The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > General Questions

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-28-2002, 09:14 AM
Theom Theom is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Why do Europeans dislike Americans?

Why is it that Europeans dislike Americans? 42% of their high school graduates can't name a country in Asia but so what?
I am genuinly interested as to if there is a specific reason across europe or if each country has it's own reason....suggestions please and of corse, defences.

Here is a tentative starter, The British hate Americans because Americans don't observe the incredible complexities of British society rules and fail to realise they exist, ie on a train carrige in which one person is sitting, take a seat as far away from them as possible .. plus they don't know where scotland is....

*This is supposed to be light hearted not a place to hurl insults!*
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 12-28-2002, 09:26 AM
Susanann Susanann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
There are generally two types of Europeans.

Depending on which country you are from, you have one of 2 different types of resentment towards the US:

1. The Euopeans from a country whose rear end we saved.

2. The Europeans from a country whose rear end we kicked.
  #3  
Old 12-28-2002, 09:30 AM
Theom Theom is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
And british hate americans btecause they don't seem to have realised that if thier president hadn't been so stupid as not to join the leage of nations then the war would not have started in the first place so it was in fact thier duty to fight
  #4  
Old 12-28-2002, 09:32 AM
Crusoe Crusoe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Oh, great. So much for factual answers to factual questions. Nice to see we're mature enough to rise above petty sniping, too.

There is a vocal minority of anti-Americanism in some European countries, mostly mainland Western European. It is not as pervasive as some observers seem to assume. This may largely be based on the perceived dominance of American culture and business, often seen as somehow responsible for the decline of local cultural and business institutions, and more recently on criticism of US foreign policy. There isn't really a concrete way of proving the degree to which these beliefs have any basis in reality, so I think this may be better placed in Great Debates or IMHO. Or even the Pit if we get any more silly generalisations on either side.
  #5  
Old 12-28-2002, 09:49 AM
Charlie Tan Charlie Tan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
This was done recently in another thread. Try a search and you'll find lots of opinions.
And Susanann, as it seems the French despise Americans, I wonder what you're trying to say? Your brush is pretty wide.
__________________
I got my original username back. In between, it was "The Gaspode" for a couple of years.
  #6  
Old 12-28-2002, 10:02 AM
hajario hajario is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Santa Barbara, California
Posts: 12,971
I've travelled through a lot of Europe over the last ten years and have been subject to very, very little anti-Americanism. Most Europeans who are vehemently against the policies of the American government are savvy enough not to blame individual Americans for them.

Haj
  #7  
Old 12-28-2002, 10:20 AM
tomndebb tomndebb is offline
Mod Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N E Ohio
Posts: 36,253
As noted, this subject has come up before. You can find examples both in GD and the Pit.

However, it begins with a false premise, and so "factual" answers are going to be unattainable.

First: "Europeans" do not dislike Americans.
There are specific small groups of Europeans who dislike American foreign policy or American tourists or American TV shows and movies flooding their theaters and TVs or American capital punishment or a number of other aspects of things American.
However, even within these groups, you will find people who despise our foreign policy who still think that individual persons from the States are quite nice. The blanket statement that "they" dislike "us" is simply wrong.

Second: A certain amount of feelings directed toward the U.S. are inspired by the sheer size of our presence in the world. We (or some percentage of unperceptive U.S. citizens) used to spend a lot of time "hating" the Russians because that nation was a very visible threat to our nation, while we rarely spent much time having any thoughts at all about people from Togo (if we could even find enough Yanks who knew where it was).
The U.S., however, is so large and powerful, that it is impossible to ignore it. Whether it is exported culture, extended military presence, or economic club wielding, nearly everyone in the world encounters some aspect of the U.S. every week, so they are all going to have some opinions. And if everyone has an opinion, some percentage of those opinions are going to be negative.

Third: Europeans (and Asians, Africans, South Americans, Oceanics, and North Americans) all have opinions of their own neighbors that can vary from the warm and friendly to the disdainful to the antagonistic. I have seen a few reports in recent years that American tourists have fallen below the Germans and the British as "most hated tourists" in several countries. The Germans and French and British are always taking cheap shots at the others--and lots of people pick on the Italians. So feelings toward Americans are simply expressions of the attitudes that all people display toward all people--and as Yanks, we tend to notice more thje comments directed at us.

Finally: there are silly statements such as those posted by Susanann that reinforce stereotypes that the U.S. believes that the rest of the world should hold us in some sort of awe and that the only bar to that admiration is jealousy or resentment. While that attitude is not held by all Americans, enough people express those attitudes that some Europeans tend to think of Americans as needlessly arrogant.


And, as hajario notes, there are many people who actively like Americans. My first trip through Europe was during the Vietnam war when there were many anti-American protests going on. In eleven months, I encountered only two people who were rude to me as a foreigner, and I cannot say that it was my nationality (as opposed to by foreignness) that triggered either insult. Even in France, where lots of Yanks claim that they "all" hate us, I was treated hospitably on many occasions and never met actual anti-American prejudices.
  #8  
Old 12-28-2002, 10:31 AM
Tapioca Dextrin Tapioca Dextrin is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Staring blankly at my GPS
Posts: 11,508
This European doesn't hate Americans. I moved to Texas and love it.

Countries do not have opinions.
  #9  
Old 12-28-2002, 10:50 AM
odd-socks odd-socks is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Theom:
Quote:
"Why is it that Europeans dislike Americans? 42% of their high school graduates can't name a country in Asia but so what?..."
and your cite is...?

Quote:
"Here is a tentative starter, The British hate Americans because Americans don't observe the incredible complexities of British society rules and fail to realise they exist, ie on a train carrige in which one person is sitting, take a seat as far away from them as possible .. plus they don't know where scotland is...."
Culturally, you will find that there are differences pertaining to body language and so forth. What is comfortable for one culture, isn't for another. People should be aware of such differences.

As for seats: I think one would be hard pressed to be able to find an empty seat on some railways, no? Think of the commuter rat hell heading into London, for example.

Although having said that, from personal experience I always wonder why I can be the only one parked in an empty car park, only to have someone decide to park right next to me when there are hundreds of spaces to choose from?

Quote:
*This is supposed to be light hearted not a place to hurl insults!*
Right. Blanket statements and blatant stereotyping aside, then?
  #10  
Old 12-28-2002, 11:04 AM
Futile Gesture Futile Gesture is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by Crusoe

Oh, great. So much for factual answers to factual questions.
The question isn't factual and designed to invite non-factual replies, inevitably of the sniping kind. Consequently it shouldn't be in GQ. IMHO maybe, as if it hasn't been done to death already.
  #11  
Old 12-28-2002, 11:09 AM
Violet Violet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Re: Why do Europeans dislike Americans?

Quote:
Originally posted by Theom
.. plus they don't know where scotland is....
Cite?
  #12  
Old 12-28-2002, 11:11 AM
Squink Squink is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Quote:
The question isn't factual and designed to invite non-factual replies
Where do you put the brackets on that monstrosity ? I'd rather see Theom given the benefit of the doubt.
  #13  
Old 12-28-2002, 11:16 AM
sailor sailor is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by Susanann
There are generally two types of Europeans.

Depending on which country you are from, you have one of 2 different types of resentment towards the US:

1. The Euopeans from a country whose rear end we saved.

2. The Europeans from a country whose rear end we kicked.
It's nice to live in such a simple world isn't it?

Now, pray tell, where does Portugal fall in that scheme of things?
  #14  
Old 12-28-2002, 11:19 AM
galen galen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Quote:
Originally posted by Susanann
There are generally two types of Europeans.

Depending on which country you are from, you have one of 2 different types of resentment towards the US:

1. The Euopeans from a country whose rear end we saved.

2. The Europeans from a country whose rear end we kicked.
Perfect example!

These are myths believed only by people in the US.
  #15  
Old 12-28-2002, 11:22 AM
tomndebb tomndebb is offline
Mod Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N E Ohio
Posts: 36,253
By the way, since this is the Straight Dope® and we hold factual accuracy in high regard, you should know that this statement is pretty much completely wrong:
Quote:
if thier president hadn't been so stupid as not to join the leage of nations then the war would not have started in the first place so it was in fact thier duty to fight
The league of Nations could almost be considered Wilson's idea (and, in U.S. high school text books, it is occasionally so presented). It was not Wilson's rejection of the League, but his inability to persuade the U.S. Senate to consent to U.S. participation, that kept the U.S. out of the League. (And, of course, the assumption that a U.S. presence in the League would have had any effect on preventing WWII is definitely a topic for Great Debates (or, at least, IMHO).
  #16  
Old 12-28-2002, 11:26 AM
tomndebb tomndebb is offline
Mod Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N E Ohio
Posts: 36,253
Quote:
This European doesn't hate Americans. I moved to Texas and love it.
What does Texas have to do with Americans?
  #17  
Old 12-28-2002, 11:27 AM
casdave casdave is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 7,508
So someone here is saying that 42% of all 16 to 18 year olds in the UK do not know about the existance of, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Israel,Vietnam, Korea, or any of the many other Asian nations that are constantly in the news !!!!!!

Good grief, not everything on the net is true, not even when it is a media organisation reporting it.

Just think about what you, the OP, have said, then look at British colonial history, then start thinking about illegal immigrants, asylum seekers, British peacekeeping operations.

Do you really believe that 42% ?
  #18  
Old 12-28-2002, 11:37 AM
MC Master of Ceremonies MC Master of Ceremonies is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
I think the 42% refers to US high school students.
  #19  
Old 12-28-2002, 11:41 AM
Crusoe Crusoe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Quote:
Originally posted by Futile Gesture
The question isn't factual and designed to invite non-factual replies, inevitably of the sniping kind. Consequently it shouldn't be in GQ. IMHO maybe, as if it hasn't been done to death already.
Yes, I know. I was being sarcastic.
  #20  
Old 12-28-2002, 11:47 AM
kniz kniz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by casdave
Do you really believe that 42% ?
"Believe it" maybe not, but I am afraid it might be true.
  #21  
Old 12-28-2002, 11:59 AM
JayElle JayElle is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Quote:
What does Texas have to do with Americans?
"It's like a whole other country..."
  #22  
Old 12-28-2002, 12:08 PM
sailor sailor is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
I did hear that Texas did, finally, decide to join the Union. I may have been misinformed though.
  #23  
Old 12-28-2002, 12:09 PM
DanBlather DanBlather is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Re: Re: Why do Europeans dislike Americans?

Quote:
Originally posted by Violet
Cite?
No, sorry, Ile de la Cite is in Paris. Scotland is north of England.
  #24  
Old 12-28-2002, 12:17 PM
Susanann Susanann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
I think a lot of Europeans, and others, do not like the United States taking military action all over the world, and assuming the role of "the world's policeman".

When America bombs other countries, civilians can, and do get hurt and blown to bits.

What was the last year that America did NOT bomb another country?

1939?
  #25  
Old 12-28-2002, 12:21 PM
Susanann Susanann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Quote:
Originally posted by Susanann
1. The Euopeans from a country whose rear end we saved.

2. The Europeans from a country whose rear end we kicked.



Originally posted by galen
Perfect example!

These are myths believed only by people in the US.
No offense, but you should take a history lesson.

For the most part, these are not myths. There are few European countries who were not "saved or kicked".
  #26  
Old 12-28-2002, 12:43 PM
MC Master of Ceremonies MC Master of Ceremonies is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
I'm sorry Susann, but your view is simplistic and ignorant.
  #27  
Old 12-28-2002, 12:56 PM
casdave casdave is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 7,508
Well done Sussann, thanks for making the fight against ignorance all the harder.

I any team game, do we say that the kicker won it and pulled everyones elses ass out of the fire ?

...or do we say that the contribution made by the whole team was significant, that the winning kick was only made possible by the performance of the team as a whole ?

It took massive contributions from every allied nation during both WW to come out on top, you don't seriously think that the US did it all by it ownsome !

There is a saying, not strictly true but it contains some trace of it,
In WWII,
The British bought the time.
The Russains paid in blood.
The Americans provided the money.

If any one of the major allies had fallen out of WWII or WWI then the chances of an overall allied victory would have been seriuosly diminished.

You comment is an insult to all the major allies, and that includes the Americans who died buying freedom for their European allies.
  #28  
Old 12-28-2002, 01:10 PM
Susanann Susanann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Quote:
Originally posted by casdave

It took massive contributions from every allied nation during both WW to come out on top, you don't seriously think that the US did it all by it ownsome !

If any one of the major allies had fallen out of WWII or WWI then the chances of an overall allied victory would have been seriuosly diminished.

You comment is an insult to all the major allies, and that includes the Americans who died buying freedom for their European allies. [/B]
I think I disagree with you. If you feel insulted, then so be it.

As I remember from the history of ww2, the only countries that would have stopped Hitler, were: the United States, and Russia.

If Russia had not fought Germany on the eastern front, then victory against Germany would have been diminished.

All others would have fallen without the United States and Russia.

...and I dont think we needed any other country to defeat Japan.
  #29  
Old 12-28-2002, 01:16 PM
MC Master of Ceremonies MC Master of Ceremonies is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Well, the US could not of entered the European theatre and western front without Britain as it is (or perhaps more correctly, was) simply impossible to form a beachead when your army is based several thousand miles away over the ocean.

The lion's share of the fighting was done by Russia who were the primary defeaters of Germany. US's most important contribution was not military but economic.
  #30  
Old 12-28-2002, 01:38 PM
sleeping sleeping is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
It's true. There was a survey (I saw it on msnbc.com but it was on many other news sites, too) and, among other questions they didn't know the answers to, 26% could not locate Afghanistan (and this was well into operation Enduring Freedom), 70% could not locate major European countries (one shudders to think how many actually knew of the existence of, say, Ukraine), 25% could not find New Jersey on a map of the U.S., and 16% of American high school students could not locate the U.S. on a world map!

The horror!
  #31  
Old 12-28-2002, 01:39 PM
casdave casdave is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 7,508
More servicemen from the British contingent died than US.Thank you for taking their contributions and their lives so lightly, perhaps they needn't have bothered, and just left it to Russia and the US.

I think you are also not making much effort to look at the British and Chines forces role in the far East.

The war against Japan nearly reached India after the longest retreat in history, it was followed by the longest advance in history, most of those forces were made up of Australians, New Zealanders, UK, Chinese etc.
The US presence against Japan in mainland Asia was minimal.
Even if the US had not pushed back Japnese forces across the Pacific as fast as they did, there is little doubt that Japans postion in Asia was unsustainable, and they were in fact losing the war in Burma and South-East Asia.

The military role of US forces in WW1 was minimal, their strategic and political effect was very significant since it led to the last major offensive by the Germans during the summer of 1918 in a bid to crush British and French forces before the US could ship serious numbers across the Atlantic.
That offensive was held by the French and British and it was the British advance (the second and thrid battles of the Marne) that finally crushed the German army.
The US troops did make a useful contribution, but it was not militarily significant.

Seems to me Susanann you are doing your absolute best to fulfil the stereotypes that some ignorant Europeans have of your nation, and you are doing this by displaying your ignorance of history.

So we have the ignorant learning from the ignorant.
  #32  
Old 12-28-2002, 01:56 PM
tomndebb tomndebb is offline
Mod Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N E Ohio
Posts: 36,253
Quote:
Originally posted by Susanann
For the most part, these are not myths.
Actually, in the context of your original statement (that there are generally two kinds of Europeans), they are simply errors of fact. Poland, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Czechoslovakia never saw U.S. troops during the war (other than the errant airman). Sweden, Switzerland, Spain, and Portugal were neither attacked nor saved. In addition, Finland, Bugaria, Romania, Yugoslavia, Albania, and Greece probably shared in defeat or salvation through U.S. aid to Britain and the U.S.S.R. and the occasional air raid, but they hardly owe the U.S. either thanks for salvation or anger for conquest. (And, when offering "thanks," the Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, Hungarians, and to a lesser extent, the Greeks and Austrians, just might want to withhold those thanks in light of U.S. lack of support or outright interference with their independence during the Cold War.)

The simplistic world view that you seem to be espousing does not reflect either the reality of world events or the reality of attitudes that different Europeans hold on any number of American-related subjects.
  #33  
Old 12-28-2002, 04:43 PM
Ryan_Liam Ryan_Liam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Without Europeans Americans wouldn't be what they are today.
  #34  
Old 12-28-2002, 05:17 PM
tomndebb tomndebb is offline
Mod Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N E Ohio
Posts: 36,253
Quote:
Without Europeans Americans wouldn't be what they are today.
So, are you attempting to praise or insult Europeans?
  #35  
Old 12-28-2002, 05:37 PM
t-keela t-keela is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
I'm sure glad to hear that y'all aren't holding Texas responsible for the U.S. and it's foreign policies.
I can't think of anyone from here (Texas) that's had much to do with it in recent years...
  #36  
Old 12-28-2002, 06:06 PM
Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Dogpatch/Middle TN.
Posts: 28,553
Quote:
Originally posted by tomndebb
By the way, since this is the Straight Dope® and we hold factual accuracy in high regard, you should know that this statement is pretty much completely wrong: The league of Nations could almost be considered Wilson's idea (and, in U.S. high school text books, it is occasionally so presented). It was not Wilson's rejection of the League, but his inability to persuade the U.S. Senate to consent to U.S. participation, that kept the U.S. out of the League. (And, of course, the assumption that a U.S. presence in the League would have had any effect on preventing WWII is definitely a topic for Great Debates (or, at least, IMHO).
His failure can be attributed to illness. President Wilson had contracted the 1918 Spanish Influenza during the Peace confrence. 1918 Spanish caused many long-term problems for the people who had it--dimminished stamina, weakness, aggravated heart/blood pressure problems, as well as clinical depression that could last for years.

During his attempts to stirr up support for the League, he collapsed from exhaustion. This doomed the ratification effort.

Several months later, he was dead of a stroke.
__________________
FRIENDS! ROMANS! COUNTRY BUMPKINS!
Lend me your auditory canals!
Ask not what your clones can do for you, but what you can do for country music!
Never in the field of conflict was so much owed by so many who only had a few!
  #37  
Old 12-28-2002, 06:33 PM
Gyrate Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by sleeping
It's true. There was a survey (I saw it on msnbc.com but it was on many other news sites, too) and, among other questions they didn't know the answers to, 26% could not locate Afghanistan (and this was well into operation Enduring Freedom), 70% could not locate major European countries (one shudders to think how many actually knew of the existence of, say, Ukraine), 25% could not find New Jersey on a map of the U.S., and 16% of American high school students could not locate the U.S. on a world map!

The horror!
While I can't completely justify the ignorance of many Americans in geographical matters, one does need to consider the sheer size of the US as one mitigating factor. The distance from London to Istanbul is about 1500 miles or so, and a flight from one to the other would take you over several different countries. The same distance in the US gets you only about halfway across the country. In Europe, a hundred miles in any direction will likely land you in a different country; in the US, you might still be in the same state.

Conversely, I find that many Brits I've spoken only seem to know where New York, Florida and Hawaii are, and are pretty much clueless about the other 47 states. Does this mean that they're all thickos? I suspect not.
__________________
"I always forget to carry the kitten when doing the math." - Folly
"Most smart people aren't very smart when when they are on fire." - Der Trihs
"Well, if she's already gone to Yahoo! Answers, I don't know what more we can hope to add to the discussion." - DrFidelius
  #38  
Old 12-28-2002, 07:51 PM
Susanann Susanann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Quote:
Originally posted by tomndebb
Actually, in the context of your original statement (that there are generally two kinds of Europeans), they are simply errors of fact. Poland, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Czechoslovakia never saw U.S. troops during the war (other than the errant airman). Sweden, Switzerland, Spain, and Portugal were neither attacked nor saved. In addition, Finland, Bugaria, Romania, Yugoslavia, Albania, and Greece probably shared in defeat or salvation through U.S. aid to Britain and the U.S.S.R. and the occasional air raid, but they hardly owe the U.S. either thanks for salvation or anger for conquest. (And, when offering "thanks," the Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, Hungarians, and to a lesser extent, the Greeks and Austrians, just might want to withhold those thanks in light of U.S. lack of support or outright interference with their independence during the Cold War.)

You need to read a history of world war 2, any history.

Nearly all the countries you mentioned, either fell, were actually conqured, and were actualy enslaved, had puppet governments set up by Hitler, or would have soon been enslaved if it were not for the US and for Russia.

Switzerland may be an exception.

If American troops had stayed out of world war 2, if we had not landed on Normandy, even Britain would have surely fell to Germany. Hitler had plans to invade Britain. Even american aid alone would not have prevented Britain from falling to Hitler.
  #39  
Old 12-28-2002, 08:00 PM
Rune Rune is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Well we obviously hate you because you’re a bunch of rotten bastards. Sheesh! How stupid can you be?! Just what to expect from someone who doesn’t have our superior European finesse.

Ahh seriously, I think you’ll find very little US directed hate in Europe (or at least here in Scandinavia – and at least not more than, what is by our fine European time-honoured traditional directed at everybody not ourselves) – it’s just that the media has to report something. When was the last time a newspaper had a story something like: “Newsflash! Today 234 million European didn’t protest US intervention in <insert favourite hot-spot>” Besides a few Frenchmen (and hey, everybody hates those damn bastards!), I think most everybody around here knows the future of Europe and the US is intimately entwined.

“There are generally two types of Europeans.
Depending on which country you are from, you have one of 2 different types of resentment towards the US:
1. The Euopeans from a country whose rear end we saved.
2. The Europeans from a country whose rear end we kicked.”

Seriously this is about the lamest reply I’ve read all week. I do so seriously hope that was irony. I know you recently have had a number of movies (Band of Brothers, Saving Private Ryan, U-571, Pearl Harbour) that extol your American WWII soldiers. That’s your entitlement; these were clearly very courageous US soldiers that you can be proud of (except of course for the U-571 sailors, which were courageous British sailors ). But I think few Europeans think of the US as among the countries that gave the most to help victory in either WWI or WWII, let alone consider themselves either kicked or saved by the US. Not that I’m oblivious to the US help, but I do think all other participants pale besides Britain and Soviet. Especially when you take into consideration the suffering endured.
  #40  
Old 12-28-2002, 08:13 PM
tomndebb tomndebb is offline
Mod Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N E Ohio
Posts: 36,253
Quote:
Switzerland may be an exception.
Along with Sweden, Spain (a neutral ally of Hitler), and Portugal. You will also note that the captive countries I named were freed by the U.S.S.R. rather than the U.S. (Although the U.S. also "allowed" the Soviets to establish their puppet governments after the war, negating your claim that they have only two reasons to dislike the U.S.)

I doubt that you will be educating me on matters historical any time soon.
  #41  
Old 12-28-2002, 08:33 PM
tomndebb tomndebb is offline
Mod Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N E Ohio
Posts: 36,253
BTW, you want me to read a book of history after posting this silliness?
Quote:
If American troops had stayed out of world war 2, if we had not landed on Normandy, even Britain would have surely fell to Germany. Hitler had plans to invade Britain. Even american aid alone would not have prevented Britain from falling to Hitler.
By the time of the Normandy invasion, the primary purpose of the invasion was to keep the U.S.S.R. from sweeping all the way to the Atlantic, taking all of Germany and France (and possibly Finland, Norway, and Denmark) with it.

The threat to Britain was three years in the past and Germany was fighting a defensive war by the summer of 1944.

I do not minimize the American contributions, at all, but your claims that Eastern Europe should be ever so grateful to the U.S. or that Britain was "saved" by the Normandy invasion are simply not historically accurate.
  #42  
Old 12-28-2002, 08:55 PM
Neurotik Neurotik is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor
His failure can be attributed to illness.
Utterly wrong.

While Wilson certainly died while stumping the country on behalf of his peace plan, it made no difference. The treaty was dead in the US.

Wilson's failure was caused not by illness, but by an inability to compromise and work with Congress. He was so sure that he was right and so ridiculously stubborn, that he poisoned his chances in Congress and failed to take any of their concerns into account.
  #43  
Old 12-28-2002, 11:33 PM
pulykamell pulykamell is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: SW Side, Chicago
Posts: 30,095
Sorry guys. Just had to pop in to say how amusing I find it seeing someone lecture tomndebb, one of the most politically and historically astute posters here on the SDMB, about history. Nothing wrong with challenging an authority on the subject... just give your argument some substance, please. Carry on folks...
  #44  
Old 12-29-2002, 12:32 AM
TitoBenito TitoBenito is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by Theom
And british hate americans btecause they don't seem to have realised that if thier president hadn't been so stupid as not to join the leage of nations then the war would not have started in the first place so it was in fact thier duty to fight
We don't realize it because it isn't true. Damn us Americans for not beleiving something an enlightened European such as yourself, just made up rather than actually researching. The League was actually Wilson's Idea and it was the republican US Senate that rejected it. The US joining would have certainly added some weight to the League, but ultimately it would have probibly collapsed anyways because of the situations created by the silly retribution payments our European friends forced on the Germans. Which I might add the US was against for the most part. Europe placing most of blame on the US for WWII is pretty laugable. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
  #45  
Old 12-29-2002, 12:39 AM
trader_of_shots trader_of_shots is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Melbourne, Oz
Posts: 277
Quote:
Originally posted by Susanann
No offense, but you should take a history lesson.

For the most part, these are not myths. There are few European countries who were not "saved or kicked".

I think we know why (not just Europe) hates Americans... because of ignorant gits like this.

On a personal note: I used to hate Americans until i went there and realised they are slaves to their government and media.

Went i left i had nothing but sympathy for the brave American people and searing hatred from they vile industries that control them.
  #46  
Old 12-29-2002, 01:15 AM
TitoBenito TitoBenito is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by trader_of_shots
I think we know why (not just Europe) hates Americans... because of ignorant gits like this.

On a personal note: I used to hate Americans until i went there and realised they are slaves to their government and media.

Went i left i had nothing but sympathy for the brave American people and searing hatred from they vile industries that control them.
If only some enlightened foreigners could save lil' ol' ignorant me from the forces of evil. You sound like how Bush talks about other countries. Although I agree with your opinion on American ignorant macho BS, being condescending about it certainly doesn't make me want to. We are not stupid children here in the states (exept for the children who happen to really be stupid), so please do not treat us if we are. Very few Americans will respond positively to this type of attitude. The only industry that controls me is the carmel colored suger water industry. mmmm camel colored suger water.
  #47  
Old 12-29-2002, 01:43 AM
DMC DMC is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 3,557
Quote:
Originally posted by Susanann to tomndebb
You need to read a history of world war 2, any history.
...and for her next trick, she'll school Tamerlane in things Middle Eastern. Followed by demonstrating to Polycarp on how one can be a compassionate, thoughtful Christian.

As to the OP, the previous thread on this subject from a few weeks ago has many answers, in addition to the one's here. You can find the thread here.
  #48  
Old 12-29-2002, 04:48 AM
casdave casdave is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 7,508
As for Hitler invading the UK, rubbish, absolute rubbish.

Even before the air war of the Battle of Britain, Hitler had begun issuing orders for military redeployment to attack Russia.His military priority was to avoid a war on two fronts and although the UK was still in there, it did not pose a significant enough threat to him to affect his East European war.

Most folk think that the Battle of Britain was Hitler's attempt to destroy the RAF to gain air supriority for a landing on the English south coast, but this is not quite the truth.

The German plans to invade England were a complete lash-up, and the Germans knew it, they knew that Britain had 80 destroyers, 11 battleships, dozens of cruisers, dozens of submarines in UK waters available for immediate deployment.This is without Roayl Navy vessels from around the world being returned to home waters which would have doubled this total.

Add to this that big gun power turned out to be absolutely crucial to opposed landings and that Germany had a fleet of around one tenth that of Britain and certainly could not have brought enough heavy gunnery to bear.

Even the Germans own estimates reckoned that an unopposed channel crossing would have taken 20 hours, there were no plans for Germn armour to cross the channel, most of the barges had no engine power and would have had to be towed, making them incredibly vulnerable to heavy weather or attack,and when you actually think of the sheer scale of the Normandy landings and what went into them, which was a culminations of three years experience of opposed landings, the Germans simply did not have the knowledge nor the logistical means to undertake such an operation.

It would have taken over a week to get 140000 German troops across the channel, they would have been out of fuel and ammo within hours.

The main reason for Hitlers persuance of the Battle of Britain was in fact political, the aim was to pose such a serious threat that Churchill would have been removed from office by a vote of no confidence in parliament and his successor would then have been mandated to sign a peace treaty with Europe.

So to counter the following myth

Quote:
If American troops had stayed out of world war 2, if we had not landed on Normandy, even Britain would have surely fell to Germany. Hitler had plans to invade Britain.
Read your history.

Hitler had always taken the view that the world needed a colonial world naval power, which Germany was not nor had ever been.
His view was that Britain was best placed for this, and its ability to raise and maintain a land army in Europe was always sporadic, and that mainland Europe should be controlled by Germany.
  #49  
Old 12-29-2002, 05:07 AM
Broomstick Broomstick is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 18,568
Quote:
Originally posted by Susanann
I think a lot of Europeans, and others, do not like the United States taking military action all over the world, and assuming the role of "the world's policeman".

When America bombs other countries, civilians can, and do get hurt and blown to bits.
How true, we are such clumsy oafs.

Everyone knows that when OTHER countries bomb people no one gets hurt but the bad guys.
  #50  
Old 12-29-2002, 05:21 AM
MC Master of Ceremonies MC Master of Ceremonies is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Quote:
Originally posted by Susanann
You need to read a history of world war 2, any history.

Nearly all the countries you mentioned, either fell, were actually conqured, and were actualy enslaved, had puppet governments set up by Hitler, or would have soon been enslaved if it were not for the US and for Russia.

Switzerland may be an exception.

If American troops had stayed out of world war 2, if we had not landed on Normandy, even Britain would have surely fell to Germany. Hitler had plans to invade Britain. Even american aid alone would not have prevented Britain from falling to Hitler.
Susann, I suggest YOU should read some history books. By the time the US had entered the war, Hitlers invasion plans for Britain were already on permenant hold after the Luftwaffe were defeated in the Battle of Britain and the opening up of the Eastern Front.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.