britain saved the USA during ww2

britian saved the US during ww2

  • Total voters
    24
tom prendergast said:
Nobody is saying that Britain could have survived without US aid, I was talking about how the US would have survived without the Brits. It really does surprise me that people seemed incapable of understanding that I was talking hypothetically.
Click to expand...

You are so full of BS.
You made a claim, that you couldn't support, got called to task on it, and are just backpedaling and juggling now.

You should really apply to work in the Circus. :palm:
 
usaloyal2theend said:
I think we should all chip in and get Tom and Low erector sets for Christmas.

It should be made in China and the same specs should include the leaded paint used in manufacturing the toys they poison children the world over with.

At least we'd know there was some lead between the two of these Nancy Boys.
Click to expand...

Tom and Low getting an erector? Now that'd be a Christmas miracle!
 
Ice Dancer said:
Tom and Low getting an erector? Now that'd be a Christmas miracle!
Click to expand...

Now, you dont believe in miracles, do you?
I dont think your pebble kicking cousin would know an erection if she saw one. It must be terrible to contemplate a headstone with the epitaph 'Returned unopened'.
I'm really glad that Tom and I are occupying your thoughts. It keeps you out of bars and her believing she still might make it.
 
Southern Man said:
We provided more men, ships and aircraft though.
Click to expand...

To an extent. However we still needed the British. Without their navy, we would have been unable to control the Atlantic and Pacific, and as Tom pointed out, their colonials provided great assistance to us during our pacific campaign, a fact often neglected over here.
 
Superfreak said:
The only arrogance being displayed on this thread was from people across the pond playing the 'u Americans are all arrogant' BS. The reason Tom was taunted was not because he wasn't American, nor was it the due to others thinking 'we are American and thus better than Tom'. Tom was taunted because he made an assertion and then continually ducked answering why he believed as he did. Tom continually made diversions in an attempt to steer the conversation elsewhere.

When Tom finally addressed his original assertion, the taunting ceased and the discussion resumed.

Now we have you coming in with your 'u Americans are arrogant' bullshit. If that is all you are good for, please understand we already have Low for that.
Click to expand...

Tom asked the guy to apologize for calling him a moron and stupid and that he would tell them.

Then you have guys like this.

Originally Posted by Watermark: I don't think the war could've been won without all three, the USSR, Britian, and the US.

and the American's response was?

Your first three words say it all.....moron.....

I never claimed ALL Americans. But from what I have encountered?MANY Americans seem to have this sentimentality. It's part of thier nationalist upbringing. My beef is not really against the American people. It's against the government of America and the way the society is governed over all.

And yes I am from Canada and I see American influence doing more harm then good here. But thank you for Bass Pro Shops.lol
 
CaptBillyTheKid said:
To an extent. However we still needed the British. Without their navy, we would have been unable to control the Atlantic and Pacific, and as Tom pointed out, their colonials provided great assistance to us during our pacific campaign, a fact often neglected over here.
Click to expand...
Some truth to that. However towards the end of the conflict we had a huge number of aircraft carriers. Something like 100 or so if my history is correct.
 
Yurt said:
huh....then don't hijack this thread.....

this is about his claim that the british saved the US during WW2......

he will use any excuse to avoid this thread, let's not give it to him.....i offer him a cordial thread to offer proof, to explain himself....

the floor is his
Click to expand...

What he said was "... as I have espoused several times before both here and on other forums, it was the Brits that saved your arses in WW2."

Espouse: –verb (used with object), -poused, -pous⋅ing.
1. to make one's own; adopt or embrace, as a cause.

Synonyms: accept, adopt, advocate, approve, back, champion, defend, embrace, get into, go in for, maintain, stand behind, take on, take up, uphold

Clearly it was an opinion, but maybe some of you just weren't familiar with the meaning of "espouse".
 
christiefan915 said:
What he said was "... as I have espoused several times before both here and on other forums, it was the Brits that saved your arses in WW2."

Espouse: –verb (used with object), -poused, -pous⋅ing.
1. to make one's own; adopt or embrace, as a cause.

Synonyms: accept, adopt, advocate, approve, back, champion, defend, embrace, get into, go in for, maintain, stand behind, take on, take up, uphold

Clearly it was an opinion, but maybe some of you just weren't familiar with the meaning of "espouse".
Click to expand...
Asking people to support their opinions is something that is regularly requested on this and other messageboards.
 
christiefan915 said:
What he said was "... as I have espoused several times before both here and on other forums, it was the Brits that saved your arses in WW2."

Espouse: –verb (used with object), -poused, -pous⋅ing.
1. to make one's own; adopt or embrace, as a cause.

Synonyms: accept, adopt, advocate, approve, back, champion, defend, embrace, get into, go in for, maintain, stand behind, take on, take up, uphold

Clearly it was an opinion, but maybe some of you just weren't familiar with the meaning of "espouse".
Click to expand...

I think everyone on here understood it was his opinion. Which is why we asked to him to explain WHY or HOW he came to have that opinion. If people want to simply state an opinion without providing the rationale for that opinion, they have that right.

However, the remaining board members also have the right to call into question those opinions. Go back and look at the other thread.... Posts 64 and beyond...
 
Last edited:
wiseones2cents said:
Tom asked the guy to apologize for calling him a moron and stupid and that he would tell them.

Then you have guys like this.

Originally Posted by Watermark: I don't think the war could've been won without all three, the USSR, Britian, and the US.

and the American's response was?

Your first three words say it all.....moron.....

I never claimed ALL Americans. But from what I have encountered?MANY Americans seem to have this sentimentality. It's part of thier nationalist upbringing. My beef is not really against the American people. It's against the government of America and the way the society is governed over all.

And yes I am from Canada and I see American influence doing more harm then good here. But thank you for Bass Pro Shops.lol
Click to expand...

Go back and look at the other thread from the point Tom made his assertion on. Roughly post 64 and beyond...

Tom stated

Fact of the matter, as I have espoused several times before both here and on other forums, it was the Brits that saved your arses in WW2.
Click to expand...

The very next post I said I would be interested in learning why he thought that. He responded to me 'I doubt it because it isn't the Hollywood version'.

At that point, no one had called him a moron for his position on the War. Yet he was already ducking the issue.... and he continued to do so for quite some time. So do us a favor and get off your knee jerk defense of his actions.

As for Waters comments.... I stated that I disagreed with him. That I thought the combo of Russia and the UK could have still defeated the Germans, though I thought it would take longer to do so.
 
Southern Man said:
Some truth to that. However towards the end of the conflict we had a huge number of aircraft carriers. Something like 100 or so if my history is correct.
Click to expand...

You may wish to re-check that memory of yours...

I think the total number of US carriers in WWII was closer to 20-25. It was certainly not anywhere near 100.
 
Superfreak said:
You may wish to re-check that memory of yours...

I think the total number of US carriers in WWII was closer to 20-25. It was certainly not anywhere near 100.
Click to expand...
Actually, it was more than 100. Here's a picture of CVE-123.

CVE-123_Tinian.gif


And here's a list of those commissioned during that era: http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ships/ships-cv.html
 
Southern Man said:
Some truth to that. However towards the end of the conflict we had a huge number of aircraft carriers. Something like 100 or so if my history is correct.
Click to expand...

Yes but almost all of them were deployed in the Pacific. And without the British colonials we would probably not have been able to take the Pacific Islands, as the colonials took up many Japanese land divisions.
 
christiefan915 said:
What he said was "... as I have espoused several times before both here and on other forums, it was the Brits that saved your arses in WW2."

Espouse: –verb (used with object), -poused, -pous⋅ing.
1. to make one's own; adopt or embrace, as a cause.

Synonyms: accept, adopt, advocate, approve, back, champion, defend, embrace, get into, go in for, maintain, stand behind, take on, take up, uphold

Clearly it was an opinion, but maybe some of you just weren't familiar with the meaning of "espouse".
Click to expand...

what is your point? of course it is his opinion....he believes his opinion is factual.....funny how you cut off the "fact of the matter is".....after realizing he could not back his opinion up on this board....he later claimed it was a hypothetical....but it is clear from his opinion he believes it is factual and has advocated his position several times, thus showing he is not being honest about his "hypothetical"...he really believes it and believes it is a fact....

i really fail to see why you made this post
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top