Comments on: Off to see the A’s vs. Italy

By: Reflex

Reflex — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 22:53:47 +0000

I don’t know who said the Civil War was the greater global threat than WW2. Can’t find that in this thread. I can see people pointing out that the Civil War was the deadliest war ever for americans, but that tends to happen when all sides of a conflict are within the same nation.

By: barrywhererufrom

barrywhererufrom — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 20:41:58 +0000

You read Reflex’s post wrong. He said the US *was* the final nail in the coffin. Also, you must read too much of that greatest generation/cold war version of history. I don’t know that I think destroying a nation via war crimes is something to tout about yourself.

Actually I took humbridge with his comment that the World War II wasn’t a greater threat world wide then the Civil War. Finally my uncle was in the Big Red One First Army Division from the beginning of the war to the end. If you knew the history of his division you would know where he was. Finally my other uncle was wounded on Iwo Jima. He was in the 5th Marine Division he also was wounded during the Korean War. I believe they were both part of the greatest generation. They did more to ensure freedom than you and I would ever do!

By: barrywhererufrom

barrywhererufrom — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 19:55:46 +0000

Birthers? what are you talking about?

By: historiophiliac

historiophiliac — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 19:17:41 +0000

Oh, yeah, because Churchill was NEVER one to pander or exaggerate…smh

By: Reflex

Reflex — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 19:07:47 +0000

*sigh* What are they teaching birthers these days anyways?

By: Reflex

Reflex — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 19:04:58 +0000

Based on the fact that the Allies were winning before the US entered the war, yes I do believe that. Germany was already crumbling and overextended, Japan was already losing to Russia as well. The US wrapped things up cleanly and certainly more speedily than otherwise.

Also, your nuts if you think the US could have won that war alone. It took us years to even build up the production capacity to enter that war, had we been attacked outright by a force like Germany initially we’d have been sunk.

By: barrywhererufrom

barrywhererufrom — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 19:00:18 +0000

So you actually believe that if we were not attacked on Dec 7th that the Allies still would of won the war? I think not..I also believe if we had to go it alone it would of took much longer but we still would of won by ourselves..

By: barrywhererufrom

barrywhererufrom — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 19:00:10 +0000

So you actually believe that if we were not attack on Dec 7th that the Allies still would of won the war? I think not..I also believe if we had to go it alone it would of took much longer but we still would of won by ourselves..

By: barrywhererufrom

barrywhererufrom — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 18:55:16 +0000

Reflex-I will take Churchill’s word over yours. And if we weren’t the final nail in the coffin for Germany than who was? And who defeated the Japanese? I don’t know were you learned your history but it is dead wrong. Finally we entered the war in 41. Gernany had to a much tougher foe to deal with. They were defeating the Allies before we entered. The final nail in the coffin of Germany was our invasion of Normandy in 44. Maybe you forgot about Dunkirk and all the other defeats that the Allies before our entry into the war..

By: Reflex

Reflex — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 18:37:41 +0000

One correction: We entered the war prior to June 1944, but we did not enter Europe until then with the Normandy landings(D-Day).

By: Reflex

Reflex — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 18:36:11 +0000

Um, the Soviets stopped Germany at Stalingrad and it was well on its way to wrapping up the eastern front by the time the US entered the war in 1944. The eastern front was won without any assistance or diversion from the United States. We did not enter the war until June 1944 and Germany surrendered in May of 1945. By the time we entered the war the Soviets had already retaken most of their territory, and only a month after D-Day they were at the Polish border.

I’m sorry to inform you of this, but the US was the final nail in the coffin for Germany, but we were NOT the deciding factor, not even close.

By: hojo20

hojo20 — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 18:29:00 +0000

My condolences to you.

By: Reflex

Reflex — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 18:26:31 +0000

Could say that about any of the Allies, including the USA.

By: barrywhererufrom

barrywhererufrom — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 18:24:04 +0000

historiophiliac when did the war with Germany change? When the US came into the war and the Germans had to worry about the western front too it started to go downhill for them. And of course that was a direct result in our entering of the war. Also the Soviets were not winning the war. How close were the Germans to Moscow? The same thing happened with the Japanese. Without our blood both axis parties would not of been defeated. More Soviets may have died but like Churchill stated ‘when the US entered the war it was the first time that he was able to sleep soundly..here is another quote from him about our entry into the war…Now at this very moment I knew that the United States was in the war, up to the neck and in to the death. So we had won after all! … How long the war would last or in what fashion it would end no man could tell, nor did I at this moment care … We should not be wiped out. Our history would not come to an end … Hitler’s fate was sealed. Mussolini’s fate was sealed. As for the Japanese, they would be ground to a powder. All the rest was merely the proper application of overwhelming force.”
― Winston Churchill

By: barrywhererufrom

barrywhererufrom — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 18:12:10 +0000

historiophiliac yes you are correct..but they(the soviets) would of not won the war by themselves..

By: paperlions

paperlions — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 17:52:32 +0000

Just curious, which side of the conflict were Italian-Italians on?

By: historiophiliac

historiophiliac — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 17:33:08 +0000

Thanks, Woodpecker. he he

By: stlouis1baseball

stlouis1baseball — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 17:21:22 +0000

Barry:
You aren’t going to win a world history argument, debate, etc… with Philac.
She will dust you my friend.
I love history. It was/is easily my favorite subject. And yet…I still don’t bite.

By: paperlions

paperlions — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 17:10:20 +0000

Yeah, there are some fan bases that if you don’t say they are the best team with the most awesome players ever who will probably win every WS over the next decade….they label you a troll….as if, somehow being object and having an information based opinion relegates one to living under bridges.

By: historiophiliac

historiophiliac — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 16:49:45 +0000

You are making assumptions you cannot prove there. I think you are just mad, and the best thing is to not try to argue in that condition. No one here hates Italian-Americans. heyblue just made a bad joke. Booo and throw some peanuts at him and move on.

By: historiophiliac

historiophiliac — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 16:46:57 +0000

Yes, but you were using that as a plus for Italian-Americans and really, that’s a plus for the Soviets, if you want to be factual about it. American casualties were paltry in comparison.

By: barrywhererufrom

barrywhererufrom — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 16:36:53 +0000

evidently typing is not part of my fundamentals!!

By: barrywhererufrom

barrywhererufrom — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 16:33:32 +0000

PSST..I never said more Americans died in WW II then any other war..I said more people..reaading is fundamental..

By: barrywhererufrom

barrywhererufrom — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 16:30:39 +0000

historiophilac..any history neophyte knows that fact about the Civil War..both sides CSA and US were mostly Americans..my point was like we all know the Civil War if lost by the North would of changed the history of our republic. Now that being said, if the Allies lost WW II not only would our country would not exist as we know it.. so would the rest of the world. In lay mans terms or historiophilac terms greater chance for disaster worlwide if we lost WW II..

By: ianrbarbo

ianrbarbo — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 16:26:17 +0000

Craig — Did they really fashion a two-thumb glove for this guy?

By: historiophiliac

historiophiliac — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 16:17:34 +0000

Half breed? There’s no need to bring Cher into this.

(Psst, more Staters died in the Civil War than WW2 — just FYI.)

By: Francisco (FC)

Francisco (FC) — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 15:58:22 +0000

Which is silly since players get hurt all the time in ST.

By: cktai

cktai — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 15:55:38 +0000

Yeah it’d be much better with more games, but if people freak out about player health with the current format, can you imagine how it will be with a proper schedule?

By: Francisco (FC)

Francisco (FC) — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 15:39:34 +0000

Which is why I dislike the format, for this few teams in a pool, double elimination is much better, though an argument can be made that if you couldn’t manage to win two games out of three you deserve to lose on whatever tie-breaker bones you.

Of course exhibition wise, it’s much nicer to see all teams play each other in the same bracket.

By: heyblueyoustink

heyblueyoustink — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 15:22:50 +0000

I’m always surprised at how sensitive some folks are to things around here. I try to keep things vanilla, I should have known better in this case.

I just thought i’d add a little perspective to Barry’s, well, whatever that was. So yeah, you got that one just about right, and maybe you’ll get crucified for it!