Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: Britain put its Empire at risk for America
  • Subject: Britain put its Empire at risk for America
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: Britain put its Empire at risk for America

"I will show you how a true Prussian officer fights!"

"And i will show you where the iron crosses grow..."

- "Cross of Iron"

Of course you had to buy the supplies from us? Your surprised by this? What country didn't ever?

Not only did we give you supplies, we gave you 50+ destroyers along with them as well for convoy protection, we supplied our own ships before we were even at war to protect yours as well.

It was wrong of us to think you might not last after the entirety of western Europe was conquered? We cant think of our country before yours?

We were supplying all sides because we were neutral, but we certainly werent giving the Germans many SINCE THEY SANK OUR SHIPS TO!

We did have your backs, what a stupid and rediculous claim.
Posted by: lonepaul2441

Posted by: Raptorx7
Yeah and all the other multi national pilots that [i[]flew[/i] in those hurricanes and spit fires (Americans, Poles, French ETC). You did not do it all alone, sorry.

Also JUST gave you supplies? What does that mean, like it wasn't as important as making fighter planes? How did you keep your people fed, your planes armed and fueled?

Logistics is everything in modern warfare my friend and we helped you out big time with it.
Posted by: elsnben

Posted by: RockdaleRooster
Yeah and American supplies saved Britain from the Germans. Stop trying to bash America while praising Great Britain more than Americans praise America.

That depends on what war you're on about, maybe WWI, but In WWII we held our own with the spitfire and hurricane, both made in britain. besides it's not like you just gave us said supplies.
We had to buy the supplies from you, at either a discount or when it came to ships we had to give you 99 years lease on use of one our bases in our Indian ocean territory.

America didn't think we would survive the attack and you where supplying Germany at the same time, seems like you had our backs.

  • 11.27.2012 11:06 AM PDT


Posted by: lonepaul2441

Posted by: Raptorx7
Yeah and all the other multi national pilots that [i[]flew[/i] in those hurricanes and spit fires (Americans, Poles, French ETC). You did not do it all alone, sorry.

Also JUST gave you supplies? What does that mean, like it wasn't as important as making fighter planes? How did you keep your people fed, your planes armed and fueled?

Logistics is everything in modern warfare my friend and we helped you out big time with it.
Posted by: elsnben

Posted by: RockdaleRooster
Yeah and American supplies saved Britain from the Germans. Stop trying to bash America while praising Great Britain more than Americans praise America.

That depends on what war you're on about, maybe WWI, but In WWII we held our own with the spitfire and hurricane, both made in britain. besides it's not like you just gave us said supplies.
We had to buy the supplies from you, at either a discount or when it came to ships we had to give you 99 years lease on use of one our bases in our Indian ocean territory.

America didn't think we would survive the attack and you where supplying Germany at the same time, seems like you had our backs.

Bought or not you got supplies from us and they kept you afloat. And America was neutral and can send supplies to whoever they want. Also most of the places that did that were private businesses that can do what they want in terms of selling.

  • 11.27.2012 11:09 AM PDT

"I will show you how a true Prussian officer fights!"

"And i will show you where the iron crosses grow..."

- "Cross of Iron"

Your ships can survive kamikaze attacks? Yeah ok, seriously where do you get this crap from?

The RN in the pacific was in serious trouble so it definitely wasnt the most powerful there.

Also the American fleet carrier doctrine certainly helped in beating the Japanese.

We didn't win because of numbers early on, we won because we learned and we were damn good at it. During the battle of Midway we defeated 4 Japanese carriers with 3 of ours. So we didn't just win because of numbers, which is definitely what your implying.
Posted by: lonepaul2441

Posted by: Raptorx7
How much bigger are we talking here? Even with an emphasis on the Pacific how would you deal with the Atlantic? The Germans only had 48 U-Boats at the start of WW2 and still managed to sink millions of tonnage. You would have suffered more in a Pacific centered Royal navy. Also, the you certainly would not have outmatched the Japanese, maybe equaled them. If you didn't have carriers it really wouldn't have mattered for the most part.
Well im not sure how many ships would have been built between America building up and Britain not giving a dam.

However the RN was the most powerful navy in the world at the time, the Japanese would not have stood a chance I mean it did lose to the American Navy.

Although to be fair America's navy became larger than the Royal Navy by the end of the war, but British ships where capable of standing up to most kamikaze attacks due to being made of steel all around.

Also Japanese ships mostly followed British design since Britain helped build its navy years before the war.

  • 11.27.2012 11:10 AM PDT


Posted by: lonepaul2441

Well im not sure how many ships would have been built between America building up and Britain not giving a dam.
And how is Britain going to keep up with the sheer industrial might of the US? Once it's Pacific bases were captured by the Japanese how is the land area of the UK and it's limited resources going to keep up with All of Americas ship-building and their abundance of resources?

However the RN was the most powerful navy in the world at the time, the Japanese would not have stood a chance I mean it did lose to the American Navy.
Because the Americans out strategized the Japanese at Midway and destroyed the bulk of their carrier fleet.

British ships where capable of standing up to most kamikaze attacks due to being made of steel all around.
That was mostly Carriers and that was because they had a steel deck while America had wooden decked carriers.
Also Japanese ships mostly followed British design since Britain helped build its navy years before the war.
So they know the weakpoints and best ways to attack the ships.

  • 11.27.2012 11:14 AM PDT

"I will show you how a true Prussian officer fights!"

"And i will show you where the iron crosses grow..."

- "Cross of Iron"

That kamikaze comment is bull at the highest degree. I don't care what your deck is made of, you get hit by a kamikaze your ship is in trouble.
Posted by: RockdaleRooster

Posted by: lonepaul2441

Well im not sure how many ships would have been built between America building up and Britain not giving a dam.
And how is Britain going to keep up with the sheer industrial might of the US? Once it's Pacific bases were captured by the Japanese how is the land area of the UK and it's limited resources going to keep up with All of Americas ship-building and their abundance of resources?

However the RN was the most powerful navy in the world at the time, the Japanese would not have stood a chance I mean it did lose to the American Navy.
Because the Americans out strategized the Japanese at Midway and destroyed the bulk of their carrier fleet.

British ships where capable of standing up to most kamikaze attacks due to being made of steel all around.
That was mostly Carriers and that was because they had a steel deck while America had wooden decked carriers.
Also Japanese ships mostly followed British design since Britain helped build its navy years before the war.
So they know the weakpoints and best ways to attack the ships.

  • 11.27.2012 11:16 AM PDT


Posted by: Raptorx7
That kamikaze comment is bull at the highest degree. I don't care what your deck is made of, you get hit by a kamikaze your ship is in trouble.
Posted by: RockdaleRooster

Posted by: lonepaul2441

Well im not sure how many ships would have been built between America building up and Britain not giving a dam.
And how is Britain going to keep up with the sheer industrial might of the US? Once it's Pacific bases were captured by the Japanese how is the land area of the UK and it's limited resources going to keep up with All of Americas ship-building and their abundance of resources?

However the RN was the most powerful navy in the world at the time, the Japanese would not have stood a chance I mean it did lose to the American Navy.
Because the Americans out strategized the Japanese at Midway and destroyed the bulk of their carrier fleet.

British ships where capable of standing up to most kamikaze attacks due to being made of steel all around.
That was mostly Carriers and that was because they had a steel deck while America had wooden decked carriers.
Also Japanese ships mostly followed British design since Britain helped build its navy years before the war.
So they know the weakpoints and best ways to attack the ships.

It just made it so their decks didn't burn as much but it's not like it's going to bounce off because it's steel.

  • 11.27.2012 11:17 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

The who wishes, fervently wishes


Posted by: lonepaul2441

Posted by: Raptorx7

Posted by: lonepaul2441


As many of us know Japan ended up attacking Britain when it invaded Singapore and then America, both Navies where incapable of fending off Japan at 1st. (Could have been avoided for the Royal Navy I imagine if it had more ships).



I actually don't think more ships would have made a difference unless they were AC's. When repulse and (King George?) were sent out to Singapore they were destroyed by the Japanese airforce which enjoyed for the most part aerial superiority over Singapore.
They where 2 ships that where available at the time.

Imagine if for 100 ships America built, Britain would have built another 100 ships to stay ahead. Those 100 ships would have been spread about the different fleets in different theaters including the Pacific.


Where the -blam!- would you guys get the resources or men to make and staff two hundred large ships? I don't think you understand how countries operate, or that Britain, while incapable of being properly invaded, would have exhausted itself completely and be rendered incapable of attacking if facing Germany and Italy alone.

  • 11.27.2012 11:19 AM PDT

"I will show you how a true Prussian officer fights!"

"And i will show you where the iron crosses grow..."

- "Cross of Iron"

Yeah you have to understand, hes pretty freaking biased.
Posted by: Wyzilla

Posted by: lonepaul2441

Posted by: Raptorx7

Posted by: lonepaul2441


As many of us know Japan ended up attacking Britain when it invaded Singapore and then America, both Navies where incapable of fending off Japan at 1st. (Could have been avoided for the Royal Navy I imagine if it had more ships).



I actually don't think more ships would have made a difference unless they were AC's. When repulse and (King George?) were sent out to Singapore they were destroyed by the Japanese airforce which enjoyed for the most part aerial superiority over Singapore.
They where 2 ships that where available at the time.

Imagine if for 100 ships America built, Britain would have built another 100 ships to stay ahead. Those 100 ships would have been spread about the different fleets in different theaters including the Pacific.


Where the -blam!- would you guys get the resources or men to make and staff two hundred large ships? I don't think you understand how countries operate, or that Britain, while incapable of being properly invaded, would have exhausted itself completely and be rendered incapable of attacking if facing Germany and Italy alone.

  • 11.27.2012 11:20 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2