If you can read this in English thank a veteran. Really?

I have some friends on Facebook who are the sort of mushy thinkers that reflexively spout patriotic banalities and I’ve seen the, “If you can read this thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank a veteran.” status a couple of Memorial Days now.

How realistic is that? Who in particular had 1. The ability to invade us. and 2. the inclination to actually attempt changing the official language?

I understand that the standing military made invasion by the Russians less likely, but were they actually interested in a full invasion of the continental US? That really seems unlikely.

Am I missing something?

Also, I am thankful for the work veterans do tracking down AQ in Afghanistan / Pakistan and fixing the mistakes of the last administration. But that doesn’t mean we should be hyperbolic in our praise.

I guess if you’re in the S. West, without the Mexican American war you would’ve still been in part of Mexico and thus have been speaking Spanish. So I guess the question is less “who would’ve invaded us” and more “who would we not have invaded that we did”.

Though your opportunity to thank a veteran of the Mexican American war has probably passed. I guess if you’re in Guam you might be speaking Japanese now if it weren’t for the US victory in WWII.

Who do I thank if I ever happen to read that bit of glurge in Portugese?

Also, since it was written in English, what other language could you possibly read it in? And why should I thank any teacher other than the ones who taught me how to read?

No, the idea is nonsense, but it sounds pleasantly vapid and jingoistic, and people love jingoism, so it sticks.

It’s not even that practical in a scenario of actual invasion - like when retards tell french people “if it weren’t for us you’d be speaking German!” - it’s not as if, even if Nazi Germany had continued, then France’s native culture and language would’ve been stamped out.

So when you apply it to the idea that the US is only free due to soldiers to have their own language, it’s even more absurd, because no power in the last two centuries has had even the most remote chance of subjugating the US by force (and at the very earliest stages, the biggest threat would be England - and we’d definitely be in for a big change if they made us start speaking their language).

You can pretty much safely chalk up anyone who says this to you as being an idiot.

The Russians? Sooner or later the Nazis would have gotten around to conquering Portugal I’m sure.

I think it entails a fully de-militarized America and a fully militarized Soviet Union. They did a lot of reorganizing and shuffling of countries that came under their control, language being one item. Imagine no US military from 1948 on, nothing to keep Stalin’s ambitions in check. Soviet growth through the fifties, sixties and seventies, and no other superpower to check them. If it weren’t for the military, could they have taken over?

(Not sure how the nuclear option fits in, but those were soldiers manning the rockets and flying the planes.)

Now now, fellas. Remember how close Mexico came to conquering us during WWII. A close call indeed.


Amphibious operations are logistically ridiculously difficult. Think about D-Day. The entire might of the largest economy in the world, along with that of GB and the commonwealth, plotted for 3 entire years to land an army on Europe. They built specialized weapons and logistics in order to accomplish this - boats that could land troops and supplies, floating docks that could be set up in days, etc. They trained otherwise idle armies of troops over and over for this specific purpose. They had overwhelming logistical, air, and naval superiority over what amounted to a tiny stretch of water cross. And they were faced up against mostly low tier troops, reserves, training units, etc. when the attention of Germany’s army was entire focused away from this theater. And they had the complete element of surprise. And yet, it was precarious - a different German response could’ve thwarted the entire invasion.

If the most well supplied military units in the world, after having 3 years of prep to cross tiny sliver of water, can barely invade a country where only a small fraction of their troops are dedicated to defending it just barely succeeds in an invasion, then the idea that another power, with lesser industrial and logistical capability could cross the entire ocean (either one) and stage a prolonged campaign on US soil is just absurd. You sometimes hear total dimwits for some odd reason proudly declare that China could take over the US anytime it wanted to! CAUSE LIKE THEY HAVE A BILLION PEOPLE AND SHIT! like they have star trek teleporter technology and they could land 200 million armed men across the country all at once.

No, even if we didn’t have a navy, air force, or a significant army (and relied on national guard type units or militia), no one could have even the slightest chance of invading the US. The very idea is ridiculous.

Oh yeah, well what about this documentary?! :dubious:

And as proof that anything’s possible, they’re even updatingit.

Do remember that the whole thing is premised on unchecked Soviet expansionism to the limit of what the propagandists taught us in the 80s and mealy-mouthed sissyhood of America–for forty to fifty years.

Over/understate Reagan’s and America’s role and whatnot, but I dare say we were a necessary element (though not the only necessary element) in keeping the USSR’s expansion in check. Imagine fifty years with the Soviet Union in control of virtually all of Europe and a lot more–look at all the mini battles of the Cold War, give them to the Union, and build on the outcome of that.

We were rightly freaked over a presence in Cuba; what if the proxy battles against Latin American Marxism all fell to the Soviets? Yes, Normandy was horrid, but with fifty years to prepare and grow, and with a lot more open territory to move in, and with a policy of uniformity in language amongst its satellites, I’m not so sure they couldn’t have done it. (Though they’d have had no hope of converting us to metric.)
Don’t forget, another premise is that any militaristic reaction short of mid-western teens calls for hugging your glurge.

I’m not supporting the glurge or beating my chest to its intrinsic truth. Blech. I’m just playing out a thought experiment that could have resulted in a very different world.

I agree that it’s jingoistic, but:

Why was there not even a remote chance?

No one since 1810 had*** a chance*** of subjugating us? The UK in 1812?

France or the UK circa 1863?

Oh how cute. The board liberals are playing “Too Cool for School” again. I bet before long they’ll start actually bashing veterans. On Memorial Day for Og’s sake.

Any intelligent comments to make or will a single threadshit suffice?

Also, I did say I like veterans. Yay!

No, that only happens on Veterans Day. And only to those who don’t speak English.

What the hell does that mean?

Well, guys. I think it’s time for our biannual veteran-bashing party. Everyone get out your batons.

It means the quality of your worship is inadequate, citizen!

It means this is basically a liberal circle jerk. So far.

Back to the OP. So does anyone here doubt the authenticity of the Holocaust?
Do you really find it so hard to believe that the Nazis declaring German as the new world language is any more implausible than the final solution?

Are facts liberal now?

Are you honestly suggesting that the Nazis would or could have taken over the US? How?