Recommended Posts

(edited)

.

Edited by Falcon
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Falcon said:

.That $100 Billion a year would build a lot of roads, bridges, schools and power plants in the United States.  This is the second time in last two months Trump has made mention of this unfair burden .

Just another example of our "allies" shirking their responsibility.  Trump working hard to free the middle East of nukes and finds little to no support. You would expect this behavior from the likes of Russia, China or "The Squad"  . . . .  but when fellow NATO members like Germany (Merkel) and France(Macron) won't pay their NATO commitments and openly trade with Iran it has to be disappointing.  

Remember when all the European Banks were failing during the Obama Administration ? Back

If the UK dont turn out to be a total bunch of pansies, then they will step up to the plate and get aggressive in those waters, they need to show Iran they cant just seize ships at will without serious consequences. Iran's actions also shows the world now that  the current Iranian regime is no one's friend even as these EU countries tried to suck up to them and coddle them. They are exposed now.

Other countries are chipping in , just not their "fair share".

Some are trying to expand their efforts and presence.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Falcon said:

The President said US receives very little oil from the region and" .  .  .  . we dont really need it"

U.S. spends over $100 Billion year Policing Mideast shipping lanes for OPEC, ASIA AND EUROPES BENEFIT. That $100 Billion a year would build a lot of roads, bridges, schools and power plants in the United States.  This is the second time in last two months Trump has made mention of this unfair burden.

US President Trump and Sec of State Pompeii have tried to get just a little cooperation from our "fair weather friends"  for Project Sentinel.  Hope President Trump learns from this lesson.

Just another example of our "allies" shirking their responsibility.  Trump working hard to free the middle East of nukes and finds little to no support. You would expect this behavior from the likes of Russia, China or "The Squad"  . . . .  but when fellow NATO members like Germany (Merkel) and France (Macron) won't pay their NATO commitments and openly trade with Iran it has to be disappointing.  

Remember when all the European Banks were all failing during the Obama Administration ? Back then Obama and Timmy Gietner funded the World Bank close to a Trillion dollars and approved the use of World Bank funds to bail out Europe.  The world Bank Funds are supposed to help third world and emerging market countries projects.  For example up front capital so the Congo could ship coaco bean harvests.

Timmy Gietner was asked if he thought the European countries would pay the funds back ?  . . . . . . .   Timmy said, " of course they will. They have in the past".

 Have they paid the World Bank Funds Back ? ? ? Nope.

Pretty DUMB to invest that kind of money for zero return 🤔🤔

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 7/23/2019 at 3:19 PM, James Regan said:

Pretty DUMB to invest that

n 🤔🤔

🤔🤔🤔🤔

Edited by Falcon
  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Falcon said:

Britain would be a strong ally if Benny Hill were Prime Minister.  

Benny Hill would "Make England Great Again".  English are still living in the past. The glory days.

Kings and Princess are for Fairy Tales or Disney Land . . . . The Land of Make believe. 

James . . . you do have to admit the US saved England's arse in WW II.

🤔🤔🤔🤔

Women's World Cup Soccer Score 

US 2  . . .  . England 1 

LOL

 

 

 

 

 

We do have Benny Hill as Prime Minister

Equal Pay for Equal Play

I am honored you made this thread to bait me, cheers Steve.

A8DFAA38-4132-49A2-9466-52F46A793B28.jpeg

  • Great Response! 1
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 7/23/2019 at 4:17 PM, James Regan said:

.

 

Edited by Falcon
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Falcon said:

James

Touche' 

Good for a laugh , but it's taking away from serious debate many come to this site to discuss.  

Maybe you and I should get together for some tea and crumpets.  

We can discuss Brits inferiority complex.  

I have to give the Brits credit for being the only NATO member to fulfill their 2% commitment and for having a great sense of humor.  Ya gotta laugh.

Oh them Limeys!!!!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ceo_energemsier said:

Oh them Limeys!!!!!

No more Limeys in Britain if you through a rock into a crowd of people 9 times out of Ten you would hit a foreigner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

3 hours ago, Falcon said:

James . . . you do have to admit the US saved England's arse in WW II.

 

 

 

 

Absolutely not; the Soviet Union did far far more. You guys entered late after profiteering.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Berlin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease

But yeah you guys dropped the A-bombs on an already failing Japan.

 

1024px-World_War_II_Casualties2.svg.png

Edited by Enthalpic
  • Great Response! 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 7/23/2019 at 3:00 PM, ceo_energemsier said:

.

Edited by Falcon
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

Absolutely not; the Soviet Union did far far more. You guys entered late after profiteering.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Berlin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease

But yeah you guys dropped the A-bombs on an already failing Japan.

 

1024px-World_War_II_Casualties2.svg.png

I've said it many times but it bears repeating. First of all the USSR lost so many people because in the early stages of the war they fought very stupidly due to Stalin's interference. They would not have been in such a bad position to begin with if Stalin had not forbade his military from taking steps as the USSR saw Germany massing for an attack. He really thought Hitler would not betray him.

Second, the US was fighting a 2 front war against 2 major powers. The wars we fought on each front were very different as well. It is very doubtful the USSR could have done what we did. The USSR, in the beginning, had to borrow equipment from us for God's sake .

There's been a lot of propaganda about Nazi soldiers and such but it was Japanese soldiers who, with few exceptions, fought to the death. In Okinawa their women would jump of cliffs with their babies. You didn't have that level of fanaticism from Germany's soldiers or populace.

This is why the calculation was made to drop A bombs on their mainland. We knew it would extremely bloody for both sides.

Meanwhile, German soldiers surrendered in the hundreds of thousands.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This brings one back to 1991 when the U.S. got Iraq out of Kuwait by the use of military force.  Who paid the bill for this? The U.S., Kuwait, oil companies and/or others?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are people slagging the British? For a country that size, with the resources that they have, they have been an outstanding ally when others simply expect the US to be the world's policeman.

Many of those posting need to spend more time studying the Second World War from a global, not Eurocentric, point of view.

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

17 hours ago, ceo_energemsier said:

If the UK dont turn out to be a total bunch of pansies, then they will step up to the plate and get aggressive in those waters, they need to show Iran they cant just seize ships at will without serious consequences. Iran's actions also shows the world now that  the current Iranian regime is no one's friend even as these EU countries tried to suck up to them and coddle them. They are exposed now.

Other countries are chipping in , just not their "fair share".

Some are trying to expand their efforts and presence.

Why? Most that oil goes East. If the Iranians want to be Robber Barons at the Straights let China, Japan etc deal with it. Stop using my tax (sterling) to continue being one of the Worlds policeman.

I'm with Trump on this - let someone else take the strain for once.

Edited by NickW
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A picture that tells a thousand words

choke_points.jpg

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Falcon said:

The President said US receives very little oil from the region and ".  . we dont really need it"

U.S. spends over $100 Billion year Policing Mideast shipping lanes for OPEC, ASIA AND EUROPE'S BENEFIT.

That $100 Billion a year would build a lot of roads, bridges, schools and power plants in the United States.  This is the second time in last two months Trump has made mention of this unfair burden.

US President Trump and Sec of State Pompeo have tried to get just a little cooperation from our "fair weather friends"  for Project Sentinel.  Hope President Trump learns from this lesson.

Just another example of our "allies" shirking their responsibility.  Trump working hard to free the Middle East of nukes and finds little to no support. You would expect this behavior from the likes of Russia, China or "The Squad"  . . . .  but when fellow NATO members like Germany (Merkel) and France (Macron) won't pay their full NATO commitments and openly trade with Iran it has to be disappointing.  

Remember when all the European Banks were failing during the Obama Administration ? Back then Obama and Timmy Geithner had US  fund the World Bank close to a $Trillion dollars (that's Trillion with a "T") and they approved the use of the World Bank funds to bail out Europe.  The World Bank Funds are supposed to help third world and emerging market countries develop projects . . . . Not Bail Out EUROPES Industrialized Countries.  For example World Bank supposed to provide up front capital so the Congo could ship coffee bean harvests.

Timmy Geithner was asked if he thought the European countries would pay the funds back ?  . . . . . . .   Timmy said, " of course they will. They have in the past".

 Have they paid the World Bank Funds Back ? ? ? Nope.

There are givers and takers 

To be fair most of the UK's £1bn destroyers are in maintenance, they don't have the crews available and weren't built to cope with Persian Gulf heat (hang up of the post war RN basically being a North Atlantic Sub hunting force)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

14 hours ago, Falcon said:

Iran wants a fight with anyone.  Brits shouldn't take the bait.  Let the ship sit in an Iranian port for a few months.  Things getting desperate in Iran. Let Iran have their Temper Tantrum. Doesn't bring in any oil revenue. 

Whatever England wants to do, US will support them. 

If Europe, including France and Germany strongly supported England, Iran might rethink this.

Nobody wants s serious conflict or war. Too much to lose. 

Some want a war if the US is the one that Fights for it, Pays for it and Sacrifices Lives for it.  But That Ain't Gonna Happen Anymore.  At least not under President Trump.

Iran losing $130 Million day, almost a $ Billion a week.  For what ?

That ship is not British.

Stena (Swedish company) paid £153* to register the ship as British

None of the crew are British.

The British Govt should sent Stena their £153 back and suggest they take the issue up with the Swedish Govt to whom they pay taxes .

This would also stick two fingers up at Iran as they then have nothing to sabre rattle at the UK with.

And then release the tanker at Gibraltar - no one gives a sh1t if that oil is going to Syria. Better Assad that some Islamist nutters.

 

*Feckin British Government turned the red duster into a flag of convenience>:(

Edited by NickW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

Absolutely not; the Soviet Union did far far more. You guys entered late after profiteering.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Berlin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease

But yeah you guys dropped the A-bombs on an already failing Japan.

Russia did far more... Yea started the damned war in the west with Germany.  Deserved everything that happened to them.  And Russia could not have attacked/defended without USA trucks(80%), Brit Tanks(33% early), USA High grade gasoline(100% fighter aircraft, not bombers or slower aircraft), not diesel, USA aluminum for their airframes(50% another 10% from Britain), 1/6th of the Russian aircraft and 25% of their frontline fighter aircraft, TNT from the USA for their artillery(50%), etc.  All for free.

As for Lend Lease... you mean Gift and next to nothing leased. Why the 10% UK paid back is rather puzzling to me.  Should have just been written off with the other 90% that way Super Nationalists on either side of the ocean can't bring up this BS 80 years later and divide us. 

PS: This graph seems BS: 4 Million for Indonesia...  95% from Famine if the numbers are anywhere accurate.  If this is true then have to add the ~million in India. 

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Wastral said:

Russia did far more... Yea started the damned war in the west with Germany.  Deserved everything that happened to them.  And Russia could not have attacked/defended without USA trucks(80%), Brit Tanks(33% early), USA High grade gasoline(100% fighter aircraft, not bombers or slower aircraft), not diesel, USA aluminum for their airframes(50% another 10% from Britain), 1/6th of the Russian aircraft and 25% of their frontline fighter aircraft, TNT from the USA for their artillery(50%), etc.  All for free.

As for Lend Lease... you mean Gift and next to nothing leased. Why the 10% UK paid back is rather puzzling to me.  Should have just been written off with the other 90% that way Super Nationalists on either side of the ocean can't bring up this BS 80 years later and divide us. 

PS: This graph seems BS: 4 Million for Indonesia...  95% from Famine if the numbers are anywhere accurate.  If this is true then have to add the ~million in India. 

 Yeah I did a double take of that graph and Indonesia seemed fishy. They weren't directly fighting in the war at any scale and if this chart is accurate the majority of those deaths were likely from starvation. Ditto for French Indochina (Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia), India as you say, and even China. But, I think this graph is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

Absolutely not; the Soviet Union did far far more. You guys entered late after profiteering.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Berlin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease

But yeah you guys dropped the A-bombs on an already failing Japan.

 

1024px-World_War_II_Casualties2.svg.png

"Profiteering" you even linked to the Lend Lease program. Did you read it? The US DONATED more than half a trillion dollars (today's money) for Lend Lease and received virtually nothing in return! How is that "profiteering"?

Add in the Marshall Plan and the numbers are doubled. How did that work out for us? Well let's see, we had our good friend (and debtor) France demand "their" money in gold, because they didn't trust our currency. When asked, DeGaulle said, "countries don't have friends, we have interests". That one act destroyed the gold standard for us and eventually caused Nixon to abandon it, causing the inflation and misery to follow. But yeah, allies. 

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wastral said:

Russia did far more... Yea started the damned war in the west with Germany.  Deserved everything that happened to them.  And Russia could not have attacked/defended without USA trucks(80%), Brit Tanks(33% early), USA High grade gasoline(100% fighter aircraft, not bombers or slower aircraft), not diesel, USA aluminum for their airframes(50% another 10% from Britain), 1/6th of the Russian aircraft and 25% of their frontline fighter aircraft, TNT from the USA for their artillery(50%), etc.  All for free.

As for Lend Lease... you mean Gift and next to nothing leased. Why the 10% UK paid back is rather puzzling to me.  Should have just been written off with the other 90% that way Super Nationalists on either side of the ocean can't bring up this BS 80 years later and divide us. 

PS: This graph seems BS: 4 Million for Indonesia...  95% from Famine if the numbers are anywhere accurate.  If this is true then have to add the ~million in India. 

Excellent point

Also the USSR also didn't fight the Japanese and didn't have to take on the Germany and Italian Navy's - which the British were dealing with virtually single handedly.

The Germans invaded western Europe in tanks filled with Soviet petrol / diesel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

"Profiteering" you even linked to the Lend Lease program. Did you read it? The US DONATED more than half a trillion dollars (today's money) for Lend Lease and received virtually nothing in return! How is that "profiteering"?

Add in the Marshall Plan and the numbers are doubled. How did that work out for us? Well let's see, we had our good friend (and debtor) France demand "their" money in gold, because they didn't trust our currency. When asked, DeGaulle said, "countries don't have friends, we have interests". That one act destroyed the gold standard for us and eventually caused Nixon to abandon it, causing the inflation and misery to follow. But yeah, allies. 

The Queen Mother once told DeGaulle that he needed to learn to hate his enemies more than he hated his friendsxD

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

4 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

"Profiteering" you even linked to the Lend Lease program. Did you read it? The US DONATED more than half a trillion dollars (today's money) for Lend Lease and received virtually nothing in return! How is that "profiteering"?

The other nations were making weapons and getting nothing in return, no land leases, no potential returns.  This was also giving US time to ramp up its industrial war machine without much risk of direct attack.

You guys value lives at nothing.

The US was also avoiding the war because there were many German Americans who were still sympathetic to the homeland.

"We sent money" so what?

Edited by Enthalpic
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Profiteering" you even linked to the Lend Lease program. Did you read it? The US DONATED more than half a trillion dollars (today's money) for Lend Lease and received virtually nothing in return! How is that "profiteering"?

I don't think he did. He wrote something trite and posted a dubious graph with wikipedia links and ran away

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.