@Al2006essandro You kind of have it backwards, champ. Soccer isn't popular because the teams suck, rather the team sucks because they don't have the same support, resources and infrastructure as in Europe. Though there are 300 million people so there is a large strata of people who will like it.
@MrMrbeastybeast I'm not dumb. An offensive coordinator tells the Quarterback through an earpiece on his helmet on who to throw to. How many plays are there in soccer? More than in American Football as they don't pause every few seconds. The action continues for 2, 45 minute halves.
@MrMrbeastybeast That's right, Barcelona plays "roll-around" ball. That is if you've ever watched Barcelona play or even know what a "Barcelona" is, Call-of-Duty-playing Yankee boy. The "strategy" in American Football is methodical, not technical. An offensive coordinator tell where the Quarterback should throw. Ultimately it's based on how fast or how high a receiver could jump. Not exactly a chess game, champ.
@MMAmachinhead92 that is still a load of shit. the quarter back chooses who too throw it to. how many plays are there for offense and defense in soccer? and call of duty sucks.
@eaglemonty05 "No strategy or tactical depth"? It has more than any American Sport. There aren't any "offensive coordinators" or special coaches, it's all the players' mind. Also, if you look at the numbers, soccer IS growing in the US. The MLS (though "mediocre" by the mass-concesus) is the third most attended league in the country. Plus there are more and more registered youth players going to become pro. So you're realy wrong.....HAHAHAHAHAHA, BITCH. Soccer forerver!!
@MMAmachinhead92 that is a load of shit. football has so much more strategy than soccer does. the only strategy in soccer is to roll around like a little bitch pretending that they broke their leg........HAHAHAHAHAHAH, BITCH. Football forever!!
@MrMrbeastybeast man, are you talking out of your ass, or simply that stupid?!
at least the-real-FOOTBALL is played BY FOOT, not hands and the tactics are developed in real-time by the players on the field.
sissy-sport americans say, but unlike your fat, slow muscle-mountains, football-players wear NO PROTECTION whatsoever (besides a bit plastic on their shins)
football-players have to be fast, think quick and need stamina, for there's very few interruptions.
@m0rbusPolytox then why do soccer players always act like pussys rolling around on the field? and you dont really need protection in soccer. you are not hit as hard as you are in AMERICAN FOOTBALL
@MrMrbeastybeast pathetic tunnel vision you got mate. total amount of action is in american football 11 min. soccer has 90! But I understand, if I were american I would be embarrassed too if my country sucked that much in soccer.go ahead, take a tight grip of american football as a sport that the whole world doesn't really care about anyway except of the Usa.
@Al2006essandro i dont like soccer either. and that is not the total amount of action.i dont get how you think soccer is interesting. it is just people running around trying to kick a ball into the opposite teams goal. i know that there are slide tackles, but they are so boring to watch. it is more fun to watch. and this is a real question: why do soccer players roll around on the ground and act like they broke a leg when they barely get a scratch?
@MrMrbeastybeast what you dont understand is that football (soccer) is much more then people running around and kicking the ball into opposite net! which could be said the same for egg ball except with people in armor suits are tackling over each other. but they get a break every 5 seconds. it has nothing really to do as a sport. not comparable with football (soccer). In soccer there are 11 men. Each one of them having a special role to fulfill but constantly playing defense and offense! 90min.
@MrMrbeastybeast in war you cant say ok talibans, you attack and we defend for 15 min. and then we switch!! WE ATTACK YOU DEFEND! (so retarded!!) You wanna know why basketball is much higher rated by europeans then american football? BECAUSE ITS OFFENSE AND DEFENSE AT THE SAME TIME. You need skill to be a ball player (counts for basketball and European football) while for american football you just need mass! not skill!! every giant idiot can be a football player. but not all humans can play soc
@Al2006essandro the training for football is too much for you. i can tell you that right now. obviously you think you are amazing and there are 11 guys on each team in football too. football is harder than soccer because you have to get through huge guys coming to knock your brains out. it is not the same in soccer. it is not as mentally demanding. and i know that soccer rounds last for a long time, but did you know that they have subs?
@MrMrbeastybeast YOU TALK ABOUT SUBS?? HAHA YOU CHANGE YOUR ENTIRE TEAM IN FOOTBALL!!! OFFENSE is a team AND defense is a team!! so plz dont talk about subs because in soccer you can substitute only 3 players, and thats it! So the Coach has to make much harder decisions then the guy from american football. (that has tactical scouts in the rang's...) The formation and the way how a team atacks and defends is way too complex to make you understand. a mistake is more damaging then in American F.
@MrMrbeastybeast A Worldcup for example has more meaning then a just 2 win trophy!! IT MEANS WHICH NATION IS THE PERFECT HUMAN! By looking at the national teams, in the way they play, it represents the country's intelligence, passion, cleverness, smartness, coolness and so much more is represented by the players of each country! Strong Soccer nations have strong personality! Brazil, Italy, Germany, England, Argentina.. people from these country's have strong personalty's thanks to soccer.
@MrMrbeastybeast I bet you never played with an official soccer ball in your entire life. Because these soccerballs are pumped with so much air that the pressure of the ball resembles a stone. ever tried to kick a rock? You think the things soccer players do is easy?? time 2 wake up buddy
@MrMrbeastybeast OH really?? In america you go for the win?? really? you know in europe we go and play so we can lose!! Man are you really that small minded?? you cant win this debate, because with everything you say I come back with a better answer because i did play both sport, and i convinced even my american football coach that soccer is superior sport. but plz keep trying to convince me, and I come back with more. too bad i cant type all in one response
@MrMrbeastybeast ahhh I am pretty happy with myself.. dont know if you know me, or what my Goal is. I am curios since you seem to know what my goal is. so plz tell me, what is my goal? and how far am I of being perfect?
@MrMrbeastybeast you probably played with a cheap ball. Not with a professional ball with the right pressure on it. And just because you and your friends play soccer like fags doesnt mean that soccer is for fags. but yeah, you Americans do play soccer like fags!
@daohammed you mean you rather play a game for roid monkeys in gay protective armour which has almost the same rules as rugby? an puhhlease. football has more flair to it than american football.
@PigsArseifyYou Soccer doesn't have any flair it's as boring as fuck to watch. American football has the best athletes in the world trying to beat eachother up how does that not entertain you
@daohammed No one cares for American Rugby, only small minded US people. Real Football is watched and loved by over 2 billion+ people also played in every country. I watched a Rugby game and the guys tackle the shit out of each other, even have blood dripping off their faces, they run to the side line get some tape to pull the skin together again and on with the game. American Rugby would never have those sort of men, they have Victoria secret men lol.
@daohammed No one cares for American Rugby, only small minded US people. Real Football is watched and loved by over 2 billion+ people also played in every country. I watched a Rugby game and the guys tackle the shit out of each other, even have blood dripping off their faces, they run to the side line get some tape to pull the skin together again and on with the game. American Rugby would never have those sort of men, they have Victoria secret men lol.
why da fuck is their comments on war. clearly this is a sports video and dumb ass americans always bring up a war to sound tough. u know whats tough? big bob shoving his dick up all your prison bitch asses
Lol coming from a Croatian who not just would the U.S. blast in WC but so would the Mexican National team because they've seen the Quarter finals of the world cup.
Futebol ( Soccer ) , é o melhor esporte do mundo , tem fans de futebol ( soccer ) em todo mundo , futebol é paixão nacional em vários países , tais como Brasil ,Argentina,Inglaterra , Espanha ,Itália ,Portugal ,Uruguai ,Alemanha ,Holanda ,França entre outros ,para ser jogador de " soccer " você não precisa ser forte ou alto , você pode ser alto , baixo ,forte , fraco , se você souber jogar você é bom , e também o futebol é o esporte mais emocionante que existe,soccer é o melhor esporte do mundo
Well you go ahead and think that the Soviet Union destroyed most of the Nazi army. Fact: The US helped protect the skies of Europe with the P-51 Mustangs, we bombed the shit out of Berlin with our flying fortresses, we took the beaches of Normandy. We lent pilots to the RAF, we gave weapons to the British and we won the war in the Pacific, and were crucial in the defeat of the Nazi army in Europe. The Soviets, British and French couldn't even handle Hitler together, what does that say?
@DaleWF10 Who patrolled the skies from the Luftwaffe? The U.S Air Force. Who was the architect of the landings? Eisenhower. How is it that 75% of those troops were British if they only landed about 85,000 and the U.S landed 70,00? That's not 75%. Well anyways, I like how much people like you guys start bitching about American involvement in the war. That's not what you said approx. 70 years ago.
@haliplusnancy It's funny how Americans try take all the credit for the war when they did very little in Europe compared to Britain and the Solviet Union.
@DaleWF10 Well, consider the fact that the Brits were using our weapons and our pilots, plus the man that ultimately was in charge of D-Day was Dwight Eisenhower, you may have heard of him. The war was started by Europe, we finished it. Just because the Brits were in the war years before we were doesn't mean that they did all the work. Remember that the tide of the war changed in 1944, and guess who got involved in that year? The U.S. Just admit it, without us you would have lost the war.
@haliplusnancy Everyone knows the tide turned when Hitler made the mistake of attacking the eastern front (Nothing to do with US) and Eisenhower wasn't in charge of the Normandy Landings he was merely directing US troops 5 of the 7 main commanders were British. And behind Germany the country with the second highest number of battles fought in WWII were by Britain and the first Nazi defeat in battle since they came into power of germany in 1933 was to the British.
@DaleWF10 When he attacked the eastern front he almost made it to Moscow. That doesn't seem like a mistake to me. He was months from defeating the Russians. Until we joined the war, he was concentrated on the east, whilst bombing the Brits. When we joined and our great General Eisenhower took command the war changed. And look it up Eisenhower was in charge. Of course the Brits had the most battles, they got to the war before we did, that's obvious. We however finished the war.
@haliplusnancy great general Eisenhower haha you are funny and deluded he sucked and only decided to join the war when Pearl Habour was bombed after three years of been a pussy and waited until all the other countries armies were tired and depleted before getting involved. 70% of German soilders were killed by the solviets. Shut the fuck up stupid Yankee. the US did alot for WWII in the pacific. But in Europe the British and Solviets campaigns were much more effective.
@DaleWF10 he was the architect of the landings go look it up. The U.S didn't have to join the war, we actually avoided it but the British government wanted us to join and help because they knew Hitler was going to, eventually, defeat them. We got bombed at Pearl Harbor and that was the beginning of the end for the Japanese Empire. We fought and won our OWN war, you couldn't even handle Hitler until we joined. We didn't ask to join, your countries did so we just did you the favor of joining.
@haliplusnancy Britain were defeating Germany in alot of battles and one of the major events kicking them out of North Africa, Limited the English Channel, Allantic espically around the Scotland Iceland Greenland gap. Britain didn't know Germany would defeat them it was more or less stalements between Britain and Germany it's just that in France, Germany had the most control it was never in Hitlers intention the British Isles he actually offered on numerous times to work alongside Britain.
@DaleWF10 The battles you talk about are nothing but small battles that never really gave any advance to the Brits in the war. Fact is, you were being bombed and practically almost defeated by Hitler when he wasn't even focusing on the Brits, what would have happened if he did? The most important parts of the war were fought in Europe not Africa. The U.S has and will remain the most powerful nation in the world, hell we even defeated the Brits for independence, with no real army.
@haliplusnancy Your fucking stupid with biast views you didn't defeat Britain for independence the British were dominating the US in almost every battle prior to France joining and helping you the British handed over the US after defeat and surrending to the French at Yorktown and signed the treaty in Paris. France. And the only places Britain bombed in Germany were marked out military bases and we do not buy stuff you design idiot infact Rolls Royce-British is a main suppylier to the pentagon.
@DaleWF10 Oh I see your mad that a rag tag militia defeated the British, whom at the time was supposed to be the world's most powerful nation. The French didn't do much anyways, we fought the British before we called on the French. We kept our war going by using guerrilla tactics. Haven't you heard the story of the farmers that took out a whole squad of red coats using only hunting rifles? And Rolls Royce doesn't make weapons, they made the engines for some planes that WE designed.
@DaleWF10 And also I suppose the computer you are using right now is made in Britain, or designed there, I suppose your iPhone, iPad, or iPod are designed in the UK, I suppose Youtube is hosted on a server in the UK, I suppose the Boeing you use to travel is made in the UK.The U.S not only imports designs and ideas we import culture, we are the biggest cultural hearth on this planet. Don't be naive, our country has become in 300 years what yours never became in a millennium. Jealous much?
@haliplusnancy My laptop is Packard Bell so it was made in the Netherlands and I have an LG android which is South Korean and your country is nothing special your just far too deep in your own ass to realize and become less arrogant truth is no one gives a fuck about the US and it's opinion the worlds most popular public broadcasting service is the BBC and the most popular league of the most popular sport in the world is the ENGLISH PREMIERLEAGUE. (Ps. the World wide web is a British invention)
@DaleWF10 Wow, the web was created in Los Angeles, CA. Specifically, UCLA. The LG android was designed in the U.S built in Korea. I watch the BPL and that I will not argue. Of course you care about my country the whole world does. What about SOPA and PIPA? What woulda happened if they passed? The world would be mad at us because the internet revolves around us! The BBC is a great service, I actually prefer it over CNN. oh and your laptop probably runs windows, which is AMERICAN.
@haliplusnancy Which I said you fucking tard learn to read I said "South Korea" and the world wide web was created by CERN in Geneva Switzerland by Timm Beiners-Lee a British person. SOPA and PIPA will not be passed in countries that doesn't sign the treaty and lets just settle it at Britain and USA are both the best we have had the most influence over the world.
But you have to understand where I am coming from the world doesn't revolve around the US we also have factories in CHINA and stuff
@DaleWF10 Seriously the first web message was sent from UCLA, that laid the foundations of the internet. Maybe your boy in Switzerland just elaborated which makes sense. Sopa and Pipa if passed would affect the world wide web because most servers are based in the U.S. regardless of what country you are from. But ok, I guess both Britain and the U.S are the daddies of the world.
@haliplusnancy 1944 wasn't the year the war changed. Soviet had major victories the years before (43,42) and SU had reconquered most of the lost territory meaning the Germans were in full retreat as major battles like Kursk, Stalingrad, Moscow were lost. Also German bore 75-85% of losses on the eastern front (manpower and material), besides airplanes. I see you got your education in America, am I correct?
@scrap222666 Yeah I did get my education in America, what's that to you? I said it before and I'll say it again, we won the war in the Pacific by ourselves. Europe couldn't handle Hitler by themselves until we joined the war, we were the real game changers, but apparently Europeans suffer from Alzheimer's cuz you tend to forget who aided the Brits in their efforts. The Soviet's I could care less. They used brute force instead of real tactics, and they fought on their home ground, which is a plus
@haliplusnancy We are talking about Europe and you say "we won the war in Pacific". Again I ask if you were schooled in America as Europe is not near the Pacific so if you are arguing over who won the war in Europe, Pacific does not have much to do with it. Then if you tell me a quarter of the cake is the whole cake (eastern front 75% victims for Germany, Allies other front) then I don't know how to argue against such people. How they won does not matter, brute force or not.
@scrap222666 You don't see my point? My country won a war against a far greater force than Hitler by itself. Your country couldn't handle Hitler by themselves. Do you get it now? And if anything, the only countries that really came out successful in that war were the USA and the USSR. Britain was shit, France almost seized to exist, so what are you gonna say now?
@haliplusnancy Why are you spouting random nonsense? First I am not from Britain, I am from Estonia. Secondly Britain didn't do a large part in the war either. I am telling you USSR was the main ally fighting. Germany lost 75% of it's army and resources on that front. Britain, Canada, US and others did about 25% of the war. Who captured Berlin first I ask, was it the American or USSR flag on the Reichstag building? Answer me, who captured the German capital first?
@scrap222666 Random nonsense? First of all, the USSR was the reason the war started. And as an American I don't really care if the USSR captured Berlin first, they just had more losses than the rest of the allies because they were to stupid to use any real strategy. That doesn't mean they did more. And if anything the crude russian weather killed the germans not your bullets. And Estonia? Please get out of here, your mediocre country is of no interest to me.
@haliplusnancy How did the war start because of USSR? It was because of USSR and Germany. Berlin first shows that USSR managed to battle all the way from the Urals to Berlin, how far did the Normandy front get? France to Berlin? I don't care if the ill equipped Germans died because of the weather, it does not make any difference. A dead soldier is a dead soldier and I don't care how many USSR lost. Point is Germany lost 75% on that front, direct that 75% on west front and u lose..
@scrap222666 Who gave Hitler the thumbs up to invade Poland? Who could have stopped him in the first place? Exactly. The Russians lost millions of troops, the Germans lost hundred thousands of troops, mainly to the weather. The U.S and Britain on the west were more effective at wasting Nazi's than the Russians were. It went vice versa as well, the Nazi's almost made it to Moscow, by the time they would have made it a majority of their troops would be dead, BECAUSE OF THE WEATHER.
@haliplusnancy There you go again with random nonsense? Where are you getting these numbers? Eastern front Germany lost about 3-4 million soldiers. USSR around 10 million. Where is this "hundreds of thousands" you said? Mainly to the weather? So tell me out of these 3-4 million how many died because of the weather? You have a very skewed view of history.
@haliplusnancy Also again as I said Hitler and Stalin both started the war. Read my reply, I didn't say it was just Hitler or just Stalin. Who had the power to stop him in the first place? I think you need to learn some history again and about an event called Winter War. Do you still think USSR could of taken Germany?
@scrap222666 Now you contradict yourself, I thought the Russians were capable of handling Hitler by themselves? My history classes do not discuss European history unless it is of some connection to ours. But then again 3-4million soldiers? WTF? That number is absurd, seriously. Check your numbers, because me of all people don't get numbers wrong sir, for I am an engineer. I never thought the USSR could take the Nazi's you are the one implying that, not me.
@haliplusnancy Dude seriously. Your logic and historical knowledge is starting to piss me off. If I talk about Russia pre 1941 and 1943 they are different. Russia did not have T34 tanks, no army uniforms no nothing. Russian army after the purge was shit, Finnish war showed it. That's when they started making reforms. They weren't even ready on the day of Barbrarossa but with the help of an extra harsh winter they managed it.
@scrap222666 My historical knowledge of Russia is limited, you are European so I understand that you would know more about these wars than I do, yet you cannot deny that the U.S had a major role to play in the war. Had Hitler been able to invade Britain which he could have, if he hadn't turned his eyes on the Soviets, the US wouldn't have been able to intervene. And Hitler would have eventually taken Russia as well. So yes, Americans had a big role.
@haliplusnancy What USSR had was resources. They managed it shit and tactics sucked but by that time Germany had managed to get a lot of manpower (a big thanks to USSR itself who provided resources to Germany and also MVP pact ), still the West knew it needed USSR who had the only army big enough to fight Germany. They had steel to make tanks (T34, KV series, IS ) and men to fight. Axis lost 75% !!! 75% of their equipment and manpower. Allied finished it off in 1944.
Winter killed germans , not russians , 3-4000 soldiers died everyday due to the weather , you put the number of deaths soldiers killed by russians weather killed more than russian , germans killed between 3 and 6 millions russians during the barbarossa operation son in 3 months , because they fought in summer . Same shit happened to Napoleon . In a country like France or Germany , Russians would have been massacred.
@NasriTheNewKing 4000 soldiers died every day? Ok that's 3 months of Russian winter and 4000 each day would amount to 480,000 dead. How did the other 2,5 to 3,5 million axis soldiers die?
The rest , allies suplies , allies ent to toe the eastern front , such as the normandie niemen squadron who asskicked the luftwaffen , german tanks unable to be used due to the winter , thousand planes used on britain , polish and yugoslavian resistance who blocked the german supplies to the east . All those facts made russia able to defeat Germany .
@NasriTheNewKing So a flight squadron, allies ent to toe (what does that even mean?) supplies, all the german tanks were disabled in those 3 months, thousands of planes (actually around 50% 50% on eastern and other fronts, varied through the years of course but during Barbarossa and onward it was pretty 50% 50% depending on plane type) and resistance forces killed 2,5 to 3,5 million axis forces?
in your 2,5 and 3-5 you also find Roumanians , italians and finnish soldiers , around 1 milions for them , which give us 1,5 and 2,5 germans , but roumanians and italians were bad soldiers so they were like target for the russians , on the otther hand Russia lost 11 million soldiers , now if you add the other winter to the list , as you put 480 000 they stayed till 1944 , 3 x 480 000 , you got your soldiers killed by russians . 1,444 000 for 11 000 000.
@NasriTheNewKing Seriously. I am beginning to see you have serious tunnel vision. Firstly what difference does it take who fought for the axis (and I did say axis). Italians bad soldiers? Are you one of those "I watched history channel guys?" Italians were great soldiers. What they were missing was equipment, good tanks and most importantly command! Under Germany command it did not matter much. Romanians I don't know. I would ask you to provide info why Romanians were bad.
Italians were bad soldiers , they failed to take a village defended by9 french soldiers ... I know alot about italians they couldn't keep my island ( corsica ) under their control and germany had to send 15 000 solders there , despite the italians navy the rest sucked hard , the werhmart was a proffessional army while the roumanian were poorly euiped , same as the finnish ( independant since 1918 ) , Hitler himself admited that the italians were useless .
@NasriTheNewKing Again Italian army groups did not act on their own accord on the Eastern front. They were actively under German high command orders so were the Romanians and Hungarians. That does not make an Italian a bad soldier. Besides I'll ask again where did you get the number that 4000 died every day. Also show me the number of Italians and Romanians compared to the Germans on the eastern front. Give some numbers please with sources if you can.
@NasriTheNewKing Secondly what "staying" are you talking about. Why should I do the homework for you, look at the map, ok? By 1943 December Russia had pushed Germans out of their land (besides the area near Leningrad). No longer was the question about harsh Russian winters with cold fronts from Urals. Also where did you get the 4000 figure of every day deaths? Give me a source.
Check the siege of leningrad , it ended iin january 1944 , the winter was -50 , during 3 years they fought there , 3 winter , my source was the bography of Von leeb , who was leading the northern army during 1941 , it wrote in his book , 3-4000 soldiers everyday , now if he's lying i don't know , but i'would rather trust him who actually fought there than a historian who don't know shit about it exept from story that he heard .
@NasriTheNewKing So the 3-4k number radiated to other sectors of the map? Also the weather was consistent throughout Russia at the same degrees? Also the weather was constantly -50 degrees? Go to climate4you and check their history 1900-1949 and click Operation Barbarossa. There it has General Raus reporting daily temperatures, he reported 800 frostbite victims per day, so one general already bringing the number down to 0,8k and those are not deaths mind you.
@NasriTheNewKing Besides that you can't have 3 winters, the last winter for example had all but the Leningrad Siegers in European territory with normal winter. Also armygroup south was near the black sea so the temperature didn't reach to such degrees. You can't take one general estimation and degrees and think thats what happened throughout 3 months on all sectors constantly. That's not how winters and temperature works.
@hazelsbum Well I saw the discussion and tried to correct a statement that basically went "US won the war in Europe". I didn't start it but now see where this has gone. Still Godwins law is a great law to live by.
@NasriTheNewKing Ok listen bub lets cut to the chase, USSR was supplied heavily by the entente agreement from trucks (Around 500,000) to wiring (USSR had bad wires particularly for wet condition) and tank radios (USSR had none at first) besides the material and tanks,guns etc ( not that many compared to what Russia had). The main bulk of the fighting was done by the hundreds of thousands of Russian tanks and soldiers. Again Germany lost 75% of its resources/manpower to the east.
@haliplusnancy I have not said USSR could take nazis alone. Allied lend lease and other factors helped. It is true however that without USSR the allied would of probably lost a lot more (again eastern front Germany lost about 75% of their equipment and men who would of focused on UK, Africa etc). I mean USSR for example didn't have wiring for radio lines or any radios at all in the start of combat that came from allies besides the tanks. Hard to put that into "what if" scenario.
@haliplusnancy And to make it perfectly clear what I am arguing about is your stupid arrogant notion that you made at the start of it that "America won the war for Europe". Just the fact that 3/4th of Axis army and equipment (tanks, AT guns, machine guns, pistols, rifles, trucks, AA guns etc) were lost on that front and were advancing toward Berlin means that the 1/4th left for Allies, nevermind Americans does not mean "America won the war".
@scrap222666 You know what pisses me off? The fact that Europeans think they are all mighty and that Americans are stupid. You fail to recognize our efforts in WW2 and still claim we think that we won the war. We helped win it, if you like that or not I do not care. If anything, knowing how ungrateful you would be that we wasted resources and left wives as widows, we shouldn't have joined until you begged us on your knees. Is that not what Britain did?
@haliplusnancy The year that Germany lost it was 1942/43. It got major defeats near Moscow, Stalingrad etc. Whole army groups surrounded and blown to bits. Hitler didn't allow to retreat. The African corps was also blown to bits in 1943 so another theater lost for Hitler (around 3000 US troops died btw there and around 200,000 Brits). By 1944 june when US brought it's guns Germany was on it's knees. Reserves where depleted. The war turned in the year 1942/43.
@scrap222666 The war didn't end till 2010 that is when Germany managed to acctually pay of their debt....oh and Ameriicanst the last second to gather all the glory we would of won it without you yanks.
@scrap222666 On top of that we make sure nukes don't fall in the wrong hands, we make sure governments don't commit genocide. We've made sure to take out terrorism networks, and rescued people from pirates, that aren't even our people. So yes, we are the self proclaimed police of the world, we protect countries that are our allies. All this because we, as well as Russia, came out the strongest from WW2. And in the Cold War, we truly flaunted the power we had.
@haliplusnancy Let me refresh your memory "Europe couldn't handle Hitler by themselves until we joined the war, we were the real game changers" is what you said. Now I pointed out around 75% of Axis equipment was lost and by 1944 May USSR was pushing to Germany already over it's border. Now I was not saying you didn't do anything. Just that "we were the real game changers when we joined the war" is a little over the top.
@haliplusnancy You also give a factual lie that SU fought on home ground. Again I ask you were are you getting this, is the US school system that bad they can't keep track of ww2 battle maps and dates or is it just you. By 1944 May SU was battling on Ukrainian, Belorussian, Polish, Estonian, Romanian, Lithuanian territory. The SU borders had been pushed to Europe and Germany was in full retreat.
The Soviet Union won WW2. Both Britain and US were just substitutes. Same with WW1, get off your fucking high horse. Pussies didn't do shit until you got attacked in 1942. Name one conflict you fags have won since WW2.
@2Pac515 1942? What happened in 1942? It was December 7, 1941. And we ain't much pussies if we used the first A-bomb, are we? Then again we used it twice and ended a war with that. WW1 wasn't even our conflict and we didn't get much involved in that war, so that argument is invalid. We have won multiple conflicts in the middle east, we took out Saddam, Bin Laden, helped the Afghan's keep the Soviets out etc. You sound like a drunk moron so I suggest you let us intelligent people argue.
@haliplusnancy That's complete bullshit and you know it. I'm not sure if you are trolling or just plain stupid... I'm not denying the efforts the US put into the war, they were extremely important. But if it wasn't for the support of the British Fleet or the British special-ops (yes, they DID exist during WWII, contrary to what most people think) that took out key targets in the days before the invasion... D-Day would've never been successfull. It was a "group effort", one could say.
@Fciamponi The U.S did everything it could to help the Brits before we joined the European war, without our support the Brits would have succumbed to Hitler's bombing. They knew we were going to join the war, they just had to hold back the Germans until our congress approved of us joining. Better yet, would D-day have been possible without the Americans? No. We supplied you with weapons, ammo and men. What else did you want? We don't take credit for a war we weren't even supposed to fight.
@KingDcome11 the difference is we can raise our debt cieling and mass produce the dollar. somthing other nations cant do. the euro will be gone soon so everyone needs the dollar.
El futbol (Me refiero a este ya que este es el verdadero) es tan bueno, por las pocas anotaciones y la verdadera emoción al ver la pelota golpear el fondo de la red los Estadounidenses son tan estúpidos que no pueden concentrarse en un deporte que no tenga 2 anotaciones por minuto y descansos a cada 10 minutos para poder seguir comiendo hamburguesas con coca cola
@KingDcome11 Clearly you are a retard that doesnt know anything about football....we wear padding cuz there is actually tackling and physical contact, something your "real men" sport doesnt do.... We wear tight padding so its harder for an opponent to grab loose cloth... I eould rather wear tight pants and actually hit ppl than prance atound in short shorts like the true footfairys soccer players are
@NoFlowButStillaBro football player's shorts are actually not that short anymore.... they are normal...unless you consider normal shorts gay than you must be gay yourself since you must wear regular shorts as well. You wear helmets and all the padding because you guys are pussies. you look so gay with those tight pants and bending over alll the time. Not to mention the grabbing eachother from behind , touching eachother's asses etc etc. what a faggot sport.
@KingDcome11 that comeback was straight up retarded...we wear helmets and padding so we are pussies? the only physical contact your sport has is slidetackling...we have blocking,rip and hammer,tackling, ect....before pointing out all the shit in football and calling it gay cuz u dont have any actual real dirt on american football, take a look at ur gay fucking sport, half of it is ur "real men" crying and rolling on the field after being tapped by an opponent...bitch
@NoFlowButStillaBro I call football gay because the padding , tight uniforms , bending over, grabbing men for behind all the time. Having a sausage fest all the time. Grabbing dicks and asses if possible to stop a player. If you don't think that's gay it might be cause it suits your tendencies.
@KingDcome11 having a sausage fest.. we have cheerleaders...and you must be gay cuz ur goalie gets into a stance similar to a 2 point...Padding? you wear shinguards...when do we ever grab men from behind? thats a penalty...and i have never seen a player grab a dick or asss? ur just making up shit cuz u dont have any dirt... ur a pussy i guess thats why soccer fits your tendancies...bitch
@NoFlowButStillaBro cheerleaders are for people who get bored watching that gay FATball. we wear shinguards but not all over our body you fuckface. You grab men form behind when you are trying to catch the you grab them form their ass if possible even their underwear sometimes. Bending over like fags while other people "watch your back". what a sausage fest!
@KingDcome11 You just dont like cheerleaders because of your sexual orientation...you pussies dont even need shinguards...you and all your footfairies never hit or tackle...all you guys can do is act after being tapped by another player...please,you dont even have a valid argument, your making things up..so uhh...u mad bro?
@iLuckyyy yeah our cheerleaders suffer many injuries from waving pom poms and having huge tits...football players suffer no injuries from tackling or blocking...clearly your retarded....have another go
@NoFlowButStillaBro American football players have padding to cushion such blows. Cheerleaders have no padding when they hit the floor after attempting a move in the air. "waving pom poms"; i see you are well informed about cheerleading moves. Nice try, use google next time.
@NoFlowButStillaBro I'm sure the tv network wants to show injured cheerleaders to the viewers - omg it's not on tv, therefore it doesn't exist - carry on with that logic, it'll do you good.
the only skilled one in football(american) are the quarterbacks the running backs the wild receiver the tigh ends and the specialists, while the off and def lines( most of the team) are just a bunch of overweigh guys trying to knock each other down
And I don't think you understand how we don't give two shits about your POS game. Kudos to the crowd for being creative in amusing themselves during such boring ass game.
American football> CRYball (soccer where grown men cry like little bitches)
@richard1972r I know dumb american's don't care about football but what you gonna do about it? it's not surprise to sat that the most watched event last year was a football match and not a gayass Fatmerican football match. American Fatball = the only sport for pussies who are all padded out and pretend to be hardasses, the only sport where you are subbed after 5 minutes. No wonder your mom and your wife will be so fat. FATball = shit
And I know that while we don't care if you like our games or not, euro fags get so horribly butthurt about the fact that we don't give a shit about your POS cryball game, but what are you gonna do about it? A fan of cryball, where grown men fall down and cry like little cunts, is calling us pussies. LMAO! Hey pot, let me introduce you to kettle, then talk about the color black, faggot. No wonder your brother and dad will be FAGGOTS. CRYball=shit.
@richard1972r I'm sorry but you are not well informed .... FOTTBALL unlike FATBALL (american hand ball) is not only watched in Europe bu all over the world. It's the most watched and played sport in the world...so it's not only Europe but everywhere in the world. While you wear your tight uniforms all padded out makes you look like a fucking faggot. It's really gay to bend down for other players...but I guess it comes naturally for FATball players since they like it up the ass.lol
Real Madrid <3
OrbitWide 1 hour ago
Soccer is boring as fuck. Filled with flopping princesses left and right.
TuPadre209 9 hours ago
fifa should ban soccer in the us. they ruin it.
9hajduk 1 day ago
''Croatian... SOCCER...'' DOUBLE LOL!!
iNTERS22 2 days ago 2
@Al2006essandro Why is Italy's basketball team so repugnantly bad then?
MMAmachinhead92 4 days ago
@Al2006essandro You kind of have it backwards, champ. Soccer isn't popular because the teams suck, rather the team sucks because they don't have the same support, resources and infrastructure as in Europe. Though there are 300 million people so there is a large strata of people who will like it.
MMAmachinhead92 5 days ago
@MrMrbeastybeast I'm not dumb. An offensive coordinator tells the Quarterback through an earpiece on his helmet on who to throw to. How many plays are there in soccer? More than in American Football as they don't pause every few seconds. The action continues for 2, 45 minute halves.
MMAmachinhead92 5 days ago
@MMAmachinhead92 ummm....okay, but the quarterback does choose who to throw it to.
MrMrbeastybeast 5 days ago
@MrMrbeastybeast That's right, Barcelona plays "roll-around" ball. That is if you've ever watched Barcelona play or even know what a "Barcelona" is, Call-of-Duty-playing Yankee boy. The "strategy" in American Football is methodical, not technical. An offensive coordinator tell where the Quarterback should throw. Ultimately it's based on how fast or how high a receiver could jump. Not exactly a chess game, champ.
MMAmachinhead92 5 days ago
@MMAmachinhead92 that is still a load of shit. the quarter back chooses who too throw it to. how many plays are there for offense and defense in soccer? and call of duty sucks.
MrMrbeastybeast 5 days ago
aaahahahaha i laughed so hard! everything is more interesting than the game x´D so true
kupfiXbutter 6 days ago
I love soccer. nuff said
Wordtomyhomies69 6 days ago
@eaglemonty05 "No strategy or tactical depth"? It has more than any American Sport. There aren't any "offensive coordinators" or special coaches, it's all the players' mind. Also, if you look at the numbers, soccer IS growing in the US. The MLS (though "mediocre" by the mass-concesus) is the third most attended league in the country. Plus there are more and more registered youth players going to become pro. So you're realy wrong.....HAHAHAHAHAHA, BITCH. Soccer forerver!!
MMAmachinhead92 6 days ago
@MMAmachinhead92 that is a load of shit. football has so much more strategy than soccer does. the only strategy in soccer is to roll around like a little bitch pretending that they broke their leg........HAHAHAHAHAHAH, BITCH. Football forever!!
MrMrbeastybeast 5 days ago
@MrMrbeastybeast man, are you talking out of your ass, or simply that stupid?!
at least the-real-FOOTBALL is played BY FOOT, not hands and the tactics are developed in real-time by the players on the field.
sissy-sport americans say, but unlike your fat, slow muscle-mountains, football-players wear NO PROTECTION whatsoever (besides a bit plastic on their shins)
football-players have to be fast, think quick and need stamina, for there's very few interruptions.
FOOTBALL > AMERICAN RUGBY or EGGBALL
m0rbusPolytox 5 days ago
@m0rbusPolytox then why do soccer players always act like pussys rolling around on the field? and you dont really need protection in soccer. you are not hit as hard as you are in AMERICAN FOOTBALL
MrMrbeastybeast 5 days ago
@m0rbusPolytox also, AMERICAN FOOTBALL OR RUGBY>SOCCER
MrMrbeastybeast 5 days ago
@MrMrbeastybeast pathetic tunnel vision you got mate. total amount of action is in american football 11 min. soccer has 90! But I understand, if I were american I would be embarrassed too if my country sucked that much in soccer.go ahead, take a tight grip of american football as a sport that the whole world doesn't really care about anyway except of the Usa.
Al2006essandro 5 days ago
@Al2006essandro i dont like soccer either. and that is not the total amount of action.i dont get how you think soccer is interesting. it is just people running around trying to kick a ball into the opposite teams goal. i know that there are slide tackles, but they are so boring to watch. it is more fun to watch. and this is a real question: why do soccer players roll around on the ground and act like they broke a leg when they barely get a scratch?
MrMrbeastybeast 5 days ago
@MrMrbeastybeast what you dont understand is that football (soccer) is much more then people running around and kicking the ball into opposite net! which could be said the same for egg ball except with people in armor suits are tackling over each other. but they get a break every 5 seconds. it has nothing really to do as a sport. not comparable with football (soccer). In soccer there are 11 men. Each one of them having a special role to fulfill but constantly playing defense and offense! 90min.
Al2006essandro 5 days ago
@MrMrbeastybeast in war you cant say ok talibans, you attack and we defend for 15 min. and then we switch!! WE ATTACK YOU DEFEND! (so retarded!!) You wanna know why basketball is much higher rated by europeans then american football? BECAUSE ITS OFFENSE AND DEFENSE AT THE SAME TIME. You need skill to be a ball player (counts for basketball and European football) while for american football you just need mass! not skill!! every giant idiot can be a football player. but not all humans can play soc
Al2006essandro 5 days ago
@Al2006essandro the training for football is too much for you. i can tell you that right now. obviously you think you are amazing and there are 11 guys on each team in football too. football is harder than soccer because you have to get through huge guys coming to knock your brains out. it is not the same in soccer. it is not as mentally demanding. and i know that soccer rounds last for a long time, but did you know that they have subs?
MrMrbeastybeast 5 days ago
@MrMrbeastybeast YOU TALK ABOUT SUBS?? HAHA YOU CHANGE YOUR ENTIRE TEAM IN FOOTBALL!!! OFFENSE is a team AND defense is a team!! so plz dont talk about subs because in soccer you can substitute only 3 players, and thats it! So the Coach has to make much harder decisions then the guy from american football. (that has tactical scouts in the rang's...) The formation and the way how a team atacks and defends is way too complex to make you understand. a mistake is more damaging then in American F.
Al2006essandro 5 days ago
@MrMrbeastybeast A Worldcup for example has more meaning then a just 2 win trophy!! IT MEANS WHICH NATION IS THE PERFECT HUMAN! By looking at the national teams, in the way they play, it represents the country's intelligence, passion, cleverness, smartness, coolness and so much more is represented by the players of each country! Strong Soccer nations have strong personality! Brazil, Italy, Germany, England, Argentina.. people from these country's have strong personalty's thanks to soccer.
Al2006essandro 5 days ago
@MrMrbeastybeast I bet you never played with an official soccer ball in your entire life. Because these soccerballs are pumped with so much air that the pressure of the ball resembles a stone. ever tried to kick a rock? You think the things soccer players do is easy?? time 2 wake up buddy
Al2006essandro 5 days ago
@Al2006essandro i would rather just have the trophy and the win. that is what we do in America. we will work hard for the win.
MrMrbeastybeast 5 days ago
@MrMrbeastybeast OH really?? In america you go for the win?? really? you know in europe we go and play so we can lose!! Man are you really that small minded?? you cant win this debate, because with everything you say I come back with a better answer because i did play both sport, and i convinced even my american football coach that soccer is superior sport. but plz keep trying to convince me, and I come back with more. too bad i cant type all in one response
Al2006essandro 5 days ago
@Al2006essandro NO ONE IS PERFECT AND YOU ARE FAR OFF FROM REACHING THAT GOAL.
MrMrbeastybeast 5 days ago
@MrMrbeastybeast ahhh I am pretty happy with myself.. dont know if you know me, or what my Goal is. I am curios since you seem to know what my goal is. so plz tell me, what is my goal? and how far am I of being perfect?
Al2006essandro 5 days ago
@Al2006essandro and i have played soccer, and it is not a stone. have you ever tried to kick a rock? are you that stupid?
MrMrbeastybeast 5 days ago
@MrMrbeastybeast you probably played with a cheap ball. Not with a professional ball with the right pressure on it. And just because you and your friends play soccer like fags doesnt mean that soccer is for fags. but yeah, you Americans do play soccer like fags!
Al2006essandro 5 days ago
@Al2006essandro That's because we don't give a shit about a game for pussies
daohammed 3 days ago
@daohammed you mean you rather play a game for roid monkeys in gay protective armour which has almost the same rules as rugby? an puhhlease. football has more flair to it than american football.
PigsArseifyYou 1 day ago
@PigsArseifyYou Soccer doesn't have any flair it's as boring as fuck to watch. American football has the best athletes in the world trying to beat eachother up how does that not entertain you
daohammed 1 day ago
@daohammed No one cares for American Rugby, only small minded US people. Real Football is watched and loved by over 2 billion+ people also played in every country. I watched a Rugby game and the guys tackle the shit out of each other, even have blood dripping off their faces, they run to the side line get some tape to pull the skin together again and on with the game. American Rugby would never have those sort of men, they have Victoria secret men lol.
RunWhilstYouCan 1 day ago
@RunWhilstYouCan I never said rugby guys aren't tough. Their not as big or as fast as American football players but they are tougher.
daohammed 3 minutes ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@daohammed No one cares for American Rugby, only small minded US people. Real Football is watched and loved by over 2 billion+ people also played in every country. I watched a Rugby game and the guys tackle the shit out of each other, even have blood dripping off their faces, they run to the side line get some tape to pull the skin together again and on with the game. American Rugby would never have those sort of men, they have Victoria secret men lol.
RunWhilstYouCan 1 day ago
@daohammed amercian football has the best athletes in the US not the world
usasoccer024 15 hours ago
@usasoccer024 american football players are stronger,faster, and tougher than soccer players.
daohammed 8 minutes ago
@daohammed American football is only played in america. Football is played everywhere including amercia. Speaks for itself?
PigsArseifyYou 14 hours ago
@PigsArseifyYou Yeah but people in America don't give a shit about soccer.
daohammed 7 minutes ago
not tradition, no heart, no soul...american football (soccer) fans suck
KingKool23 1 week ago
@KingKool23 That's because we don't care about soccer.
daohammed 7 minutes ago
Wow... Boring as hell... this has nothing to do with the athmosphere in a european football game..
highfive96 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
FUCK! SOCCER!
No scoring.
Grown Ass men, rolling on the ground, crying like little Bitches! because they got touched.
Drunken fans, so Fucking! bored with their own sport, they have to start fires and riots in the stands.
Contrived drama and excitement.
No true strategy or tactical depth.
The US will NEVER! accept Soccer as a legitimate sport. it's meant for little children and girls.
Soccer is an Awful! game.
FUCK! SOCCER!!!
eaglemonty05 1 week ago
Ironic how both our countries use the war in which we fought together to split us apart, We both lost lives and both contributed to winning.
JamezCraft 2 weeks ago
why da fuck is their comments on war. clearly this is a sports video and dumb ass americans always bring up a war to sound tough. u know whats tough? big bob shoving his dick up all your prison bitch asses
Harleqcuin 2 weeks ago
@Harleqcuin well then watch the video and don't read the comments. Don't get your panties in a bunch.
haliplusnancy 2 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy ooooooooooooo, clever comeback
Harleqcuin 2 weeks ago
@Harleqcuin You literally couldn't be more of a faggot.....
thebackup1230 2 weeks ago
@Harleqcuin Calm the fuck down you creep
thebackup1230 2 weeks ago
@Harleqcuin that happen to you mate?
ChaneyisBishop 2 weeks ago
those are not americans those are MEXICANS in a american stadium
08joshy 2 weeks ago
How has this turned into a USA vs Britain argument?
tommyncfc 2 weeks ago
Lol coming from a Croatian who not just would the U.S. blast in WC but so would the Mexican National team because they've seen the Quarter finals of the world cup.
PoshPartyESP 3 weeks ago
This is a stupid video. The people didn't pay money to play with a blow up doll, they payed to watch the sport. Fucking idiot.
aeternusero 3 weeks ago
geez, get it straight :
football : loved by 15 % americans 95% others
handegg : loved by 70% americans 0% others
dirkkut18FTW 3 weeks ago
Futebol ( Soccer ) , é o melhor esporte do mundo , tem fans de futebol ( soccer ) em todo mundo , futebol é paixão nacional em vários países , tais como Brasil ,Argentina,Inglaterra , Espanha ,Itália ,Portugal ,Uruguai ,Alemanha ,Holanda ,França entre outros ,para ser jogador de " soccer " você não precisa ser forte ou alto , você pode ser alto , baixo ,forte , fraco , se você souber jogar você é bom , e também o futebol é o esporte mais emocionante que existe,soccer é o melhor esporte do mundo
N97K 3 weeks ago
not just americans. we australians hate soccer 2
sliat1981 3 weeks ago
trust me bro, some of us would do that even if if was the world series or super bowl.
ovechkin1095 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
FUCK! SOCCER!
No scoring.
Grown Ass men, rolling on the ground, crying like little Bitches! because they got touched.
Drunken fans, so Fucking! bored with their own sport, they have to start fires and riots in the stands.
Contrived drama and excitement.
No true strategy or tactical depth.
The US will NEVER! accept Soccer as a legitimate sport. it's meant for little children and girls.
Soccer is an Awful! game.
FUCK! SOCCER!!!
eaglemonty05 3 weeks ago
Silly americans :)
Narleeth 4 weeks ago
Well you go ahead and think that the Soviet Union destroyed most of the Nazi army. Fact: The US helped protect the skies of Europe with the P-51 Mustangs, we bombed the shit out of Berlin with our flying fortresses, we took the beaches of Normandy. We lent pilots to the RAF, we gave weapons to the British and we won the war in the Pacific, and were crucial in the defeat of the Nazi army in Europe. The Soviets, British and French couldn't even handle Hitler together, what does that say?
haliplusnancy 4 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy 75% of the Normandy Landings were made up of British and Commonwealth.
DaleWF10 4 weeks ago
@DaleWF10 Who patrolled the skies from the Luftwaffe? The U.S Air Force. Who was the architect of the landings? Eisenhower. How is it that 75% of those troops were British if they only landed about 85,000 and the U.S landed 70,00? That's not 75%. Well anyways, I like how much people like you guys start bitching about American involvement in the war. That's not what you said approx. 70 years ago.
haliplusnancy 3 weeks ago 3
@haliplusnancy It's funny how Americans try take all the credit for the war when they did very little in Europe compared to Britain and the Solviet Union.
DaleWF10 3 weeks ago
@DaleWF10 Well, consider the fact that the Brits were using our weapons and our pilots, plus the man that ultimately was in charge of D-Day was Dwight Eisenhower, you may have heard of him. The war was started by Europe, we finished it. Just because the Brits were in the war years before we were doesn't mean that they did all the work. Remember that the tide of the war changed in 1944, and guess who got involved in that year? The U.S. Just admit it, without us you would have lost the war.
haliplusnancy 3 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy Everyone knows the tide turned when Hitler made the mistake of attacking the eastern front (Nothing to do with US) and Eisenhower wasn't in charge of the Normandy Landings he was merely directing US troops 5 of the 7 main commanders were British. And behind Germany the country with the second highest number of battles fought in WWII were by Britain and the first Nazi defeat in battle since they came into power of germany in 1933 was to the British.
DaleWF10 3 weeks ago
@DaleWF10 When he attacked the eastern front he almost made it to Moscow. That doesn't seem like a mistake to me. He was months from defeating the Russians. Until we joined the war, he was concentrated on the east, whilst bombing the Brits. When we joined and our great General Eisenhower took command the war changed. And look it up Eisenhower was in charge. Of course the Brits had the most battles, they got to the war before we did, that's obvious. We however finished the war.
haliplusnancy 3 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy great general Eisenhower haha you are funny and deluded he sucked and only decided to join the war when Pearl Habour was bombed after three years of been a pussy and waited until all the other countries armies were tired and depleted before getting involved. 70% of German soilders were killed by the solviets. Shut the fuck up stupid Yankee. the US did alot for WWII in the pacific. But in Europe the British and Solviets campaigns were much more effective.
DaleWF10 3 weeks ago
@DaleWF10 he was the architect of the landings go look it up. The U.S didn't have to join the war, we actually avoided it but the British government wanted us to join and help because they knew Hitler was going to, eventually, defeat them. We got bombed at Pearl Harbor and that was the beginning of the end for the Japanese Empire. We fought and won our OWN war, you couldn't even handle Hitler until we joined. We didn't ask to join, your countries did so we just did you the favor of joining.
haliplusnancy 3 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy Britain were defeating Germany in alot of battles and one of the major events kicking them out of North Africa, Limited the English Channel, Allantic espically around the Scotland Iceland Greenland gap. Britain didn't know Germany would defeat them it was more or less stalements between Britain and Germany it's just that in France, Germany had the most control it was never in Hitlers intention the British Isles he actually offered on numerous times to work alongside Britain.
DaleWF10 3 weeks ago
@DaleWF10 The battles you talk about are nothing but small battles that never really gave any advance to the Brits in the war. Fact is, you were being bombed and practically almost defeated by Hitler when he wasn't even focusing on the Brits, what would have happened if he did? The most important parts of the war were fought in Europe not Africa. The U.S has and will remain the most powerful nation in the world, hell we even defeated the Brits for independence, with no real army.
haliplusnancy 3 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy Your fucking stupid with biast views you didn't defeat Britain for independence the British were dominating the US in almost every battle prior to France joining and helping you the British handed over the US after defeat and surrending to the French at Yorktown and signed the treaty in Paris. France. And the only places Britain bombed in Germany were marked out military bases and we do not buy stuff you design idiot infact Rolls Royce-British is a main suppylier to the pentagon.
DaleWF10 3 weeks ago
@DaleWF10 Oh I see your mad that a rag tag militia defeated the British, whom at the time was supposed to be the world's most powerful nation. The French didn't do much anyways, we fought the British before we called on the French. We kept our war going by using guerrilla tactics. Haven't you heard the story of the farmers that took out a whole squad of red coats using only hunting rifles? And Rolls Royce doesn't make weapons, they made the engines for some planes that WE designed.
haliplusnancy 3 weeks ago
@DaleWF10 And also I suppose the computer you are using right now is made in Britain, or designed there, I suppose your iPhone, iPad, or iPod are designed in the UK, I suppose Youtube is hosted on a server in the UK, I suppose the Boeing you use to travel is made in the UK.The U.S not only imports designs and ideas we import culture, we are the biggest cultural hearth on this planet. Don't be naive, our country has become in 300 years what yours never became in a millennium. Jealous much?
haliplusnancy 3 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy My laptop is Packard Bell so it was made in the Netherlands and I have an LG android which is South Korean and your country is nothing special your just far too deep in your own ass to realize and become less arrogant truth is no one gives a fuck about the US and it's opinion the worlds most popular public broadcasting service is the BBC and the most popular league of the most popular sport in the world is the ENGLISH PREMIERLEAGUE. (Ps. the World wide web is a British invention)
DaleWF10 3 weeks ago
@DaleWF10 Wow, the web was created in Los Angeles, CA. Specifically, UCLA. The LG android was designed in the U.S built in Korea. I watch the BPL and that I will not argue. Of course you care about my country the whole world does. What about SOPA and PIPA? What woulda happened if they passed? The world would be mad at us because the internet revolves around us! The BBC is a great service, I actually prefer it over CNN. oh and your laptop probably runs windows, which is AMERICAN.
haliplusnancy 3 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy Which I said you fucking tard learn to read I said "South Korea" and the world wide web was created by CERN in Geneva Switzerland by Timm Beiners-Lee a British person. SOPA and PIPA will not be passed in countries that doesn't sign the treaty and lets just settle it at Britain and USA are both the best we have had the most influence over the world.
But you have to understand where I am coming from the world doesn't revolve around the US we also have factories in CHINA and stuff
DaleWF10 3 weeks ago
@DaleWF10 Seriously the first web message was sent from UCLA, that laid the foundations of the internet. Maybe your boy in Switzerland just elaborated which makes sense. Sopa and Pipa if passed would affect the world wide web because most servers are based in the U.S. regardless of what country you are from. But ok, I guess both Britain and the U.S are the daddies of the world.
haliplusnancy 3 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy World wide web servers are based all over the world if they wern't then it wouldn't be a WORLD connection =]
and the first web message wasn't sent until after the World Wide Web was built but yeah thats why we are both allies =]
DaleWF10 3 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy 1944 wasn't the year the war changed. Soviet had major victories the years before (43,42) and SU had reconquered most of the lost territory meaning the Germans were in full retreat as major battles like Kursk, Stalingrad, Moscow were lost. Also German bore 75-85% of losses on the eastern front (manpower and material), besides airplanes. I see you got your education in America, am I correct?
scrap222666 3 weeks ago
@scrap222666 Yeah I did get my education in America, what's that to you? I said it before and I'll say it again, we won the war in the Pacific by ourselves. Europe couldn't handle Hitler by themselves until we joined the war, we were the real game changers, but apparently Europeans suffer from Alzheimer's cuz you tend to forget who aided the Brits in their efforts. The Soviet's I could care less. They used brute force instead of real tactics, and they fought on their home ground, which is a plus
haliplusnancy 3 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy We are talking about Europe and you say "we won the war in Pacific". Again I ask if you were schooled in America as Europe is not near the Pacific so if you are arguing over who won the war in Europe, Pacific does not have much to do with it. Then if you tell me a quarter of the cake is the whole cake (eastern front 75% victims for Germany, Allies other front) then I don't know how to argue against such people. How they won does not matter, brute force or not.
scrap222666 3 weeks ago
@scrap222666 You don't see my point? My country won a war against a far greater force than Hitler by itself. Your country couldn't handle Hitler by themselves. Do you get it now? And if anything, the only countries that really came out successful in that war were the USA and the USSR. Britain was shit, France almost seized to exist, so what are you gonna say now?
haliplusnancy 2 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy
Harleqcuin 2 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy Why are you spouting random nonsense? First I am not from Britain, I am from Estonia. Secondly Britain didn't do a large part in the war either. I am telling you USSR was the main ally fighting. Germany lost 75% of it's army and resources on that front. Britain, Canada, US and others did about 25% of the war. Who captured Berlin first I ask, was it the American or USSR flag on the Reichstag building? Answer me, who captured the German capital first?
scrap222666 2 weeks ago
@scrap222666 the americans had the oppertunity to capture the capital, but to aviod a third world war, we gave it to them.
ChaneyisBishop 2 weeks ago
@scrap222666 Random nonsense? First of all, the USSR was the reason the war started. And as an American I don't really care if the USSR captured Berlin first, they just had more losses than the rest of the allies because they were to stupid to use any real strategy. That doesn't mean they did more. And if anything the crude russian weather killed the germans not your bullets. And Estonia? Please get out of here, your mediocre country is of no interest to me.
haliplusnancy 2 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy How did the war start because of USSR? It was because of USSR and Germany. Berlin first shows that USSR managed to battle all the way from the Urals to Berlin, how far did the Normandy front get? France to Berlin? I don't care if the ill equipped Germans died because of the weather, it does not make any difference. A dead soldier is a dead soldier and I don't care how many USSR lost. Point is Germany lost 75% on that front, direct that 75% on west front and u lose..
scrap222666 2 weeks ago
@scrap222666 Who gave Hitler the thumbs up to invade Poland? Who could have stopped him in the first place? Exactly. The Russians lost millions of troops, the Germans lost hundred thousands of troops, mainly to the weather. The U.S and Britain on the west were more effective at wasting Nazi's than the Russians were. It went vice versa as well, the Nazi's almost made it to Moscow, by the time they would have made it a majority of their troops would be dead, BECAUSE OF THE WEATHER.
haliplusnancy 2 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy There you go again with random nonsense? Where are you getting these numbers? Eastern front Germany lost about 3-4 million soldiers. USSR around 10 million. Where is this "hundreds of thousands" you said? Mainly to the weather? So tell me out of these 3-4 million how many died because of the weather? You have a very skewed view of history.
scrap222666 2 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy Also again as I said Hitler and Stalin both started the war. Read my reply, I didn't say it was just Hitler or just Stalin. Who had the power to stop him in the first place? I think you need to learn some history again and about an event called Winter War. Do you still think USSR could of taken Germany?
scrap222666 2 weeks ago
@scrap222666 Now you contradict yourself, I thought the Russians were capable of handling Hitler by themselves? My history classes do not discuss European history unless it is of some connection to ours. But then again 3-4million soldiers? WTF? That number is absurd, seriously. Check your numbers, because me of all people don't get numbers wrong sir, for I am an engineer. I never thought the USSR could take the Nazi's you are the one implying that, not me.
haliplusnancy 2 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy Dude seriously. Your logic and historical knowledge is starting to piss me off. If I talk about Russia pre 1941 and 1943 they are different. Russia did not have T34 tanks, no army uniforms no nothing. Russian army after the purge was shit, Finnish war showed it. That's when they started making reforms. They weren't even ready on the day of Barbrarossa but with the help of an extra harsh winter they managed it.
scrap222666 2 weeks ago
@scrap222666 My historical knowledge of Russia is limited, you are European so I understand that you would know more about these wars than I do, yet you cannot deny that the U.S had a major role to play in the war. Had Hitler been able to invade Britain which he could have, if he hadn't turned his eyes on the Soviets, the US wouldn't have been able to intervene. And Hitler would have eventually taken Russia as well. So yes, Americans had a big role.
haliplusnancy 2 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy Secondly 3-4 million are the SOLDIER VICTIMS of the AXIS on the EASTERN FRONT. Get that through your thick skull.
scrap222666 2 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy What USSR had was resources. They managed it shit and tactics sucked but by that time Germany had managed to get a lot of manpower (a big thanks to USSR itself who provided resources to Germany and also MVP pact ), still the West knew it needed USSR who had the only army big enough to fight Germany. They had steel to make tanks (T34, KV series, IS ) and men to fight. Axis lost 75% !!! 75% of their equipment and manpower. Allied finished it off in 1944.
scrap222666 2 weeks ago
@scrap222666
Winter killed germans , not russians , 3-4000 soldiers died everyday due to the weather , you put the number of deaths soldiers killed by russians weather killed more than russian , germans killed between 3 and 6 millions russians during the barbarossa operation son in 3 months , because they fought in summer . Same shit happened to Napoleon . In a country like France or Germany , Russians would have been massacred.
NasriTheNewKing 2 weeks ago
@NasriTheNewKing 4000 soldiers died every day? Ok that's 3 months of Russian winter and 4000 each day would amount to 480,000 dead. How did the other 2,5 to 3,5 million axis soldiers die?
scrap222666 1 week ago
@scrap222666
The rest , allies suplies , allies ent to toe the eastern front , such as the normandie niemen squadron who asskicked the luftwaffen , german tanks unable to be used due to the winter , thousand planes used on britain , polish and yugoslavian resistance who blocked the german supplies to the east . All those facts made russia able to defeat Germany .
NasriTheNewKing 1 week ago
@NasriTheNewKing
allies unit sent to the eastern front
NasriTheNewKing 1 week ago
@NasriTheNewKing So a flight squadron, allies ent to toe (what does that even mean?) supplies, all the german tanks were disabled in those 3 months, thousands of planes (actually around 50% 50% on eastern and other fronts, varied through the years of course but during Barbarossa and onward it was pretty 50% 50% depending on plane type) and resistance forces killed 2,5 to 3,5 million axis forces?
scrap222666 1 week ago
@scrap222666
in your 2,5 and 3-5 you also find Roumanians , italians and finnish soldiers , around 1 milions for them , which give us 1,5 and 2,5 germans , but roumanians and italians were bad soldiers so they were like target for the russians , on the otther hand Russia lost 11 million soldiers , now if you add the other winter to the list , as you put 480 000 they stayed till 1944 , 3 x 480 000 , you got your soldiers killed by russians . 1,444 000 for 11 000 000.
NasriTheNewKing 1 week ago
@NasriTheNewKing Seriously. I am beginning to see you have serious tunnel vision. Firstly what difference does it take who fought for the axis (and I did say axis). Italians bad soldiers? Are you one of those "I watched history channel guys?" Italians were great soldiers. What they were missing was equipment, good tanks and most importantly command! Under Germany command it did not matter much. Romanians I don't know. I would ask you to provide info why Romanians were bad.
scrap222666 1 week ago
@scrap222666
Italians were bad soldiers , they failed to take a village defended by9 french soldiers ... I know alot about italians they couldn't keep my island ( corsica ) under their control and germany had to send 15 000 solders there , despite the italians navy the rest sucked hard , the werhmart was a proffessional army while the roumanian were poorly euiped , same as the finnish ( independant since 1918 ) , Hitler himself admited that the italians were useless .
NasriTheNewKing 1 week ago
@NasriTheNewKing Again Italian army groups did not act on their own accord on the Eastern front. They were actively under German high command orders so were the Romanians and Hungarians. That does not make an Italian a bad soldier. Besides I'll ask again where did you get the number that 4000 died every day. Also show me the number of Italians and Romanians compared to the Germans on the eastern front. Give some numbers please with sources if you can.
scrap222666 1 week ago
@scrap222666 italy even failed against ethiopia .................
NasriTheNewKing 1 week ago
@NasriTheNewKing Secondly what "staying" are you talking about. Why should I do the homework for you, look at the map, ok? By 1943 December Russia had pushed Germans out of their land (besides the area near Leningrad). No longer was the question about harsh Russian winters with cold fronts from Urals. Also where did you get the 4000 figure of every day deaths? Give me a source.
scrap222666 1 week ago
@scrap222666
Check the siege of leningrad , it ended iin january 1944 , the winter was -50 , during 3 years they fought there , 3 winter , my source was the bography of Von leeb , who was leading the northern army during 1941 , it wrote in his book , 3-4000 soldiers everyday , now if he's lying i don't know , but i'would rather trust him who actually fought there than a historian who don't know shit about it exept from story that he heard .
NasriTheNewKing 1 week ago
@NasriTheNewKing So the 3-4k number radiated to other sectors of the map? Also the weather was consistent throughout Russia at the same degrees? Also the weather was constantly -50 degrees? Go to climate4you and check their history 1900-1949 and click Operation Barbarossa. There it has General Raus reporting daily temperatures, he reported 800 frostbite victims per day, so one general already bringing the number down to 0,8k and those are not deaths mind you.
scrap222666 1 week ago
@NasriTheNewKing Besides that you can't have 3 winters, the last winter for example had all but the Leningrad Siegers in European territory with normal winter. Also armygroup south was near the black sea so the temperature didn't reach to such degrees. You can't take one general estimation and degrees and think thats what happened throughout 3 months on all sectors constantly. That's not how winters and temperature works.
scrap222666 1 week ago
@scrap222666 you gotta be kidding me its a football vid and you talk about ww2? ffs get out of here
hazelsbum 1 week ago
@hazelsbum Well I saw the discussion and tried to correct a statement that basically went "US won the war in Europe". I didn't start it but now see where this has gone. Still Godwins law is a great law to live by.
scrap222666 1 week ago
@NasriTheNewKing Ok listen bub lets cut to the chase, USSR was supplied heavily by the entente agreement from trucks (Around 500,000) to wiring (USSR had bad wires particularly for wet condition) and tank radios (USSR had none at first) besides the material and tanks,guns etc ( not that many compared to what Russia had). The main bulk of the fighting was done by the hundreds of thousands of Russian tanks and soldiers. Again Germany lost 75% of its resources/manpower to the east.
scrap222666 1 week ago
@haliplusnancy I have not said USSR could take nazis alone. Allied lend lease and other factors helped. It is true however that without USSR the allied would of probably lost a lot more (again eastern front Germany lost about 75% of their equipment and men who would of focused on UK, Africa etc). I mean USSR for example didn't have wiring for radio lines or any radios at all in the start of combat that came from allies besides the tanks. Hard to put that into "what if" scenario.
scrap222666 2 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy And to make it perfectly clear what I am arguing about is your stupid arrogant notion that you made at the start of it that "America won the war for Europe". Just the fact that 3/4th of Axis army and equipment (tanks, AT guns, machine guns, pistols, rifles, trucks, AA guns etc) were lost on that front and were advancing toward Berlin means that the 1/4th left for Allies, nevermind Americans does not mean "America won the war".
scrap222666 2 weeks ago
@scrap222666 You know what pisses me off? The fact that Europeans think they are all mighty and that Americans are stupid. You fail to recognize our efforts in WW2 and still claim we think that we won the war. We helped win it, if you like that or not I do not care. If anything, knowing how ungrateful you would be that we wasted resources and left wives as widows, we shouldn't have joined until you begged us on your knees. Is that not what Britain did?
haliplusnancy 2 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy The year that Germany lost it was 1942/43. It got major defeats near Moscow, Stalingrad etc. Whole army groups surrounded and blown to bits. Hitler didn't allow to retreat. The African corps was also blown to bits in 1943 so another theater lost for Hitler (around 3000 US troops died btw there and around 200,000 Brits). By 1944 june when US brought it's guns Germany was on it's knees. Reserves where depleted. The war turned in the year 1942/43.
scrap222666 2 weeks ago
@scrap222666 The war didn't end till 2010 that is when Germany managed to acctually pay of their debt....oh and Ameriicanst the last second to gather all the glory we would of won it without you yanks.
braddy000 2 weeks ago
@scrap222666 On top of that we make sure nukes don't fall in the wrong hands, we make sure governments don't commit genocide. We've made sure to take out terrorism networks, and rescued people from pirates, that aren't even our people. So yes, we are the self proclaimed police of the world, we protect countries that are our allies. All this because we, as well as Russia, came out the strongest from WW2. And in the Cold War, we truly flaunted the power we had.
haliplusnancy 2 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy Let me refresh your memory "Europe couldn't handle Hitler by themselves until we joined the war, we were the real game changers" is what you said. Now I pointed out around 75% of Axis equipment was lost and by 1944 May USSR was pushing to Germany already over it's border. Now I was not saying you didn't do anything. Just that "we were the real game changers when we joined the war" is a little over the top.
scrap222666 2 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy You also give a factual lie that SU fought on home ground. Again I ask you were are you getting this, is the US school system that bad they can't keep track of ww2 battle maps and dates or is it just you. By 1944 May SU was battling on Ukrainian, Belorussian, Polish, Estonian, Romanian, Lithuanian territory. The SU borders had been pushed to Europe and Germany was in full retreat.
scrap222666 3 weeks ago
@DaleWF10 us fought mainly against japan...only a few years in europe so stfu
NoFlowButStillaBro 3 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy army air corps, you where close. or navy pilos.
ChaneyisBishop 2 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy
The Soviet Union won WW2. Both Britain and US were just substitutes. Same with WW1, get off your fucking high horse. Pussies didn't do shit until you got attacked in 1942. Name one conflict you fags have won since WW2.
2Pac515 2 weeks ago
@2Pac515 1942? What happened in 1942? It was December 7, 1941. And we ain't much pussies if we used the first A-bomb, are we? Then again we used it twice and ended a war with that. WW1 wasn't even our conflict and we didn't get much involved in that war, so that argument is invalid. We have won multiple conflicts in the middle east, we took out Saddam, Bin Laden, helped the Afghan's keep the Soviets out etc. You sound like a drunk moron so I suggest you let us intelligent people argue.
haliplusnancy 2 weeks ago
@haliplusnancy That's complete bullshit and you know it. I'm not sure if you are trolling or just plain stupid... I'm not denying the efforts the US put into the war, they were extremely important. But if it wasn't for the support of the British Fleet or the British special-ops (yes, they DID exist during WWII, contrary to what most people think) that took out key targets in the days before the invasion... D-Day would've never been successfull. It was a "group effort", one could say.
Fciamponi 2 weeks ago
@Fciamponi The U.S did everything it could to help the Brits before we joined the European war, without our support the Brits would have succumbed to Hitler's bombing. They knew we were going to join the war, they just had to hold back the Germans until our congress approved of us joining. Better yet, would D-day have been possible without the Americans? No. We supplied you with weapons, ammo and men. What else did you want? We don't take credit for a war we weren't even supposed to fight.
haliplusnancy 2 weeks ago
How come the most rated comments in a football/blow-up doll video are about the history of radar and the Afghanistan war?
VicenteGrubsic 1 month ago
@KingDcome11 the difference is we can raise our debt cieling and mass produce the dollar. somthing other nations cant do. the euro will be gone soon so everyone needs the dollar.
zanev 1 month ago
@zanev yes, keep dreaming lol. if what you are saying is possible I wonder why the u.s hasn't paid china
KingDcome11 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
El futbol (Me refiero a este ya que este es el verdadero) es tan bueno, por las pocas anotaciones y la verdadera emoción al ver la pelota golpear el fondo de la red los Estadounidenses son tan estúpidos que no pueden concentrarse en un deporte que no tenga 2 anotaciones por minuto y descansos a cada 10 minutos para poder seguir comiendo hamburguesas con coca cola
vache95nd 1 month ago
Thats how footbal should be embraced. :D
etetepete 1 month ago
@KingDcome11 Clearly you are a retard that doesnt know anything about football....we wear padding cuz there is actually tackling and physical contact, something your "real men" sport doesnt do.... We wear tight padding so its harder for an opponent to grab loose cloth... I eould rather wear tight pants and actually hit ppl than prance atound in short shorts like the true footfairys soccer players are
NoFlowButStillaBro 1 month ago
@NoFlowButStillaBro football player's shorts are actually not that short anymore.... they are normal...unless you consider normal shorts gay than you must be gay yourself since you must wear regular shorts as well. You wear helmets and all the padding because you guys are pussies. you look so gay with those tight pants and bending over alll the time. Not to mention the grabbing eachother from behind , touching eachother's asses etc etc. what a faggot sport.
KingDcome11 1 month ago
@KingDcome11 that comeback was straight up retarded...we wear helmets and padding so we are pussies? the only physical contact your sport has is slidetackling...we have blocking,rip and hammer,tackling, ect....before pointing out all the shit in football and calling it gay cuz u dont have any actual real dirt on american football, take a look at ur gay fucking sport, half of it is ur "real men" crying and rolling on the field after being tapped by an opponent...bitch
NoFlowButStillaBro 1 month ago
@NoFlowButStillaBro I call football gay because the padding , tight uniforms , bending over, grabbing men for behind all the time. Having a sausage fest all the time. Grabbing dicks and asses if possible to stop a player. If you don't think that's gay it might be cause it suits your tendencies.
KingDcome11 1 month ago
@KingDcome11 having a sausage fest.. we have cheerleaders...and you must be gay cuz ur goalie gets into a stance similar to a 2 point...Padding? you wear shinguards...when do we ever grab men from behind? thats a penalty...and i have never seen a player grab a dick or asss? ur just making up shit cuz u dont have any dirt... ur a pussy i guess thats why soccer fits your tendancies...bitch
NoFlowButStillaBro 1 month ago
@NoFlowButStillaBro cheerleaders are for people who get bored watching that gay FATball. we wear shinguards but not all over our body you fuckface. You grab men form behind when you are trying to catch the you grab them form their ass if possible even their underwear sometimes. Bending over like fags while other people "watch your back". what a sausage fest!
KingDcome11 4 weeks ago
@KingDcome11 You just dont like cheerleaders because of your sexual orientation...you pussies dont even need shinguards...you and all your footfairies never hit or tackle...all you guys can do is act after being tapped by another player...please,you dont even have a valid argument, your making things up..so uhh...u mad bro?
NoFlowButStillaBro 4 weeks ago 2
@NoFlowButStillaBro Your cheerleaders suffer injuries in order to ''cheer'' for their american football team. Get your priorities straight.
Don't compare american football with world football, compare it with rugby. Nice try, have another go.
iLuckyyy 3 weeks ago
@iLuckyyy yeah our cheerleaders suffer many injuries from waving pom poms and having huge tits...football players suffer no injuries from tackling or blocking...clearly your retarded....have another go
NoFlowButStillaBro 3 weeks ago
@NoFlowButStillaBro American football players have padding to cushion such blows. Cheerleaders have no padding when they hit the floor after attempting a move in the air. "waving pom poms"; i see you are well informed about cheerleading moves. Nice try, use google next time.
iLuckyyy 3 weeks ago
@iLuckyyy if cheerleaders were hurt in a game paramedics would go to the sideline...do u ever see that happen? dont make a dumfuck comment next time
NoFlowButStillaBro 3 weeks ago
@NoFlowButStillaBro I'm sure the tv network wants to show injured cheerleaders to the viewers - omg it's not on tv, therefore it doesn't exist - carry on with that logic, it'll do you good.
iLuckyyy 3 weeks ago
ITS CALLED FOOTBALL NOT SOCCER FFS! In american football you use your hands, so why do you call it Football?
TheZeNHome 1 month ago
They´re americans! I´m sure the republicans do that in their preliminaries all the time...
YeeSoest 1 month ago
what is soccer...?
Mintberrycrunchhhh 1 month ago
or american football for that matter
wadwad22 1 month ago
Dude, no one wants to play rugby.
wadwad22 1 month ago
the names isn't soccer is FOOTBALL, the real football!!!!!!!!
lennonvivecarajo 1 month ago
the only skilled one in football(american) are the quarterbacks the running backs the wild receiver the tigh ends and the specialists, while the off and def lines( most of the team) are just a bunch of overweigh guys trying to knock each other down
tuija321 1 month ago
gee, she gets around the shop, dosent she.
MrJulz26 1 month ago
GOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLL
arangolg 1 month ago
soccer >FATBALL
KingDcome11 1 month ago
@KingDcome11 hahaha really bro? Also its football not soccer, 6 billion ppl calls it football you ignorant mother fuckers should accept that.
MrErsin92 1 month ago
@MrErsin92 I don't think you understand that this comment is directed to dumb american's who think american football is better than football.
Soccer > FATball. ( american football where they are all fat)
KingDcome11 1 month ago
@KingDcome11
And I don't think you understand how we don't give two shits about your POS game. Kudos to the crowd for being creative in amusing themselves during such boring ass game.
American football> CRYball (soccer where grown men cry like little bitches)
richard1972r 1 month ago
@richard1972r I know dumb american's don't care about football but what you gonna do about it? it's not surprise to sat that the most watched event last year was a football match and not a gayass Fatmerican football match. American Fatball = the only sport for pussies who are all padded out and pretend to be hardasses, the only sport where you are subbed after 5 minutes. No wonder your mom and your wife will be so fat. FATball = shit
KingDcome11 1 month ago
@KingDcome11
And I know that while we don't care if you like our games or not, euro fags get so horribly butthurt about the fact that we don't give a shit about your POS cryball game, but what are you gonna do about it? A fan of cryball, where grown men fall down and cry like little cunts, is calling us pussies. LMAO! Hey pot, let me introduce you to kettle, then talk about the color black, faggot. No wonder your brother and dad will be FAGGOTS. CRYball=shit.
richard1972r 1 month ago
@richard1972r I'm sorry but you are not well informed .... FOTTBALL unlike FATBALL (american hand ball) is not only watched in Europe bu all over the world. It's the most watched and played sport in the world...so it's not only Europe but everywhere in the world. While you wear your tight uniforms all padded out makes you look like a fucking faggot. It's really gay to bend down for other players...but I guess it comes naturally for FATball players since they like it up the ass.lol
KingDcome11 1 month ago