The Battle of Britain Was The First Defeat For The German Luftwaffe.

[Triggaaar]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

guys, there is no need to get aggressive on each other over a matter that was resolved 65 years ago.

immediately followed by:

living in England has taught me that Britons are probably one of the most stubborn populations on this planet (if not the Solar System)
...
Some Britons can't be objective: characters like Dowding, Harris and above all Montgomery (a pompous imbecile, nothing more nothing less) embody a military ineptitude that, again hadn't the Americans joined, would have been fatal to them.

Wow, Pot Kettle.

Originally Posted by Kongo-Otto

You Sir are an asshole! Not more and not less!!

Classy.

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

from Wikipedia

so it must be true

The total cost of these reparations was assessed at 132 billion Marks (then $31.4 billion, £6.6 billion) in 1921 which is roughly equivalent to US $442 billion and UK £217 billion in 2011, a sum that many economists at the time, notably John Maynard Keynes, deemed to be excessive and counterproductive and would have taken Germany until 1988 to pay.

Britain has only recently stopped paying for the wars. If the treaty was unfair, Germany should have concentrated on renegotiating it. Going to war again was hardly the solution was it.

Originally Posted by Dutch_851

it is my opinion that but for the Channel and the existence of the Royal Navy, Germany's land and airforces combined would've stuffed us.

As above, that's a pointless comparison. Were it not for the channel, world history would be completely different.

[swiss]

Originally Posted by Triggaaar

Britain has only recently stopped paying for the wars.

In October 2010 Germany paid the last rate of reparation for WWI - after 92 years.

If the treaty was unfair, Germany should have concentrated on renegotiating it. Going to war again was hardly the solution was it.

LOL. That like negotiating with your own kidnapper.
Hint: As he's in power he doesn't give a sh1t.

The Romans took over Europe, they won - they were not the goodies.
The Brits took over half the world - they were not the goodies.
The Crusaders went on a killing spree under the name of god - they were not the goodies.

They were not? Who says that? You?
What's right or wrong lies in the eye of the beholder, end of story.
I for one dont agree with your judgment.
-We learned a lot from the Romans-> good thing
-Brits: same thing, most of their colonies were better of while being part of the empire.
-Crusader: Those guys conquered a good part of the Roman empire 500 years before that. Europe being part of the caliphate would have been the better option, right?

There is no such way to defend the holocaust.

Correct - only you can't use to justify the bombing of civilians as no one knew about it at the time.

[Triggaaar]

Originally Posted by Dutch_851

Oh no.

It's all kicked off again.

Yes, sorry. It could keep doing that until the thread is closed.

Originally Posted by swiss

LOL. That like negotiating with your own kidnapper.
Hint: As he's in power he doesn't give a sh1t.

I disagree. I think it's better to try than start WWII. To each their own.

What's right or wrong lies in the eye of the beholder, end of story.

It may not always be clear cut, and there can be differing opinions, I agree, but sometimes it is clear cut.

That we learnt from the Romans doesn't make what they did right (not that I judge them by todays standards).
Same for the British empire, just because many people are in a better position than they would have been does not mean that the cause was just or the deaths of innocent people worthwhile.

-Crusader: Those guys conquered a good part of the Roman empire 500 years before that. Europe being part of the caliphate would have been the better option, right?

Travelling through foreign lands murdering, raping and pillaging is bad in my books, but you think it's ok because it's better than letting the Muslims carry on without Christianity. I guess we won't be agreeing on this.

Correct - only you can't use to justify the bombing of civilians as no one knew about it at the time.

I didn't use it to justify killing civilians, that didn't cross my mind. We were looking back at right and wrong, and I was saying that the holocaust was a bad thing (call me radical).