Replies

Then you look at Europe itself, totally in the tank for the Palestinians. Whose men died to defend it?

Firstly, Western Europe is not all of Europe. The nations that have supported the Palestinians now are Western European, not Central Europe.

Yes, I could have been more precise. The sad fact is, I did provide enough information that there should have been no confusion who I was talking about. You broke it out just right here. It was my take most folks could do so, in the full context of my comments. Why are you acting as if it wasn't perfectly clear to you who I was talking about?

Secondly, the men who died to defend it were in terms of numbers firstly European, then Russian then American.

Case in point, you just brought it to my attention that I should have referenced Western Europe, so you did know what portion of Europe I was talking about.

Then you reference losses, including the U. S. S. R. Tell me, how many losses did the U. S. S. R. have in Western Europe?

Did we fight to liberate Eastern Europe? No. So why would you try to point out to me that I should have only referenced Western Europe?

Now lets reference who had skin in this game. The U. S. S. R. did. Europeans did. We didn't. None the less, we sent our men to Europe to do the right thing. Many of them remain in Europe to this day, in massive cemetaries.

Now we expect Europe to do the right thing, when it comes to Israel vs the Arabs. If Eastern Europe is doing so, great. I never accused it of not doing so. I specifically mentioned the area we had fought to liberate. You know damn well what area that was.

WWII was won due to American military supplies to the USSR and to Britain and then due to the Soviets breaking the back of the Germans.

Okay then, the U. S. S. R. broke the back of the Germans in Western Europe? Good to know. Thanks.

Where did the U. S. S. R. lose the bulk of it's forces? I'm fairly sure you know exactly where that was. It did lose troops on the way to Berlin too.

I guess the saturation bombing of German forces and factories across Europe into Berlin wasn't really necessary then. I guess U. S. forces that traversed Italy up to Berlin, participated in D-Day and fought fierce battles from the French Coast to Berlin weren't really necessary either. Gee, what a waste. If we had only known.

Only Western Europe was liberated at the end of WWII -- for central Europeans the war ended in 1989...

My aren't you Captain Obvious. Look, when it comes to the years Eastern Europe was occuped by the U. S. S. R., I have a lot of respect and sympathy for it's people. And while the people there were having to deal with the ramifications of U. S. S. R. dictates on a daily basis, we in the United States were faced with the prospect of massive numbers of thermo-nuclear weapons strikes at any moment. The U. S. S. R. had thirty thousand plus nuclear warheads, and a major portion of them were aimed at me and my fellow citizens.

The U. S. S. R. supported terrorists around the world. It funded Marxist and Socialist activism in Europe, Asia, the Carribean, and even in the United States. We didn't get a free ride during those years. We had to counter the efforts of the U. S. S. R. constantly. We didn't just do that for our interests. We tried to do it for a lot of people's interest, including folks from other nations, and their governments. And we expended massive sums of money over half a century to accomplish this.

At times when the U. S. S. R. took measures, moved troops and supplies to the edge of Easter Europe, the U. S. heightened our military stance, and made it perfectly clear we would not tolerate further adventurism. Massive number of tanks were common on the U. S. S. R.'s Western most frontier. We introduced Pershing missiles in Europe despite major objections by the governments there. We did so, so that we could stop the Soviet tanks before they could invade. If we hadn't, the U. S. S. R. would have been able to conquer all of Europe in a matter of days. This caused increased tension between the U. S. S. R. and the U. S. And it's something we could have avoided, if we had just let the U. S. S. R. know we wouldn't stand up to it on Europe's behalf.

The citizens of of the Eastern Block were a common focus of our global goals for decades. I believe President Reagan's efforts eventually led to the fall and break-up of the U. S. S. R.

In light of our efforts on behalf of Europe, I believe we have a right to address others who have a need now, and chastise entities in Europe that are not using their heads.

I happen to believe Eastern Europe has been more sympathetic to Israel's plight. It was not my intent to infer otherwise. And I would expect anyone who has seen my writings on this site, would try to read my comments knowing that I am not going to be unfair to any people, and try to interpret my intent and meaning with that in mind.

And we both know, I gave you more information than needed, to make it perfectly clear what part of Europe I was talking about.

The USSR destroyed German armies in the East. This leeched off men and weapons from the West. In the West, the Germans had absolute control of the Atlantic coast. By reducing their manpower, America and Britain had a chance to liberate western Europe

We didn't. None the less, we sent our men to Europe to do the right thing -- true

Okay then, the U. S. S. R. broke the back of the Germans in Western Europe? -- as I described above, yes, the actions on the Eastern front (which, let me remind me couldn't have been done without American military supplies) is what broke the back of the Germans. The losses suffered on the Eastern front meant that they had to understaff the Western.

I guess the saturation bombing of German forces and factories across Europe into Berlin wasn't really necessary then. -- no, I didn't say that -- on the contrary it WAS necessary -- I said "the Soviets broke the back" -- if we hadn't done saturation bombing and fought in Italy, etc. then the Soviets would have been controlling all of Germany and probably France as well

Western Europe, in particular the French were horrendously slimy -- France was protected from the USSR by a mass of nations, hence they thought they could withdraw from NATO as they didn't directly face a threat.....