Author Topic: The Greatest Wars (Or Battles) the Ameri-Centric World has never heard of.  (Read 11561 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Atheissimo

  • Bishop
  • ***
  • Posts: 137
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Greatest Wars (Or Battles) the Ameri-Centric World has never heard of.
« Reply #30 on: October 30, 2012, 03:03:36 pm »


The sad thing is, even though the USA was indirectly responsible for the creation of the Commonwealth of Australia AND saved your asses in WWII, your economy is doing better than ours.

Whether we in the west like it or not Russia saved all our "asses" in WWII. Our 1 year on the european mainland cannot be compared to Russia's 4 years combatting the German invasion of their homeland. The largest armies, the biggest battles, the highest number of casualties were all in the east not the west. Read your history. WW2 was won and lost in the vast interior of Russia. Everything else was secondary to theatre of war.

This is the kind of thing that happens when history is taught from our own point of view. Especially when it means giving credit to those who we no longer like, in this case "communist" Russia.

THIS

Imagine if the pride of the Wermacht hadn't been destroyed at Stalingrad, but had stood at the beaches in 1944. It was costly enough to defeat the conscripts and walking wounded that comprised a portion of the Nazi forces, never mind thousands of their best and brightest.
'You're not married, you haven't got a girlfriend... and you've never watched Star Trek? Good Lord.' - Sir Patrick Stewart

Offline largeham

  • Dirty Pinko
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1326
  • Gender: Male
  • The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
Re: The Greatest Wars (Or Battles) the Ameri-Centric World has never heard of.
« Reply #31 on: October 30, 2012, 03:18:58 pm »
I think he means that in reference to Australia's involvement in WW2, not the war in general. And that is another can of worms right there.

But because I can, after June 1941 over 70% of the German army at any point was on the Eastern Front and over 75% of the Wehrmacht's total casualties were suffered in the East. However Bagration, the Lvov-Sandomierz Offensive, the operations in Romania, and etc would not have been possible without the hundreds of thousands of trucks given to the Red Army by the Americans.

My Little Comrade
My Little Comrade
Ah ah ah aaaaah!
(My Little Comrade)
I used to wonder what socialism could be!
(My Little Comrade)
Until you all shared its materialist dialectic with me!

Offline Fpqxz

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 903
  • Gender: Male
  • Generic forum poster #666
Re: The Greatest Wars (Or Battles) the Ameri-Centric World has never heard of.
« Reply #32 on: October 30, 2012, 03:28:18 pm »


The sad thing is, even though the USA was indirectly responsible for the creation of the Commonwealth of Australia AND saved your asses in WWII, your economy is doing better than ours.

Whether we in the west like it or not Russia saved all our "asses" in WWII. Our 1 year on the european mainland cannot be compared to Russia's 4 years combatting the German invasion of their homeland. The largest armies, the biggest battles, the highest number of casualties were all in the east not the west. Read your history. WW2 was won and lost in the vast interior of Russia. Everything else was secondary to theatre of war.

This is the kind of thing that happens when history is taught from our own point of view. Especially when it means giving credit to those who we no longer like, in this case "communist" Russia.

The sacrifices of the Russian/Soviet people notwithstanding, the USSR didn't declare war on the Empire of Japan until April of 1945 and was only marginally involved in the Pacific Theater.

If the Japanese hadn't bombed Pearl Harbor and the USA hadn't declared war on them, there would have been nobody to stop the Japanese advance in the East.  Everything from the Aleutians in the North to New Zealand in the South would have been theirs for the taking.  The British, French, and Dutch were in no position to defend their colonial/territorial holdings, and in India, the crown jewel of the British Empire, some of the pro-independence forces actively collaborated with Japan.

The Soviets won their part of the war by throwing more and more bodies at the Axis.  The USA won because back then, our industrial base could simply outproduce its opponents, and we were producing better weapons than the Japanese were anyway.

I think he means that in reference to Australia's involvement in WW2, not the war in general. And that is another can of worms right there.

But because I can, after June 1941 over 70% of the German army at any point was on the Eastern Front and over 75% of the Wehrmacht's total casualties were suffered in the East. However Bagration, the Lvov-Sandomierz Offensive, the operations in Romania, and etc would not have been possible without the hundreds of thousands of trucks given to the Red Army by the Americans.

Yes, thank you for clarifying.
Read some real news:  Allgov.com, JURIST

Quote
Step down Mr. and Mrs. Politically Correct.
It's so easy to be "punk" and "aware" living at home.
You can't change shit, you're too self-righteous;
you're the bigots you flaunt to loathe.
--Thought Industry, Boil

Offline Atheissimo

  • Bishop
  • ***
  • Posts: 137
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Greatest Wars (Or Battles) the Ameri-Centric World has never heard of.
« Reply #33 on: October 30, 2012, 03:49:01 pm »


The sad thing is, even though the USA was indirectly responsible for the creation of the Commonwealth of Australia AND saved your asses in WWII, your economy is doing better than ours.

Whether we in the west like it or not Russia saved all our "asses" in WWII. Our 1 year on the european mainland cannot be compared to Russia's 4 years combatting the German invasion of their homeland. The largest armies, the biggest battles, the highest number of casualties were all in the east not the west. Read your history. WW2 was won and lost in the vast interior of Russia. Everything else was secondary to theatre of war.

This is the kind of thing that happens when history is taught from our own point of view. Especially when it means giving credit to those who we no longer like, in this case "communist" Russia.

The sacrifices of the Russian/Soviet people notwithstanding, the USSR didn't declare war on the Empire of Japan until April of 1945 and was only marginally involved in the Pacific Theater.

If the Japanese hadn't bombed Pearl Harbor and the USA hadn't declared war on them, there would have been nobody to stop the Japanese advance in the East.  Everything from the Aleutians in the North to New Zealand in the South would have been theirs for the taking.  The British, French, and Dutch were in no position to defend their colonial/territorial holdings.

THIS too.

As somebody whose great grandad fought the Japanese in Burma and Singapore, and who probably wouldn't be alive without American air support.
'You're not married, you haven't got a girlfriend... and you've never watched Star Trek? Good Lord.' - Sir Patrick Stewart

Offline Meshakhad

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
  • Gender: Male
  • The Night Is Dark And Full Of Terrors... Like Me
Re: The Greatest Wars (Or Battles) the Ameri-Centric World has never heard of.
« Reply #34 on: October 30, 2012, 05:47:20 pm »


The sad thing is, even though the USA was indirectly responsible for the creation of the Commonwealth of Australia AND saved your asses in WWII, your economy is doing better than ours.

Whether we in the west like it or not Russia saved all our "asses" in WWII. Our 1 year on the european mainland cannot be compared to Russia's 4 years combatting the German invasion of their homeland. The largest armies, the biggest battles, the highest number of casualties were all in the east not the west. Read your history. WW2 was won and lost in the vast interior of Russia. Everything else was secondary to theatre of war.

This is the kind of thing that happens when history is taught from our own point of view. Especially when it means giving credit to those who we no longer like, in this case "communist" Russia.

The sacrifices of the Russian/Soviet people notwithstanding, the USSR didn't declare war on the Empire of Japan until April of 1945 and was only marginally involved in the Pacific Theater.

If the Japanese hadn't bombed Pearl Harbor and the USA hadn't declared war on them, there would have been nobody to stop the Japanese advance in the East.  Everything from the Aleutians in the North to New Zealand in the South would have been theirs for the taking.

They wouldn't have taken Australia, though.
G-d's Kingdom Is A Hate-Free Zone

Quote from: Reploid Productions
Pardon the interruption, good sir/lady; there are aspects of your behavior that I find quite unbecoming, and I must insist most strenuously that I be permitted to assist in resolving these behaviors through the repeated high-velocity cranial introduction of particularly firm building materials.

Quote from: Meshakhad
GIVE ME KNOWLEDGE OR I WILL PUT A CAP IN YO ASS!

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: The Greatest Wars (Or Battles) the Ameri-Centric World has never heard of.
« Reply #35 on: October 30, 2012, 07:42:28 pm »


The sad thing is, even though the USA was indirectly responsible for the creation of the Commonwealth of Australia AND saved your asses in WWII, your economy is doing better than ours.

Whether we in the west like it or not Russia saved all our "asses" in WWII. Our 1 year on the european mainland cannot be compared to Russia's 4 years combatting the German invasion of their homeland. The largest armies, the biggest battles, the highest number of casualties were all in the east not the west. Read your history. WW2 was won and lost in the vast interior of Russia. Everything else was secondary to theatre of war.

This is the kind of thing that happens when history is taught from our own point of view. Especially when it means giving credit to those who we no longer like, in this case "communist" Russia.

I'd argue that China played the second-most important role of any of the allies, by drawing off the IJA from a potential invasion of Eastern Russia- the only eventuality I can think of that could have easily caused the Soviets to lose the war. Third is maybe Britain, or the US Navy.

But yeah. More Vietnamese died fighting in that war than Americans (and the Australian Army barely fought at all). Australia was too irrationally afraid of Japanese invasion* to deploy soldiers anywhere they could be properly useful.

* An invasion we actually should have encouraged.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2012, 07:44:52 pm by Lt. Fred »
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Offline Fpqxz

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 903
  • Gender: Male
  • Generic forum poster #666
Re: The Greatest Wars (Or Battles) the Ameri-Centric World has never heard of.
« Reply #36 on: October 31, 2012, 03:30:07 am »
I'd argue that China played the second-most important role of any of the allies, by drawing off the IJA from a potential invasion of Eastern Russia- the only eventuality I can think of that could have easily caused the Soviets to lose the war. Third is maybe Britain, or the US Navy.

If by "drawing off" you mean requiring the greatest amount of manpower/resources to kill people, I suppose you are right.  If the Soviets had been compelled to fight on two fronts (as the Americans were) they might not have been able to do it.  As it was, they were throwing everything they had at the Germans, who already held a big chunk of their western territory.

But yeah. More Vietnamese died fighting in that war than Americans (and the Australian Army barely fought at all). Australia was too irrationally afraid of Japanese invasion* to deploy soldiers anywhere they could be properly useful.

* An invasion we actually should have encouraged.

Are you suggesting that Australia would somehow have benefited from a Japanese invasion?   :o
Read some real news:  Allgov.com, JURIST

Quote
Step down Mr. and Mrs. Politically Correct.
It's so easy to be "punk" and "aware" living at home.
You can't change shit, you're too self-righteous;
you're the bigots you flaunt to loathe.
--Thought Industry, Boil

Offline Canadian Mojo

  • Don't Steal Him. We Need Him. He Makes Us Cool!
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1770
  • Gender: Male
  • Υπό σκιή
Re: The Greatest Wars (Or Battles) the Ameri-Centric World has never heard of.
« Reply #37 on: October 31, 2012, 05:31:27 am »
I'd argue that China played the second-most important role of any of the allies, by drawing off the IJA from a potential invasion of Eastern Russia- the only eventuality I can think of that could have easily caused the Soviets to lose the war. Third is maybe Britain, or the US Navy.

If by "drawing off" you mean requiring the greatest amount of manpower/resources to kill people, I suppose you are right.  If the Soviets had been compelled to fight on two fronts (as the Americans were) they might not have been able to do it.  As it was, they were throwing everything they had at the Germans, who already held a big chunk of their western territory.

But yeah. More Vietnamese died fighting in that war than Americans (and the Australian Army barely fought at all). Australia was too irrationally afraid of Japanese invasion* to deploy soldiers anywhere they could be properly useful.

* An invasion we actually should have encouraged.

Are you suggesting that Australia would somehow have benefited from a Japanese invasion?   :o
I'm hoping what he meant is that if Japan had committed forces to an invasion it would have been easy for the Aussies to deal them a swift and crushing blow with their Emu cavalry regiments.

Offline largeham

  • Dirty Pinko
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1326
  • Gender: Male
  • The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
Re: The Greatest Wars (Or Battles) the Ameri-Centric World has never heard of.
« Reply #38 on: October 31, 2012, 07:04:50 am »
Emu regiments supported by shock Cassowary battalions and wombat-drawn artillery.

It was impossible for the Japanese to come anywhere close to invading Australia, it could have been possible if that was all they focused on after 1931 and didn't bother invading China.

If by "drawing off" you mean requiring the greatest amount of manpower/resources to kill people, I suppose you are right.  If the Soviets had been compelled to fight on two fronts (as the Americans were) they might not have been able to do it.  As it was, they were throwing everything they had at the Germans, who already held a big chunk of their western territory.

But the Soviets thrashed the Japanese in 1938 and 1939. And funnily enough the Japanese signed their non-aggression pact only months before Barbarossa (though not as funny as the lack of cooperation between the North Koreans and the Chinese). Khalkhin Gol led directly to Pearl Harbor.

My Little Comrade
My Little Comrade
Ah ah ah aaaaah!
(My Little Comrade)
I used to wonder what socialism could be!
(My Little Comrade)
Until you all shared its materialist dialectic with me!

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: The Greatest Wars (Or Battles) the Ameri-Centric World has never heard of.
« Reply #39 on: October 31, 2012, 09:51:42 am »
I'd argue that China played the second-most important role of any of the allies, by drawing off the IJA from a potential invasion of Eastern Russia- the only eventuality I can think of that could have easily caused the Soviets to lose the war. Third is maybe Britain, or the US Navy.

If by "drawing off" you mean requiring the greatest amount of manpower/resources to kill people, I suppose you are right.  If the Soviets had been compelled to fight on two fronts (as the Americans were) they might not have been able to do it.  As it was, they were throwing everything they had at the Germans, who already held a big chunk of their western territory.

The Americans weren't really fighting on two fronts though. Neither front had any capacity to force them into engagement by threatening anything, so they could shift resources at will- and did.

Quote
But yeah. More Vietnamese died fighting in that war than Americans (and the Australian Army barely fought at all). Australia was too irrationally afraid of Japanese invasion* to deploy soldiers anywhere they could be properly useful.

* An invasion we actually should have encouraged.

Are you suggesting that Australia would somehow have benefited from a Japanese invasion?   :o

Not directly. But every IJA soldier who landed in this country would have starved, every aircraft that landed here would have been shot down to little loss and every ship that sailed here would have been easily sunk by an American submarine.  It would have been the end of the war within a month or two. Unfortunately, the Japanese were too smart to try it- and Australia was too dumb to reduce our land defences in order to encourage them. Virtually every allied soldier defending Australia was worse than wasting his time; he was basically acting to the advantage of the Japanese.

That's why I think the decision to move the Australian part of the ANZAC Corps from North Africa was one of the stupidest, most selfish things we ever did.
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Offline TheL

  • The Cock Teasing Teacher
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2219
  • Gender: Female
  • Fly like cheese sticks.
Re: The Greatest Wars (Or Battles) the Ameri-Centric World has never heard of.
« Reply #40 on: October 31, 2012, 12:08:04 pm »
The Persian War and specifically the Battle of Thermopylae Pass is usually covered pretty well, isn't it?  I teach U.S. and World History, though certainly not in a standard setting, and I always give those a reasonable amount of attention (and I don't care for military history).  I remember learning about Thermopylae in my own high school World History class--I distinctly remember thinking that it was the single coolest thing ever to happen.

My history class regarded the Battle of Thermopylae little more than a piece of propaganda. It included a lot of Arcadians, far more than Spartans, and the Persians defeated them with a bit high, but nothing too crazy, causalities. During that war, the Naval defeat of the Persians was infinitely more important than the battle of Thermopylae. Probably one of the few Naval battles were 'knowing the terrain' really was hugely important, at least I know of.

Battle of Wizna is a tad more impressive.

Worse:  I never had any actual battles covered in any K-12 class I ever took that mentioned ancient Greek or Roman history or mythology, except for the Trojan Horse's role in ending that particular war (in literature class, not history class), and some vagueness about the sacking of Rome by the Vandals.  Alexander the Great was discussed, of course, as was the prowess of Julius Caesar, but absolutely none of their actual battles or tactics were even mentioned in passing.

I learned about Thermopylae, the whole Antony/Cleopatra thing, the Punic Wars, the rape of the Sabine women, and Archimedes' role in the (failed) defense of Syracuse from outside sources, mostly pleasure reading and the Internet.  (I also learned an insane variety of non-age-appropriate mythology, literature, and history from my father.  I knew at age 6 that the reason Macduff kills Macbeth in the play is because, while "No man of woman born can harm Macbeth," Macduff was "from my mother's womb untimely ripp'd."  I knew the basic outline of the mythical founding of Rome and the story of Achilles by age 4 at least.)

How much attention is paid to the various Israeli conflicts, the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, and the war in the Falklands by the US school system?

In the schools I went to?  Zero.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2012, 01:35:37 pm by TheL »
Quote from: ladyrenae
You there. The creepy person who decided I was supporting their position. Stop it.

"Half the reason that I like foreign music is because I can kid myself that "Shake dat ass" is more poetic in Hindi."
--Sanda

Move every 'sig.'  For great justice!

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: The Greatest Wars (Or Battles) the Ameri-Centric World has never heard of.
« Reply #41 on: October 31, 2012, 04:58:58 pm »
I've always hated the secondary school presumption that events must be more important if they happened a long time ago. You get a lot of emphasis on things- like Athenian democracy- that have no obvious long-term significance. And, of course, nobody ever goes to any effort to try to analyse how one thing caused another.

Also, I hate the near-complete lack of evidence for anything. As a result, you get centuries of historians writing about the Cathars- a group that never existed.
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Offline Fpqxz

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 903
  • Gender: Male
  • Generic forum poster #666
Re: The Greatest Wars (Or Battles) the Ameri-Centric World has never heard of.
« Reply #42 on: October 31, 2012, 11:07:24 pm »
The Americans weren't really fighting on two fronts though. Neither front had any capacity to force them into engagement by threatening anything, so they could shift resources at will- and did.

Well, the Americans certainly did have more options available to them.


Not directly. But every IJA soldier who landed in this country would have starved, every aircraft that landed here would have been shot down to little loss and every ship that sailed here would have been easily sunk by an American submarine.  It would have been the end of the war within a month or two. Unfortunately, the Japanese were too smart to try it- and Australia was too dumb to reduce our land defences in order to encourage them. Virtually every allied soldier defending Australia was worse than wasting his time; he was basically acting to the advantage of the Japanese.

That's why I think the decision to move the Australian part of the ANZAC Corps from North Africa was one of the stupidest, most selfish things we ever did.

So...you would have drawn the IJA into Australia and used it as a "quagmire"-type trap?

It's an interesting theory, but I think it would have cost far too many civilian lives and too much infrastructure to have been worth it for the Aussies.
Read some real news:  Allgov.com, JURIST

Quote
Step down Mr. and Mrs. Politically Correct.
It's so easy to be "punk" and "aware" living at home.
You can't change shit, you're too self-righteous;
you're the bigots you flaunt to loathe.
--Thought Industry, Boil

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: The Greatest Wars (Or Battles) the Ameri-Centric World has never heard of.
« Reply #43 on: November 01, 2012, 01:04:32 am »
The Americans weren't really fighting on two fronts though. Neither front had any capacity to force them into engagement by threatening anything, so they could shift resources at will- and did.

Well, the Americans certainly did have more options available to them.


Not directly. But every IJA soldier who landed in this country would have starved, every aircraft that landed here would have been shot down to little loss and every ship that sailed here would have been easily sunk by an American submarine.  It would have been the end of the war within a month or two. Unfortunately, the Japanese were too smart to try it- and Australia was too dumb to reduce our land defences in order to encourage them. Virtually every allied soldier defending Australia was worse than wasting his time; he was basically acting to the advantage of the Japanese.

That's why I think the decision to move the Australian part of the ANZAC Corps from North Africa was one of the stupidest, most selfish things we ever did.

So...you would have drawn the IJA into Australia and used it as a "quagmire"-type trap?

It's an interesting theory, but I think it would have cost far too many civilian lives and too much infrastructure to have been worth it for the Aussies.

Know how big this country is? Presuming the existence of the US navy, they would have taken a single city or town- perhaps Townsville or Cairns- and then be stuck there forever, gradually starving to death. At most a few thousand civilian deaths, and that's assuming the IJA went full-Nanjing. Totally worth it to end a war that cost millions of civilian lives.
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Offline Fpqxz

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 903
  • Gender: Male
  • Generic forum poster #666
Re: The Greatest Wars (Or Battles) the Ameri-Centric World has never heard of.
« Reply #44 on: November 01, 2012, 01:07:33 am »
Know how big this country is? Presuming the existence of the US navy, they would have taken a single city or town- perhaps Townsville or Cairns- and then be stuck there forever, gradually starving to death. At most a few thousand civilian deaths, and that's assuming the IJA went full-Nanjing. Totally worth it to end a war that cost millions of civilian lives.

Australia is big, almost as big as the lower 48 states.  But I see no reason that the Japanese would not be able to expand beyond an initial beachhead, given the proper amounts of vehicles and equipment and that they could maintain a supply line.
Read some real news:  Allgov.com, JURIST

Quote
Step down Mr. and Mrs. Politically Correct.
It's so easy to be "punk" and "aware" living at home.
You can't change shit, you're too self-righteous;
you're the bigots you flaunt to loathe.
--Thought Industry, Boil