US quietly maneuvers to cut UN dues

originally posted by: stumason


For the USA's part, you made damn sure you made as much out of the War as possible - there was no altruism involved at all. For the record, the majority of Congress and the people supported Germany at the outbreak of the War, so any Hollywood nonsense about saving the Jews or rescuing the "free world" was just propaganda. Had Japan not attacked, there was no guarantee that the US would have ever joined the War at all.

This for emphasis and truth.

There was no altruism or coming to rescue out of love of "freedom". USA got dragged into the war kicking and screaming by Japan.

a reply to: crazyewok


Dragged into a war that was caused at the end of the previous world war.
Germany was screwed so badly at Versailles that another war was inevitable.
We also drug our feet to enter a war we were not yet ready to fight.

originally posted by: intrptr
"Justice"? Do tell me from your higher moral pulpit how justly this country behaves towards other nations.

What does the United Nations have to do with any of that? You already agreed with me and admitted that it is ineffective, you just seem to be taking a contrary tact since it suites your cynical proclivity to do such.

Excuse me while I hurl

Make sure you use a bucket cheify, I would not want to have any land on your happy feet.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You already agreed with me and admitted that it is ineffective, you just seem to be taking a contrary tact since it suites your cynical proclivity to do such.

Because Imperialists have made it ineffective. They want to continue to exploit hapless nations for labor and resources without being told not to by some Union of Nations.

And I agree its more than broke, its a facade, keeping up appearances in a world that seems to have forgot what the last Empire was like.

Of course it isn't the way it was set out to be. Of course it is neglected and ineffectual, just like its supposed to be; in a world of petty tyrants, the voice of peoples matters little.

I expect derision to be heaped on the notion of giving little people a voice, they got resources and labor to be stolen and enslaved.

Who cares, right? Now prove you do care about legality and high moral ground.

Sell me another humanitarian aid package, an endless peace process, a Military "intervention".

originally posted by: intrptr
Of course it isn't the way it was set out to be. Of course it is neglected and ineffectual, just like its supposed to be; in a world of petty tyrants, the voice of peoples matters little.

The fact that you admit the United Nations is farcical yet make a condescending reply to my post where I say it is a waste shows that you are only interested in an antagonistic dialogue.

Tell me why we should be funding the United Nations to the degree we are if it is not working?

a reply to: stumason

Typical Yank idiocy..

please, you the one displaying idiocy.
you are just like the other two or three that come on here crying that the U.S didn't do any thing to help before we entered , and that you could have and did defeat them on your own before we came in. all you did was turn and run back to your island and hunker down, if the UK had been left alone and not received the lend lease agreement from the U.S.,and if hitler would have listened to his generals, and not tried to fight a two front war, your island would have fallen soon enough. after all you were the furthest away and it took time for germany to defeat everyone else you were helping on the way before they got to you.

tell me where was it that other than your island, that the british empire stopped hitler from marching across europe? ah that's right no where.
you ran from Norway, you ran from France, in Africa you had a little luck mostly with the italians who couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag and made stupid decisions. Rommel and the germans drove you out Libya, and Most of Egypt if it wasn't for the arrival of montgomery who was able to hold them until arrival the of the U.S . you would have been toast there to.
if the U.S hadn't have come when they did, there is no doubt that ol monty wouldn't have been as famous as he was, and his forces soundly defeated. if not for Amercian attacks on the germans forces and them having to defend, they would have won in africa to.

the only saving grace for the UK was the Navy. had it not been for the your navy chances are you would have been speaking german and spending Deutschmarks. that and hitler's need to be smarter than his generals

if not for those, the combination of the german u boats and the Luftwaffe would have worn the navy down before long, and then their paratroopers would have blitzed britain to.

Please, do point out where I was actually complaining or bemoaning the loss of the Empire?

pretty much the whole post but if you want a specific part. her it is below.

"This is how it is going to be after the War. You must give up your Empire, you must pay us money for 60 years and you must acquiesce to our bidding - your time is over". To think we had any input in the decision making is laughable. The US tried to swindle us every step of the War and, largely, got away with it. The only time Churchill told the US to naff off was when the US demanded the Caribbean Islands in return for some destroyers... We did, however, give you all our research on radar, jet engines and nuclear weapons just to get you to join us in the first place - see the Tizard Mission

you posted no facts to or documents to support what you say or even refered to a mission that was initiated by the UK.

I suppose you're under the impression that the US raced to the rescue of the world and without US help, we would have been overrun? Utter bollocks, of course. The war was won by Russia and by 1940, the UK had already fought off the Germans on it's own who abandoned plans to invade.

if not for the lend lease agreements made with the all four, the USSR and the british, both would have folded before and during the war. when the the U.S entered and engaged in the war it turned. had not it been for the aid the USSR got from the U.S it would not have been able ro sustain it's advance. it's that plain and simple.


and just so you know the UK came up with the Tizard Mission to the U.S to entice the U.S to enter which they didn't and Churchill was disapointed that we didn't.
from your wiki source.

The Tizard Mission, officially the British Technical and Scientific Mission, was a British delegation that visited the United States during the Second World War in order to obtain the industrial resources to exploit the military potential of the research and development (R&D) work completed by the UK up to the beginning of World War II, but that Britain itself could not exploit due to the immediate requirements of war-related production. It received its popular name from the program's instigator, Henry Tizard. Tizard was a British scientist and chairman of the Aeronautical Research Committee, which had propelled the development of radar.

so in other words the UK couldn't do anything but build what they already had in order to hold off the germans and were running out of that pdq.

a reply to: crazyewok

yes we were, it wasn't our fight and we were still struggling from the depression, no matter what some say. as a matter of fact many economist say if not for the war the U.S. would have struggled from the depression even longer

we had a very poor military and just had started modernizing it, a few decades before.

the one thing we had was resources, that everybody wanted. you should be glad it was shared even for a price.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

There is no doubt without US assistance prior to entering the British would have lost. There production capacity was gone and couldn't even produslce enough food to feed their people. If the US didn't provide food and materials and even use the navy to make sure those shipments got there Germany would have just starved them out. In fact that was the idea by the Germans an island can be a defense but can also be a prison. Germany had little reason to fear the British military he threw them out of europe.

As far as Churchill he knew if he didn't get the US to end its isolationism that Germany Italy and japan would own it all. Churchill needed two things resources and manpower both of which the US could supply. Let's face it at the beginning the US military was a joke poorly trained and poorly supplied. You see this in the fact that Britain had to help bring them up to speed. They moved aircraft manufacturing and supplied officers to help train. Realize most military tech early on was of British design.

But what churchhill knew is that the capacity could be expanded quickly and by 1943 had taken over the commading roll in the fight producing thousands of tanks and planes and sending the badly needed troops to turn the war around.

Point is neither could have won without the other

a reply to: stumason
oh and something else i meant to point out.

The only time Churchill told the US to naff off was when the US demanded the Caribbean Islands in return for some destroyers...

we did indeed get base in Caribbean Islands.


per the wiki.

The bases
Bermuda
Not actually part of the exchange, but the US received base rights here for free, in addition to those that were part of the exchange. The US Naval Operating Base was established in 1940, operating as a flying boat base until 1965 (when the US Navy switched to using landplanes from Kindley Air Force Base). The base continued in use for other purposes as the US Naval Annex until 1995. Construction began at the same time of a US Army Air Force airfield, Kindley Field, attached to Fort Bell, and which later became Kindley AFB. Transferred to the US Navy in 1970, it operated as NAS Bermuda until it was closed in 1995.

Newfoundland
Several Army Air Force airfields. As with Bermuda, no destroyers or other war material was received in exchange for base rights in Newfoundland. Pepperrell Airfield (later AFB) (closed August 1961) Goose Bay Army Airfield (later AFB) (turned over to Canadian Forces, July 1976) Stephenville Army Airfield (later AFB) (closed December 1966) McAndrew Airfield (later AFB) (transferred to US Navy, 1955; closed 1994 and eventually transferred to the government of Newfoundland and Labrador for civilian use) A Naval Air Station

Naval Station Argentia (closed 1994)
Multiple Marine and Army Bases and detachments in support of the above.

British West Indies
Antigua A Naval Air Station at Crabbs Peninsula
An Army Air Force airfield (Coolidge Army Airfield (later AFB)) (closed 1949)
The Bahamas Naval seaplane base on Exuma Island at George Town.[6][7][8]
British Guiana An Army Air Force airfield (Atkinson Aerodrome (later AFB)) (closed 1949) A Naval seaplane base near Suddie.
Jamaica
An Army Air Force airfield (Vernam Army Airfield (later AFB)) (closed 1949)
A Naval Air Station (Little Goat Island) and a Naval facility at Port Royal
Saint Lucia An Army Air Force airfield (Beane Army Airfield (later AFB)) (closed 1949)
A Naval Air Station (Gros Islet Bay)
Trinidad Two Army Air Force airfields
Waller Army Airfield (later AFB) (closed 1949)
Carlsen Army Airfield (later AFB) (closed 1949) A Naval Operating Base, a Naval Air Station, blimp base, and a radio station[9]
Destroyers for Bases Agreement

as i have shown your the one who knows little about the war using your own sources yet again.

Get the U.S. out of the U.N., and get the U.N. out of the U.S..

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Tell me why we should be funding the United Nations to the degree we are if it is not working?

The original notion, one nation one vote, was torpedoed when the security council was formed.

The idea is noble. Like I said, the Empire builders will never give a proper mandate to international opinion.

The only voices that count are the super powers. Thats the problem, that won't get fixed until another world war and millions, billions die.

Then they'll unite again and sue for peace. And again people like you will call it a sham and and call for it to be disbanded.

You can keep denying thats what you are doing.

You prefer one nation to run the world? Or all?

a reply to: Bluntone22

Good news, although at under $9 for "peacekeeping", it's kind of a drop in the bucket. What does that buy anyway? 6 baby blue helmets and a few hundred peacekeeping bullets?

a reply to: Bluntone22

We don't seem to be smart enough to step away from the rigged game.

Yes that may be the real problem. I mean I am sure the UN is as inept and expensive as any other, but really in that area were would one start since so is every other group or nation, or take your pick of groups and systems created by them out there. But the real problem is not all that, the real problem is that people just so love to play at rigged games.

Does mirror every other group that came before it does it not, in fact most of such things are set up for that very reason no matter the acronym they place upon themselves before isms were popular however in current times acronyms are the cool thing to do and be.

Lets be honest here self interest is the only thing that exists, everything else is merely prose and veneer. Leads one to wonder just how this whole dung heap really stays floating. The truth is just barely and by magic the magic of ignorance and not having to much pressure put on things. Generally when that happens, which eventually will, well then it also happens that things happen to fall...Merely a matter of happenstance....Right?

I am quite content were the UN stands and all other structures and countries as well. Not because it isn't all just one big mud pile, but because wherever else it would stand and whatever else it would be composed or made of. It would still be in the same pile and in the same mess. People are people after all, self delusion is a great pastime for all. So let us indulge in it, I see you all have gotten off to a great start here in this thread. That's so cool. And also? So predictable.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
please, you the one displaying idiocy.

Says the man who clearly cannot read or comprehend English...

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
you are just like the other two or three that come on here crying that the U.S didn't do any thing to help before we entered , and that you could have and did defeat them on your own before we came in.

Where did I say that? Once again, reading comprehension issues compounded by an acute case of trying to put words in my mouth. Once again, American Idiocy.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
all you did was turn and run back to your island and hunker down, if the UK had been left alone and not received the lend lease agreement from the U.S.,and if hitler would have listened to his generals, and not tried to fight a two front war, your island would have fallen soon enough. after all you were the furthest away and it took time for germany to defeat everyone else you were helping on the way before they got to you.

If, if, if, if, if....

Bottom line is, they couldn't invade, they did fight a two front war and they had no real desire to conquer the UK anyway, it was Churchill's intransigence on negotiating with the Germans that prolonged the War.

And you can piss of with the "run back to our island and hunker down" comment - that is not what happened at all. Your ignorance is astounding...

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
tell me where was it that other than your island, that the british empire stopped hitler from marching across europe? ah that's right no where.

No one did. What's your point?

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
you ran from Norway,

At least we were there, the US did jack...

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
you ran from France,

The French ran from France - at least we managed a reasonable decent withdrawl. Where was the US again? Oh, that's right, twiddling their thumbs and cheering Adolf on...

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
in Africa you had a little luck mostly with the italians who couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag and made stupid decisions. Rommel and the germans drove you out Libya, and Most of Egypt if it wasn't for the arrival of montgomery who was able to hold them until arrival the of the U.S . you would have been toast there to.

What? The US units that (finally) turned up in North Africa were the furthest from the Germans! It was a propaganda peice to make Torch look like US landings when in actual fact they weren't. It was the British force at Algiers that encircled the Germans - US forces landed in Morroco and Tunisia, miles from the enemy.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
if the U.S hadn't have come when they did, there is no doubt that ol monty wouldn't have been as famous as he was, and his forces soundly defeated. if not for Amercian attacks on the germans forces and them having to defend, they would have won in africa to.

You're so full of BS You've clearly bought into the Holllywood mantra that the US "saved the day". Africa was all but over by the time Operation Torch was even launched. The Africa campaign was over in January 1943 with the capture of Tripoli (you know, Libya, where we apparently got driven out from until the US turned up to save the day) by the British 8th Army. There were no US forces present in the fight against Rommel.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
the only saving grace for the UK was the Navy. had it not been for the your navy chances are you would have been speaking german and spending Deutschmarks. that and hitler's need to be smarter than his generals

if not for those, the combination of the german u boats and the Luftwaffe would have worn the navy down before long, and then their paratroopers would have blitzed britain to.

As it was meant to be - we never had a large Army. By 1942/43, the U-boat threat had been contained, by and large and did not pose the threat it once did. Combined with strategic bombing, cutting production of those U-boats, they were just an annoyance.

The Luftwaffe was never again in a position to threaten the UK after 1940. It had taken massive losses as a result of the BoB and even further losses as a result of fighting the USSR.

You have litterally no idea what you're talking about, do you?

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Once again, you misunderstand - get you're head out of Wikipedia and read a book...

I said "the US demanded the Islands", not "The US demanded basing rights"...

I'll let you work out the subtle difference...

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: crazyewok

yes we were, it wasn't our fight and we were still struggling from the depression, no matter what some say. as a matter of fact many economist say if not for the war the U.S. would have struggled from the depression even longer

we had a very poor military and just had started modernizing it, a few decades before.

the one thing we had was resources, that everybody wanted. you should be glad it was shared even for a price.

You didn't share you SOLD.

And bollocks to the rest. It was your fight as tge Japanese made it your fight.
You did not choose to enter the war you were forced to enter it by japan.

a reply to: stumason

Again emphasis for true.

The UK had to retreat from France not because we were useless but because France screwed up and surrendered and left us on our own.

And the USA far from saved the day in Africa. The UK had to hold the USA hand through the entire campaign as the US army had so little experience and had such bad equipment. Hell look at kasserine pass! The one battle the US got to do the main fighting and they screwed it up and us british had to come in and bail them out!

a reply to: intrptr

Sorry, did all of that rhetorical blather counter your original agreement that the United Nations is useless?

No need to answer, it is quite obvious: NO.

My original comment stands, the less money we piss down the sewer hole that the United Nations is the better off we will be.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: intrptr

Sorry, did all of that rhetorical blather counter your original agreement that the United Nations is useless?

No need to answer, it is quite obvious: NO.

My original comment stands, the less money we piss down the sewer hole that the United Nations is the better off we will be.

Like I said to you originally…

Spoken like a true Imperialist.

originally posted by: intrptr
Like I said to you originally…

Considering you agree that the United Nations is ineffective and inept what does that make you besides a hypocrite?

The UN is an object lesson in what happens when you take a bunch of third world dictators and teach them parliamentary procedure. It does not, as the progressives hoped, set them afire for the magic and glory of democracy and make them take it home to enlighten their own countries. Instead, they simply learn the rules of the game and use it against you.

For crying out loud, they are murderous dictators for a reason, not out of ignorance.