ultimate price during the whole of WWII.

For the record the most recent research suggests that around 18,000 people died during the bombing of Dresden, nothing to be proud of by any stretch of the imagination, but it put's things in perspective.

Perhaps you should spare some of your indignation for the victims of German military rather than conveniently ignoring or glossing over.

Unlikely that they would help in my not so humble opinion. Not unless they were personally getting something out of it. Now of course if anyone else got into trouble they would expect the US to help them ironically enough! I think it is interesting though how people can hate americans, yet really have no understanding of your average american beyond what the media tells them is true.

reply to post by sith9157


I wonder what the US of A would look like to day if they didn't fight in ww2.

I doubt the US would dominate like they do to day. And Israel would never have existed.

The whole world would have been different. The US dollar wouldn't have been the world currency either.

reply to post by nwtrucker

One last point, it certainly won't be a U.S. vs China scenario. China is not a military threat to the U.S. and won't be for a good twenty years, at least.

Well this is the crux.

America is a failure. Its economy is a mess. They are pretty much a punchline.

Do you really think their economy will justify them keeping the Reserve Currency in 20 years?
2 years? I dont.

And I disagree about China. I think they and their allies can win. I think they are the favourites and the US the underdog.

And speaking of underdods,they often win. I usually cheer for them.

reply to post by spy66


Yup

Not just Eastern Europe but all of Europe would have fallen under Stalin's iron grip because nobody would have stood in their way while Europe was in shambles.

Originally posted by Germanicus
reply to post by nwtrucker

 

One last point, it certainly won't be a U.S. vs China scenario. China is not a military threat to the U.S. and won't be for a good twenty years, at least.

Well this is the crux.

America is a failure. Its economy is a mess. They are pretty much a punchline.

Do you really think their economy will justify them keeping the Reserve Currency in 20 years?
2 years? I dont.

And I disagree about China. I think they and their allies can win. I think they are the favourites and the US the underdog.

And speaking of underdods,they often win. I usually cheer for them.

Everyones economy is a mess, if anything, the world economy is the punchline....

USA and NATO is stronger than any military out there....

USA/NATO > China/Russia

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by Germanicus

 

You seem to be mentioning Dresden quite a lot yet consistently refuse to condemn The Blitz.

Without wanting to diminish the effort and role Australia played in WWII but around 43,000 civilians died as a direct result of German bombing of London and other UK cities during The Blitz, that's slightly more than the total amount of Australians, military and civilians, who paid the ultimate price during the whole of WWII.

For the record the most recent research suggests that around 18,000 people died during the bombing of Dresden, nothing to be proud of by any stretch of the imagination, but it put's things in perspective.

Perhaps you should spare some of your indignation for the victims of German military rather than conveniently ignoring or glossing over.

dont put words in my mouth

I have clearly said that I am not in favour of bombing non-combatants on either side. Clearly. Just because I dont spend a paragraph on the Blitz does not mean I " refuse to condemn' it. So what is your problem?

And what is your point?

Darwin was hit harder than Pearl Harbour.

Are you saying I am in favour of attacks on Darwin? Are you? Because it sounds like you are. I have not mentioned Darwin have I? Does that mean I refuse to condemn it? Does it? Are you saying I am fine withmy home being bombed?

And,as I said,in my opinion Dresden was the worst,most uncalled for thing in the history of the world. It makes me sick.

So what is your point? And what the hell?



edit- egocentric Brit

reply to post by SLAYER69


With all due respect, Stalin never once expressed any sort of desire to invade and control Western Europe.

Yes, he wanted to destroy Germany militarily so that they could never realistically pose a threat again and he would have still controlled a buffer zone between Russia and Western Europe but I doubt very much he had either the will or ability to control the whole continent.
That would have brought him a whole lot of grief that he neither needed or wanted.

Stalin was many things, but a fool he wasn't.

reply to post by Germanicus


So you cant admit that there was no real legitimate justification for Pearl Harbor.

But let's go with your logic here
Cutting off their American Oil supplies and cutting off access to American steel because of the slaughtering they were doing in their war with China justifies their further aggression at Pearl Harbor?

reply to post by Freeborn


With all due respect, you actually would take Stalin at his word? I think the Poles made that mistake once.

Stalin was many things but being truthful wasn't always on the top of the list.