Teen Forums - Teen Chat, Teen Help, Teen Advice & Support

Well I stand corrected. But still, the vast majority of politicians (I'd estimate 99% considering that the one you mentioned is the only one I know of who fought change) preach at least some sort of change or making things better or going back to the good ol' days.

If the US didn't get into the war at all. Germany would have beaten down the USSR eventually, Africa would be Italian, Britain would be bombed to next week, and well the french still lose =P
So in large scale terms FDR could of sacrificed all that just to get into the war. Japan as a whole wouldn't be able to beat the US in the end game IF we lost the pacific war. They just don't have the man power to take over such a huge country.
But again this is all conspiracy, without assuming anything what FDR did made perfect sense. He stopped trading with japan because they where messing over China, US's trading partner. Fair enough
Battleships and a few thousand men seem like a small price to pay to enter a war to go get rid of the racist madman in Europe.

How was FDR Racists?!?! Holy hell almost everyone was racist back then! But ill give at least FDR the title of suspicious. He did trust Japanese Americans to go fight for the country, so hurrah to that!

How the hell is FDR a communist?!?!?!?
0.o

Really no one died in the camps in the US. Since they were not evil, just well areas you weren't suppose to leave. And really the US just got paranoid, just like how they are paranoid about terrorist nowadays.

Forgive the crappy grammar!
"The more man meditates upon good thoughts, the better will be his world and the world at large. " - Confucius
"The guy in the back always has something to say"

Actually, no. Germany never would have won, Africa would NOT have been Italian, and Britain would not have been bombed into oblivion. Here is why.

If there is one single rule to follow if you are a great general, it is this: Never invade Russia. It is nearly impossible to do so. The only person to attempt an invasion of Russia in recorded history and actually succeed was Genghis Khan. Why is so near impossible to invade? Many reasons.
One, Russia has a vast army.
Two, there are only three months during a year when you can invade in tolerable weather. The spring and fall months turn Russia into a giant mud flat, getting tanks and other automobiles stuck in the thick mud. The winter months are impossible to invade during because of the "white-out" snow conditions and the sub-zero temperatures. The only time when an army can invade is during the summer months. When the first snowflake fell September 1, 1941, Germany had no chance of winning the war.
Three, Russia uses both of these tactics to completely obliterate the opponent without much fighting. Because Russia is so large, the Red Army can just play cat and mouse with the opponent, luring them into the country until the winter months, letting many of the enemy die during the intolerable winter, then launching a massive counter attack against enemy units unsuited for Russian winters


I'll admit, USA DID help repel Italy in Africa, but Britain did a major part of that.

Also, Britain would by means have been bombed into oblivion. During the Battle of Britain(a German-British air battle), Germany repeatedly tried to destroy British buildings, but were, in the end, crushed by the British RAF(Royal Air Force).

I encourage @hallace to read the book that I mentioned above. It discusses all of this. I did not know most of this until I read the book. It goes into great detail in proving that the Allies did not need America to defeat Hitler.

He was racist because he sent hundred of thousands of Japanese Americans to concentration camps. He even sent children of people born in the USA who were of Japanese descent to the camps.

Read Richard Maybury's book. I don't remember every single reason he gives, but think about this: If he wasn't Communist, why would he make an alliance with Communist Russia?

Ohh wow. Well for one FDR isnt a communist. Hell we where allies with the USSR because WE NEEDED them! Plus we where both fighting Germany, so it only makes sense to ban together. And right after the war the US and the USSR took aim at each other!
Really saying FDR was a communist is more of a joke than an actual statement. Since he also could of been the most Democratic president that has ever lived. (first hundred days anyone?)


The internment of the Japanese is segregation. African American people around this time where still segregated. So really EVERYONE at this time was racist. Saying FDR was racist is also a sorta pointless statement. He couldn't of gotten elected if he said something so radical as "everyone is equal" it just wasn't the time for it yet.
Oh also, my grandmother got sent to the damn camps. My uncle was born in the same camp. And my other uncle got out of the camps and fought in the 442nd damnit. So i know what the hell is going on here. 0.o

I really dont know if the USSR could of won the war without the US's help. Really we will never know. I would like to think the USSR could of won it, but really they where getting beat down pretty hard. So hell it makes sense to use the winter, but even WITH the US's helping in the war, the USSR had MASSIVE causalities. So i can only imagine if there was no US's to help.

Finally the battle of Britain was won mainly by the usage of RADAR. But the RAF did start taking mounting causalities simply because the Luftwaffe where keen pilots. I doubt Churchill would of surrendered by the air bombardment, but really he couldn't do much once there was no area of Europe to attack. So it would be completly left up to the USSR to win the war by the offensive. Which again seems to be a daunting task.




Ill bring up ONE last point here. What about Japan? The US was the only country that could fight off the advance Japanese navy in the pacific. Without the US Japan would of ruled over most of the pacific. Nether Britain or the USSR had a navy that could fight them off.

Forgive the crappy grammar!
"The more man meditates upon good thoughts, the better will be his world and the world at large. " - Confucius
"The guy in the back always has something to say"

How so? Why did we need them?


Actually, we didn't join the war until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. Germany invaded Russia in spring of 1941. If the United States of America was really in the war to stop Hitler, why didn't we join the war sooner?
Yes, we did take aim at the USSR, but that was AFTER FDR had died.


No, it isn't segregation. Segregation is division. FDR put the Japanese-Americans into internment camps. He didn't just divide them from the white Americans. He punished them for not being white Americans.
You are correct. Pretty everyone at the time WAS racist.

So, are you saying that FDR shouldn't tell the truth? Are you saying he should just tell people what they want to hear?

They were not being beaten down as hard as the media would like us to think. Yes, they lost more troops than any other nation. But, they also had MANY MORE troops than any other nation.

No, the Battle of Britain was not mainly won by the use of RADAR. RADAR is not a weapon. It is a means of location. The RAF were actually MUCH better pilots. They drove off the German Luftwaffe, even though they were extremely outnumbered. You also say that defeating Germany is a daunting task. Why? The Axis powers as a whole, at it's peak, owned somewhere from 3.3-6.6% of the world. Russia, coming into the war owned 15% and Britain owned 22% of the world.
Also, Germany's soldiers were under equipped for war with the Allied Powers. If I was to ask anyone off the street what was the most common means of Germany transportation, most people would say "tank" or "Panzer". Guess what? THey would be wrong. The Germans had under 20,000 tanks in their army. Their main source of transportation was their 500,000+ HORSES. Yep, you read that right. Horses.
Hollywood overplays Germany's strength. Panzers, the famous line of Germany tanks, were scrap metal. The Panzer I and Panzer II's strongest guns were 30 mm, mere pop-guns compared to the Allied tanks. Also, the Panzers' armor was less than 6 inches thick, at a time when most tanks had multiple feet of armor. The German Panzers were more like armored cars than tanks.

Also, here is an important fact.
Axis Powers owned 3% of the world oil.
Allied Powers owned 90% of the world's oil!
In other words, the Allies had 30 times the oil that the Axis Powers did!
Without oil, you can't run planes, tanks, or other automobiles.

These figures alone show how powerless Germany was against the Allies.

I could give you even more evidence of Germany's underachievment in producing weapons compared to the Allies' ability to do so.

Here is is all neatly organized =D
Before i start i would like to say i go mainly off the top of my head of what i know. But what i know is ALOT, i learned most of this stuff only off my own will. It wasnt smashed into my brain, and some of it i learn due to it being a big part of my ancestry.
This post is REALLY long haha, but im not going back to edit it. So next time i might cut out a bunch of stuff just for the sake of the argument.
ok let the dissection begin!! =P



1: As u said before, the USSR could of won the war alone. But could of the other powers have done just as well WITHOUT the USSR'S help? Lets say Hitler didnt invade poland, then the USSR and Hitler would still be "allies" thus giving Germany HUGE military backup. It would make world war 2 nearly IMPOSSIBLE to win for any country.
Now there is another version of this, if the USSR fought Germany and the US just didnt allie with them. Well guess what, such a matter wouldn't happen. When you have an enemy, you want allies. SO why the hell wouldn't u ban together? Tactically and politically it would help the two allies.

2: The US didnt want to enter ANOTHER European conflict. They never want to, but they always get dragged into it one way or another. No one in Europe really wanted another war, but appeasement can only go so far. SO before hitler invaded poland, Hitler was ALLOWED to take over parts of countries close to Germany also (sorry i forgot the names! )


3: the placement of Japanese into camps was to protect the rest of america from spies. It was sorta a punishment, which IS RACIST. Also segregation itself is RACIST. U do something determined by race, its racists. Thats like the definition of the word.

4: Its all politics. Almost every president does it. For example no smart politician runs for president under the campaign to make same sex marriage legal Nationally. He may very well believe it, but the common public would denounce it and the canadate would be the center of a lot of fire. So People who run normally evade such topics. And in this case it would be Segregation. Maybe FDR really was racists, but so was everyone at the time.


5: Sir just because you have more troops, DOESNT mean you automatically win the war. And yes, they got beaten down FUCKING HARD! Russian war tactics during world war 2 where pretty fucking lame. Stalingrad was won with nearly bricks thrown onto German heads due to the lack of bullets. There where certain areas where the USSR troops had more MP40's than Their own rifles and SMGs.
Communisum doesnt produce fine and well manufactured guns, bullets, tanks, planes. But it did make ALOT. Again alot doesnt always mean you win!

6: What you just said made no sense to me. I know how radar works. It is a weapon, since no axis power had such a device. It allowed great information on German Air raids, allowing minimal causalities to occur AND allow Pilots to vector in on the raids. INFORMATION WINS WARS.

6.5: Germany at this time was one of the most militarized nations in Europe, or it WAS the most. After world war 1 most of europe was messed up. No one wanted to go BACK into war, so no one made troops. People believed in keeping peace over everything else. Russia istself was flipping over due to a bunch of internal problems, France was still getting back on its feet. Now GERMANY had it the hardest after ww1. Hitler brought Germany back up and raised a pretty impressive army. NO ONE did anything about it or raised their own army due to believing in appeasing to keep peace.
So the rest of europe got caught with their pants down when Germany started invading. German Blitzkrieg tactics shouldnt be underestimated.

7: You are looking ONLY at stats. This is fucking war , you must see through the statistacs to see why Germany's Panzer divisions where a bad ass mother ******. German tank crews unlike other nations had experience, The Panzer IV was very reliable compared to its more powerful counterpart the t-34, German tactics also relied on Blitzkrieg which took over most of Europe, Their tanks also held RADIO'S thus allowing better communications between tanks groups, they also where integrated with infantry and allowed more flowing tactics compared to Russian tank groups, The tanks crews also worked with air squadrons to call in air strikes to cripple the enemy before the tanks even arrive, and Finally Germany also produced some of the most massive and devastating tanks in the entire war. Yea Panzers where the main stay, but what about the Tigers, the Panthers, and the KING TIGERS?!?!
Also the t-34 was a GREAT tank, its advantage was it had slanted armor, allowing it to take almost infinite shots from the front. BUT, it was very unreliable, it had major design flaws, it was a bi*** to drive, to gun, to manage. But it did its job well.

8: you want a crappy tank... look up the Sherman....
The best stats are it was reliable... and there was alot of them....

9: Very true... but it doesn't matter how much oil you have if in one month you lose all the oil fields cuse Germany just blew all your armys up and is in you capital =D

Forgive the crappy grammar!
"The more man meditates upon good thoughts, the better will be his world and the world at large. " - Confucius
"The guy in the back always has something to say"

1. The USSR did not become enemies with Germany because they invaded Poland! In fact, USSR invaded Poland from the East, while Germany invaded from the West. The USSR only fought against Germany because Germany broke their agreement and invaded Russia and the surrounding countries.

2. The US people did not want to get into the war, but FDR did. He instigated Pearl Harbor so that the American populace would be more willing to go to war. Germany was allowed to take some countries, I believe Austria and the Sudetenland.

4. But just because everyone does it doesn't make it right. That is a logical fallacy called "Appeal to Majority".

5. USSR lost a lot, but still had MANY more troops. Most of the troops they lost during Germany's invasion were lost during Stalingrad. While Germany pushed farther into Russia, the USSR just kept retreating, drawing Germany farther into Russia and trapping them deep in Russia during winter. Then, while most of the German equipment was stuck or frozen, the Russians attacked and routed the Germany invasion force.

6. I am saying that, although RADAR is a great advantage, it didn't shoot down German planes. The RAF shot down the planes, not the RADAR.

7. The King Tigers were probably the most advanced tanks for their time, but there were three problems with them. First, the Germans didn't have enough oil to operate them very much. Second, they were so complex that, if they were damaged or malfunctioned, they were close to impossible to repair. Third, Hitler was a perfectionist. He spent so much time on the quality of things, and not much time on the quantity of things. The King Tigers were deadly weapons, but not many were produced (under 5,000).

THANK YOU for keeping it short. I have a bad habit of making my posts very long!

1. Yes.

2. Ah again this is CONSPIRACY its one that i see good logic into it. But it again is still a CONSPIRACY. FDR never said he did it on purpose, it seems likely he did do it. But he never said he did it on purpose.

3. =O theres no three!! but thats ok haha DROPPED IT!

4. Nope, but thats politics!!! It appeals to MAJORITY!!!

5. Yes. Hitler's Blitzkrieg tactics fell short due to mess ups. Germany just picked wrong points of attack, such as hitlers incessance on taking Stalingrad, and Stalin's want to KEEP Stalingrad. And its much hard to keep a stable ongoing siege than it it is to hold the area.

6. Nope it didnt directly shoot down the planes. But it made the over idea of the battle of britain a failure. The whole point of the attack was to scare the Birtish into surrendering. But the battle wasnt so scary when you could see what was coming and could plan accordingly.

7. The biggest thing was Germany wasn't as industrial Superior as Russia or the US, thus they just couldn't make as much in the first place. But again Germans tank groups where deadly, they where as crappy as you believe. But when you have less elite troops, you couldnt be an idiot with them so much. And thats exactly what happened.

Forgive the crappy grammar!
"The more man meditates upon good thoughts, the better will be his world and the world at large. " - Confucius
"The guy in the back always has something to say"