@\NightandtheShape/@ Posted June 14, 2004 Share Posted June 14, 2004 Holy smokes. Here I thought this was a thread about the upswing in wonderful European games lately, and since several of my new favorite developers are European, I happily clicked into the conversation. Imagine my surprise to see it turn into yet another "America sucks" thread. Looks like Europe has not only a large contingent of talented game developers, it also has its own fair share of hateful, mean-spirited bigots... and a few of them are posting here. For shame. Well in terms of games, i really can't think of a single title to come outta the US that I couldn't wait to get my hands on. Though this summer looks interesting, as the 3d engines for Doom 3 and Half Life 2 look interesting.... But in terms of RPG's it's pretty hopeless. "I'm a programmer at a games company... REET GOOD!" - Me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderAndrew Posted June 15, 2004 Share Posted June 15, 2004 And in fairness, the more Anti-American government cartoon in response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nur Ab Sal Posted June 28, 2004 Share Posted June 28, 2004 I don't really believe that Americans did any sacrifice during WWII in Europe... all you did was earning money on others' miserable cause thanks to this war you defeated Great Depression and US economy moved from dead point. This 3 million Americans entered fight in last phase of war (1944) and faced weak german forces The outcome of this war was decided on the eastern front and Russians are real heroes of WWII not some marines who were chewing gum and watched donald duck. This is just silly how those "western allies" exaggerate their small role. The power of the wehrmacht was broken by Red Army in a series of giant battles that required great heroism and sacrifice. Other war theatres weren't important at all. Eastern Front is in fact WWII. You say that it isn't, you lie. Americans just came and stole part of others' victory. Not to mention that Red Army destroyed "unbeatable" Japs in two weeks while you couldn't beat them for 3 years and only your nuke change their mind about surrender... HERMOCRATES: Nur Ab Sal was one such king. He it was, say the wise men of Egypt, who first put men in the colossus, making many freaks of nature at times when the celestial spheres were well aligned. SOCRATES: This I doubt. We are hearing a child's tale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderAndrew Posted June 28, 2004 Share Posted June 28, 2004 You claim that the war was one front, and debating that point is lying. Well, then 99% of the history books all must lie. The war really had four fronts. And ask France sometime about Bellau Woods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nur Ab Sal Posted June 28, 2004 Share Posted June 28, 2004 French are cowards and have real antitalent for war. They just prefered to surrender than to die in glory. And what is Bellau woods in compare to Stalingrad or Kursk? Sure it's too bad that some GI's died but if Russians wouldn't exhaust Germans so much there would be much more dead GI's HERMOCRATES: Nur Ab Sal was one such king. He it was, say the wise men of Egypt, who first put men in the colossus, making many freaks of nature at times when the celestial spheres were well aligned. SOCRATES: This I doubt. We are hearing a child's tale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderAndrew Posted June 28, 2004 Share Posted June 28, 2004 One of Hitler's biggest mistakes was going into Russia in the winter. Yes that played a large part in his defeat. I wouldn't say Russian heroism won the war considering that Russia got it's butt kicked. But Russia's weather helped out a lot. If you said that people overlooked the Eastern Front, I'd agree with you. To say the Eastern Front was the entirety of the war is foolish. If the US hadn't entered the war, people would be speaking German in France right now. And I thought the whole world wanted the US to stay out of affairs. The US hadn't been attacked. Why should we have entered the war sooner? Either people want us to police the world, or they don't. Make up your minds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nur Ab Sal Posted June 28, 2004 Share Posted June 28, 2004 Always the strongest rule. It's natural that today USA leads. But the future of the globe lies in Asia. Besides I'm not saying that Eastern front was the only front. I'm saying that other fronts weren't important. Americans saved french asses from communism but not from Germans. In 1946 Russians would arrive to France anyway and they would made France a communist state- like Poland (and there was always a big number of communists among the french). So for this French should be grateful to you. Stalin would send millions of them to labour camps. HERMOCRATES: Nur Ab Sal was one such king. He it was, say the wise men of Egypt, who first put men in the colossus, making many freaks of nature at times when the celestial spheres were well aligned. SOCRATES: This I doubt. We are hearing a child's tale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderAndrew Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 I'm not sure Stalin would march that far. First off, he lost 20 million people in WWII. If Germany wasn't fighting on multiple fronts, Stalin may have lost more. Marching back across Europe would have meant even more losses. I think that the amount of money and economic influence of China is huge. I think the US horribly underestimates China on many levels. Then again, the oppression of their government might someday lead to revolt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Child of Flame Posted June 29, 2004 Author Share Posted June 29, 2004 What about the Battle of the Bulge and Imijima (sp?) My grandfather on my mom's side fought in the first one, not as bad as the second, but still ugly. My grandfather on my dad's side fought in the second. He was one of the first waves to hit after they dropped the bomb, wonder he didn't get cancer from the radiation. Not to mention he was one of the only members of his platoon that survived. My dad didn't even know that he fought there until he died and he saw his service records. It was so bad he never, ever talked about it. <_< Didn't sacrifice nothin' my ass. :angry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Russia lost 20 million people and you still claim American won WW2? Everyone knows the russians fought 70% of Hitler's entire german army. Kursk was the single biggest battle in the entire war. Stalingrad was were the most ferocious of all battles played out (despite what american filmmakers claim), and yet the russians reached Berlin first. If Hitler had put more men in the western front the allies would have been slaughtered. With only 20% defending the west coast it was still a very close battle. Read more and educate yourself. Perhaps here? Two quotes from www.2worldwar2.com: "After the battle of kursk, the war in the eastern front was a long russian advance, in which the russian army returned to all the territory it lost to the germans, conquered all of eastern europe, and reached all the way to germany and to Berlin and won the war. The germans could no longer attack or stop the russian advance, and were just pushed back in a long retreat." "D-Day June 6, 1944 - After months and years of fighting and preparations, the western allies were finally ready for their decisive move of invading western europe in order to occupy germany from west to match the russian advance from the east. D-Day, the invasion of France, did not change the outcome of the war, as germany was already losing it, but it marked the long awaited beginning of the last chapter of the war. The war ended a year after D-Day." I wonder what your history "books" are called? Saving Private Ryan? Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderAndrew Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 I never once on this entire forum claimed American won WWII. You keep putting those words into my mouth. I have claimed several times that the US bailed out France. And I can say that pretty safely because France says we bailed them out, despite not liking the US these days. They recently held another ceremony commemorating how their country was saved by US Marines. The 2nd division of the USMC wears a special cord to this day, given to them by the French. You keep going off on a few words, and exploding into anti-American crap. If you read the thread, someone else claimed the entire war was one front. I merely said the war was far more than one front. Both of you also seem to believe the entirely of the war involved Germany, and discount Japan's role. Apparently their island hopping never happened. Asian affairs apparently don't count in European's views of world history, or atleast in your history books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nur Ab Sal Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Both of you also seem to believe the entirely of the war involved Germany, and discount Japan's role. Apparently their island hopping never happened. Asian affairs apparently don't count in European's views of world history, or atleast in your history books. Japan was so super but after 6 months they met their shatterpoint near Midway. I do not really believe that country in which 90% of all bridges were made of wood and without mineral resources can be compare to the power of Germany which had best scientists, brilliant officers and great education. Japan absorbed some US forces but Eastern Front was most important. Don't forget that Hitler was planning invasion on England and resigned only becouse he was afraid of Stalin's treachery. Third Reich had in plans also giant project of navy building to challenge anglosaxon nations. If they did't have to put so much resources into war with Russia they would build grand fleet (believe me Germans could build it really fast) and strike on USA together with Japan. And then you would speak german today. Thanks to the Russians then. HERMOCRATES: Nur Ab Sal was one such king. He it was, say the wise men of Egypt, who first put men in the colossus, making many freaks of nature at times when the celestial spheres were well aligned. SOCRATES: This I doubt. We are hearing a child's tale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellester Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Wow, I Life is like a clam. Years of filtering crap then some bastard cracks you open and scrapes you into its damned mouth, end of story. - Steven Erikson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakron Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 That is because the pacific theater was a side show. As for Europe ... well Nazi germany lacked two things, long range bombers and a surface fleet, Hitler did not invaded England not because of him being afraid of Stalin but because the RAF won the battle, what would happen if the germans tried a landing would be they would have NO fighter escort (only thing that had enough range was BF 110) and little support from surface ships. Hitler was not that stupid to send his divisions to their deaths, the german invasion was doom to failure as long the RAF was in control over the sky and as long the Home Fleet was there, he could not strike at both so he tried the second best thing, cut England from the rest of the world and stave it ... then he did the stupid thing of going after the Soviet Union. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nur Ab Sal Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 If Hitler threw all his airforce upon England RAF would disappear. HERMOCRATES: Nur Ab Sal was one such king. He it was, say the wise men of Egypt, who first put men in the colossus, making many freaks of nature at times when the celestial spheres were well aligned. SOCRATES: This I doubt. We are hearing a child's tale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakron Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 The Luftwaffe had two primary fighters, the BF 109 and the BF 110. The BF 109 lacked ranged and was restricted to combats over the channal as for the BF 110 it was simply outperformed by the spits. The Luftwaffe tried to beat the RAF with a very large operation (that was literraly throwing everything they got) and almost won but then a bomber acciently attack London and in retaliation the english bomb Berlin and Hitler altered operations towards the attacks against London. And BTW if you want to talk about the French military I going to throw the numbers of wounded and injured of the allined and axis forces until the armistice: French: Dead: 92 000 Injured: 250 000 Dutch: Dead: 2890 Injured: 6889 Belgian: Dead: 7500 Injured: 15 850 British: Dead: 3457 Injured: 13 602 German: Dead: 27 074 Injured: 111 034 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nur Ab Sal Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 No I don't want to talk about a joke called "french military" but thanks for the info Drakron anyway. HERMOCRATES: Nur Ab Sal was one such king. He it was, say the wise men of Egypt, who first put men in the colossus, making many freaks of nature at times when the celestial spheres were well aligned. SOCRATES: This I doubt. We are hearing a child's tale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakron Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 At least they got a next generation aircraft (Rafale) well before EF 2000 come out and I still dont see F 22 going into production ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Wow....some of you (no names...you know who you are) have really got to get a broader range of resources. Some of this "we did this" "you didn't do that" is so incredibly school-textbook it's laughable. For history, you cannot trust the textbooks of the country of origin because they will always be skewed. Likewise are the wave-the-flag websites, who are written by die-hard nationalists for the most part. Read some of the work of the true historians. Read some of the textbooks from the other nations. Educate yourself to know what and how the "other side" views these topics. Real quick...Germany had a vested interest in throwing a majority of it's armed forces to the east...natural resources. Russia had them in abundance. If Hitler hoped to continue his aggressions he needed the resources, and a subjugated Russian populace, to succeed. The overwhelming Russian forces, coupled with weather conditions the Germans were just not used to, spelled Hitler's doom. And Nur Ab Sal, it was 1942...not 1944. The US also participated in Africa. In the Pacific, Japan had already been on the rampage, overtaking other Asian nations, and dropping into China, again for those all-important natural resources. Their ultimate objective was to control the entire Pacific, including the West coast of the US, which they felt was rightfully theirs anyway because of the Asian background of the native US people. Keep in mind that the war in Europe, from the US perspective, was about preventing the Germans from having the ability to cross the Atlantic with anything other than U-Boats (which were all up and down the east coast of the US). The US was far more interested in the war in the Pacific. The Japanese possed a far greater immediate threat to the US than the Germans did. Because we were helping no one but ourselves, really, in the Pacific, the war there did not get the same press and glory that the European war was given. We were helping our friends (in Europe) and that is always good press.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakron Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 I dont think so. The books I base is historie controvers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellester Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 That is because the pacific theater was a side show. I Life is like a clam. Years of filtering crap then some bastard cracks you open and scrapes you into its damned mouth, end of story. - Steven Erikson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakron Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 So what? It was a side show, Africa was also a side show and many people died there ... does not change the fact it was not a much relevent theater of operations at some point. At one point Japan could no longer launch attacks, Midway was a turning point in the Pacific theater but it was a decisive factor in the war, the european theater was more unclear because Nazi germany had many resources avaible and was experiment on some advanced weapons. Japan could not produce nuclear weapons, Germany could and worst was that germany had the V project moving along and it was their develivry system ... perhaps instead of Hiroshima and Nagazaki we would instead had London and New York? You are the one delusional, war requires the sacrifice of what we call humanity by the people that wage it, its a dirty and immoral and people are reduced to statistics and suffering is simply ignore. Japan did a lot of horrible thing but dont you EVER compare Japan Emperial System to the Nazis, the Nazis were the closest thing to evil we have ever faced and I hope we never face such idiology ever again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 I dont think so. The books I base is historie controvers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Japan did a lot of horrible thing but dont you EVER compare Japan Emperial System to the Nazis, the Nazis were the closest thing to evil we have ever faced and I hope we never face such idiology ever again. I disagree with the Japan-sideshow thought, but agree with you here. The Nazi's were about genocide (And not just the Jews). The Japanese were about Imperialism. Apples and Oranges. Should the Axis have won the war, Germany would have eventually gone after Eastern Asia. Given Germany's superior scientifict research, they would have likely wiped the Japanese out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellester Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Japan did a lot of horrible thing but dont you EVER compare Japan Emperial System to the Nazis, the Nazis were the closest thing to evil we have ever faced and I hope we never face such idiology ever again. I never did compare Japan to Germany, you did. You Life is like a clam. Years of filtering crap then some bastard cracks you open and scrapes you into its damned mouth, end of story. - Steven Erikson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now