"It's the commandes job to train equip and lead the men"
The person who trains them is not necessarily the same person who leads them in battle.
Some people actually work with training people, rather then leading them in battle.
Besides, the US commander wanted these troops to be well equipped, it was chiang kai shek who wanted to save the US lend lease equipment for later use against Communist china.
jimmyn89 Battle of Guilin-Liuzhou,USA involved Operation Ichi-Go,Not a battle. Battle of Yunnan-Burma Road,USA involved Winter Offensive,Not a battle Like i wrote China lost 2 battles in WW2 Britain caused more casualties in Hong Kong than USA did at Midway. Youve got those statistics from wikipedia which is usulaly wrong. It says: Hong Kong 2240 casualties And Midway 3500 casualties. Although close theyre wrong. Britain destroyed more at Hong kong than USA did at Midway.
"Britain destroyed more at Hong kong than USA did at Midway. "
Japan lost 4 out of 6 carriers (they had more but only light carriers) aswell as a large number of their trained aircrews.
The American casualties may not have been very light either, but atleast the U.S could replace what they had lost.
But on the other hand, some japanese commanders knew their chance of winning a war against the United States was small, even before they attacked Pearl Harbor.
And the attack on pearl harbor was not the success it could have been, sure they sank a lot of ships (many of them were raised later on) but the main goal of the attack was to sink the american carriers, but they were not there at the time.
and there was also several other important targets which the japanese ignored, the fuel reserves for example.
After Midway the situation was even worse for Japan, sure they were still a long way from defeat, but their chance of winning the war was gone.
The thing was that the US carreirs hid like cowards in the Ocean.
Battle of the Coral Sea USA was whooped again.
The problem was the Chinese were giving Japan a thrahing. As ive pointed out China lost 2 battles in word war 2 destroyed more ofthe japanese miltray than anyone else and drained their resources.
Without China USA would of been destroyed as Japan could of built more ships.
"USA would of been destroyed as Japan could of built more ships."
Japan still wouldn't be able to match the U.S industrial strenght, the war would have lasted longer, the US casualties would have been higher but eventually Japan would have lost.
US industry trumped anything the Axis had, they could and did produce more war material than Germany, Italy, and Japan combined.
And the reason Germany never invaded Britain is due in large part to the brave defense by RAF pilots, and to the fact that Hitler said, "Screw it, Russia has more resources, and they aren't expecting it, let's hit them. Britain will be there later for the taking."
Then the US entered the war and muffed up Hitler's plans.
What? Sorry, but what did you say in that first sentence?
I'm not sure of the number of tanks produced by Russia, and planes produced by Britain; but I do know that the US produced 86,000 tanks and 300,000 aircraft during the war.
And actually Russia's offensive didn't get underway until early 1943 (Almost a year and a half after the US entered the war).
The seige of Stalingrad didn't end until Feb. 2nd 1943; Rostov was recaptured (for the second time) on Feb. 14th, 1943.
Yes I knew that, but your first sentence was all mixed up. The US was in a depression until WWII. The jobs provided by the war brough the US out of the depression and made us into a world superpower by the end of the war.
As for Army/Airforce/Navy size, I am assuming you are talking about pre-war.
Russia has ALWAYS had a crapload of tanks, they still do to this day.
Stalingrad wasn't won until they surrendered, and still, it was long AFTER the US entered the war, unlike what you said.
Also your calling me uneducated? Which one of us stated that Russia won at Rostov, Ukrain, Moscow, and Stalingrad BEFORE the US entered the war??? Last I checked the end of 1941 comes before the beginning of 1943.
And if "the USSR had surrounded the nazis asking them to surrender months before Febuary." counts as the date it fell, then the US beat Japan before Russia ever set one foot into Manchuria.
Now I'm not saying we did, but it could be said that way according to your logic.
Battles are not one when one side has an advantage. Take Bastogne, had the Germans won once they surrounded the city? No, Patton relieved the city. Did that happen to Stalingrad? No, but it could have. A city is not conquered until it's defender's surrender.
The US was busy exacting some revenge on the Japanese during most of 1942, then they landed troops in North Africa as you said.
I know USSR was in Manchuria, obviously if they kicked the Japanese out of there. It was an example.
It took the Russians several months to take it didn't it? Sounds like quite a good foothold to me. And yes, if some army took control of New York and we took it all back except for the Empire State building, the city still wouldn't be freed until every enemy still holding that building was either killed or captured.
And how am I a joke? In my experience, when people start insulting their opponent during a debate, it usually means they are the one losing...
IT'S STILL A FOOTHOLD!!! I wasn't saying anything about once the Soviets won Stalingrad, yes, the Germans took horrific casualties. But had they taken all of those 4 months before the city fell???
If your quoting me with actual quotation marks, you should really make sure I said that.
A city is taken when all organized resistance has ended. If there were still German troops defending the Reichstag building a month after the rest of the city had been taken would the battle have been over?
That is how the military counts it. And not just the US military. A city/island/country/ect. is not conquered until all organized military resistance has ended. There could be a few snipers still laying low, or a small degree of civilian resistance.
It's not a hostage situation in war, but yes, if the last defenders of a city are holed up in one building, the battle isn't over until they surrender or are killed.
It didn't happen to the Germans, but as long as there is still that resistance there is always the possibility of of them communicating to headquarters for reinforcements. Which could have easily happened at Stalingrad. A few months is plenty of time to send another army to relieve them.
My point was that history didn't record it as falling until early 1943, and Russia wasn't sprinting towards Germany while Stalingrad held on.
So actually, that "one little airfield" prolonged the life of Nazi Germany for several months. Which is why history says it didn't fall until Feb. 2nd 1943, which is the date the German defenders surrendered. Hence that being the date that the city fell.
I'm tired of this, since it is apparent that neither of us will relinquish our positions, I'm going to quit wasting my precious time.
You can't reason with a brick wall. I still think your disrespectfull to anyone in the uniform. I never once even hinted at calling any troops cowards, be they Nazis or British. They are still soldiers fighting for their cause, and I refuse to call them cowards. My Dad is right, 9/10 people are idiots, and as long as I'm not one of the nine, it's all good.
Just mark cowards thumbs down and spam. He is like an STD. Never address him. Just ignore him and mark him spam. He isn't interested in anything truthful.
His life is literally a wasteland. All he has to do is troll online. He will pick a fight with anyone over anything saying the dumbest things he can imagine.
Give him nothing back. Mark him thumbs down and spam. Never interact with him.
"yes US airforce failed meaning chinese ground forces failed"
The chinese forces was probably equaly responsible for the defeat, after all air superiority or even air supremacy does not guarantee victory.
"Yes American commander that failed to gain victory even with superior numbers."
The commander could be one of the reasons for the defeat, but it was hardly the only reason, and superior numbers doesn't guarantee victory either, just look at the Finnish winter war and continuation war.
It depends, people have different opinions of when WW2 actually started, some say 1931 when Japan invaded Manchuria, others say 1937 when the second sino-japanese war started, other ssay 1939 when Germany invaded Poland.
jimmyn89, Fair comment i ment in our WW2 China only lost 2 battles. Vietnam did control the skys over Vietnam. Vietnam had the superior Mig 15,17,19 and 21 example Opertaion line backer: USA lost 144 aircraft Vietnam lost 54 aircraft "Operation Rolling Thunder" The part named "largest shooting gallery on earth" is what youre looking for. Youre from Sweden so wouldnt know. But believe me its down to the commander if they lost the battle. The commander trains and equpis them.
The US had the F-4 Phantom II nicknamed "MiG killer" and "World's Leading Distributor of MiG Parts"
"The commander trains and equpis them."
The commander leads a unit in battle, usually the soldiers are equipped and trained well before they are thrown into battle, but if this was not the case then i certainly understand why they lost.
And the outcome of a battle is determined by many things, the commander is only one of these things.
did u know when Britain was leaving Malta they people where crying to see the British leave would they have done that if Britain treated them like you do in iraq? Gibraltar
is mainly spanish people BUT they concistentely vote to stay under British than spanish rule when the British took over cyprus people walked for days to go n welcome the British
tell me ONE JUST one case the people welcomed america?
look at Britain's society one of the best in the world even am not native born British am proud to be British i love Britain i respect the people and am proud my father and one uncle where in the British army in el alamain is only British n Russian armies the germans feared the most as for the german navy most times it never left the norwegian fjods to face the Royal navy! every time they faced the R navy they paid a high price Britain/russia saved the world from facist germany FACT
Do you Americans ever question anything that those in power tell you? No wonder you all believe you're doing nothing but good in the world; you believe everything that you hear. Fucking lemmings.
War of 1812? Americans attacking Britain? That is about the funniest thing I have ever heard in my life.
Seriously, where did you hear that USArCowards? Any Norwegian infant could tell that, technically, Britain attacked the Americans first that started the War of 1812.
Right now, I am giving you a benefit of a doubt that you might actually been making jokes all along. Seriously, I fell out of my chair laughing at the comment. "USA attacked Britain" indeed...
...and no freedom. The US freed Europe from the Nazis in WWII, The entire Middle East would become Islamic. Japan would've taken over all of Asia in WWII. Try to say the world would be better without America.
wait wait wait! you said the entire middle east would become islamic? if they like the islamic religon then they can practice it, and america was one of the causes of the second world war, the stock market crash of 1929 caused a worldwide depression which was one of the things that drove hitler to power.
and remember the canadians and australians helped win the war and free europe as well as the USA.
Yeah the russians freed the eastern half and then put it under a dictatorship, far worse then the germans had. While America freed the sounthern and western parts.
As for China, russia and the brits in the pacific, the brits didn't fight in the pacific theater and neither did the russians (they almost did but japan surrendered before the could get involved.) The chinese had major help from the U.S and was not involved in any major sea battles and was not involved in a lot of island hopping.
Russia didn't fight the japanese, China was raped by the japanese (hence the rape of Nanjing) and please enlightem me, where did the brits fight the japanese?
Its called the Pacific Theatre because thats just what its called, kind of like how people call the war in europe the european theatre. Most educated people who have studied the World Wars would know this (clearly you're not one of them)
You are one of the dumbest people i have ever met. Dude the Japanase were slaughtering the chinese. The Rape of Nanjing, the battle fo hong kong (which i will point out was owned by the british) and many other battles was where the japanese not only beat the chinese but in their own country
AndRod29 All of those battles happened before WW2 China didnt lose a single battle in WW2 You in USA are taught false history to protect your innocence because USA was cowardly during WW2 1939: Battle of Suixian-Zaoyang. China beat Japan Battle of Changsha. China beat Japan 1940: Battle of South Henan. China beat Japan Hundred Regiments Offensive. China beat Japan 1941: Battle of Shanggao. china beat japan The list is endless Without China you and USA would be speaking Japanese
All of those battles you list are from the second sino-japanese war. USA was about as cowardly as the briish were in ww2 (sacarasm)
And if China didn't lose a single battle in ww2 then how come the complete eastern side of china had been taken over and wasn't fixed until America stepped in?
USArCOWARDS, you cannot accuse someone of stupidity when 1) you claim the Soviets killed over a million men in Manchuria, when you didn't bother to actually look at the casualty list. The Soviets certainly did NOT kill a million Japanese in Operation August Storm.
Look DOWN the Wikipedia article you obviously tried to cite.
2. You claimed the English helped win a battle they were not even present.
3. You gave victory to the Assies for a battle they had ONE SHIP.
We are talking about the 20th century - even in the 13th century, the Mongolians had trouble invading Japan. Before the Japanese Imperial Navy was critically injured and destroyed, the Japanese empire as well as its homeland would have been well-supplied and defended.
I was VITAL to Japan's defeat that its navy was demolished.
Earlier, you claimed the USSR had caused a million casualties, and you pulled the numbers for the total Japanese forces instead of the REAL casualty figure.
Did you seriously just call the Japanese navy "pathetic"?
Seriously. Is that you just said? Is that your "academic" analsis? Because no serious student of this conflict can give his review of the Japanese navy as being "pathetic."
Then, you followed it up with "Japans navy being destroyed was not vital to the beating of the Japanese at all."
IT IS AN ISLAND. It is like the UK, whose naval was vital in the North Atlantic.
Quit it. Stop talking crap. This does no service for you.
You just said "Britain's Navy isn't vital." Let me repeat this: YOU JUST SAID BRITAIN'S NAVY ISN'T VITAL. THE BRITISH! As in the island nation that would have starved to death no navy. The island that would starve to death NOW with no navy, and without imports. The same British Empire that has heroes such as Admiral Nelson, who epitomizes the strength of England in its iron-strong naval power.
Because what the germmans tried to do is gain control of the air before they gained control of the sea dumbass.ANyone who has ever been in the military or studided wars would know that if you contorl the air you can control the battle.
USArCOWARDS, There are certain facts about the war that are well-understood. It is the stuff you learn in 101 history courses. For students of the war, you do not argue about them, because they are well-known. There are jut a given and part of the history.
One of these, is that Japan's empire was vitally involved with its survival.
You CANNOT make your statements in any serious discussion of this conflict without making a complete horse's ass out of yourself.
What battles listed? You listed SEVERAL battles that came after 1940 - what in the heck are you talking about? Trying to avoid the fact that you made crappy research?
That being said, again, the main focus of the US was defeating its navy and the Pacific fortifications. That being said, there are several large battles, such as the Battle of Chang-te, that were certainly important.
I wouldn't take away the importance of the Chinese, British, and Indians in fighting the Japanese.
Enough with your bullshit on "cowardly actions." You are some twenty-four year old punk kid that has never seen combat in his life and wouldn't even have the HONOR to be in the same presence of a World War 2 veteran, let alone an American war veteran.
ANYONE that has been in combat has more balls then you do - you are just a wanna-be armchair mediocre historian.
Only an absolute fool that has demonstrate severely lacking knowledge of World War Two would attempt to make your arguments.
Ohhhh...now it comes out. THIS is why 1) USArCOWARDS hates the US, and 2) is obviously devoid of real history: HE IS CHINESE. He is a product of anti-American history that has taught him some strange Communist version of history.
Of course Chinese lost battles - that is how the Japanese expanded INTO China.
The US, BTW, aided China against Japan.
The Russians had a cease-fire with Japan after 1939, until 1945.
The Pacific has islands - that is why they were called ISLAND hoping campaigns.
It isn't historical "fact": The stuff you've purveyed would be laughed out of academia if you went onto campus and tried to make these discussions.
Of course, combined, all those nations killed more Japanese. But it August Storm, Japanese sources cite 21,000 dead; that is less then the US inflicted by US forces.
I bet you do not even know the number of casualties inflicted by the British.
The Chinese were poorly coordinated: You have Commie and Nationalist forces fighting separately.
World War II, in the war between China and Japan, was considered the Second Sino-Japanese war. And the Chinese most certainly lost battles during this conflict. Which is why, by 1940, the Chinese air force was wiped out, and millions of Chinese died in aerial bombardments.
Cities such as Nanking paid the price, with hundreds of thousands dead.
The Chinese were poorly equipped and had low technology, which is why they had large casualties.
This was a longer conflict that bled over into WW2.
It isn't a fact - you have proved nothing to demonstrate this fact. It as factually as your asinine claims that the British won Leyte Gulf, which you claim with zero documentation.
The US fields one of the biggest forces ever, and your insight is to claim the US "ran away like cowards," in a stupendously absurd statement. I know you have not read a single bit of REAL FACT about this battle.
I NAMED CHINESE BATTLES LOST DURING WW2. Look it up for yourself.
Look at the absurdity of this point: You are somehow trying to give more credit to the Russians because they came in the last week-and-a-half war and capture surrendering Japanese, while the US destroyed its navy, took out its Pacific occupations, bombed and interdicted its production capacity, and ultimately demoralized the populace with conventional and atomic bombings.
And yet, because the Russians capture a bunch of POWs, they were more vitally involved.
How are you giving "facts"? You are saying over and over again the same claims none of which you will find in ANY history book.
The Japanese didn't surrender because of Russia - that is silly. That is to act like the years of fighting against the Americans, Chinese, British and Indians didn't happen.
Why are you taking away from the efforts of the Chinese, who had more to do with Japan surrendering the the USSR, and giving it to the Russians?
British empire destroyed more of the Japanese military at the battle of hong kong than USA did at midway.
If you bothered to look things up instead of talking rubbish you will realise we saved the USA.
Youve just proved you havent read anything.
If you had read you will find out the reason japan surrendered was because the experienced USSr army went through Japns main force like a hot knife through butter
And yet the british still lost Hong Kong. please enlighten me, how does this work?
And if you would actually read hat historians have written you should realise that the US saved Britians ass.
Yeah Japan surrendered because of the fact that they didn't want to be hit with any more nukes and the russian army. I'll give the russians credit for that but you have to consider america's part as well.
The Japanese military on the mainland never would have been there without its navy. It had to be supplied by the navy - the wartime productivity was reliant upon resources found in other parts of various parts of its empire.
This is the reason why commanders such as Isoroku Yamamoto, Fleet Admiral, were so important to the cause, including initiating war against the US?
Ok. I think we are probably done. You are obviously a troll; this is not a historical discussion.
With the suggestion that you can "swim" from Japan to China, you have reached the final height of your silliness. The idea that the Japanese would swim to China.
wait, so you just said he can, swim from Japan to china and that man people have done it. Besides that making no snese at all what you're saying is the japanese could've invaded by swimming?
Right and how did the british get the funds and supplies that were needed to defend themselves? Oh, thats right, The USA gave the british those supplies! Before the United States had even entered the war, the british had been driven out of Europe and were getting their butts kicked by Rommel in N. Africa.
Yes riddle me this. How did the British own the US when they borrowed billions of dollars from us to repair their country and that the US emerged the major economic power of the world?
Yeah the british weren't getting kicked in Africa, they were getting owned, for christ's sake man the British were riven back to Alexandria before the US stepped in and Eisenhower pushed Rommel back.
Right the British ddin't borrow billions, they were given billions witht the intention of them paying later!
AndRod29, Youre taught false history in the USA! Britain won in East and West Africa and were winning in the North. Second Battle of El Alamein Britain pushes rommel back before USA even joined WW2 USA got owned in North africa while Britian and allies just won. If you read history you would know. USA loses at Djebel Abiod USA lose at Terbourba and Djedeida USA lose at Medjez el Bab USA lose at Tebourba USA lose at Faïd pass USA lose at Sidi Bou Zid USa lose at Kasserine Pass
your telling me that the US got owned in N.Africa, yeah i'm sure we lost a few battles but it nothing compared to what happneed to the biritish. The british couldn't have possibly been winning because Rommel had pushed them back to Alexandria (after the 2nd battle of Alamein)
yes and why didn't the biritish buld an a bomb until the 50's? By your logic the british should've had the bomb first not the US. And the US didn't need the bomb to end the war, we just used it becuase we ddin't want the russians occupying Japan.
A navy is just a little necessary if you want to get troops across the ocean. But by your strategy, all people need to do is have their armies swim across the ocean to invade China
Even though after Hong Kong the Japanese were still going strong and conquering all sorts of territory and after Midway the japanese weren't able to manuever as well because the USA crippled their fleat.
The US did save britiain. If we hadn' sent you supplies and food, you would've been starved out of their.
The US didn't need th a bombs to end the war, it was just a way to hurry the process up
USA was gettiing trahsed by the Japansese. doesn't seem that way to me. Seeing as how the united states took all of the islands previuosly held by the japanese.
British didn't help at the Phillipines buddy. That was the McCarthur and his marines who liberated the phillipines.
And you got the roles reversed here. See the british were gtting pushed back by Rommel in N.Africa (and has already been driven out of W Africa) Until the US stepped in.
Yes there was that surrender. But on the second retuurn we thrashed the Japanese.
You have proven ten tims over how stupid you are. You go aorund sayng "Naval battles aren't important" and 'the british won N.Africa with no US' seriously dude you're just so fucking retarded its not even funny.
jimmyn89 Battle of Guilin-Liuzhou<USA involved Operation Ichi-Go<Not a battle. Battle of Yunnan-Burma Road<USA involved Winter Offensive<Not a battle Like i wrote China lost 2 battles in WW2 Britain caused more casualties in Hong Kong than USA did at Midway. Youve got those statistics from wikipedia which is usulaly wrong. It says: Hong Kong 2240 casualties And Midway 3500 casualties. Although close theyre wrong. Britain destroyed more at Hong kong than USA did at Midway.
jimmyn89 Battle of Guilin-Liuzhou<USA involved Operation Ichi-Go<Not a battle. Battle of Yunnan-Burma Road<USA involved Winter Offensive<Not a battle Like i wrote China lost 2 battles in WW2 Britain caused more casualties in Hong Kong than USA did at Midway. Youve got those statistics from wikipedia which is usulaly wrong. It says: Hong Kong 2240 casualties And Midway 3500 casualties. Although close theyre wrong. Britain destroyed more at Hong kong than USA did at Midway.
so by your logic you're sending the soldiers in little rowboats! Yeah real smart, watch your troops get decimated by battleships and destroyers! You need the navy to transport and protect the soldiers dumbshit.
Righ the brits were getting bombed but once the war was over (1945) and according to you the biritsh were at the top of their game, then how come they couldn't build one before the soviets did? (Who were even worse off then the british)
why don't you tell that to the irish. I bet they'd have something different to say about that.
You betray your ignorance by trying to say a navy is usleless. you are probably one of the most illogical thinkers i have ever met.
Besides if you have aircraft carriers near the coast, there is a strategic advantage to the fact that you planes don't have to waste fuel flying over the ocean.
Oh and lets see the russians built an A-bbomb after WW2 so why not the British!
I never said that the battle of britiain needed a navy for the planes. What you're trying to say is that a navy is not important which you are dead wrong on.
The US didn't need the bomb to end the war dumass. The only reason truman authorized its use was to end the war quickly because
1. We didn't want to waste lives invading Japan
2. We didn't want the soviets to be an occupier in Japan
Dude, the a-bomb ended the war. After the Japanese emporer saw the destruction it caused he said that wnough was enough. If we didn't have the A-bomb we would have invaded.
Besides the causualties would've been horrendous on both sides, since the japanese took the term "fight to the death" a little too seriously. Using the A-bomb was smart in the fact that it saved american lives not because it was cowardly.
SO what you are effectivley saying is that the japanese should've swam across the ocean to invade japan. WOW, that could be the dumbest thing i've ever heard.
Why are you bringing in radar? I have brough anything up about that.
And once agian you offer no facts for your claims (for the 16th time)
USA kicked taliban out of Afghanstan and now NATO can't manage them, we won with the stated objective of korea, vietnam we made peace before pulling out, and cuba-no US troops
Yeah and what do you suggest the japanese do swim? Your calling me reatrded when your saying the navy isn't important, and taking a DISNEY movie as fact. Hate to break it to ya, but Mickey Mouse and Snow White aren't real. Now back under the bridg you go you little troll.
except most of the wars that you claim we have "lost" we didn't. We were pushed back to the 38th parallel and that was only because the chinese had a superior amount of numbers then we did. (wave after wave)
I'm willing to dmit thta the US has lost a war, we lost vietnam (the peace was pretty much a sham) but i won't admit that we have never won a war because we have won many wars. (more then we've lost anyway)
BUT it was the Royal airforce the R. navy Monty n the red army that beat facist germany is right did u ever win a war against another army with equal manpower/equipment? NEVER we are not talking about women n children in iraq/agfanistan u entered the WW2 to save u r ass after the japs attacked you NOT for any other reason look at the British sector in iraq n the mess in the american sector am not saying you are not cowards BUT the British amry is a real army they don't murder women n children
I wouldn't really count the wars against britain seeing as their military was much larger then ours (and they still lost) but itthey don't fit your criteria.
And why are you brigning the RAF into this? I've already said before that they did a heeluva job in WW2. (it was also the US that helped end the world wars but we had allies so agian it doesn't fit your criteria)
Nort Korea attacked South Korea first. And who pushed the North back? US troops. The reason why we pulled back from the chinese is because We didn't want full scale war with the chinese.
As for Vietnam your facts are wrong, we were only in there ten years, not fifteen.
Can't win a war? We beat the british twice, the spanish once, rocked the germans, destoryed some iraqis (desert storm) and have been policing s.america for years
PAID THE SPANISH! Dude we won every battle that we fought the spanish in! Fuck man,i've never met anyone so stupid in my life!
As for the war of 1812, no territorial gains were made on either side. And as for the revolution true, we had the help from the french, but all they really supplied us with, was with a fleet, america did a majorty of the land battles, but hey as you say, "a navy isn't important"
China was not prepared for war, and had little armor and mechanized units: They did have a lot of people.
Also, the Chinese certainly lost battles, such as the Battle of South Shanxi, Operation Ichi-Go, during the actual period of WW2, but most Japanese victories came during early and mid-30's, before the Chinese could really mobilize and secure aid from other nations.
The Chinese did, though, give a good accounting of themselves, in spite of some of the disadvantages they often faced.
ROFL. First, you claim the Chinese never lost a battle. And then, when you find out they did, you blame it on the US Air support???
The Chinese were outnumbered, and US air forces were still able to disrupt the Japanese. How in the world can you blame the loss on the US AIRFORCE?
That is so laughable: Oh, so NOW you admit the Chinese lost a battle? BTW, the Second Sino-Japanese war was one LONG war: it does not matter if the battles happened before or during WW2.
The Second Sin-Japanese war was LONG then WW2. It wasn't as if they quit fighting and said, "Ok, now World War 2" is starting! It was one long conflict that overlapped with WW2.
It does not matter if I can or not, you made the claim, more then once, that China NEVER lost a battle during World War 2. And you were wrong.
I NEVER said China never did anything. From the start, I said they were major contributers to the conflict.
USArCOWARDS, you tried making your factually flawed comments in the other video.
Anyone that knows anything about Pacific war combat knows that the US naval took on and defeated the Japanese.
Now, the Chinese and British tied up land forces and made the Japanese use a lot of resources, but no other naval fleet could have defeated the Japanese. With no navy, the island empire of Japanese were in trouble and could not win the conflict.
Have you ever looked at a map, USArCOWARDS? Are you unaware of geography that you do not that ISLANDS occupu the Pacific? Heck, the state of Hawaii is in the Pacific.
That is why the Island hoping campaigns took place: The Japanese were using various islands as strong points, air, and supply bases.
The fact that you are trying to argue that the "Pacific" is an ocean, when the main battles of the Pacific conflict took place between NAVAL battles, IN WATER, is a bit silly.
Look at the invasion of Okinawa, which involved a half-million allied troops (mostly American) and a hundred thousand Japanese troops.
The Japanese lost over sixty-thousand troops here along. This isn't some small tiny island battle - this is a major battle, even by land campaign size.
The Pacific battles were filled with all sorts of nasty, ugly battles, with bravery shown by both Axis and Allied forces.
You should be ashamed of yourself for the totally baseless accusations of cowardice.
PROVE that the "USA would of been completely wiped out." Name the ships involved in these battles; demonstrate the number of British ships. Show some REAL information to show that you aren't just spewing more disinformation.
How about this: I will do it for you.
At the most, the British fleet in the Pacific numbered between 50-60 ships. Most of the ships were used to support actions around Sumatra and raids, support of the Okinawa invasion, and various raids.
Neither the Russians nor Chinese had a respectable fleet in the Pacific. One purpose of the Japanese Imperial Fleet was to guards the Japanese merchant fleet that brought raw materials, such as oil and rubber, that fueled the Imperial War Machine.
Like the UK, the navy was VERY important to Japan: It's an island nation.
The US WAS in mainland China - obviously you don't know squat about units such as the Flying Tigers, and the supplies that the US supplied (to mostly the nationalists Chinese).
The first powered flying machine that was successful was invented by a german in 1901 and he fly it for ages and far(500 miles) but he didnt patent it and it was only discovered in his books in the 50s
Yes many great things like South Park, Star Trek, Rock and Roll, Jazz, rap music, mass production, GPS, computers, great movies and actors and hopefully less ignorance about the not so great things like the education, political system, the environment, sustainability, rigid viewpoints, the economy and the ability to deal with critisism.
the world would be dead without america, america invented electricity, and the web, and the tv, and video games!!! so stfu! what else is there so much things... the fridge! washing machine, baseball, basketball, light bulb, the telephone, america rulez
Yes new swamp land for nuclear waste, testing and dumping our general waste. Well now we don't have to worry about deforestation.
Lordangers 11 months ago
jimmyn89
You say the F-4 Phantom II was nick named the MIG killer. But that doesnt change the facts that the MIGS were thrashing the USA airforce.
You'll find the MIGS were shooting down 3 for everyone of theirs.
US pilots had losttheir dog fighting skills.
Thats why USA started "Top Gun"
It's the commandes job to train equip and lead the men
The commander has all the cards he can choose to fight or not.
If he chooses to fight and loses its his fault if he wins its his glory.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
"It's the commandes job to train equip and lead the men"
The person who trains them is not necessarily the same person who leads them in battle.
Some people actually work with training people, rather then leading them in battle.
Besides, the US commander wanted these troops to be well equipped, it was chiang kai shek who wanted to save the US lend lease equipment for later use against Communist china.
jimmyn89 3 years ago
As i said the outcome of battles is determined by many things.
and yes, the commander is one of these, but not the only one.
But of course, the commander was American so it's not suprising that you blame it all on him.
jimmyn89 3 years ago
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
"Battle of Guilin-Liuzhou,USA involved"
Only air forces, the ground troops were chinese
"Battle of Yunnan-Burma Road,USA involved"
The commander was American, but with a chinese Executive Officer, the soldiers were also chinese.
"Operation Ichi-Go,Not a battle"
several battles took place during the operation, Japan won most of them and achieved their goal of the operation.
"Winter Offensive,Not a battle"
also a series of battles, and the chinese failed to accomplish their objectives.
jimmyn89 3 years ago
"Britain destroyed more at Hong kong than USA did at Midway. "
Japan lost 4 out of 6 carriers (they had more but only light carriers) aswell as a large number of their trained aircrews.
The American casualties may not have been very light either, but atleast the U.S could replace what they had lost.
But on the other hand, some japanese commanders knew their chance of winning a war against the United States was small, even before they attacked Pearl Harbor.
jimmyn89 3 years ago
And the attack on pearl harbor was not the success it could have been, sure they sank a lot of ships (many of them were raised later on) but the main goal of the attack was to sink the american carriers, but they were not there at the time.
and there was also several other important targets which the japanese ignored, the fuel reserves for example.
After Midway the situation was even worse for Japan, sure they were still a long way from defeat, but their chance of winning the war was gone.
jimmyn89 3 years ago
jimmyn89,
Thats false the Japanese were well ahead.
After Pearl harbour.
The thing was that the US carreirs hid like cowards in the Ocean.
Battle of the Coral Sea USA was whooped again.
The problem was the Chinese were giving Japan a thrahing. As ive pointed out China lost 2 battles in word war 2 destroyed more ofthe japanese miltray than anyone else and drained their resources.
Without China USA would of been destroyed as Japan could of built more ships.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
"Battle of the Coral Sea USA was whooped again."
The casualties were pretty even in that battle.
"USA would of been destroyed as Japan could of built more ships."
Japan still wouldn't be able to match the U.S industrial strenght, the war would have lasted longer, the US casualties would have been higher but eventually Japan would have lost.
jimmyn89 3 years ago
jimmyn89,
battle of Coral sea. USA lost a Fleet carrier.
Thats a whooping.
the thing is yes Japan could of matched USA's industry.
That was the whole point of taking more land, thats what Japan wanted. The largest industy in the world.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
US industry trumped anything the Axis had, they could and did produce more war material than Germany, Italy, and Japan combined.
And the reason Germany never invaded Britain is due in large part to the brave defense by RAF pilots, and to the fact that Hitler said, "Screw it, Russia has more resources, and they aren't expecting it, let's hit them. Britain will be there later for the taking."
Then the US entered the war and muffed up Hitler's plans.
JJJNProductions 3 years ago
For a 2nd world country like USA not at war during USA that was probably difficult
However Britain was creating more planes that the Nazis during WW2 and The Russians were producing more tanks.
Youre taught false history in USA to protect your innocence from your countrys cowardly actions during WW2.
The USSR had won at rostov,Ukrain,Moscow and stalingrad and had the Nazis restreating before USA joined WW2
While Britain also had tha nazis retreating in Africa
USA=Home of the cowards
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
What? Sorry, but what did you say in that first sentence?
I'm not sure of the number of tanks produced by Russia, and planes produced by Britain; but I do know that the US produced 86,000 tanks and 300,000 aircraft during the war.
And actually Russia's offensive didn't get underway until early 1943 (Almost a year and a half after the US entered the war).
The seige of Stalingrad didn't end until Feb. 2nd 1943; Rostov was recaptured (for the second time) on Feb. 14th, 1943.
JJJNProductions 3 years ago
JJJNProductions at the start of WW2 USA was a 2nd world country.
Didnt you know?
USA's navy was pathetic being only the 5th largest in the world.
The same with the airforce and army.
At the sart of the war Russia had more aircraft than the rest of the world put together. And more tanks than any other.
LMAO you uneducated yank.
Try reading about Stalingrad instead of looking at numbers and pictures.
The USSR had surrounded the nazi's asking them to surrender months before Febuary
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Yes I knew that, but your first sentence was all mixed up. The US was in a depression until WWII. The jobs provided by the war brough the US out of the depression and made us into a world superpower by the end of the war.
As for Army/Airforce/Navy size, I am assuming you are talking about pre-war.
Russia has ALWAYS had a crapload of tanks, they still do to this day.
Stalingrad wasn't won until they surrendered, and still, it was long AFTER the US entered the war, unlike what you said.
JJJNProductions 3 years ago
Also your calling me uneducated? Which one of us stated that Russia won at Rostov, Ukrain, Moscow, and Stalingrad BEFORE the US entered the war??? Last I checked the end of 1941 comes before the beginning of 1943.
And if "the USSR had surrounded the nazis asking them to surrender months before Febuary." counts as the date it fell, then the US beat Japan before Russia ever set one foot into Manchuria.
Now I'm not saying we did, but it could be said that way according to your logic.
JJJNProductions 3 years ago
JJJNProductions
Once surrounded in September 1942 the battle was won.
The Nazis were no longer able to take Stalingrad. USSR had won.
USA wernt fighting even with us until November 1942.
So claiming it was long after US entered is pure rubbish.
LMAO.
And yes i am calling you uneducated.
Where was USA in 1941 exactly?
USA wasnt fighting with us until November 8th1942
USSR was i Manchuria before Japan surrendered spastic
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Battles are not one when one side has an advantage. Take Bastogne, had the Germans won once they surrounded the city? No, Patton relieved the city. Did that happen to Stalingrad? No, but it could have. A city is not conquered until it's defender's surrender.
The US was busy exacting some revenge on the Japanese during most of 1942, then they landed troops in North Africa as you said.
I know USSR was in Manchuria, obviously if they kicked the Japanese out of there. It was an example.
JJJNProductions 3 years ago
JJJNProductions,
The city was conqured.
The Nazis held nothing but a tiny airstrip.
Basically what youre saying is if i took the empire state building in the USA hostage i have taken control of New york!
Youre a joke!
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
It took the Russians several months to take it didn't it? Sounds like quite a good foothold to me. And yes, if some army took control of New York and we took it all back except for the Empire State building, the city still wouldn't be freed until every enemy still holding that building was either killed or captured.
And how am I a joke? In my experience, when people start insulting their opponent during a debate, it usually means they are the one losing...
JJJNProductions 3 years ago
JJJNProductions,
QUITE A FOOTHOLE!
A 5th of the Nazis military was wiped out at Stalingard.
And enough eqquipment to supply one 3rd of the entire Nazi military.
Losing?
Youve just written
"If someone takes over the empire state builing. They have taken over all of New York"
Youre clearly a spastic.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
IT'S STILL A FOOTHOLD!!! I wasn't saying anything about once the Soviets won Stalingrad, yes, the Germans took horrific casualties. But had they taken all of those 4 months before the city fell???
If your quoting me with actual quotation marks, you should really make sure I said that.
A city is taken when all organized resistance has ended. If there were still German troops defending the Reichstag building a month after the rest of the city had been taken would the battle have been over?
JJJNProductions 3 years ago
JJJNProductions yes IMO the battle was over.
I dont count a city as one building because i have a brain.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
That is how the military counts it. And not just the US military. A city/island/country/ect. is not conquered until all organized military resistance has ended. There could be a few snipers still laying low, or a small degree of civilian resistance.
JJJNProductions 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
JJJNProductions No a military doesnt count it like that at all.
A military calls that a hostage situation.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
If they are in a WAR it is not a hostage situation. Yes, if a few random terrorists take over a single building, then it is a hostage situation.
Once again, I said that IF an army had taken over ALL of New York, then we counterattacked and took back ALL of it EXCEPT the Empire State building.
JJJNProductions 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
JJJNProductions yes war can be a hostage situation.
Nazis were surrounded they had no escape.
Russia asked then to surrender.
Exactly.
So once again youre saying holding a single building in a city means the city is still taken.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
It's not a hostage situation in war, but yes, if the last defenders of a city are holed up in one building, the battle isn't over until they surrender or are killed.
It didn't happen to the Germans, but as long as there is still that resistance there is always the possibility of of them communicating to headquarters for reinforcements. Which could have easily happened at Stalingrad. A few months is plenty of time to send another army to relieve them.
JJJNProductions 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
JJJNProductions What?
1/5 of the Nazis entire forces were there. They couldnt send anyone else.
Thats why its know as the turning point of WW2.
And no Nazi comunication could get to headquarters for reinforcements without Russia knowing about it.
So no
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
My point was that history didn't record it as falling until early 1943, and Russia wasn't sprinting towards Germany while Stalingrad held on.
So actually, that "one little airfield" prolonged the life of Nazi Germany for several months. Which is why history says it didn't fall until Feb. 2nd 1943, which is the date the German defenders surrendered. Hence that being the date that the city fell.
JJJNProductions 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
JJJNProductions,
By late 1942 the Nazis had retreated out of stalingard and were being counter attacked by the Soviets.
Operation Satern and Uranas shows the Soviets advanced about 300 miles past Stalingard attacking retreating Nazis.
That little airfield ment the Nazis were stuck and told to fight to the death by Hitler.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
I'm tired of this, since it is apparent that neither of us will relinquish our positions, I'm going to quit wasting my precious time.
You can't reason with a brick wall. I still think your disrespectfull to anyone in the uniform. I never once even hinted at calling any troops cowards, be they Nazis or British. They are still soldiers fighting for their cause, and I refuse to call them cowards. My Dad is right, 9/10 people are idiots, and as long as I'm not one of the nine, it's all good.
JJJNProductions 3 years ago
To put it simply, it ain't over till the fat lady sings...or Nazis surrender, whichever you prefer.
JJJNProductions 3 years ago
Just mark cowards thumbs down and spam. He is like an STD. Never address him. Just ignore him and mark him spam. He isn't interested in anything truthful.
His life is literally a wasteland. All he has to do is troll online. He will pick a fight with anyone over anything saying the dumbest things he can imagine.
Give him nothing back. Mark him thumbs down and spam. Never interact with him.
IlSeFousDeTaGuele 2 years ago
jimmyn89, i dont care how many ships USA sunk.
Britain caused as many casualties.
Battle of Guilin-Liuzhou
yes US airforce failed meaning chinese ground forces failed
Battle of Yunnan-Burma Road
Yes American commander that failed to gain victory even with superior numbers.
Operation Ichi-Go yes Chine lost the battles you have mentioned in this opertaion
Winter Offensive yes China lost battles in this campaign the ones you mentioned.
Once again China lost 2 battles in WW2
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
"yes US airforce failed meaning chinese ground forces failed"
The chinese forces was probably equaly responsible for the defeat, after all air superiority or even air supremacy does not guarantee victory.
"Yes American commander that failed to gain victory even with superior numbers."
The commander could be one of the reasons for the defeat, but it was hardly the only reason, and superior numbers doesn't guarantee victory either, just look at the Finnish winter war and continuation war.
jimmyn89 3 years ago
jimmyn89,
You obvioulsy dont know about battles.
If you control the sky you control the battle field.
Thats why britain never got invade by the Nazis.
The RAF controlled the sky.
The fact is the loss was led by a USA commander. that means the US commander lost the battle.
Thats how it works.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
"If you control the sky you control the battle field."
Who controled the skies over Vietnam?
Who controls the skies over Afghanistan and Iraq?
"Thats why britain never got invade by the Nazis."
No, thats because Operation Sealion was more or less doomed to fail even with air superiority.
"that means the US commander lost the battle."
The US commander AND the chinese executive.
On the other hand the commander only tells the soldiers what to do,but it is up to them to actually do it.
jimmyn89 3 years ago
"Once again China lost 2 battles in WW2 "
It depends, people have different opinions of when WW2 actually started, some say 1931 when Japan invaded Manchuria, others say 1937 when the second sino-japanese war started, other ssay 1939 when Germany invaded Poland.
jimmyn89 3 years ago
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
"Vietnam had the superior Mig 15,17,19 and 21"
The US had the F-4 Phantom II nicknamed "MiG killer" and "World's Leading Distributor of MiG Parts"
"The commander trains and equpis them."
The commander leads a unit in battle, usually the soldiers are equipped and trained well before they are thrown into battle, but if this was not the case then i certainly understand why they lost.
And the outcome of a battle is determined by many things, the commander is only one of these things.
jimmyn89 3 years ago
did u know when Britain was leaving Malta they people where crying to see the British leave would they have done that if Britain treated them like you do in iraq? Gibraltar
is mainly spanish people BUT they concistentely vote to stay under British than spanish rule when the British took over cyprus people walked for days to go n welcome the British
tell me ONE JUST one case the people welcomed america?
polygamous1 3 years ago
look at Britain's society one of the best in the world even am not native born British am proud to be British i love Britain i respect the people and am proud my father and one uncle where in the British army in el alamain is only British n Russian armies the germans feared the most as for the german navy most times it never left the norwegian fjods to face the Royal navy! every time they faced the R navy they paid a high price Britain/russia saved the world from facist germany FACT
polygamous1 3 years ago
Do you Americans ever question anything that those in power tell you? No wonder you all believe you're doing nothing but good in the world; you believe everything that you hear. Fucking lemmings.
MarilynFilth 3 years ago 6
War of 1812? Americans attacking Britain? That is about the funniest thing I have ever heard in my life.
Seriously, where did you hear that USArCowards? Any Norwegian infant could tell that, technically, Britain attacked the Americans first that started the War of 1812.
Right now, I am giving you a benefit of a doubt that you might actually been making jokes all along. Seriously, I fell out of my chair laughing at the comment. "USA attacked Britain" indeed...
onlooker555 3 years ago
the world without usa = PARADISE and no WAR
TurkWingTsun 3 years ago
I AGREE
cameronlorentz 3 years ago
...and no freedom. The US freed Europe from the Nazis in WWII, The entire Middle East would become Islamic. Japan would've taken over all of Asia in WWII. Try to say the world would be better without America.
AmericanCountryPride 3 years ago
wait wait wait! you said the entire middle east would become islamic? if they like the islamic religon then they can practice it, and america was one of the causes of the second world war, the stock market crash of 1929 caused a worldwide depression which was one of the things that drove hitler to power.
and remember the canadians and australians helped win the war and free europe as well as the USA.
conormarch 3 years ago
AmericanCountryPride,
UsA didnt free europe from the nazis!
The russians freed way more!
And itwas China russia and British empire than saved the USA from the japanese.
With us USA would be speaking Japanese.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Yeah the russians freed the eastern half and then put it under a dictatorship, far worse then the germans had. While America freed the sounthern and western parts.
As for China, russia and the brits in the pacific, the brits didn't fight in the pacific theater and neither did the russians (they almost did but japan surrendered before the could get involved.) The chinese had major help from the U.S and was not involved in any major sea battles and was not involved in a lot of island hopping.
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29,
Youre clearly an uneducated fool from the USA.
Youre taught false history in the USA to protect your innocence from your countrys cowardly actions during the war.
China,Russia and British empire all destropyed more of the Japanese army than the USA.
China,Russia and British empire also liberated more land from the Japanese than the USA.
You call it the "pacific theater".
You do realise the pacific is and Ocean?
We were in asia where Japans main army was.
You idiot!
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Russia didn't fight the japanese, China was raped by the japanese (hence the rape of Nanjing) and please enlightem me, where did the brits fight the japanese?
Its called the Pacific Theatre because thats just what its called, kind of like how people call the war in europe the european theatre. Most educated people who have studied the World Wars would know this (clearly you're not one of them)
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29,
USSR was fighting the Japanese before USA was even in WW2.
The Chinese didnt lose a singke battle in our WW2.
the battle of Nanjing happened on December 13,1937. By March the next year China was beating the Japanese again.
No its called the Pacific because youre talking about islands.
Its called the East Asia War by everyone but USA
Europe is a piece of land. Pacific is an ocean you idiot!
If you had studied WW2 you would know that without us USA would be speaking japanese
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
You are one of the dumbest people i have ever met. Dude the Japanase were slaughtering the chinese. The Rape of Nanjing, the battle fo hong kong (which i will point out was owned by the british) and many other battles was where the japanese not only beat the chinese but in their own country
AndRod29 3 years ago
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
All of those battles you list are from the second sino-japanese war. USA was about as cowardly as the briish were in ww2 (sacarasm)
And if China didn't lose a single battle in ww2 then how come the complete eastern side of china had been taken over and wasn't fixed until America stepped in?
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29,
Youve proven youre plain stupid.
Those battles listed were in 1939 1940 after WW2 started.
And there is no "if china didnt lose a battle in WW2"
China didnt lose a battle in WW2 thats a fact.
And the USA deffinatly did not step in and remove the Japanese from China. It was the USSR
The Japanese troops in China formally surrendered to the chinese on September 9, 1945.
You in USA are taught false history to protect your innocence from your countrys cowardly actions during WW2
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
USArCOWARDS, you cannot accuse someone of stupidity when 1) you claim the Soviets killed over a million men in Manchuria, when you didn't bother to actually look at the casualty list. The Soviets certainly did NOT kill a million Japanese in Operation August Storm.
Look DOWN the Wikipedia article you obviously tried to cite.
2. You claimed the English helped win a battle they were not even present.
3. You gave victory to the Assies for a battle they had ONE SHIP.
You are looking REALLY bad.
Baculus 3 years ago
BTW, that is supposed to be Aussies, not Assies. Haha.
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
The USSR and Chinese didnt need a big fleet.
Japan is only a few hundred miles away.
LMAO flying tigers were circus stunt team.
The best japanese pilot shot down more planes than all the flying tigers kills put together.
I didnt say USSr "killed" over a million.
I said USSR destroyed more of the japanese army than USA. Which they did.
And I said British empire not English. the Aussies had 3 ships and the ship was hit the most time by kamakazi than any other ship in WW2
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
We are talking about the 20th century - even in the 13th century, the Mongolians had trouble invading Japan. Before the Japanese Imperial Navy was critically injured and destroyed, the Japanese empire as well as its homeland would have been well-supplied and defended.
I was VITAL to Japan's defeat that its navy was demolished.
Earlier, you claimed the USSR had caused a million casualties, and you pulled the numbers for the total Japanese forces instead of the REAL casualty figure.
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
What rubbish are you talking?
The Japanese navy was patetic and unable to support its main army which was mainland asia.
Japans navy being destroyed was not vital to the beating of the Japanese at all.
I didnt say USSr caused over a million casualties at all.
USSr destroyed more of japans army in ww2 than USa did. Which is a fact.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Did you seriously just call the Japanese navy "pathetic"?
Seriously. Is that you just said? Is that your "academic" analsis? Because no serious student of this conflict can give his review of the Japanese navy as being "pathetic."
Then, you followed it up with "Japans navy being destroyed was not vital to the beating of the Japanese at all."
IT IS AN ISLAND. It is like the UK, whose naval was vital in the North Atlantic.
Quit it. Stop talking crap. This does no service for you.
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
Yes the Japanese navy was pathetic compared to its main land army.
The majority of countries in the world rely on its main land army.
Britains navy isnt vital, Britains airforce was what was vital.
Bombers can bomb Japan from main land asia.
The destruction of japans navy was pathetic compared to the destruction of its armies done by china USSr and british empire.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Hahahahahahahahahahaha.
You just said "Britain's Navy isn't vital." Let me repeat this: YOU JUST SAID BRITAIN'S NAVY ISN'T VITAL. THE BRITISH! As in the island nation that would have starved to death no navy. The island that would starve to death NOW with no navy, and without imports. The same British Empire that has heroes such as Admiral Nelson, who epitomizes the strength of England in its iron-strong naval power.
And you live in England and making this claim?
Ahahaha...Hahahahahaha.
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
No i'm saying "in battle" Britains navy is not vital.
Which it isnt.
The battle of britain proves this.
However if youre talking about cutting of supply lines then yes our navy is vital.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Because what the germmans tried to do is gain control of the air before they gained control of the sea dumbass.ANyone who has ever been in the military or studided wars would know that if you contorl the air you can control the battle.
AndRod29 3 years ago
USArCOWARDS, There are certain facts about the war that are well-understood. It is the stuff you learn in 101 history courses. For students of the war, you do not argue about them, because they are well-known. There are jut a given and part of the history.
One of these, is that Japan's empire was vitally involved with its survival.
You CANNOT make your statements in any serious discussion of this conflict without making a complete horse's ass out of yourself.
Baculus 3 years ago
What battles listed? You listed SEVERAL battles that came after 1940 - what in the heck are you talking about? Trying to avoid the fact that you made crappy research?
That being said, again, the main focus of the US was defeating its navy and the Pacific fortifications. That being said, there are several large battles, such as the Battle of Chang-te, that were certainly important.
I wouldn't take away the importance of the Chinese, British, and Indians in fighting the Japanese.
Baculus 3 years ago
Enough with your bullshit on "cowardly actions." You are some twenty-four year old punk kid that has never seen combat in his life and wouldn't even have the HONOR to be in the same presence of a World War 2 veteran, let alone an American war veteran.
ANYONE that has been in combat has more balls then you do - you are just a wanna-be armchair mediocre historian.
Only an absolute fool that has demonstrate severely lacking knowledge of World War Two would attempt to make your arguments.
Baculus 3 years ago
"China didnt lose a single battle in WW2"
1939-40 Winter Offensive - Japanese victory
Battle of South Shanxi 1941 - Japanese victory
Battle of Yunnan-Burma Road 1942 - Japanese victory
Operation Ichi-Go 1944 - Japanese victory
Battle of Central Henan 1944 - japanese victory
Battle of Guilin-Liuzhou 1944 - japanese victory
jimmyn89 3 years ago
Ohhhh...now it comes out. THIS is why 1) USArCOWARDS hates the US, and 2) is obviously devoid of real history: HE IS CHINESE. He is a product of anti-American history that has taught him some strange Communist version of history.
Of course Chinese lost battles - that is how the Japanese expanded INTO China.
The US, BTW, aided China against Japan.
The Russians had a cease-fire with Japan after 1939, until 1945.
The Pacific has islands - that is why they were called ISLAND hoping campaigns.
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
LMAO, that twice youve said i hate USA and no i dont i piont out historical facts.
1,China,USSR and British empire all destroyed more of the Japanese army and liberated more land from the japanese than the USA.
2,Britain realised the A bomb was possible and flew to USa to get it made.
3,Britain also sold USA radar.
4,Without us USA would of been beaten by Japan. And you would be speaking Japanese.
China lost battles in the sino-japanese war. Not ww2.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
It isn't historical "fact": The stuff you've purveyed would be laughed out of academia if you went onto campus and tried to make these discussions.
Of course, combined, all those nations killed more Japanese. But it August Storm, Japanese sources cite 21,000 dead; that is less then the US inflicted by US forces.
I bet you do not even know the number of casualties inflicted by the British.
The Chinese were poorly coordinated: You have Commie and Nationalist forces fighting separately.
Baculus 3 years ago
World War II, in the war between China and Japan, was considered the Second Sino-Japanese war. And the Chinese most certainly lost battles during this conflict. Which is why, by 1940, the Chinese air force was wiped out, and millions of Chinese died in aerial bombardments.
Cities such as Nanking paid the price, with hundreds of thousands dead.
The Chinese were poorly equipped and had low technology, which is why they had large casualties.
This was a longer conflict that bled over into WW2.
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
No combined.
Indervidually, China,USSR and british Empire all destroyed moe of the Japanese army than USA. FACT
And it has nothing to do with kills. USSR captured 2 million japanese soldeirs thats more than USa killed or took prisoner in the whole war.
yes the japanese lost battles in the sino-chinese war. But in WW2 they did not.
And without China,USSr and British Empire fighting. You in the USa would be speaking japanese
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
It isn't a fact - you have proved nothing to demonstrate this fact. It as factually as your asinine claims that the British won Leyte Gulf, which you claim with zero documentation.
The US fields one of the biggest forces ever, and your insight is to claim the US "ran away like cowards," in a stupendously absurd statement. I know you have not read a single bit of REAL FACT about this battle.
I NAMED CHINESE BATTLES LOST DURING WW2. Look it up for yourself.
Baculus 3 years ago
Battle of Leyte Gulf:
Australian Navy, including the County Class heavy cruisers Shropshire and Australia, and the destroyer Arunta were there.
HMS australia was hit by the most kamakazis of WW2 at that battle.
If it wasnt there along with the other British Empire ships.
USA would of lost and been compoletly destroyed.
And proves we saved the USA cowards
USA doesnt field one of the biggest armys ever. Irans army is 6 times as big as the USA's.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
yes okay china lost 2 battles in WW2 to Japan. One of them because of USA's cowardness.
I bet you cant name a third.
Fact is China destroyed more of Japans army tha the USA along with USSR and the British empire.
Without us you would be speaking Japanese.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Look at the absurdity of this point: You are somehow trying to give more credit to the Russians because they came in the last week-and-a-half war and capture surrendering Japanese, while the US destroyed its navy, took out its Pacific occupations, bombed and interdicted its production capacity, and ultimately demoralized the populace with conventional and atomic bombings.
And yet, because the Russians capture a bunch of POWs, they were more vitally involved.
That is silly.
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
The reason Japan surrendered was because USSr entered the war and destroyed Japans main army.
The is nothing absurd about it.
Like i said japans Navy wasnt japans main force. Japans main force was on mainland asia.
The Japanese didnt surrender because of the A bombs. They surrendered because USSr had beaten its mainland army.
You should read things instead of just giving your opinion
That way you'll know the facts.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
How are you giving "facts"? You are saying over and over again the same claims none of which you will find in ANY history book.
The Japanese didn't surrender because of Russia - that is silly. That is to act like the years of fighting against the Americans, Chinese, British and Indians didn't happen.
Why are you taking away from the efforts of the Chinese, who had more to do with Japan surrendering the the USSR, and giving it to the Russians?
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
they are facts!
you should read history and you'll find out.
British empire destroyed more of the Japanese military at the battle of hong kong than USA did at midway.
If you bothered to look things up instead of talking rubbish you will realise we saved the USA.
Youve just proved you havent read anything.
If you had read you will find out the reason japan surrendered was because the experienced USSr army went through Japns main force like a hot knife through butter
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
And yet the british still lost Hong Kong. please enlighten me, how does this work?
And if you would actually read hat historians have written you should realise that the US saved Britians ass.
Yeah Japan surrendered because of the fact that they didn't want to be hit with any more nukes and the russian army. I'll give the russians credit for that but you have to consider america's part as well.
AndRod29 3 years ago
The Japanese military on the mainland never would have been there without its navy. It had to be supplied by the navy - the wartime productivity was reliant upon resources found in other parts of various parts of its empire.
This is the reason why commanders such as Isoroku Yamamoto, Fleet Admiral, were so important to the cause, including initiating war against the US?
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
NEVER WOULD OF BEEN THERE! LMAO!
Thats a joke. You can swim from Japan to China.
the reason the Japanese attacked USa was because USa stoped their oil forcing japan into war.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Ok. I think we are probably done. You are obviously a troll; this is not a historical discussion.
With the suggestion that you can "swim" from Japan to China, you have reached the final height of your silliness. The idea that the Japanese would swim to China.
Now, back under the bridge you go!
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
Youre just completly uneduacted.
Because you can swim from Japan to China.
Many people have done it.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
wait, so you just said he can, swim from Japan to china and that man people have done it. Besides that making no snese at all what you're saying is the japanese could've invaded by swimming?
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29
The British lost at hong kong but in the process destroyed more of the japanesea rmy than USA did at midway
USA didnt save Britain!
Britain won the batle of britain 2 years before USa even entered world war 2
Britain fought the Nazis fro4 years without USA you idiot
USA wouldnt of had A bombs if it wasnt for Britain
Proving we saved you USA cowards
Why did Britain need a bomb? The war was over and we owned the USA
i said a huge navy isnt needed to attack china from Japan
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Right and how did the british get the funds and supplies that were needed to defend themselves? Oh, thats right, The USA gave the british those supplies! Before the United States had even entered the war, the british had been driven out of Europe and were getting their butts kicked by Rommel in N. Africa.
Yes riddle me this. How did the British own the US when they borrowed billions of dollars from us to repair their country and that the US emerged the major economic power of the world?
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29,
Britain paid for the supplies from USA and shipped it home.
The USA did not "GIVE" any supplies everything was paid for by Britain.
Britain did not get kicked in North Africa,
Britain had won in east and West Africa and was winning in the North when USA joined.
Britain did not borrow billions. it just appeared that way.
In reality Britain had paid that much to use USA's military and was paying it back.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Its called the lend lease policy dumbass.
Yeah the british weren't getting kicked in Africa, they were getting owned, for christ's sake man the British were riven back to Alexandria before the US stepped in and Eisenhower pushed Rommel back.
Right the British ddin't borrow billions, they were given billions witht the intention of them paying later!
AndRod29 3 years ago
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
your telling me that the US got owned in N.Africa, yeah i'm sure we lost a few battles but it nothing compared to what happneed to the biritish. The british couldn't have possibly been winning because Rommel had pushed them back to Alexandria (after the 2nd battle of Alamein)
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29, LMAO!
Who told you we got pushed back to Alexandria after 2nd battle of Alamein?
Thats exactly what i mean when i say you in the USA are taught false history.
2nd battle of Alamein many say was the turning point in the North african campaign.
it was after the battle churchill gave his famous speech:
"This is not the end, it is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
yes and why didn't the biritish buld an a bomb until the 50's? By your logic the british should've had the bomb first not the US. And the US didn't need the bomb to end the war, we just used it becuase we ddin't want the russians occupying Japan.
A navy is just a little necessary if you want to get troops across the ocean. But by your strategy, all people need to do is have their armies swim across the ocean to invade China
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29,
Quite simply.
USA destroyed less in a win at midway than britain did in a loss at hongkong.
Its because USA is a country of cowards who wernt really even in WW2.
No US saved Britian.
Britain won the battle of Britain 2 years before the USA cowards joined WW2.
USA wouldnt of had those A bombs if Britain hadnt of flown to USa to get them made.
Proving once again we saved the USA
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Even though after Hong Kong the Japanese were still going strong and conquering all sorts of territory and after Midway the japanese weren't able to manuever as well because the USA crippled their fleat.
The US did save britiain. If we hadn' sent you supplies and food, you would've been starved out of their.
The US didn't need th a bombs to end the war, it was just a way to hurry the process up
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29,
Once again "USA DID NOT SEND SUPPLIES"
Britain bought supplies from the USA and Canada and Britain shipped them home them selves
USA were cowards avoiding war
USA was getting thrashed by the Japanese until we stepped in
USA was owned at the phillipines and if we hadnt of helped. USA would be speaking japanese
We also saved you cowards in north africa.
All you cowards did was lose and we won!
Youre taught false history in the USA. If you read books you'd realise
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
USA was gettiing trahsed by the Japansese. doesn't seem that way to me. Seeing as how the united states took all of the islands previuosly held by the japanese.
British didn't help at the Phillipines buddy. That was the McCarthur and his marines who liberated the phillipines.
And you got the roles reversed here. See the british were gtting pushed back by Rommel in N.Africa (and has already been driven out of W Africa) Until the US stepped in.
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29, yeah right the largest surrender of allied soliders in the Pacific by the USA at the phillipines!
USA was getting thrashed.
For the first 6 months againt japan all USA did was surrender retreat retreat surrender.
Youve proved how uneducated you are.
British empire saved you cowards at phillipines and beat rommel before USa even entered the war.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Yes there was that surrender. But on the second retuurn we thrashed the Japanese.
You have proven ten tims over how stupid you are. You go aorund sayng "Naval battles aren't important" and 'the british won N.Africa with no US' seriously dude you're just so fucking retarded its not even funny.
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29,
Yes and on the seciond return the the Phillipines there were the allies withthe USA and without them USA would of been thrashed again.
Naval battles arnt important. Britain destroyed the Nazis and Italians navys excluding U boats before the USA cowards turned up.
Yet the nazis were still fighting
You should read youre looking like a spastic
The 2nd Battle of El Alamein marked a major turning point in the Western Desert Campaign of World War 2 and the USA cowards werent there
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
"USA destroyed less in a win at midway than britain did in a loss at hongkong."
Hong Kong: around 700 japanese killed, around 1500 wounded
Midway: 4 carriers,1 cruiser,332 aircrafts, 3500 killed
jimmyn89 3 years ago
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
AndRod29,
Britain was at war, unlike the USA and getting bombed.
It was impossible to safely build one.
Tube alloys was set up in canada, but then USA swapped the technology for some of its soldiers and started the Man hatan project.
Obvioulsy youre thick.
Battle ships and aircraft carriers are not troop transporters.
Theyre mobile weapons.
You dont need a huge navy to move men 50 miles from China to Japan.
Then again youre from USA and stupid so you probably think you do.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
so by your logic you're sending the soldiers in little rowboats! Yeah real smart, watch your troops get decimated by battleships and destroyers! You need the navy to transport and protect the soldiers dumbshit.
Righ the brits were getting bombed but once the war was over (1945) and according to you the biritsh were at the top of their game, then how come they couldn't build one before the soviets did? (Who were even worse off then the british)
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29,
I never said row boats!
However as its only 50 miles away you dont need aircraft carriers.
The navy is completly usless compared to aircraft you idiot. battleships and destroyers were used to protect aircraft carriers.
Britain didnt need A bomb the war was over!
What sort of message would building an A bomb after WW2 send. "Oh the message USA thought USSR was sending!"
Unlike you in the USA we are not human trash. We dont kill civillians and see it as normal.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
why don't you tell that to the irish. I bet they'd have something different to say about that.
You betray your ignorance by trying to say a navy is usleless. you are probably one of the most illogical thinkers i have ever met.
Besides if you have aircraft carriers near the coast, there is a strategic advantage to the fact that you planes don't have to waste fuel flying over the ocean.
Oh and lets see the russians built an A-bbomb after WW2 so why not the British!
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29, a navy is usless.
The battle for Britain and Island country that you believe needs a navy won. "The battle of britain" with planes. NOT NAVY!
Why would Britain need an A bomb after WW2 had just been won?
The historical facts show.
MAUD committe and tube alloys created the A bomb. The USA paid for the technology and set up Manhatten project.
Without it you cowards in USA would be speaking japanese.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
I never said that the battle of britiain needed a navy for the planes. What you're trying to say is that a navy is not important which you are dead wrong on.
The US didn't need the bomb to end the war dumass. The only reason truman authorized its use was to end the war quickly because
1. We didn't want to waste lives invading Japan
2. We didn't want the soviets to be an occupier in Japan
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29,
The British Navy invented the aircraft carrier because planes are better than ships.
A navy isnt needed by and island whats needed are the supplies.
USa used the A bomb because USa is a country of cowards scared of battle.
It didnt even end the war.
The Japanese surrendered because the USSr destroyed the main japanese army and industrial areas
1,USA were cowards and scared of fighting so used the A bomb.
2,The USSR had no intention of invading Japan.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Dude, the a-bomb ended the war. After the Japanese emporer saw the destruction it caused he said that wnough was enough. If we didn't have the A-bomb we would have invaded.
Besides the causualties would've been horrendous on both sides, since the japanese took the term "fight to the death" a little too seriously. Using the A-bomb was smart in the fact that it saved american lives not because it was cowardly.
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29, what rubbish are you talking now!
Japan surrendered a week after the 2nd A bomb.
The Japanese surrendered because USSr destroyed their main army.
USA are a country of cowards whether you accept it or not and you and the entire USA would be speaking Japanese if we hadnt of saved you
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
What rubbish I"M talking? Hey i'm not the one who claims that navies aren't important and that the Japanese could've invaded china by swimming there!
Oh and since you haven't sad it before, remnd me where and when in this war, that the british saved the us
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29,
For the 16th time,
You do not need a huge navy to cross a distance of 50 miles which can be swam.
1.The british realised the possibily of the A bomb.
2, The British invented Radar.
3, The chinese,british empire and USSr destroyed more of the Japanese army than the USA.
USA could not beat cuba,Vietnam,Korean or afghanistan.
Without us USA would of lost to Japan.
Fact!
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
SO what you are effectivley saying is that the japanese should've swam across the ocean to invade japan. WOW, that could be the dumbest thing i've ever heard.
Why are you bringing in radar? I have brough anything up about that.
And once agian you offer no facts for your claims (for the 16th time)
USA kicked taliban out of Afghanstan and now NATO can't manage them, we won with the stated objective of korea, vietnam we made peace before pulling out, and cuba-no US troops
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29, you truely are retarded.
For the 17th time.
JAPAN IS ONLY 50 MILES FROM CHINA!
YOU DONT NEED AN IMPERIAL NAVY TO CROSS A DISTANCE THAT COULD BE SWAM ACROSS.
i'm pointing out that we saved you USA cowards.
Without radar you would of been completly wiped out.
Ever seen peral harbour the film. The beginning.
"DUHHHHH WHAT IS THAT BLIP"
USA is so retarded they ddnt know how to use it! LMAO
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Yeah and what do you suggest the japanese do swim? Your calling me reatrded when your saying the navy isn't important, and taking a DISNEY movie as fact. Hate to break it to ya, but Mickey Mouse and Snow White aren't real. Now back under the bridg you go you little troll.
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29,
The USa got thrashed by the chinese and pushed back into the sea.
Then USa said they would use nuclear wepoans on defencless civillians.
China then pulled back to the 38th.
And USa was in Vietnam for 15 years and couldnt win.
Youre such a coward you cant even say that yur country was beaten in a war. which it was and its proven fact.
LMAO, Youre a typical USa coward
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
except most of the wars that you claim we have "lost" we didn't. We were pushed back to the 38th parallel and that was only because the chinese had a superior amount of numbers then we did. (wave after wave)
I'm willing to dmit thta the US has lost a war, we lost vietnam (the peace was pretty much a sham) but i won't admit that we have never won a war because we have won many wars. (more then we've lost anyway)
AndRod29 3 years ago
BUT it was the Royal airforce the R. navy Monty n the red army that beat facist germany is right did u ever win a war against another army with equal manpower/equipment? NEVER we are not talking about women n children in iraq/agfanistan u entered the WW2 to save u r ass after the japs attacked you NOT for any other reason look at the British sector in iraq n the mess in the american sector am not saying you are not cowards BUT the British amry is a real army they don't murder women n children
polygamous1 3 years ago
Yes we have
1. Spanish American War
2. Mexican American War
I wouldn't really count the wars against britain seeing as their military was much larger then ours (and they still lost) but itthey don't fit your criteria.
And why are you brigning the RAF into this? I've already said before that they did a heeluva job in WW2. (it was also the US that helped end the world wars but we had allies so agian it doesn't fit your criteria)
AndRod29 3 years ago
USA hasnt kicked the Taliban out of Afghanistan at all. Who told you that?
So you say USa kicked the Taliban out of Afghanistan but then say NATO who is in afghanistan acnt handle them. LMAO!
Face it USA lost to them!
USA attacked north korea. Tried to take it over and failed USa got thrashed by the chinese!
USa fought for 15 years in vietnam and pulled out because they couldnt win.
And Cuba had USa pilots shot down.
LMAO its fun to read your USA lies.
Aww poor USA cant wina war LOL
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Funny, i didn't know the war was over yet
Nort Korea attacked South Korea first. And who pushed the North back? US troops. The reason why we pulled back from the chinese is because We didn't want full scale war with the chinese.
As for Vietnam your facts are wrong, we were only in there ten years, not fifteen.
Can't win a war? We beat the british twice, the spanish once, rocked the germans, destoryed some iraqis (desert storm) and have been policing s.america for years
AndRod29 3 years ago
USa never beat the british!
The revolution was won by a host of european nations
In 1812 USA attacked britain and at the end of the war Britain had gaind 1,000,000 acers of land from the USA!
USa pad the Spainish to stop fighting.
face it USa is the home of the cowards
Without us you would be speaking Japanese
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
PAID THE SPANISH! Dude we won every battle that we fought the spanish in! Fuck man,i've never met anyone so stupid in my life!
As for the war of 1812, no territorial gains were made on either side. And as for the revolution true, we had the help from the french, but all they really supplied us with, was with a fleet, america did a majorty of the land battles, but hey as you say, "a navy isn't important"
AndRod29 3 years ago
AndRod29,
The real question is.
Why do you think Britain and France have the 3rd and 4th largest stockpiles of nuclear weapons.
If it has nothing to do with MAUD committe and Tube alloys which were our nuclear programs before USA even realised A bombs were possible.
USA couldnt beat Cuba,vietnam,Korea,Afghanistan and cant beat Iraq on their own.
But you think USA could of beaten Japan!
Dream on!
We saved you USA cowards.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
China was not prepared for war, and had little armor and mechanized units: They did have a lot of people.
Also, the Chinese certainly lost battles, such as the Battle of South Shanxi, Operation Ichi-Go, during the actual period of WW2, but most Japanese victories came during early and mid-30's, before the Chinese could really mobilize and secure aid from other nations.
The Chinese did, though, give a good accounting of themselves, in spite of some of the disadvantages they often faced.
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
Operation Ichigo was lost because USa airforce failed to do its part because they were cowards.
China lost 2 battles to Japan in WW2. one of them was because of the USA.
China did more than give a good account of them selves.
They destroyed more of the Japanese army than the USA cowards.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
ROFL. First, you claim the Chinese never lost a battle. And then, when you find out they did, you blame it on the US Air support???
The Chinese were outnumbered, and US air forces were still able to disrupt the Japanese. How in the world can you blame the loss on the US AIRFORCE?
That is so laughable: Oh, so NOW you admit the Chinese lost a battle? BTW, the Second Sino-Japanese war was one LONG war: it does not matter if the battles happened before or during WW2.
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
Like i said Okay China lost 2 battles in WW2 try and name a third.
I can name more than 3 that USA lost.
Yes i admit china lost a battle in WW2.
So what?
You said China didnt do anything in WW2 and they were completly beaten.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
The Second Sin-Japanese war was LONG then WW2. It wasn't as if they quit fighting and said, "Ok, now World War 2" is starting! It was one long conflict that overlapped with WW2.
It does not matter if I can or not, you made the claim, more then once, that China NEVER lost a battle during World War 2. And you were wrong.
I NEVER said China never did anything. From the start, I said they were major contributers to the conflict.
Learning is good.
China fought hard against the Japanese.
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
Yes the second Sino-Chinese war took up more of Japans forces than USA did in the whole of WW2.
without the chinese fighting USA would of been completly destoryed.
Thats what i'm saying.
Like i said okay China lost 2 battles during WW2. USA lost more than that.
Proving China put up a better fight.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Baculus,
Yes the second Sino-Chinese war took up more of Japans forces than USA did in the whole of WW2.
without the chinese fighting USA would of been completly destoryed.
Thats what i'm saying.
Like i said okay China lost 2 battles during WW2. USA lost more than that.
Proving China put up a better fight.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
USArCOWARDS, you tried making your factually flawed comments in the other video.
Anyone that knows anything about Pacific war combat knows that the US naval took on and defeated the Japanese.
Now, the Chinese and British tied up land forces and made the Japanese use a lot of resources, but no other naval fleet could have defeated the Japanese. With no navy, the island empire of Japanese were in trouble and could not win the conflict.
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
Anyone who knows anything about the "pacifc war"
Knows that the pacific is an Ocean.
And that japans strongest part of a military was on mainland asia. A place USA never went.
The japanese would of lost even if it had a naval fleet. USSR and China are no more than a few undred miles from Japan.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Have you ever looked at a map, USArCOWARDS? Are you unaware of geography that you do not that ISLANDS occupu the Pacific? Heck, the state of Hawaii is in the Pacific.
That is why the Island hoping campaigns took place: The Japanese were using various islands as strong points, air, and supply bases.
The fact that you are trying to argue that the "Pacific" is an ocean, when the main battles of the Pacific conflict took place between NAVAL battles, IN WATER, is a bit silly.
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
Yes i'm aware a few tint islands occupy the pacific.
However Japans main army was on main land asia.
the main battles did not take place in the pacific.
The main battles were fought in china and main land asia.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Look at the invasion of Okinawa, which involved a half-million allied troops (mostly American) and a hundred thousand Japanese troops.
The Japanese lost over sixty-thousand troops here along. This isn't some small tiny island battle - this is a major battle, even by land campaign size.
The Pacific battles were filled with all sorts of nasty, ugly battles, with bravery shown by both Axis and Allied forces.
You should be ashamed of yourself for the totally baseless accusations of cowardice.
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
The battle of Okinawa involved allied aircover. And the British Pacific Fleet. Without it USA would of been completly wiped out.
Once again proves we saved the USA.
A the battle of okinawa was 20 times smaller than the battle of machuria.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
PROVE that the "USA would of been completely wiped out." Name the ships involved in these battles; demonstrate the number of British ships. Show some REAL information to show that you aren't just spewing more disinformation.
How about this: I will do it for you.
At the most, the British fleet in the Pacific numbered between 50-60 ships. Most of the ships were used to support actions around Sumatra and raids, support of the Okinawa invasion, and various raids.
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
yes there are many facts about WW2 history.
1 is,
British Empire,China,USSR each destroyed more of the japanese army than the USA
2 is:
British Empire,China,USSR all liberated more land from the japanese than the USA.
3 is: the A bomb was discovered possible in britain and britain flew to the USa to get it made.
You just cant accept that without us you and the entire USA would be speaking Japanese.
We saved you and youre to cowardy to admit it.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
The A bomb was not discovered in England, and you make this mangled statement of "discovered possible." IT WASN'T.
Baculus 3 years ago
Baculus,
yes the a bomb was realise possible in britain
google"who invented the a bomb" and you'll find out.
it was discovered possible in britain and we flew to the USa to get it made.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
then how come the british didn't get the bomb until 1952? By your logic the british should've gotten t by at least 1948.
AndRod29 3 years ago
Baculus,
Yes in the Okinawa invasion British gave all the carrier support 12 carriers.
The british battle ships also destroyed japans airports.
Without us USa would of been completly destroyed.
And in the Leyte Gulf. Without the australian ships USa would of been hit by kamakazis and wiped out there as well.
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
Seriously, why do you keep saying "Without us USa would of been completly destroyed" with no proof?
ROFL. Now you are being a troll.
You are saying a couple of Aussie ships kept the two hundred American ships from being "wiped out there." The US had around TWO HUNDRED SHIPS.
Baculus 3 years ago
Neither the Russians nor Chinese had a respectable fleet in the Pacific. One purpose of the Japanese Imperial Fleet was to guards the Japanese merchant fleet that brought raw materials, such as oil and rubber, that fueled the Imperial War Machine.
Like the UK, the navy was VERY important to Japan: It's an island nation.
The US WAS in mainland China - obviously you don't know squat about units such as the Flying Tigers, and the supplies that the US supplied (to mostly the nationalists Chinese).
Baculus 3 years ago
Bloody hell are you all ignorant
slavery has been around since humans were around.
all i recall of those thing usa invented were nukes and the lightbulb plus basketball
telephone was by an italian
greeks were first to know bout eletrics
english invented baseball, fridge, video games
scots invented TV but americans improved on it quite a bit
conormarch 3 years ago
americans invented baseball and the telegragh
gangbangpersecond 3 years ago
dude basketball was invented by a canadian ur the fucking ignorant fuck here
Cyytaah 3 years ago
well sorry but i didnt know that basketball was made by a canadian, but the point is im saying slavery has been around since people have been.
also tell me this, who invented the aeroplane if your so great and im so ignorant?
conormarch 3 years ago
lol i m just kidding bud
Cyytaah 3 years ago
conormarch,
It depends what you mean by aeroplane?
The very first or the planes we use today?
Jet engines was british Frank wittle
As for wings that will be thousands of years ago.
The wright brothers created the 3 axis control plane that could hold a man.
But the 3 axis control was around in model form in Britain before that.
Slavery has been around a long time. But it was made ileegal in London England in 1107
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
The first powered flying machine that was successful was invented by a german in 1901 and he fly it for ages and far(500 miles) but he didnt patent it and it was only discovered in his books in the 50s
conormarch 3 years ago
conormarch,
That is bloody far!
I believe the USA wright brothers flew their plane for 36 seconds. LMAO
compared to 500 miles makes it seem a joke!
What about that Rocket man Yves Rossy who flew with jet packs the other day!
WOW!
USArCOWARDS 3 years ago
no he didnt fly it in one go, that was his total of flying it(and at the end it crashed into the sea)
conormarch 3 years ago
Yes many great things like South Park, Star Trek, Rock and Roll, Jazz, rap music, mass production, GPS, computers, great movies and actors and hopefully less ignorance about the not so great things like the education, political system, the environment, sustainability, rigid viewpoints, the economy and the ability to deal with critisism.
whiteandnerdy84 3 years ago
the world would be dead without america, america invented electricity, and the web, and the tv, and video games!!! so stfu! what else is there so much things... the fridge! washing machine, baseball, basketball, light bulb, the telephone, america rulez
wtf58 3 years ago
wtf58 usa didnt invent the most things you said . youre a brainwashed fat us dog .
and you forgot something . usa invented the nuclear bomb , usa invented the biggest lie [ 911 ] and and and . i just can say conquralations !
TurkWingTsun 3 years ago
911 HAPPENED STFU!
wtf58 3 years ago
Jews did not hijack those planes; Muslims did. Deal with it.
TrickShepherd 3 years ago