Political discussions moved here from other forums

[Foamy T. Squirrel]

votre patriotisme vous honores, cher écureuil, mais dire que les asiatiques et les européens sont responsables des 2 plus grands conflits mondiaux, doit certainement être un trait d'humour de votre part!! ;D ;D ;D les seuls responsables du chaos mondial actuel, sont et ont toujours été les Etats-Unis!!! je n'ose même pas parler du Moyen-Orient et de ce qui se passe en Ukraine!!!! ;D ;D ;D

your patriotism honored, dear squirrel, but to say that Asian and European leaders are the 2 largest global conflicts, must surely be a trait of humor from you !! ; D; D; D solely responsible for the current global chaos, are and have always been the United States !!! I dare not even speak of the Middle East and what is happening in Ukraine !!!! ; D; D; D

I am referring to World War I and World War II. The Middle East situation was sparked by the death of the "Old Man of Europe," followed by the damage caused to the British Empire and French Empires by World War One. It was later compounded when the US and the Soviet Union dashed in to clean up the mess left by the death of European Imperialism during World War II, which led to the numerous proxy wars that followed.

Suffice to say, the world was better off with Pax Romana, Pax Britannica, and Pax Americana, that it would have been without them. Trade and technology improved during these periods, international commerce shipping was safer, and life spans increased. As the chart shows, there has been huge decline in deaths from war, going from 300 people per 100,000, to 1 person per 100,000.

I suspect that will change abruptly as the US continues to decline, and I don't wish to be involved.

------

Je fais allusion à la Première Guerre mondiale et de la Seconde Guerre mondiale. La situation au Moyen-Orient a été déclenchée par la mort du "Old Man of Europe», suivie par les dommages causés à l'Empire britannique et empires français par la Première Guerre mondiale. Il a ensuite été aggravée lorsque les Etats-Unis et l'Union soviétique précipités pour nettoyer le gâchis laissé par la mort de l'impérialisme européen au cours de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, qui a conduit à de nombreuses guerres par procuration qui ont suivi.

Qu'il suffise de dire, le monde était mieux avec Pax Romana, Pax Britannica, et Pax Americana, qu'il aurait été sans eux. Le commerce et la technologie améliorée au cours de ces périodes, l'expédition de commerce international était plus sûr, et une espérance de vie a augmenté. Comme le montre le graphique, il a été énorme baisse des décès dus à la guerre, passant de 300 personnes par 100 000, pour 1 personne pour 100.000.

Je soupçonne que cela va changer brusquement les Etats-Unis continue de diminuer, et je ne veux pas être impliqué.

[Guest vkyour]

:'(

[corboblanc]

I am referring to World War I and World War II. The Middle East situation was sparked by the death of the "Old Man of Europe," followed by the damage caused to the British Empire and French Empires by World War One. It was later compounded when the US and the Soviet Union dashed in to clean up the mess left by the death of European Imperialism during World War II, which led to the numerous proxy wars that followed.

Suffice to say, the world was better off with Pax Romana, Pax Britannica, and Pax Americana, that it would have been without them. Trade and technology improved during these periods, international commerce shipping was safer, and life spans increased. As the chart shows, there has been huge decline in deaths from war, going from 300 people per 100,000, to 1 person per 100,000.

I suspect that will change abruptly as the US continues to decline, and I don't wish to be involved.

------

Je fais allusion à la Première Guerre mondiale et de la Seconde Guerre mondiale. La situation au Moyen-Orient a été déclenchée par la mort du "Old Man of Europe», suivie par les dommages causés à l'Empire britannique et empires français par la Première Guerre mondiale. Il a ensuite été aggravée lorsque les Etats-Unis et l'Union soviétique précipités pour nettoyer le gâchis laissé par la mort de l'impérialisme européen au cours de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, qui a conduit à de nombreuses guerres par procuration qui ont suivi.

Qu'il suffise de dire, le monde était mieux avec Pax Romana, Pax Britannica, et Pax Americana, qu'il aurait été sans eux. Le commerce et la technologie améliorée au cours de ces périodes, l'expédition de commerce international était plus sûr, et une espérance de vie a augmenté. Comme le montre le graphique, il a été énorme baisse des décès dus à la guerre, passant de 300 personnes par 100 000, pour 1 personne pour 100.000.

Je soupçonne que cela va changer brusquement les Etats-Unis continue de diminuer, et je ne veux pas être impliqué.

Let's continue this discussion over at Old Dude's, where it is relevant and where I won't ban myself for being off topic!  ;D

j'avais peur de la traduction, mais votre syntaxe est parfaite!!!  je vous répondrais demain si vous le permettez, car il est trop tard pour moi ce soir, pour entrer dans de telles discussions....la géopolitique varie, selon l'endroit ou l'on vit dans le monde... ;) ;) ;)

I was afraid of the translation, but your syntax is perfect !!! I would reply tomorrow if I could, because it is too late for me tonight, to enter such discussions .... geopolitics varies, depending on where one lives in the world ...;) ;);)

[happyone]

Snaky said: You started this when noone here was talking politics, and now you wanna run to another topic like this subject only concerns "old dudes". You just entered my black book. How dare you say that US won those wars especially the World War II? You must have skipped your history classes at school. Here's an excerpt for you from wikipedia:  "The war in Europe ended with an invasion of Germany by the Western Allies and the Soviet Union culminating in the capture of Berlin by Soviet and Polish troops and the subsequent German unconditional surrender on 8 May 1945. Following the Potsdam Declaration by the Allies on 26 July 1945 and the refusal of Japan to surrender under its terms, the United States dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on 6 August and 9 August respectively"      That's how US approaches world peace: You don't want to surrender, here's some atomic bombs for you.

[Foamy T. Squirrel]

I see my statements have been taken out of context. It is a popular belief that the US is the reason for all the violence in the world. Actually, most Americans would rather not be world police.

There is the fact that Russia, who was cleverly neutral in the WWII Pacific Theater, suffered great losses taking Berlin and nearly all of Eastern Europe. If you want, you can say that Russia won the war.

Still, I think, if those "violent" Americans had sat that war out in the comfort of their homes, then I would not be having such discussions with my Western European friends, and the Iron Curtain would have enclosed the whole of Europe.

My point was that much of the problems in the world derive not from my previously happy continent, but from Europe itself. We Americans got stuck with cleaning up the previous wars, it has cost us our earnings, and I would be happy to see the British Royal Navy protecting the world's shipping lanes again. Let's note that when the UK was top dog, everybody in the world bitched about them, too.

The US had a monopoly on the atomic bomb, and did not use it once it ended the war with Imperial Japan. Had things been different, and Stalin or Hitler had this weapon, you can bet they would have not hesitated to use it, and none of us would be discussing anything on the Internet at all.

[woodworker]

Or at least not in English.

[Ozi]

I see my statements have been taken out of context. It is a popular belief that the US is the reason for all the violence in the world.

Towards the end of the 1800s questions arose as to how the Jewish people could overcome increasing persecution and anti-Semitism in Europe, which led to the political movement, Zionism, to establish a Jewish homeland in the Middle East. In 1916, the Brits convinced Arab leaders to revolt against the Ottoman Empire (which was allied with Germany). In return, the British government would support the establishment of an independent Arab state in the region, including Palestine.

However, in 1917, to get support of Jewish people, the British Foreign Minister Lord Arthur Balfour, issued the Balfour Declaration, which announced the British Empire’s support for the establishment of “a Jewish national home in Palestine.”

From 1920 to 1947, the British Empire had a mandate over Palestine. At that time, Palestine included all of Israel and today’s Occupied Territories, of Gaza, West Bank, etc. The increasing number of Jewish people immigrating to the “Holy Land” increased tensions in the region.

And if things couldn’t get worse, there was a deal between Imperial Britain and France to carve up the Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire and divide control of the region. The spoils of war were to be shared, creating artificial borders, support of monarchies, dictators and other leaders that could be regarded as “puppets” or at least could be influenced by these external powers.

After World War II, the newly formed United Nations recommended the partition of Palestine into two states and the internationalization of Jerusalem. The minority Jewish people received the majority of the land. US support for the Israel state was driven by internal politics. The United States not only accepted the UN plan, it aggressively promoted it among the other members of the United Nations. Truman acknowledged later, in his memoirs, that he was “fully aware of the Arabs’ hostility to Jewish settlement in Palestine.” He, like his predecessor, had promised he would take no action without fully consulting the Arabs, and he reneged. Truman’s decision to support establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine was made against the advice of most of the State Department and other foreign policy experts, who were concerned about U.S. relations with the Arabs and possible Soviet penetration of the region.

Back then they believed it would not only create anti-Americanism but would also require U.S. troops to enforce it.

There is evidence to suggest that support for Jewish admission to and statehood in Palestine may have had another domestic political angle. That support sidestepped the sensitive issue of U.S. immigration quotas, which had kept European Jews out of the United States since the 1920s and had left them at the mercy of the Nazis. In other words, support for Zionism may have been a convenient way for people who did not want Jews to come to the United States to avoid appearing anti-Semitic.

In 1948 approximately750,000 Palestinians were driven out of the new Israel into refugee camps in Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon and other regions. It should be noted that many Jews were also expelled from surrounding Arab countries. Zionist organizations and even some Arab nations also encouraged many Jews to immigrate to Israel. As with Palestinians, expelled Jews often had their land and/or bank accounts and other property seized.

In 1956, Britain, France and Israel invaded the Sinai peninsula after Egypt nationalized the Suez canal because these waning empires feared further loss of power, this time of a major economic trading route entry point for the West to the rest of the Middle East. While Egypt was defeated, predominantly US pressure forced their withdrawal.

So who is to blame for starting the current Middle East crisis? Everyone, but mostly the Brits and France for promises they didn’t keep.

Who is to blame for it continuing? Everyone, but maybe the US for encouraging and pushing for the Brits to leave the Sinai back in ’56. Should have left the Brits there. Even at the end of WWII they realized they would need boots on the ground to control the region.

As for the Americans involvement in WWII, the allies wouldn’t have survived without them and the Americans couldn’t have done it without the allies. It was sheer mass of numbers and resources, added to some huge military blunders on the part of the enemy.