Dave Heil wrote:

Hmmm. There is no doubt that had Britain taken this war seriously it
would have won it.


Sure, sure. Your historical revisionism is a needed face-saving measure.

Ah yes of course, you'll be telling us next that America wasn't defeated
in Vietnam...oh wait. Whats next? Afghanistan attacked America? Weapons
of mass destruction in Iraq? No torture in Guantanamo?

America defeats Britain in the War of 1812.

Ho Ho! I suppose you'll be telling us next the White House was torched
by aliens?

Coventry was fire-bombed. Did you lose WWII? London endured waves of
buzz bomb and V2 attacks. Did you lose WWII?

The White House was torched after America declared war on Britain which
was already involved in a war against another dictator. Did you win the
war? No. America was suicide bombed. Have you won the "War against
terror"? NO!

The United States defeated Britain for the second time in the War of
1812.

Of course I can see now where you're coming from. America in yet another
war of aggression attacks Great Britain when it thinks its attention is
elsewhere and its forces weakened. Even though playing from home Crown
Forces successfully repulse the invasion of Canada and go on to burn the
nations capital. Having learned from this lesson America decides it is
safer to have the UK as an ally rather and an enemy and in future limits
its aggression to wars that are already mostly won or the invasion of
little 3rd world countries.

I'm sure that you can come up with a scenario in which Britain
could have won the war if only it had taken it seriously.

Yes I can see how an American would equate the buring of his capital and
seat of power along with several repulsed invasions of Canada as a victory.
Only a typical yank could equate the ending of the war as a victory.

America pulls Britain's fat from the fire in WWI.


America came into the war when it was all but won and 3 years after it
started. Its troops played only a minor but crucial role. America saw
the potential for profit and a chance to increase its sphere of
influence for little effort, Britain on the other hand went to war in
defence of its allies.


All but won? Little had changed in the three years of WWI. It was
largely back and forth, back and forth in the same muddy fields.

When the war ended the best army in the field was unquestionably the
British and it was largely the British who made the sweeping gains of
the last days. The Americans did bugger all even when the war was in
danger of being lost early in 1918.

America pulls Britain's fat from the fire in WWII.


Once again America enters the war late and only for profit.


There's more historical revisionism. That Marshall Plan was a big money
making scheme, was it?

Lease lend certainly was.

Britain entered the war yet again in defence of its Allies. America
was the only country to end the war richer than when it started.


...and I see that it chafes you. How rich you'd have been under German
domination!

What German domination? Unaided by America the UK thwarted for all time
Hitlers plans to invade.

Post WWII finds the British Empire in eclipse.


Indeed. Two world wars cost Britain an Empire.


I thought I'd pointed that out.

No you didn't. I pointed out that it took two world wars of selfless
British action to end the Empire.

Six out for twenty-two overs, Toad-in-a-hole and Bob's your uncle.
Is that about it?


No its about the dollar pure and simple. Why don't you go and research
how many wars of aggression America has waged? Name me one time
America has gone to war in defence of its allies please.


I've already done so.

No you haven't because if you had there'd by no way you'd label the
American War of 1812 a victory.

And as someone who lives in Northern Ireland I'd like to thank all you
Americans for financing decades of terror in my country, in particular
I'd like to thank the NYPD and the NYFD who openly financed and
supported the IRA.


I'll bet that if you bothered to research it, you'd find only a tiny
percentage of Americans who act as professional Irishmen donating to
that cause.

What are you saying? America is a ******* nation? That because of the
size of the Irish American vote successive Presidents did nothing to
stop it?

I personally don't know anyone who provided even a dime.

What you personally know or don't know does not change the facts. I'd be
willing to bet you don't know anyone who fought in the aggressive war of
1812 yet here you're clearly distorting the facts!

Boy didn't they just love it when it became their turn to suffer at
the hands of murderers?


C'mon. You've got a bunch of grown men who wear bowler hats and their
Sunday best, marching in celebration of battles fought eons ago. Get
over it. You were fighting each other. That isn't what took place here
in 2001.

Isn't this thread about battles that were fought eons ago in which you
have tried to distort history?! What we had here was a bunch of
murdering *******s who would not accept the democratic will of the
majority open expressed in free and fair elections who were funded and
armed by loony Americans and loony dictators. You should also remember
that the freedoms you and I enjoy would not exist but for the victories
celebrated by these marches.

--
Proud Holder of Old Nick's Deputy First Class Badge