History Lesson For Anti-Americans

I love this country so much. Ten years ago some liberal scum asked me why i joined the ARMY in 1983 considering what the US did to the Indian people, especially the US army. My reply was nobody in my unit harmed me. i don't do victim politics. This country has done some terrible things, no question about that, but overall this is a kind and benevolent country and i thank God he saw fit to give me the greatest gift. that gift is the honor and privilege to be born in the greatest country in the world. I have some reservations about the War in Iraq. Being at war sucks, but I will never believe we are there to steal oil or to conquer it's people. I believe in the debate but once this country is at war it is time to put those differences aside and win it. Even if, God forbid, Hillary was pres i would feel the same way. When people say we are a terrorist nation, I want them to say it more so people can see who they are and who controls the Dem party. I am still working on my mother. She holds none of the beliefs of the new Dem party but cant pry herself away from them. I am making some inroads but still have a long way to go

RE: "How many nations could genuinely say that they had the potential to conquer the world or destroy it? "

Today, there is indeed something similar. There is a now loose, but ever tightening, confederation of anti American / anti Western lands and groups, who have not only the desire but the twisted will, to do this. Meanwhile, idiots stupidly lash out at the US, calling us a "lone superpower" or "hegemon." In fact, we are only a fading great power, who is not preparing for the inevitable next great war. Do the words "Lost Generation" ring a bell? Who, if anyone, will be our Churchill?

Oops…sorry for the confusion…

the discussion about the “Patton Plan” was an offshoot of an Eichmann thread

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1644534/posts

in post # 3, Spanalot wrote “We should have let Patton take the last two nukes into Moscow and Stalingrad”

in post # 7, I asked for clarification

and was answered in # 10 by MeanWestTexan

"what was the Patton plan?"

To take the SS (largely intact and willing) and attack Russia.

A moral compromise I am happy we did not make, regardless of how foul Russia was. It would have bitten us somehow, somewhen.

And again, answered by Spanalot in # 18
Patton said (of the bomb) "give me two of them things and we'll take care of the communists now - because we'll only have to do it after they have these things too."

No wonder he was the most feared by the Nazis ( and commies).

Then, we get a discussion of the reasonableness of this plan in #29 by RedStateRocker
As long as one was SURE you wouldn't have to contend with nearly one hundred Russian divisions and those winters.
What makes anyone think the Russians wouldn't have done the same thing, trade space for time, let winter do the dirty work and strike once our lines of supply were hundreds of miles along. I mean I admire Patton as much as anyone on this board but I bet Ike knew a damn sight more than most of us and looking at the logistics said 'no'.
It would make an interesting scenario to game out; have to see if I still have Squad Leader around.

But there were a HELL of a lot of well armed, battle trained Red army and highly paranoid (with good reason having just lost 20 million or so to Germany) leadership, in the scale of things two 20 kiloton nukes might not have been as overwhelming as they were against tiny Japan.

And, answered in # 40 by MeanWestTexan
Nuke their cities and factories and don't advance forward against the russians --- use the winters against them.

Bomb the troops conventionally and use our superior air power to keep them from advancing further.

The russians divisions would have been fairly -- fairly --- easily prevented from forward motion, and eventually starved out as supplies stopped.
/////end of thread

Terribly hubristic to imagine we are or were capable of taking over the world. People were tired of the war, war was a net drain on the economy, and our nuke production hadn't even entered mass production yet. Our wartime propagandists had also been pushing the USSR as our brother in democracy, and there were even still a few Nazi partisans running around after the surrender that needed killing.

Talk of the US conquering the earth never rises above late-nite drunken dorm room bull sessions.

Not unrealistic at all. It is unrealistic to deny it.

We could have easily conquered the world.

"A net drain on the economy?" Are you kidding? What ended the Depression? Nuke production not mass? So what it easily could have been.

The only thing you state that is true is that Americans were tired of war. Everything else is the product of your own drunken bull sessions - which is where you seemed to have learned your history.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.