Josiahafk said: »
Most of my countries' travesties are internal and they also try to keep them very well hidden.
Opinionated History Lessons! World War 2!
|
Opinionated History Lessons! World War 2!
Josiahafk said: » It's always interesting to see various posters from various countries and see how the billions each country's government spends on propaganda affects their citizens' mindsets for global issues like this, and how much factual data penetrates it. Extremely hard to overcome that degree of attempted subtle bias affirmations. (Most of my countries' travesties are internal and they also try to keep them very well hidden.) Well, it’s worth noting that just because you recognize that bias doesn’t mean that you’re above it yourself. We’re all prone to various kinds of biased thinking. Admitting it can go a long way in trying to combat it, though.
[+]
Josiahafk said: » It's always interesting to see various posters from various countries and see how the billions each country's government spends on propaganda affects their citizens' mindsets for global issues like this, and how much factual data penetrates it. Extremely hard to overcome that degree of attempted subtle bias affirmations. (Most of my countries' travesties are internal and they also try to keep them very well hidden.) Take comfort in the fact that Team Canada did it's part in defending Antwerp, which directly led to the US breakthrough.
[+]
Viciouss said: » Josiahafk said: » It's always interesting to see various posters from various countries and see how the billions each country's government spends on propaganda affects their citizens' mindsets for global issues like this, and how much factual data penetrates it. Extremely hard to overcome that degree of attempted subtle bias affirmations. (Most of my countries' travesties are internal and they also try to keep them very well hidden.) Take comfort in the fact that Team Canada did it's part in defending Antwerp, which directly led to the US breakthrough. Not to denounce their involvement, though, but it sure didn't look like they went out of anger or defense, but because Papa Brit was in it.
[+]
Yeah, even worse for them, they were under Monty's command, and he tried to ignore them as much as possible. Until it almost cost him his command. But they were there.
[+]
Well, America did contribute the bulk of the tonnages for the war, tanks, ships, ammo, bodies.... As long as you have logistics on your side and you don't screw it up, then it's a matter of time before you win. You just need the other guy to fumble and you can take advantage of it, or just grin the other guy down slowly.
Still, it's hard to win a war without choking the other guy's logistics. Both British and American ships raiding the sea route was pretty much a vital. British intelligence contributed massively to this. Axis would probably have put up a massive struggle if they didn't have the Eastern Front and over extended themselves.
[+]
The only thing I know about Canada and WW2 it that Scotty was there....
[+]
And the French Canadian Leo Major who liberated a town by himself like a baws.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/globalnews.ca/news/4178944/leo-major-soldier-zwolle-liberated/amp/
[+]
Bahamut.Ravael said: » Josiahafk said: » It's always interesting to see various posters from various countries and see how the billions each country's government spends on propaganda affects their citizens' mindsets for global issues like this, and how much factual data penetrates it. Extremely hard to overcome that degree of attempted subtle bias affirmations. (Most of my countries' travesties are internal and they also try to keep them very well hidden.) Well, it’s worth noting that just because you recognize that bias doesn’t mean that you’re above it yourself. We’re all prone to various kinds of biased thinking. Admitting it can go a long way in trying to combat it, though. All we can do is be aware of the role it plays in our species to diminish it's control on our actions. Bismarck.Josiahflaming said: » Bahamut.Ravael said: » Josiahafk said: » It's always interesting to see various posters from various countries and see how the billions each country's government spends on propaganda affects their citizens' mindsets for global issues like this, and how much factual data penetrates it. Extremely hard to overcome that degree of attempted subtle bias affirmations. (Most of my countries' travesties are internal and they also try to keep them very well hidden.) Well, it’s worth noting that just because you recognize that bias doesn’t mean that you’re above it yourself. We’re all prone to various kinds of biased thinking. Admitting it can go a long way in trying to combat it, though. All we can do is be aware of the role it plays in our species to diminish it's control on our actions.
[+]
Ragnarok.Zeig said: » Isn't that exactly what he said? his posed situation cannot exist due to our nature. Bismarck.Josiahflaming said: » Ragnarok.Zeig said: » Isn't that exactly what he said? his posed situation cannot exist due to our nature. Otherwise I completely agree with you. We're inhenrently biased creatures and I believe it's impossible to have 0 bias when we make judgements.
[+]
Ragnarok.Zeig said: » Bismarck.Josiahflaming said: » Ragnarok.Zeig said: » Isn't that exactly what he said? his posed situation cannot exist due to our nature. Otherwise I completely agree with you. We're inhenrently biased creatures and I believe it's impossible to have 0 bias when we make judgements. Yeah, I'm not quite sure how to interpret my post in any way that suggests someone can have zero bias. You have the right of it.
[+]
I'd say that the content of this thread is pretty good so far. Let's keep it that way.
[+]
If you wanted to cry about American exceptionalism WWII was never the right example to use. Should have tried WWI, or better yet, Vietnam.
[+]
DirectX said: » Yet not once have you ever contributed to the discussion of what variables could be used to determine the answer. Or are you just intent on shitting this thread up with your empty rhetorical posts? Eboneezer said: » Tell me if any of the following isn't true. The US split its military to fight in Europe and Asia. The US completely supplied its own armies and navy. The US supplied arms and troops to all allies, especially the Soviets. The US was a major contributor to the air warfare in Europe. The US supplied a significant amount of the materials the British and Soviets used to fight the Nazis in Europe. The Soviets definitely played a major role. No one has said otherwise. They destroyed a ton of equipment and killed large numbers of men. They lost more men than any of the allies, but they relied on US factories to supply major gaps in war materials. They never really attacked Japan while a major portion of the US military was tied down there. At the end, they tried to jump into the Asian war to try to claim the spoils that the US and Australia had won. Again, no one is trying to downplay the Soviet's significant role, nor the UK. Normandy would have been near impossible without the Nazis being engaged with the Soviets. I know you originally commented solely on the Europe front, but I still say the US supplies and the Air Force / RAF bombing runs had the biggest impact in Europe. Eboneezer said: » I can find historians that credit each of the three as the major contributor to the fall of Nazi Germany. It all comes down to the opinion of what contributed the biggest impact. They all have valid claims. From a military perspective, "I" still stand by the US's supply contributions in addition to the bombing runs that destroyed Germany's economy and distracted troops and air support away from the Eastern front to defend Germany. Their production changed from bombers to fighters, which weren't as effective as they had hoped. The Soviets hosted the lion's share of the fighting. They lost way more people. They were inferior in tactics and arms. They held on long enough to start winning the production war and turn the tide with the help of the distractions from the West that recalled soldiers/air support and crippled the Nazi economy. It is what it is though. You can't dismiss Britain's contributions either. Whatever. I'm going to sleep. Seriously though, we need to move this to its own topic if we are going to continue Eboneezer said: » And to further clarify on this, you randomly asked me my opinion on (America vs Russia) vs Nazi Germany. There isn't one truth, it's all subjective and opinions. You insinuated that only Americans believe this because of our limited and American only sources, so I went looking for the opinions of other countries. It doesn't show contradicting information like you claim. It showed all four of the countries polled, listing every country BUT the Soviet Union as the #1 contributor. So I guess you can take that up with those citizens for apparently also using limited and American only sources? Nothing you or I can present, will be fact on this topic. You didn't pose the question as who killed more Nazis, if that's what you were intending maybe? There is no tangible number to be found for an answer. Contribution is completely subjective. Eboneezer said: » My argument is that the impact of the different countries is completely subjective and is solely based on opinions. He disagrees. Yet he hasn't listed what exact metric is to be used to determine the "winner." I've acknowledged and pointed to how different historians argue the different impacts of each country and hesitate to name one as the one that "beat the nazis more than the others." I get his argument about the Soviets. i don't hate it. They hosted much of the fighting. They lost the most people. They killed the most Nazis. Honestly, I hate when people tell me what my opinion is before we even discuss the topic, and i like to argue, so I entertained the position he gave me. I do agree with it though, but don't hate if anyone feels differently. I know the major impact of crippling your enemies economy during war, pulling forces from the front lines to defend their capital, and reinforcing all of your military and allies' militaries with arms and supplies. It is what it is, two people with opinions. He keeps changing the arguments though and I try to keep chasing it with him. Ah well. It was fun. No offense man but none of those are from “this thread”
I was just pointing out how he was shitting up our other thread. Then tries to put on a completely different show over here.
[+]
DirectX said: » Eboneezer said: » I was just pointing out how he was shitting up our other thread. Then tries to put on a completely different show over here. You don't need to ***this thread up too. Well, this is a WW2 thread. If you want an Iraq thread, start one.
[+]
DirectX said: » It's not "your" thread, it's a public forum, and it was you shitting it up ranting essays for days proving the point. I repeatedly pointed out there that I wanted to discuss Iraq with the point about America/Russia in WW2 being a related but side-issue. Never said it was my thread. Can you quote me "ranting?" I followed every argument you posed, but you kept changing the arguments. You didn't repeatedly point out anything about Iraq with America/Russia in WW2 being related. Don't lie. You just continuously whined about Americans and how they are the only ones that think like they do with their biased media/sources. Then you ignore anything presented from citizens of other countries. I will gladly exit from this discussion since you seem to be backing off your tirades and changing your tune in the face of the majority disagreeing with you.
[+]
If you want to talk about Iraq of WW2, then bring it.
If you want to talk about Iraq of today, you should probably find one of the many P&R threads about it and necro one of them
[+]
Asura.Kingnobody said: » If you want to talk about Iraq of WW2, then bring it. If you want to talk about Iraq of today, you should probably find one of the many P&R threads about it and necro one of them |
All FFXIV and FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD.
FINAL FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.