History from the perspective of Europe?

[dogsdad]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Originally posted by JB:<br /> Hmmm. Our kids get revisionist history, too.<br /><br />How many people actually believe that the Civil War started over slavery?<br /><br />The Allies wouldn't have won WWII in the way they did without the UK, Australia and NZ, nor they without the USA.

JB is right. Australia and New Zealand pitched in and deserve credit. Others too, probably. Even the most seemingly insignificant events, of which we may never know, might have altered the course of history.<br /><br />As far as the War Between the States (Civil War is such an incongruous and contentious term) goes, there are no doubt that many believe it was fought over slavery. Technically, it was fought over States' rights. But slavery was the issue that brought States' rights to the forefront. In my opinion, that is splitting hairs. Maybe this should be a subject for another thread. But then again, maybe this should not be a subject for another thread. Things get heated enough as it is around here!<br /><br /><br />-dd-

 

[Gary Graycar]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

I am 59 and was never educated in our school system about the full role Russia played in WWII. We were basically taught about meeting in Berlin, but never the impact Russia had on the outcome. Loosing 20 million people is stagering.<br />My point is that the new generqation Europeans may downplay our role, but so did we about Russia. And if it were not for the Japanese, we may of let England fall before getting involved. We may never know. Roosevelt was doing everything he could to avoid involvement. But once involved, Roosevelt did everything he could to ensure we won on both theaters. <br />Him and JFK are the last of the great democrats. Look who we have today - Ted Kennedy and John Kerry.

 

[Nos4r2]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Britain wouldn't have fallen for a very long time-if at all.Had Hitler launched his invasion plans the canal barges he planned to use woulnt have made it across the channel-and we (unlike the french-dig, dig) didn't have anywhere to retreat to...<br />Had Britain fallen the war probably would have gone nuclear on both sides-there would have been nowhere to launch an invasion of Europe from apart from reinforcing Russia and Hitler or the japs probably would have had A-bomb technology too. Somehow I doubt life would be the same at all now, if there was even much life left after a nuclear war with the kind of understanding of the consequences that we had in the 40's. Scary ain't it.

 

[Boomyal]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Originally posted by Gfishn:<br /> Roosevelt was doing everything he could to avoid involvement.

Respectully Gfishn but au contrair. Roosevelt was doing absolutely everything he could to get us involved in WWII. But he had to be very crafty about it because of his 1939 Presidential campaign promises and a very anti-war Congress. (not to mention the public)<br /><br />Actually he was all but pulling his hair out over the prospect that Britain would fail without direct US involvement. A 20 page letter from Winston Churchill, detailing the dire straights of Britain, was enough to get Roosevelt in gear. He conceived of and started the LendLease program, to supply Britain, because he did not have to go thru Congress to lend the goods. He was also able to get US Navy protection of convoys carrying American goods to Britain.<br /><br />He also began to prime the US public that the US must do everything it could to keep Britain from falling. Then along came Pearl Harbor.

 

[McGR]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

My father is English and I spent my early childhood growing up in the British Isles. So, I certainly have noticed the difference of perception of the events of WWII from both a British and American perspective. Both sides tend to slant the story a little bit in their favor. Americans sometimes seem to think they single handedly won the war then again at times I get a similar impression from my English relatives. As stated several times now, it really took a combined joint effort to ultimately bring down the Axis powers. However, I do agree with Gfishn that, the Russian contribution has been severely understated. I suppose this was due to prevailing feelings toward the USSR during the cold war where it was unlikely that any western publishers of text books were going out of their way to glorify the Russian contribution. I'm sure if you go to Russia they'll probably claim they were the ones most responsible for Allied victory.

 

[Boomyal]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

I don't think that the Russian part in WWII was so much purposefully hidden from the American public as it was hidden by the Russians themselves. It wasn't until the '80's that Russian archival films became available for showing to the American public. Since that time, it has been plain to see what the Russians went thru and accomplished.<br /><br />But I will say it again. If it had not been for American aid, the Russians may well have collapsed before they were able to organize their own war production and defense/offense.

 

[Nos4r2]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

It wasn't hidden from us in England Boomyal, I remember reading about the eastern front, the Russian scorched earth tactics and the remarkable impact that the t-34 and the weather had in turning the German advance into a dying shambles back in the 70's.I also seem to remember the Russians used to send deserters and military criminals up against the German frontline in battalions unarmed-so their human rights record wasn't exactly good at that time either.<br /><br />I suspect it was more part of an anti-communist thing going on in the USA up til the Berlin Wall fell as to why you didnt hear much about it.

 

[rudeafrican]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

JB said:<br />"The Allies wouldn't have won WWII in the way they did without the UK, Australia and NZ, nor they without the USA"<br /><br />Thousands of South Africans also lost their lives fighting German and Italian forces, specifically in Africa and Italy. My father was one of the lucky one who came home. There was probably as many South Africans in the war as there was Australians and New Zealanders.

 

[RPJS]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Originaly posted by rudeafrican<br /><br /> Thousands of South Africans also lost their lives fighting German and Italian forces, specifically in Africa and Italy. My father was one of the lucky one who came home. There was probably as many South Africans in the war as there was Australians and New Zealanders. . <br />

Just goes to show that manipulation of the facts is not a new thing.<br />I studied the history of WW1 & WWII in depth when younger and this is the first time I have been made aware of any South African involvment in either conflict.<br />I can only suppose that there were political reasons for this at the time.

 

[Laddies]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

RPJS, just spent alittle time and checked some data on D Day. I think that it would be nice to mention the nations that landed troops at Normandy on the 6th of June 1943<br />Australia<br />Belgium<br />Canada<br />Chechosvakia<br />France<br />Greece<br />Netherlands<br />New Zealand<br />Norway<br />Poland<br />UK<br />USA<br />Thats 12 countries blood and we should not forget the effort of these many men. The force was 3 British Div. 1 Canadain Div. 5 American Div. Apparent when you were counting troops you lumped the brave men of some of the colonies (a English term not a American, that is looking down your blue blooded nose at them, except when England is in trouble and needs there help in a war, and I don't think the troops floating on ships count a an invasion force, also did you forget the lend lease plan that supplied the UK with weapons. I am almost ashamed of myself for getting involved in this but we need to give credit where credit is due and thank all of our ancesetors, what ever nation, they were truly the bravest generation---Bob

 

[90skichallenger]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Truly that was an event that solidifies the strong ties that even currently exist between the US and our english speaking brethren. We can none of us discount the fact that many of us had fathers or grandfathers that served with pride and distinction. I am glad to acknowledge the outstanding actions done by the troops of all allied nations (although they shouldnt have stopped Patton so that Monty could ride in as the savior.) The Nations of all the world payed a horrible price in that conflict to rid the world of an Evil form of government. I would like to go on to say that any of ya are welcome to stay with me if you ever get to central texas. But let us not forget the responsibility to properly teach our children about the past is inherent to the parents. I make sure that my childs education includes more than just the watered down politically correct pablum they are pushing in todays educational facilities.<br />Just one mans opinion,<br />Later,

 

[DJ]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Sickening.<br /><br />OK, let's just all agree that the Americans are all brutal heathens.<br /><br />Revisionist history is DANGEROUS. Since there is no WWII "wall", yet, for those who died, I guess they didn't-right?<br /><br />BTW, JB, I know that ther civil war was not about slavery. That makes two of us.

 

[rodbolt]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

DJ<br /> make that three.<br /> but ya have to admit it was a novel way to direct the masses and focus attention someplace else and like today it was a simple easy explanation that did not require thought.

 

[DJ]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

rodbolt,<br /><br />Just like the Iraq war is about oil. Right? <br /><br />So was Japans involvement in WWII, by the way.

 

[rodbolt]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

while our current war is about oil its more about who is going to control what. right now oil is power, those that control it are in control. unless you believe in the iraq-9/11 connection, or the iraq wmd or the iraq-democracy fairy tales and the tooth fairy. maybe next will be the fairy tale about the 9 US airbases in afghanistan, all straategically located near the propoed US oil pipeline, as being mere coincedent.<br /> but technically our people and our govt really could care less about democracy if the oil was flowing .

 

[beniam]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

I was born while the Canadians were firing artillery at the Germans in Holland. <br />Nobody talked about the war much when I grew up.<br />Dutch textbooks -zilch<br />US textbooks- zilch<br />Best sources on WW2: Nontexts.<br />Best sources-English history books<br />Next bestsources- American history books<br />Germans- still trying to come to grips with it all.<br />Nationalistic tendencies-Everybody<br /><br /><br />Went shooting white water in 14 ft kayak last week,during snow squall. Life is good.<br />My thanks to the ALLIED forces which made it all possible.<br />Be happy, boat lots, enjoy life. Batavier

 

[Realgun]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Did you know Russia dropped more bomb tonage during the war than the other alies combined?

 

[Boomyal]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Originally posted by rodbolt:<br /> but technically our people and our govt really could care less about democracy if the oil was flowing .

It's obvious that you just love to hate what the US does rodbolt. It's also obvious that you do not recognize that 'democracy' i.e., the free market, insures that the oil will continue to flow without some tinpan dictator trying to play games with it.

 

[dogsdad]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Maybe it just seems fashionable...maybe it makes certain people feel smarter than and morally superior to others to say things like that, Boomy.<br /><br />All the US is trying to do is keep commerce free and stable. All certain Islamic extremists are trying to do in the Iraqi situation is stifle fair and free petroleum commerce in order to harm the USA. I guess even some Americans think it would be better to let the Islamofascists have their way. That makes them intellectually and morally superior, you see.<br /><br />Ain't THAT a crock? <br /><br /><br />-dd-

 

[rodbolt]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

boomyall<br /> over the years our policy has been dictated by who is getting the oil. in the 50's we took out a democratically elected govt over the fact the democratically elected govt decided to nationalize the oilfield and sell oil to the russians and not us. that country has been in a conflict eversince.the govt we installed was very corrupt and we turned a blind eye as long as the oil flowed west. in the african region we did and have done nothing. why? care to ansew that?<br /> in the case of the hatians we really did nothing.<br /> in another country in the 50 and early 60's we (the CIA) tried an assaniation attempt on another democratically elected leader near the other country. it failed the first time. care to guess who the CIA trained,paid and later assisted the exit of the country and then paid more?? take a guess. we wont even go into our meddling with centraal and south american govts. with our terror training camps, oh I guess the school of the americas wont qualify as a terror training camp cause its in the US not the middle east.<br /> I dont hate much the US does just the reaasons why and the methods sometimes. seems we have a 40 year track record of making the same mistakes then hideing it or spinning it so it sounds good. terrorists working on our side are called "contractors" and they are called rebels, terroists and insurgents if they oppose.<br /> happens all over the world. problem with all of the above is they have no uniform, no govt and no one that is in control.all I ever ask is people read the history and try to understand how we went from friends and sometimes liberators to what we have now.<br />but seems all anyone wants to do is flame someone that does not agree with the mainstram party line, be it democrats or republicans. its way easier to flame than disscuss the history I guess.