US Politics

[Spindle]

Iran's greatest mistake was to trust the United States.

If they had not signed a nuclear treaty which they kept to, and Trump tore up, they could by now have joined the nuclear club and have the security others do, in particular the prevention of nuclear attack by the United States.

The only time a nuclear bomb was fired was by the United States on Japanese civilians in WW2, the USA is now widely perceived in the world as the creator of global chaos with its incessant wars from which no good has ever come, they are a rogue state bullying the world by borrowing to enforce their empire's hegemony.

The United States was born by genocide and racism against it's indigenous people and has had only 19 years peace in the 250 years of it's existence.

Why are americans so stupid as to allow a small country like Israel to practically rule them?

Well they do, congress has just voted to allow merger of their military with the genocidal IDF.

Its quite incredible, like WW2 reversed.

😎

Please bag your bags and fk off to one of the islamic shtholes that you flagshag for, you are not British

 

[Spindle]

What a stupid crass comment. Is that your sole response, just showing you can't come up with a reasoned argument.
Because someone is critical of the USA does not make them a raving communist.

He's a Jew hating Islamist not a communist. You can stick up for him but he'd be celebrating when they chop off your head

 

[silvertop]

I agree, the US has been primarily responsible for the decades of global peace since the end of WWII. That it had partners who were willing to have open to frank conversations but also capable partners, I think helped more than people realize. Post WWII is a fascinating time to study in that the US is trying to get out of Europe but trying to stick around to keep the Soviets out while hoping at the same time that the broken economies of Europe would be able to fund strong militaries that could relieve the US of the responsibility but many European politicians realized that they could improve social programs and put less into their military and they did so for decades.

The original gold issues arouse two years before the US even joined World War I, England wanted goods from the US and the US wasn't going to give it for free. That England couldn't pay for everything that it wanted wasn't the fault of the US, that is the fault of England not being fiscally responsible. England destroyed its economy for a continent who refused to spend the same amount on themselves.

It is my individual perspective that there really wasn't as much of a switch in going from the UK to the US in terms of transitions as people would like to believe. There is an ethical component inside of the English speaking world that has its roots in the Magna Carta that most of the rest of the world has never taken to heart at the same level. So while the accent may have switched, the morals and ethics have been fairly consistent.

I think Trump makes some solid points at times in which I agree with him. And then he'll turn around and say something that is so asinine that I cannot figure out what his point is. That being said, the European anti-American attitudes did arrive with Trump and have been going for longer then most of have been alive. Pretending that it doesn't exist is just as disingenuous as saying Trump is a moral person, it just isn't accurate.

Some good stuff in there but please call our country by its name.

Also this claim of the US seeking to pass back responsibility for European defence is a Trump thing. Previous incumbents have occasionally paid lip service to the concept for popular reasons but have largely followed the concept of the post war settlement and serving the military industrial behemoth.

 

[Mark B]

Some good stuff in there but please call our country by its name.

Also this claim of the US seeking to pass back responsibility for European defence is a Trump thing. Previous incumbents have occasionally paid lip service to the concept for popular reasons but have largely followed the concept of the post war settlement and serving the military industrial behemoth.

So you prefer just England? Works for me, whatever makes you happy.

The pass back to Europeans on defense actually started with Eisenhower back in the 1950s. He hit on many of the same problems today while recognizing that most of Europe was not economically capable of taking on that role. Especially following the collapse of the Soviet Union American Presidents pushed for it but they were polite about it, unlike Trump who seems to derive almost sexual pleasure from pointing out European issues.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Biden was clearly incapable Wisbech. It was unfortunate for him and his family but clearly true. Even the Democrats who had been desperately peddling lies to prop him up had to act to remove him.

When these points were first raised on Hol Wisbech denied them and put them down to 'conspiracy'.

If I remember correctly it took the Democrats removing Biden until he came to terms with reality.

Coming to terms with reality isn't his strong suit.

 

[Stirlingsays]

The US is perceived as the "world as the creator of global chaos" because it is the only nation that actually does anything around the globe.

Hang on....This is the position that America fought, over many decades, to be in.

When America was the second player to the British Empire, it worked against our empire exactly because it wanted to replace it. WW2 was the event that made this a reality.

America battled like mad to become the main superpower....it wasn't an accident and many books from the era commented upon it.

For the same reason that morons hate cops, they hate people that stop them from doing evil things to others. For example, Europeans continue to fail at keeping the peace within Europe so the Americans have to get involved. When the US tries to pull back Europeans cry and beg them to stay. You don't want them involved until something goes wrong and then you cry that they haven't solved your problems for you.

This is another observation that also contains recency bias.

After WW2 America stationed troops in Europe to stop the threat of the Soviet Union taking it over. While there is a historic and genetic connection to Europe this decision was.....and continues to be in America's best interest.

If America had lost all of Europe to the Soviets then they would have been the weaker power.....America have been obsessed with keeping Russia and Germany apart and it's literally formed their policy since before WW2.

Trump makes a big noise about removing troops from Europe but only the more gullible in his base fall for it. I would love America to do that....but you notice that it's never done? That isn't an accident.

America would lose massive influence and the ability to control Europe.....Those European leaders don't fawn around Trump because they like him, it's because the current set up means that America has a major role economically and militarily in Europe.

If they stepped away then that role would be filled by others and America would lose Europe as client status.....there are a lot of negatives to that.

Now America's power and influence around the world has been declining....It's not just Trump, but he hasn't helped. Just like late stage Rome it's ebbing away and that's a concern for the west in general.

But this idea that America has just been doing Europe a favour is closing one eye and refusing to see the reality.

Personally I've grown tired of Trump insults and he's done a large amount of soft power damage.

So maybe instead of sitting in the cuck chair in the corner requiring the French to protect British citizens and property, maybe you should actually get back in to the game and be a productive nation for the first time in decades. Britain was once the greatest nation in the world but the loss of the brave bloodlines during WWI made it so only the meek reproduced and you end up with what you have now. A country with too many whiners who complain about others while the few actual British patriots are arrested by the thought police for pointing out the issues.

There isn't anything to disagree with on this.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Biden was clearly incapable Wisbech. It was unfortunate for him and his family but clearly true. Even the Democrats who had been desperately peddling lies to prop him up had to act to remove him.

He wasn’t incapable! He functioned perfectly well, primarily by surrounding himself with competent people to whom he listened and delegated.

His problem was aging and the impact it had on his public appearances. He was never at his best when in front of cameras and this got markedly worse. As public perception is vital, especially during an election campaign, it was very clear for a long time that he ought not to run for a second term. Getting him to accept that proved difficult.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

When these points were first raised on Hol Wisbech denied them and put them down to 'conspiracy'.

If I remember correctly it took the Democrats removing Biden until he came to terms with reality.

Coming to terms with reality isn't his strong suit.

Read my reply to ASCPFC. It contains all you need to know about my opinion on Biden, both now and previously. No conspiracies involved. I have no idea where that idea comes from! Other than unrelenting prejudice.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Read my reply to ASCPFC. It contains all you need to know about my opinion on Biden, both now and previously. No conspiracies involved. I have no idea where that idea comes from! Other than unrelenting prejudice.

It's ok....You're kind of Hol's Biden.

You should go and have a nap or something.

 

[Mark B]

Hang on....This is the position that America fought, over many decades, to be in.

When America was the second player to the British Empire, it worked against our empire exactly because it wanted to replace it. WW2 was the event that made this a reality.

America battled like mad to become the main superpower....it wasn't an accident and many books from the era commented upon it.




This is another observation that also contains recency bias.

After WW2 America stationed troops in Europe to stop the threat of the Soviet Union taking it over. While there is a historic and genetic connection to Europe this decision was.....and continues to be in America's best interest.

If America had lost all of Europe to the Soviets then they would have been the weaker power.....America have been obsessed with keeping Russia and Germany apart and it's literally formed their policy since before WW2.

Trump makes a big noise about removing troops from Europe but only the more gullible in his base fall for it. I would love America to do that....but you notice that it's never done? That isn't an accident.

America would lose massive influence and the ability to control Europe.....Those European leaders don't fawn around Trump because they like him, it's because the current set up means that America has a major role economically and militarily in Europe.

If they stepped away then that role would be filled by others and America would lose Europe as client status.....there are a lot of negatives to that.

Now America's power and influence around the world has been declining....It's not just Trump, but he hasn't helped. Just like late stage Rome it's ebbing away and that's a concern for the west in general.

But this idea that America has just been doing Europe a favour is closing one eye and refusing to see the reality.

Personally I've grown tired of Trump insults and he's done a large amount of soft power damage.



There isn't anything to disagree with on this.

Hang on....This is the position that America fought, over many decades, to be in.

- Untrue, complete European fiction. The US has been trying to get out of Europe since 1950. British Lord Ismay, famously remarked that the purpose of the controversial new postwar alliance would be “to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.” He was the First Secretary-General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

When America was the second player to the British Empire, it worked against our empire exactly because it wanted to replace it. WW2 was the event that made this a reality.

- The US had replaced England as the largest economy in the 1890s, so you are about 50 years late on that claim. That England continuously made military decisions to preserve its Empire and influence that extended the war would suggest that England was more of the party playing politics then the US was. A lot of books say a lot of things, most of them random fantasies. I can find just as many books that disagree with your viewpoints.


-After WW2 America stationed troops in Europe to stop the threat of the Soviet Union taking it over. While there is a historic and genetic connection to Europe this decision was.....and continues to be in America's best interest.

- The US stationed troops to maintain order in Germany and Italy. That is why they were called the United States Constabulary.


If America had lost all of Europe to the Soviets then they would have been the weaker power.....America have been obsessed with keeping Russia and Germany apart and it's literally formed their policy since before WW2.

Taking over a destroyed Europe wouldn't have put the Soviet Union in a more power economic situation following WWII then the US. Destroyed factories wouldn’t have given the Soviets much and the US had and economic engine that dwarfed the rest of the world. They would have also had to spend time securing countries where the people hated them.

Trump makes a big noise about removing troops from Europe but only the more gullible in his base fall for it. I would love America to do that....but you notice that it's never done? That isn't an accident.

You mean other then the 36,000 personnel who have left Europe in the last two decades? Who left under Bush, Obama, Trump previously and Biden? I was one of the guys in the units there that got sent back to the states, so yeah, it happened.

America would lose massive influence and the ability to control Europe.....Those European leaders don't fawn around Trump because they like him, it's because the current set up means that America has a major role economically and militarily in Europe.

I think most European Leaders hate Trump because he says in public what previous US leaders said primarily in private, Europeans are leaches and don’t pay their fair share on defense.


If they stepped away then that role would be filled by others and America would lose Europe as client status.....there are a lot of negatives to that.

Who? Europeans have been saying that the US would be replaced but who steps up? When I check the number of young English who are willing to de to save England it is miniscule, do you think more are magically going to defend Poland?


Now America's power and influence around the world has been declining....It's not just Trump, but he hasn't helped. Just like late stage Rome it's ebbing away and that's a concern for the west in general.

So the nation whose economy continues to expand whose military is vastly stronger then everyone else’s is actually declining in influence? Nah, sorry, doesn’t work. The US just cares less about Europe and the interest went to Asia and South America. Because you view Europe as being central to the world, you view it as declining because otherwise you are irrelevant.

But this idea that America has just been doing Europe a favour is closing one eye and refusing to see the reality.

I’m not the delusional one here buddy, I’ve been studying this for decades. You seem to have just picked up on it about three weeks ago.

Personally I've grown tired of Trump insults and he's done a large amount of soft power damage.

• Here is where I 100% agree with you. There is a way to disagree with being a huge dick about it and he seems to enjoy just being an asshole. These are not new problems but because he seems to enjoy pissing Europeans off at stage he makes the problems drastically worse. Previous Presidents have actually pulled back forces from Europe but did it through careful thought and not a whim tweet that causes the staff chaos. I also happen to think his selection of Pete put a frat boy retard in charge who shouldn’t be trusted to run a gas station.

There isn't anything to disagree with on this.

There is always stuff to disagree on. Except the Trump thing, he is a dick. He just happens to be correct that Europeans invested in social programs and let the US pay the defense bill since the end of the Cold War.

 

[ASCPFC]

Hang on....This is the position that America fought, over many decades, to be in.

- Untrue, complete European fiction. The US has been trying to get out of Europe since 1950. British Lord Ismay, famously remarked that the purpose of the controversial new postwar alliance would be “to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.” He was the First Secretary-General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

When America was the second player to the British Empire, it worked against our empire exactly because it wanted to replace it. WW2 was the event that made this a reality.

- The US had replaced England as the largest economy in the 1890s, so you are about 50 years late on that claim. That England continuously made military decisions to preserve its Empire and influence that extended the war would suggest that England was more of the party playing politics then the US was. A lot of books say a lot of things, most of them random fantasies. I can find just as many books that disagree with your viewpoints.


-After WW2 America stationed troops in Europe to stop the threat of the Soviet Union taking it over. While there is a historic and genetic connection to Europe this decision was.....and continues to be in America's best interest.

- The US stationed troops to maintain order in Germany and Italy. That is why they were called the United States Constabulary.


If America had lost all of Europe to the Soviets then they would have been the weaker power.....America have been obsessed with keeping Russia and Germany apart and it's literally formed their policy since before WW2.

Taking over a destroyed Europe wouldn't have put the Soviet Union in a more power economic situation following WWII then the US. Destroyed factories wouldn’t have given the Soviets much and the US had and economic engine that dwarfed the rest of the world. They would have also had to spend time securing countries where the people hated them.

Trump makes a big noise about removing troops from Europe but only the more gullible in his base fall for it. I would love America to do that....but you notice that it's never done? That isn't an accident.

You mean other then the 36,000 personnel who have left Europe in the last two decades? Who left under Bush, Obama, Trump previously and Biden? I was one of the guys in the units there that got sent back to the states, so yeah, it happened.

America would lose massive influence and the ability to control Europe.....Those European leaders don't fawn around Trump because they like him, it's because the current set up means that America has a major role economically and militarily in Europe.

I think most European Leaders hate Trump because he says in public what previous US leaders said primarily in private, Europeans are leaches and don’t pay their fair share on defense.


If they stepped away then that role would be filled by others and America would lose Europe as client status.....there are a lot of negatives to that.

Who? Europeans have been saying that the US would be replaced but who steps up? When I check the number of young English who are willing to de to save England it is miniscule, do you think more are magically going to defend Poland?


Now America's power and influence around the world has been declining....It's not just Trump, but he hasn't helped. Just like late stage Rome it's ebbing away and that's a concern for the west in general.

So the nation whose economy continues to expand whose military is vastly stronger then everyone else’s is actually declining in influence? Nah, sorry, doesn’t work. The US just cares less about Europe and the interest went to Asia and South America. Because you view Europe as being central to the world, you view it as declining because otherwise you are irrelevant.

But this idea that America has just been doing Europe a favour is closing one eye and refusing to see the reality.

I’m not the delusional one here buddy, I’ve been studying this for decades. You seem to have just picked up on it about three weeks ago.

Personally I've grown tired of Trump insults and he's done a large amount of soft power damage.

• Here is where I 100% agree with you. There is a way to disagree with being a huge dick about it and he seems to enjoy just being an asshole. These are not new problems but because he seems to enjoy pissing Europeans off at stage he makes the problems drastically worse. Previous Presidents have actually pulled back forces from Europe but did it through careful thought and not a whim tweet that causes the staff chaos. I also happen to think his selection of Pete put a frat boy retard in charge who shouldn’t be trusted to run a gas station.

There isn't anything to disagree with on this.

There is always stuff to disagree on. Except the Trump thing, he is a dick. He just happens to be correct that Europeans invested in social programs and let the US pay the defense bill since the end of the Cold War.

I'd suggest a watch of the new Tom Hanks narrated WW2 series. It's written largely from a US angle and deals with the post war.

 

[silvertop]

So you prefer just England? Works for me, whatever makes you happy.

The pass back to Europeans on defense actually started with Eisenhower back in the 1950s. He hit on many of the same problems today while recognizing that most of Europe was not economically capable of taking on that role. Especially following the collapse of the Soviet Union American Presidents pushed for it but they were polite about it, unlike Trump who seems to derive almost sexual pleasure from pointing out European issues.

Did any President from Ike to Biden withdraw net military resources from Europe? There was nothing stopping them. They could have done so at any time. However, to my knowledge, the only country the US did leave was France because (having been enriched by the Marshall Plan the ungrateful fecker) de Gaule kicked you out.

You are applying a revisionism to fit current Republican rhetoric.

We have been called the UK for quite some time.

 

[silvertop]

Hang on....This is the position that America fought, over many decades, to be in.

- Untrue, complete European fiction. The US has been trying to get out of Europe since 1950. British Lord Ismay, famously remarked that the purpose of the controversial new postwar alliance would be “to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.” He was the First Secretary-General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

When America was the second player to the British Empire, it worked against our empire exactly because it wanted to replace it. WW2 was the event that made this a reality.

- The US had replaced England as the largest economy in the 1890s, so you are about 50 years late on that claim. That England continuously made military decisions to preserve its Empire and influence that extended the war would suggest that England was more of the party playing politics then the US was. A lot of books say a lot of things, most of them random fantasies. I can find just as many books that disagree with your viewpoints.


-After WW2 America stationed troops in Europe to stop the threat of the Soviet Union taking it over. While there is a historic and genetic connection to Europe this decision was.....and continues to be in America's best interest.

- The US stationed troops to maintain order in Germany and Italy. That is why they were called the United States Constabulary.


If America had lost all of Europe to the Soviets then they would have been the weaker power.....America have been obsessed with keeping Russia and Germany apart and it's literally formed their policy since before WW2.

Taking over a destroyed Europe wouldn't have put the Soviet Union in a more power economic situation following WWII then the US. Destroyed factories wouldn’t have given the Soviets much and the US had and economic engine that dwarfed the rest of the world. They would have also had to spend time securing countries where the people hated them.

Trump makes a big noise about removing troops from Europe but only the more gullible in his base fall for it. I would love America to do that....but you notice that it's never done? That isn't an accident.

You mean other then the 36,000 personnel who have left Europe in the last two decades? Who left under Bush, Obama, Trump previously and Biden? I was one of the guys in the units there that got sent back to the states, so yeah, it happened.

America would lose massive influence and the ability to control Europe.....Those European leaders don't fawn around Trump because they like him, it's because the current set up means that America has a major role economically and militarily in Europe.

I think most European Leaders hate Trump because he says in public what previous US leaders said primarily in private, Europeans are leaches and don’t pay their fair share on defense.


If they stepped away then that role would be filled by others and America would lose Europe as client status.....there are a lot of negatives to that.

Who? Europeans have been saying that the US would be replaced but who steps up? When I check the number of young English who are willing to de to save England it is miniscule, do you think more are magically going to defend Poland?


Now America's power and influence around the world has been declining....It's not just Trump, but he hasn't helped. Just like late stage Rome it's ebbing away and that's a concern for the west in general.

So the nation whose economy continues to expand whose military is vastly stronger then everyone else’s is actually declining in influence? Nah, sorry, doesn’t work. The US just cares less about Europe and the interest went to Asia and South America. Because you view Europe as being central to the world, you view it as declining because otherwise you are irrelevant.

But this idea that America has just been doing Europe a favour is closing one eye and refusing to see the reality.

I’m not the delusional one here buddy, I’ve been studying this for decades. You seem to have just picked up on it about three weeks ago.

Personally I've grown tired of Trump insults and he's done a large amount of soft power damage.

• Here is where I 100% agree with you. There is a way to disagree with being a huge dick about it and he seems to enjoy just being an asshole. These are not new problems but because he seems to enjoy pissing Europeans off at stage he makes the problems drastically worse. Previous Presidents have actually pulled back forces from Europe but did it through careful thought and not a whim tweet that causes the staff chaos. I also happen to think his selection of Pete put a frat boy retard in charge who shouldn’t be trusted to run a gas station.

There isn't anything to disagree with on this.

There is always stuff to disagree on. Except the Trump thing, he is a dick. He just happens to be correct that Europeans invested in social programs and let the US pay the defense bill since the end of the Cold War.

Sorry I responded without reading this.

The reduction in troop number was partly cost saving and partly because they were no longer needed. Improved tech reduced manpower but did not reduce military capability. And numbers were pulled as part of the peace dividend. That is not a policy of transferring defence to those countries who can afford to defend themselves.

Europeans largely agree that you have subsidised our defence bills and facilitated social investment. We also agree that we have procrastinated on investing our fair share for too long. Most European countries are now either stepping up defence spending or pretending that they are.

 

[silvertop]

I'd suggest a watch of the new Tom Hanks narrated WW2 series. It's written largely from a US angle and deals with the post war.

Yes. If tom hanks is involved you know it's going to be a US centric we saved the world out of pure altruism narrative.

 

[ASCPFC]

Yes. If tom hanks is involved you know it's going to be a US centric we saved the world out of pure altruism narrative.

It has aspects of that but you can still read between the lines. It is written by historians but all US ones as far as I could work out.

 

[silvertop]

It has aspects of that but you can still read between the lines. It is written by historians but all US ones as far as I could work out.

Why bother when The World at War exists?

 

[Badger11]

Why bother when The World at War exists?

One of the great documentaries, I have seen it many many times.

I suppose there is an argument that it was made before the fall of the Soviet Union so since then archives have become available not just in Russia but across Eastern Europe that were not previously available.

But I take your point.

 

[Stirlingsays]

- Untrue, complete European fiction. The US has been trying to get out of Europe since 1950. British Lord Ismay, famously remarked that the purpose of the controversial new postwar alliance would be “to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.” He was the First Secretary-General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

It absolutely is true and you are deluding yourself if you think otherwise.

America wanted an Empire and worked to take over from the British. From the Monroe doctrine in the 1820s to support for anti-British nationalism to finally destroying the empire via the WW2 deals, where the US traded 50 old destroyers for 99-year leases on British bases in the Caribbean and Newfoundland and with land lease deal where aid was tied to Britain opening colonial markets to US trade, which was the final death blow to the empire.

What Lord Ismay said doesn't even relate to it.

When America was the second player to the British Empire, it worked against our empire exactly because it wanted to replace it. WW2 was the event that made this a reality.

- The US had replaced England as the largest economy in the 1890s, so you are about 50 years late on that claim.

Hang on, that doesn't help your previous claim does it......besides it wasn't per capita until the 1910s.

However, I was talking about Empire, which is power projection around the world, not purely the size of an economy.

That England continuously made military decisions to preserve its Empire and influence that extended the war would suggest that England was more of the party playing politics then the US was. A lot of books say a lot of things, most of them random fantasies. I can find just as many books that disagree with your viewpoints.

Enoch Powell wasn't a fantasist and as he was one of the most decorated academics the UK ever produced I'll pretty confident in his analysis on this particular point.

The USA wasn't a direct enemy but it wasn't a friend to the British Empire.....it wanted to take over and that's what happened.

-After WW2 America stationed troops in Europe to stop the threat of the Soviet Union taking it over. While there is a historic and genetic connection to Europe this decision was.....and continues to be in America's best interest.

- The US stationed troops to maintain order in Germany and Italy. That is why they were called the United States Constabulary.

Yes, in its own interest.

If America had lost all of Europe to the Soviets then they would have been the weaker power.....America have been obsessed with keeping Russia and Germany apart and it's literally formed their policy since before WW2.

Taking over a destroyed Europe wouldn't have put the Soviet Union in a more power economic situation following WWII then the US. Destroyed factories wouldn’t have given the Soviets much and the US had and economic engine that dwarfed the rest of the world. They would have also had to spend time securing countries where the people hated them.

The power of a nation is in its people. The Soviets would have been taking over a continent of highly educated people....the control of which would have been a direct threat to the US. It would have taken the Soviets much longer to rebuild it along with the countries themselves, than the US due to economics, but it would have happened.....Britain built itself don't you know, America came from us, so the idea that we wouldn't have rebuilt along with other powerful nations like Germany is not realistic.

The US, were very aware of this, it's why the Marshall plan happened and why they made sure the Soviets didn't take their place.

Trump makes a big noise about removing troops from Europe but only the more gullible in his base fall for it. I would love America to do that....but you notice that it's never done? That isn't an accident.

You mean other then the 36,000 personnel who have left Europe in the last two decades? Who left under Bush, Obama, Trump previously and Biden? I was one of the guys in the units there that got sent back to the states, so yeah, it happened.

You can't be serious, those are rookie numbers and nothing to do with reducing control in Europe.

Bases all over Europe.

Don't talk about it, just leave, you guys only have contempt for us.....but all I hear are threats and no actual leaving.

We will have the cheap Russia gas and source our own weaponry.

America would lose massive influence and the ability to control Europe.....Those European leaders don't fawn around Trump because they like him, it's because the current set up means that America has a major role economically and militarily in Europe.

I think most European Leaders hate Trump because he says in public what previous US leaders said primarily in private, Europeans are leaches and don’t pay their fair share on defense.

We will pay for our own defence if you leave won't we.

So leave....but you won't....and exactly for the reasons I stated.

If they stepped away then that role would be filled by others and America would lose Europe as client status.....there are a lot of negatives to that.

Who? Europeans have been saying that the US would be replaced but who steps up? When I check the number of young English who are willing to de to save England it is miniscule, do you think more are magically going to defend Poland?

You are making a different point.....of course America going isolationist would mean they would get replaced in Europe.....China and Russia would take larger roles both in energy and trade.

You moved onto slagging off today's nationalism.....Well yeah, you aren't wrong. However, have you taken a look at your own military? Aside from your elite regiments it's a bit of a joke.....DEI hires who are only there for the paycheck.

Now America's power and influence around the world has been declining....It's not just Trump, but he hasn't helped. Just like late stage Rome it's ebbing away and that's a concern for the west in general.

So the nation whose economy continues to expand whose military is vastly stronger then everyone else’s is actually declining in influence? Nah, sorry, doesn’t work. The US just cares less about Europe and the interest went to Asia and South America. Because you view Europe as being central to the world, you view it as declining because otherwise you are irrelevant.

You are fooling yourself.....You are in huge debt and your military can't even beat Iran....mainly because you are too scared to take the losses from a land invasion.
You can have a large military but if it loses wars it's not exactly something to brag about.

The US is an anglo saxon country or was anyway....good luck in Asia and South America....you're gonna need it.

But please, stop the threats and pull out of Europe.

But like I say....You won't, it's all just jingoism for the gullible.

But this idea that America has just been doing Europe a favour is closing one eye and refusing to see the reality.

I’m not the delusional one here buddy, I’ve been studying this for decades. You seem to have just picked up on it about three weeks ago.

Sorry mate, but you are very much delusional on a lot of this.
Very one eyed.

There isn't anything to disagree with on this.

There is always stuff to disagree on. Except the Trump thing, he is a dick. He just happens to be correct that Europeans invested in social programs and let the US pay the defense bill since the end of the Cold War.

We can both agree that the US needs to leave Europe.

Unfortunately it won't......and we have to hear this endless crap about how you're apparently doing us a favour.

Yeah, tell that to Greenland.

 

[ASCPFC]

Why bother when The World at War exists?

True, I love the World at War and it was fascinating to me when it came out. I've always been interested in WW2. All my family were in it.
However, some of the history in the World at War has moved on.
However, I'd take issue with some of the new stuff. I'm a self appointed expert! I am an historian but not of that period. I guess it's an interest/ hobby of mine. Rather than work.

 

[silvertop]

It absolutely is true and you are deluding yourself if you think otherwise.

America wanted an Empire and worked to take over from the British. From the Monroe doctrine in the 1820s to support for anti-British nationalism to finally destroying the empire via the WW2 deals, where the US traded 50 old destroyers for 99-year leases on British bases in the Caribbean and Newfoundland and with land lease deal where aid was tied to Britain opening colonial markets to US trade, which was the final death blow to the empire.

What Lord Ismay said doesn't even relate to it.



Hang on, that doesn't help your previous claim does it......besides it wasn't per capita until the 1910s.

However, I was talking about Empire, which is power projection around the world, not purely the size of an economy.



Enoch Powell wasn't a fantasist and as he was one of the most decorated academics the UK ever produced I'll pretty confident in his analysis on this particular point.

The USA wasn't a direct enemy but it wasn't a friend to the British Empire.....it wanted to take over and that's what happened.



Yes, in its own interest.



The power of a nation is in its people. The Soviets would have been taking over a continent of highly educated people....the control of which would have been a direct threat to the US. It would have taken the Soviets much longer to rebuild it along with the countries themselves, than the US due to economics, but it would have happened.....Britain built itself don't you know, America came from us, so the idea that we wouldn't have rebuilt along with other powerful nations like Germany is not realistic.

The US, were very aware of this, it's why the Marshall plan happened and why they made sure the Soviets didn't take their place.



You can't be serious, those are rookie numbers and nothing to do with reducing control in Europe.

Bases all over Europe.

Don't talk about it, just leave, you guys only have contempt for us.....but all I hear are threats and no actual leaving.

We will have the cheap Russia gas and source our own weaponry.



We will pay for our own defence if you leave won't we.

So leave....but you won't....and exactly for the reasons I stated.



You are making a different point.....of course America going isolationist would mean they would get replaced in Europe.....China and Russia would take larger roles both in energy and trade.

You moved onto slagging off today's nationalism.....Well yeah, you aren't wrong. However, have you taken a look at your own military? Aside from your elite regiments it's a bit of a joke.....DEI hires who are only there for the paycheck.



You are fooling yourself.....You are in huge debt and your military can't even beat Iran....mainly because you are too scared to take the losses from a land invasion.
You can have a large military but if it loses wars it's not exactly something to brag about.

The US is an anglo saxon country or was anyway....good luck in Asia and South America....you're gonna need it.

But please, stop the threats and pull out of Europe.

But like I say....You won't, it's all just jingoism for the gullible.



Sorry mate, but you are very much delusional on a lot of this.
Very one eyed.



We can both agree that the US needs to leave Europe.

Unfortunately it won't......and we have to hear this endless crap about how you're apparently doing us a favour.

Yeah, tell that to Greenland.

I think you may be being a little aggressive in your arguments as he is probably a fellow fan albeit one who has been reading the wrong stuff.

Thus, on WWII, Americans and Russians have one thing in common. They are both taught AT SCHOOL that they defeated the Axis powers and that other allied work was peripheral. After school, most look no further than war films which flog the same orthodoxy, save for different reasons. Thus, how will movies about El Alamein or Kursk fill cinema seats in Duluth? Some do further research but, unless you are reading serious history texts, you are getting your data from the internet - largely the same narrative as the school books save with more grown up prose.

The same applies to the post war settlement. Our Empire was on the wane, but WWII hastened its demise. And the US definitely inherited our empire and has occupied western Europe since then for its own purposes.

The belief that the US has sought to withdraw from Europe since 1950 is a belief not supported by any actual fact.