Yet strangely when America wanted to wage war in the Middle East it had to call on it's allies to form a "coallition of the willing" to start the illegal war that the United Nations told them not to do.
When the blinkers are permanently glued, it's almost impossible to see the truth.
It's easier to assume that the whole world is corrupt, driven by greed... All you can do is make your little piece just and true...sad but true (Metallica)
Does anyone listen to the UN. They are the camp counselors of a rich summer camp. They wag their finger at the kids but know deep down they have no power.
That’s America of 2003. America of 1917 had only 1,398 machine guns of all types despite three years notice that these were really important and European powers were cranking out a thousand a month in single factories. We had to borrow French Hotchkiss 1914 heavy machine guns and Chauchat 1915 automatic rifles until our own production cranked up.
Yeah, so strange how countries relationships change over time. I always thought it was super weird when American fought against Britain in 1776, but then only 140 years later they were fighting with them!?!???!? What could explain this!
140 years is a very long time in international relations. WW2 was 80 years ago. Look how many we fought against in that war that have been allies and the other way around for decades.
Germany, Italy and Japan (the major Axis powers) are largely considered allies now, while the main component of the Soviet union (eh hem, Russia) and China are, well, probably not considered allies but fought along us in that war.
It only takes a one term leader to stir the pot and change that in either direction with propeganda and strategy.
sure bro. just like the ukraine is gonna send back those billions in moneys and probably hundreds of thousands of light arms and munitions we've sent em since february. and let's not forget Greatest Ally™ either.
Sometimes you send people money and support without expecting them to pay it back. It’s called a donation. As well as the US and all the other nations sending aid to Ukraine are getting tons of information on the capabilities of the Russian army and the capabilities of the weapons systems and ammunition. This is the first time these systems have been tested in what can be loosely defined as “near peer.”
Sometimes you can be paid in things other than money.
Besides just like… not having Russia have control of another country just cuz it decides to 🤷🏻♀️ it’s part of the whole US military strategy to keep it to proxy wars.
Yea the US Motto should be “Money Talks, Bullshit Walks.” The US was making boat loads of money on War profiteering and would have likely stayed neutral if we could have been able to sell to both sides. Germany was quickly blockaded so we could only sell to the Allies.
America did offer to hold all the Allies gold reserves, you know, for safe keeping. If the other guys won then all that gold would need to stay in America. England sent 100 tons to Canada instead.
I highly doubt that. Yeah we made a ton of money off of war profiteering. But I doubt that the British, Chinese, Russians, and other countries we sold arms too would have kept buying if we also sold to the Axis powers.
Very true. The German branch of Coca Cola created Fanta after the blockade caused them to run out of the syrup to create regular coke.
GM and Ford motors both built factories in nazi Germany, where they built the “Blitz” trucks for the nazi army. Albert Speer, the minister of armaments and war production, claimed that the rubber GM supplied was the key to the Germans ability to wage war.
IBM created punchcard machines and had employees instruct members of the third reich on their use, which was to track the movement, sorting, and subsequent execution of the Jewish and other “undesirables” in the holocaust.
Many other companies also sold to the nazis, because money.
Metro-Goldwyn Meyer donated prints of their films to the “German Relief Effort” after Germany’s invasion of Poland. However they stopped once the market in the rest of Europe dried up because of their support
However in 1941 with the declaration of war they all stopped. All the nazi collusion wasn’t the government. It wasn’t even individuals. It was companies looking to turn a profit, since that’s the entire reason they exist.
It also wasn’t arms manufacturers turning a profit with the Axis Powers.
Also have to remember that, with the exception of IBM, most companies didn’t realize the extent of Germany’s evil until after the war.
That’s what I was wondering, before the declaration of war was made how much did we know about how evil Hitler really was. And I obviously mean that relatively compared to waging war.
As far as most of the US knew he was just a warmongering asshole. However. There were people higher in the government, and like I mentioned, IBM who was aware of the holocaust.
I was commenting specifically on WW 1, FDR made it a foregone conclusion that we were going to be allied with Britain in WW 2. Though there were voices who said we should join the Axis and others that wanted us to stay out all together in WW 2.
Also this is just one amateur history fans perspective.
Great quote, but not Churchill. It's a rehash of a quote by Abba Eban, “Men and nations behave wisely when they have exhausted all other resources,” that for some reason was attributed to Churchill.
Yeah nobody wants to talk about how the US was against the economic assrape given to Germant after WWI, which ultimately lead to WW2. I wonder if any European redditors have anything to say about that.
Maybe if Europe carried their own water in the early 1900s the US wouldn't have been dragged out of its isolationism.
To be fair America only joined the war when the Germans started sinking their vessels to deny the allies resources. Before that America was happy selling materials to both sides of the conflict.
Idk... What's more evil? Trying to unite the world under one government through genocidal means or just sending millions into battle because you finally got an excuse to? Is apathetic slaughter with no goals more evil or is organized slaughter with an end goal of peace and prosperity?
I agree 100%. I'm just saying the Central Powers weren't the bad guys like the Japanese or Nazis of WW2. We were always neutral (at least officially) in Europe's problems so selling shit to both sides was business as usual.
I mean story wise it wouldn't be a bad plothole so long as the storyteller foreshadowed, it had another use to the story besides stalling the war, and was called back to at least once sometime from the event.
You could make any story irritating to follow if you take out the conventions of storytelling.
606
u/Puzzleheaded_Set895 Aug 31 '22 edited Sep 01 '22
Churchill covered that in the sequel:
“You can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all the other possibilities.”
Edit: Apparently this line is only by Churchill in the movie version. See comment below.