Guns on boats equals 5 years jail time

[rognvald]

Originally Posted by boatman61

LMFAO... First I've heard we in the UK were liberated Dood...!!
Though we were near bankrupted paying for the piece of ***** mothballed ships you sold us at extortionate prices..

Boatman,
The irony of your remarks is that your greatest statesman, war leader and politician, Winston Churchill, would have vehemently disagreed with your twisted statement above. It was in Churchill's own words that would best describe your response:

Show me a man in his youth
That was not a liberal
And I show you a man
Without a heart.

Show me a man over 40
That is not a conservative
And I show you a man
Without a brain.

Sir Winston Churchill

Where do you fall, Boatman?

[Sailing55]

Originally Posted by Vipe6

I don't think it's arrogance on my behalf. I actually used to be a fan of the us untill I came into contact with some of that arrogance. It cured me for good. (so there's your answer to the chicken and the egg)
For instance, we have perfectky good cars here in europe, no need for your president to bring his own car when he visits. We even have these desks for him to stand behind when he gives a speech. And above all, we have our own police, no need for american security personnel to push us out of the way in our own countries.

Why don't you tell us of the arrogance you came in contact with. You are one of the most vicious people posting here. I would love to hear how your hatred of an entire nation began. Your rabid hatred of all things American must have a cause. Please share it with us all. I can feel the hate directed at me and my fellow Americans...at least we deserve to know the reason.

[Vipe6]

Originally Posted by alha

I agree, due to the winter, vastly over extended supply lines, etc, but again my point is that without our air superiority due to our massive resupplying of the allies, and all that brought with it, they would probably have regrouped and resupplied, if their factories were still standing, as well as their railways, depots, transport systems in general. Regardless, my humble opinion is that if we had stayed on the sidelines, Europe would be a _significantly_ different place than it is today, and Hitlers demise was anything but inevitable.

But I digress, we have a difference of opinion, which is fine, no harm done. Unlike lets say the group of people in Rwanda 20 years ago who were unarmed and with whom other people had 'disagreements' with, and who didn't end up in a very happy place at the end of the day. By the 10's of thousands. Or Bosnia. But those are different events for different discussions, though all are relevant in some way to this one. It just shows that it did/does happen today, just like it did back Way Back Then. Nothing really changes, other than the dates and places, because no one really learns. We're Humans, and that sadly isn't going to change any time soon. If ever.

To me weapons are weapons, wether they're guns, machetes or swords. No one civilian should be carrying any of them. Of course a machete is normally used as a tool (as is an axe). I'm also not opposed to carrying a gun when for instance living in the forrests in canada. Man is a vulnerable creature compared to a bear for instance. But there can be absolutely no reason for me to carry a firearm in New York or any other big city that has no dangerous animals except our own species. If europeans get by without carying firearms but the us is constantly shocked by mass shootings, isn't it time to think? I recently heard some republican fool say that le bataclan in paris would have ended up differently if people would have had guns. Indeed it would heve been very different. Who would have known who was a terrorist and who a civilian? Terrorists usually do not paint the word terrorist on their forehead, police would have had immense difficulty in distinguishing the both.

[SpiritofGlenans]

Originally Posted by rognvald

KVB,
Wherever you went to school, you must have been sleeping during your World History classes. Roosevelt and Stalin did not parcel out Eastern Europe-- Stalin forcibly occupied those countries after the fall of Berlin and they became the future United Soviet Republics. It was Roosevelt's weakness and reluctance to continue the war in 1945 and negotiate for a better deal that enabled Stalin and Mother Russia to be the greatest winner of WWII. And, it was U.S. General MacArthur that advised Roosevelt to continue forward and liberate Eastern Europe from the Soviets and neutralize the Russian threat in the future. Of course, we know what happened and the resulting Cold War and the threat of nuclear confrontation lasted 44 years until Reagan and Gorbachev dismantled the Iron Curtain and tore down the Berlin Wall.
Secondly, no educated person would make your last statement that "WWII would not have happened if the US stayed out of WWI." This is patently absurd since WWI exploded because of territorial disputes, alliances, economic conflicts, colonial issues that related to the balance of power in Europe caused by the decline in the Ottoman Empire and the burgeoning power grabbing for control over Europe by the English, French, and Russians opposed to Germany. Archduke Ferdinand of Austria assassination was just the fuse that set the fire. It was Germany, Austro-Hungary, Serbia, France, Russia and Great Britain who in an unstoppable domino effect caused the conflagration. US President Woodrow Wilson, acting as a peacemaker, tried to keep the US out of the war for 2 1/2 years until April of 1917 when merchant ships were bombed by German subs. At that point, the US became involved. However, after the war, it was the dreaded Treaty of Versailles in 1919 pushed by the French Prime Minister Clemenceau for its harshest measures to neutralize and weaken Germany--an age-old enemy/threat and power that led to WWII. US President Wilson and Lloyd George of England were against the harsh treatment of the Germans since they knew, in their wisdom, that it would affect the rebuilding of Germany and create hatred among the German people for their ultimate national and economic destruction. However reluctantly, they still signed the decree. Ultimately, Wilson and George were correct as History unfolded and it was the spite, hatred and fear of Germany by the French, not the US, that caused the emergence of Hitler and ultimately WWII. Good luck. Dr. Rognvald, Professor Emeritus Cruisers University.

Thought Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill met at Potadam (that's just west of Berlin) in 1945, to settle on "spheres of influence" in post-war Europe? Didn't the Soviets unsuccessfully claim control over Greece and Austria?
Towards the end of the war, Churchill wanted the Allies to isolate pockets of German resistance in North-Western Europe so as to leave themselves free to break through to Berlin and further east, thus preventing further westward incursion by the Soviets, but Roosevelt preferred to advance slowly on a broad front and let the Russians take the punishment. The British even kept captured German formations intact and their materiel stored in good condition, so as to re-activate them in a possible war against the Soviet Union. It was the lack of geopolitical "street-smarts" on Rooseveldt's part that left Russia in such an advantageous position that the Cold War ensued.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by rognvald

Vipe,
This is changing, as we speak, with the ubiquitous terrorism/violent crime in England and throughout Europe as well as the recent violent refugee crimes. And, to compare a country of roughly 50 million, England, with the US--300 million is patently absurd.

Okay.. compare it with NYS and W. Virginia.. roughly the same size..

[Vipe6]

Originally Posted by morven55

Why don't you tell us of the arrogance you came in contact with. You are one of the most vicious people posting here. I would love to hear how your hatred of an entire nation began. Your rabid hatred of all things American must have a cause. Please share it with us all. I can feel the hate directed at me and my fellow Americans...at least we deserve to know the reason.

As I have stated before, it's not the people of the us it's their leaders. (heard something like that before?)

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Lizzy Belle

What ads do you guys get?
I always have the exact same ones, and they're still there now ...

(Right panel: wiki, Spade, GMN, some prop, Vesper & Mantus. Never changes.)

The adds are smart. If you look for something on the web then you get adds for that. As I searched about Solar panels and watermakers, that is what I get as adds and not any but the brands I searched

[SpiritofGlenans]

Originally Posted by Vipe6

Enlighten us. When were there "boots on the ground" before 1944?

What about North Africa and Italy in 1943?

[Sailing55]

Originally Posted by Vipe6

As I have stated before, it's not the people of the us it's their leaders. (heard something like that before?)

Please answer the question. Your hateful rants need some substance. No backpedalling allowed.

The people of the US have been continually berated by you and I, for one, want to know why. Specifically. You have made the claims, now it's time to back it up. Of course, that would require moral courage, which you seemingly do not possess.

But please answer the question...

[tdoster]

Part of the reason cruising was so attractive to me is for the most part the rhetoric was left at home and it did not matter who you are, or where you are from as we all have sundowners at the same time and together where we happen to be at the time.

Albeit, with a little tongue and cheek flag waving for the home team, but nothing like some of these posts.

What we carry on board is really personal choice, and has nothing to do with where we are from, in my opinion. The OP clearly stated he was just trying to pass information and not start a war.

The gun debate is fruitless as are any political discussions.

The best proven protection is to travel in groups with someone with local knowledge and at least someone who speaks the language and stay out of places that are not even safe for the locals. Advise equally correct whether in Syria or Detroit, MI USA or literally in any other country in the world.

[SpiritofGlenans]

Originally Posted by Vipe6

Never knew that north africa was part of europe.

Yes the French controlled territories in North Africa, such as Morocco and Algeria were constitutionally, provinces of Metropolitan France.

[Vipe6]

Originally Posted by SpiritofGlenans

What about North Africa and Italy in 1943?

Indeed, Italy was sooner, my mistake but the discussion was initially about the soviets beating the hell out of the nazis before the other allied forces landed in europe. And the nazis took their most serious blow in stalingrad (and moscow). That was my point.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by rognvald

Boatman,
The irony of your remarks is that your greatest statesman, war leader and politician, Winston Churchill, would have vehemently disagreed with your twisted statement above. It was in Churchill's own words that would best describe your response:

Show me a man in his youth
That was not a liberal
And I show you a man
Without a heart.

Show me a man over 40
That is not a conservative
And I show you a man
Without a brain.

Sir Winston Churchill

Where do you fall, Boatman?

Learnt at a very early age to trust those closest to me the least.. and I regret to say I don't fall into your simplistic Western classification..
Victorian upbringing in a new born Islamic State with still strong Sikh, Hindu, Jain, Bhuddist and Parsee influences.. sampled all of them before the Beatles made it fashionable..
Folk have been trying to put me in a box all my life.. join the club..
Kipling's 'Kim' may yield some clues..

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by alha

Son, you need to read up on your history a little more, the soviets _didn't_ have the Nazis "on their knees" before we joined the war, in fact, they were losing millions of people on the eastern front and getting their azzes handed to them. The siege of Leningrad lasted until January of 1944. And a big part of the reason that they were able to break out of Russia and start the march west was because of our years long, almost constant bombing of German material, transport and military assets. Please, get your facts straight before you make yourself look (more) silly. Oh, and you should care, because you would probably be speaking German right now, instead of your native language (if you would have even been born), if we hadn't came in with our "unwilling" soldiers. You are truly a piece of work, sir. Truly.

This is getting further and further from cruising, but he's actually right. The Germans were broken and in full retreat before Rokossovsky's and Zhukov's armies by the time D-Day happened in June, 1944. All of the fighting on the Western Front, including all of the bombing, produced less than 10% of German casualties. It is generally agreed by historians today that the strategic bombing of German cities had little military effect. The Soviets did beat the Germans, and our role in it is highly exaggerated (for Cold War propaganda purposes, probably). The most significant thing we did was not any of the fighting, but providing about 10% of the materiel which the Soviets used, through Lend-Lease, including useless items like our crappy Sherman "Ronson" tanks, but also some crucial items like our superb Studebaker trucks (Soviet forces nearly fully motorized versus Germans using mostly horses for transport -- hugely important in the outcome), and, oddly, gasoline (Soviets second biggest oil producers in the world at the time, but no refining capacity). Occasionally our bombing had some significant effect (destruction of Ploesti oil complex in Romania; bombing of shipyards), but mostly we bombed residential neighborhoods (killing 300,000 civilians and rendering millions homeless), which had no effect on the war. German military production increased continuously throughout the war despite the bombing.

So yes, the Soviets -- Soviet blood and Soviet industrial capacity -- won the European part of WWII, not quite single-handed, but close. We won the war in the Pacific, however. These are historical facts.

[Vipe6]

Originally Posted by morven55

Please answer the question. Your hateful rants need some substance. No backpedalling allowed.

The people of the US have been continually berated by you and I, for one, want to know why. Specifically. You have made the claims, now it's time to back it up. Of course, that would require moral courage, which you seemingly do not possess.

But please answer the question...

I believe I did answer that question when I talked about american arrogance, you know with the presidential car and especially american security personnel taking over a country he visits.