A world without America?

SEPT 23 1989 · 09-10-2017 02:23PM

no Chuck Berry?

Skylinehead · 09-10-2017 02:31PM

donegaLroad wrote: »

Also, the US sold strategic materials to the Nazis in 1941, in order to help them defeat the Russians. The Nazi's were funded by large American banks, and supported by American companies such as IBM and Standard Oil.

What? That's not even close to being true. Lend-lease was in full effect in 1941, before America even entered the war, delivering supplies to the USSR barely a day after the Germans invaded. Where did you pull that from?

branie2 · 09-10-2017 02:35PM

No French Revolution or 1798 rising, as they were inspired by the War of Independence in America.

marieholmfan · 09-10-2017 02:49PM

rustynutz wrote: »

Id say we'd be all speaking German if America never existed

Instead we speak Cromwell's language.

marieholmfan · 09-10-2017 02:50PM

the_syco wrote: »

We'd be all speaking German, and wouldn't think anything of old people and anyone with autism being turned into ashes as part of the final solution?

Instead of Oliver Cromwell's language.

doolox · 09-10-2017 02:54PM

.....a lot of Irelands route to freedom was from considerable assistance and support from America.

Contrast Irelands demise after the 1798 rebellion with relative success in 1919-1922. Because of US support and Britains unwillingness to upset American political opinion Ireland achieved a partial amount of home rule and was able to go much further than in previous attempts to gain freedom in 1641,1690,1798,1803,1848 and 1857.....the six attempts at freedom taking mentioned in the 1916 proclamation

The Good Friday agreement and modern peace in our time was made much more possible with US support.

We would probably be a nation of impoverished, badly developed and badly educated people without American support throughout our recent history.

donegaLroad · 09-10-2017 03:00PM

Skylinehead wrote: »

What? That's not even close to being true. Lend-lease was in full effect in 1941, before America even entered the war, delivering supplies to the USSR barely a day after the Germans invaded. Where did you pull that from?

I'll get it in a while, I'm away from the pc at the minute.

Ash.J.Williams · 09-10-2017 03:08PM

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

If there was no America commerce would be entirely different and many of those companies wouldn't exist in the first place

PeterParker957 · 09-10-2017 03:09PM

doolox wrote: »

We would probably be a nation of impoverished, badly developed and badly educated people without American support throughout our recent history.

There's a fair few in Dublin therefore that America hasn't been near!

Ash.J.Williams · 09-10-2017 03:09PM

doolox wrote: »

.....a lot of Irelands route to freedom was from considerable assistance and support from America.

Contrast Irelands demise after the 1798 rebellion with relative success in 1919-1922. Because of US support and Britains unwillingness to upset American political opinion Ireland achieved a partial amount of home rule and was able to go much further than in previous attempts to gain freedom in 1641,1690,1798,1803,1848 and 1857.....the six attempts at freedom taking mentioned in the 1916 proclamation

The Good Friday agreement and modern peace in our time was made much more possible with US support.

We would probably be a nation of impoverished, badly developed and badly educated people without American support throughout our recent history.

Or we'd be healthy protestants

A Little Pony · 09-10-2017 03:09PM

donegaLroad wrote: »

eeguy wrote: »

Don't understand this "We'd all be speaking German". Sure the Germans were defeated and they don't all speak English or Russian

It is a popular claim as an alternative ending to WW2, had the Allies not defeated the Germans, the Nazis would have continued their takeover of Europe and as a result, we would all be speaking German.

What is not mentioned though, is that Russia played a very large part in defeating the Germans before the Allies ever moved in. The Russians lost over 8 million soldiers during WW2. By one calculation, for every single American soldier killed fighting the Germans, 80 Soviet soldiers died doing the same.... the Germans suffered 75% of their wartime losses fighting the Russians.

Also, the US sold strategic materials to the Nazis in 1941, in order to help them defeat the Russians. The Nazi's were funded by large American banks, and supported by American companies such as IBM and Standard Oil.

Should we be impressed that Stalin treated his army worse than dogs? The Russian losses are down to the Russians themselves with the tactics they employed. Nazi Germany would have stood a great chance of beating them if D-Day didn't happen. The suffocation effect is what destroyed Nazi Germany, once the Allies landed they didn't have a chance, it's impossible.

A Little Pony · 09-10-2017 03:11PM

doolox wrote: »

.....a lot of Irelands route to freedom was from considerable assistance and support from America.

Contrast Irelands demise after the 1798 rebellion with relative success in 1919-1922. Because of US support and Britains unwillingness to upset American political opinion Ireland achieved a partial amount of home rule and was able to go much further than in previous attempts to gain freedom in 1641,1690,1798,1803,1848 and 1857.....the six attempts at freedom taking mentioned in the 1916 proclamation

The Good Friday agreement and modern peace in our time was made much more possible with US support.

We would probably be a nation of impoverished, badly developed and badly educated people without American support throughout our recent history.

Heh, you got whipped that day. 8-)

Ash.J.Williams · 09-10-2017 03:12PM

branie2 wrote: »

On the bright side, we wouldn't have Bible Belt fundamentalists

We have our own

PeterParker957 · 09-10-2017 03:13PM

A Little Pony wrote: »

Heh, you got whipped that day. 8-)

Seriously ???

I really thought Paisley was dead.

Near broke my ankle jigging in happiness for nothing clearly.

Pugzilla · 09-10-2017 03:24PM

A Little Pony wrote: »

Should we be impressed that Stalin treated his army worse than dogs? The Russian losses are down to the Russians themselves with the tactics they employed. Nazi Germany would have stood a great chance of beating them if D-Day didn't happen. The suffocation effect is what destroyed Nazi Germany, once the Allies landed they didn't have a chance, it's impossible.

80% of German forces were devoted to the Eastern Front. Allied strategic bombing and landings in France and Italy only shortened the War. All the decisive battles were in the East.

Germany lost the war in 1941 and 1942. Failure to capture Moscow in Operation Typhoon was the first major failure. Hitler squandered any remaining chance of victory by fixating on Stalingrad, a city of no major strategic importance. Even with a victory at Kursk, Axis defeat was inevitable. Germany could never hope to beat the USSR in a war of attrition. It didn't have the manpower or resources.

ForestFire · 09-10-2017 03:25PM

Flat?:o

A Little Pony · 09-10-2017 03:38PM

Pugzilla wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

Should we be impressed that Stalin treated his army worse than dogs? The Russian losses are down to the Russians themselves with the tactics they employed. Nazi Germany would have stood a great chance of beating them if D-Day didn't happen. The suffocation effect is what destroyed Nazi Germany, once the Allies landed they didn't have a chance, it's impossible.

80% of German forces were devoted to the Eastern Front. Allied strategic bombing and landings in France and Italy only shortened the War. All the decisive battles were in the East.

Germany lost the war in 1941 and 1942. Failure to capture Moscow in Operation Typhoon was the first major failure. Hitler squandered any remaining chance of victory by fixating on Stalingrad, a city of no major strategic importance. Even with a victory at Kursk, Axis defeat was inevitable. Germany could never hope to beat the USSR in a war of attrition. It didn't have the manpower or resources.

If Britain and America wasn't involved in the war Germany was certainly capable of holding off the Soviet Union, maybe to take over the country is up for debate, not even the great Napoleon could do that and he was a genius military commander.

But because D day was a success it meant it was over for Germany. Losing ground in the war against the Soviet Union from not capturing Moscow (of which they really should have done) and then losing the battle of Stalingrad doesn't mean Germany would have capitulated as they ended up doing in 45. I think if they reinforced themselves in (remember US and Britain not involved here) then they could have fended them off and possibly a truce agreement.

Skylinehead · 09-10-2017 03:47PM

A Little Pony wrote: »

If Britain and America wasn't involved in the war Germany was certainly capable of holding off the Soviet Union, maybe to take over the country is up for debate, not even the great Napoleon could do that and he was a genius military commander.

But because D day was a success it meant it was over for Germany. Losing ground in the war against the Soviet Union from not capturing Moscow (of which they really should have done) and then losing the battle of Stalingrad doesn't mean Germany would have capitulated as they ended up doing in 45. I think if they reinforced themselves in (remember US and Britain not involved here) then they could have fended them off and possibly a truce agreement.

The war was lost well before D-Day. Some say Kursk, I'd personally say it was lost by Stalingrad. Now that's not to say that the western Allies didn't help there, they certainly did with massive amounts of materiel and Operation Torch, but D-Day as the turning point is nonsense. It sped up the wars end, but it did not decide it.

A Little Pony · 09-10-2017 04:12PM

Skylinehead wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

If Britain and America wasn't involved in the war Germany was certainly capable of holding off the Soviet Union, maybe to take over the country is up for debate, not even the great Napoleon could do that and he was a genius military commander.

But because D day was a success it meant it was over for Germany. Losing ground in the war against the Soviet Union from not capturing Moscow (of which they really should have done) and then losing the battle of Stalingrad doesn't mean Germany would have capitulated as they ended up doing in 45. I think if they reinforced themselves in (remember US and Britain not involved here) then they could have fended them off and possibly a truce agreement.

The war was lost well before D-Day. Some say Kursk, I'd personally say it was lost by Stalingrad. Now that's not to say that the western Allies didn't help there, they certainly did with massive amounts of materiel and Operation Torch, but D-Day as the turning point is nonsense. It sped up the wars end, but it did not decide it.

Depends what you mean by lost. Taking control over the Soviet Union maybe but if they hadn't been at war with Britain and the US I don't see any reason why they could not reinforce themselves with more men closer to home and bed themselves 'in' and not be so stretched which is what ultimately destroyed them. Hitler was a moron for declaring war on the US, opening himself up to shared air raids by both Britain and the US and obviously all the US manpower and material.

Skylinehead · 09-10-2017 04:19PM

A Little Pony wrote: »

Depends what you mean by lost. Taking control over the Soviet Union maybe but if they hadn't been at war with Britain and the US I don't see any reason why they could not reinforce themselves with more men closer to home and bed themselves 'in' and not be so stretched which is what ultimately destroyed them. Hitler was a moron for declaring war on the US, opening himself up to shared air raids by both Britain and the US and obviously all the US manpower and material.

Mmm, I'm not sure the extra 20% of men being sent to the Eastern Front would be enough. It would have prolonged the war for a much longer time, in the order of a few years at least, but if the Russians remained committed enough, they wouldn't have stopped. Of course, this is all hypothetical - would the Russians have American/British supplies? That would change things.

Hitler was a moron for invading the USSR in the first place, a moron for declaring war on the USA, a moron for thinking he could actually personally manage the strategy of the war himself.

Permabear · 09-10-2017 05:45PM

This post has been deleted.

Skylinehead · 09-10-2017 05:55PM

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

That's a pretty simplistic view to take. How could you possibly know what would happen?

How Soon Is Now · 09-10-2017 06:03PM

By the way I never actually said I wanted rid them was more wondering how things would be without them.

To be totally honest there's constantly been amazing things coming out that country over the years but there attitudes towards everyone else isn't!

begbysback · 09-10-2017 06:22PM

No America then no hot dogs, no no country for old men, no cowboys and Indians, no friends, no Silicon Valley, no awesome, no bad boys bad boys whatchya gonna do, no Christopher Columbus, no mini league baseball, no ice hockey players fighting, no Martin Luther king, no Forrest Gump, no driving on the freeway and no parking on the driveway, no sopranos, no simpsons and no Tommy Hilfiger jumpers.

Permabear · 09-10-2017 06:36PM

This post has been deleted.

OnDraught · 09-10-2017 06:45PM

begbysback wrote: »

No America then no hot dogs, no no country for old men, no cowboys and Indians, no friends, no Silicon Valley, no awesome, no bad boys bad boys whatchya gonna do, no Christopher Columbus, no mini league baseball, no ice hockey players fighting, no Martin Luther king, no Forrest Gump, no driving on the freeway and no parking on the driveway, no sopranos, no simpsons and no Tommy Hilfiger jumpers.

Absolutely everything on this list is muck.

Apart from the Sopranos.

FatherTed · 09-10-2017 06:50PM

Well there'd be no complaining on here boards.ie because the internet wouldn't exist. And you'd have no PC/Laptop/Mobile phone to type your disgust at the US anyways.

Harry Palmr · 09-10-2017 07:02PM

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The internet would exist as an extension of the Manchester University designed Small-Scale Experimental Machine (SSEM), and would look like this

Capt'n Midnight · 09-10-2017 07:17PM

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Konrad Zuse developed a mechanical computer during WWII http://people.idsia.ch/~juergen/zuse.html with pretty much all the concepts we still use today.

The UK also developed computers independently of the US.

So we would still have computers without the US. Also the world wide web is not a US invention.

Everyone had radar by the end of WWII. UK, US, Russia, Germany, France Japan and Hungry had all developed their own versions. So the electronics were ready to go.

begbysback · 09-10-2017 07:17PM

OnDraught wrote: »

Absolutely everything on this list is muck.

Apart from the Sopranos.

No vanilla ice ice baby, no jfk, no Eminem, no Willie Wonkas chocolate factory, no ivy league colleges, no going to the mall, no empire state building, no statue of liberty, no grand canyon, no George Washington, no dirty Harry, no right turn clyde, no River Pheonix and James Dean dying too young, no dollars, no cents, no Pulp Fiction, no Omar Little and Jimmy Mc Nulty, no Disneyland, no golden gate bridge, no Larry David and no Seinfeld.

A world without America?

Comments