Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kevin Rose who wrote (133129)	3/23/2001 4:03:05 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Don't you think that the bombing that we and the Brits did had any impact? Or the millions of troops that Germany had to deploy in France, Italy, and North Africa could have been better used in Russia? Yes and yes. And the Russians most likely would still have beaten the Germans if Britain and the US had never gotten involved. Remember Napoleon? He had by far the best army in Europe; he led it into that endless Russian steppe and came home without it. As I said, by far the major losses of men and equipment for the Germans occurred on the Eastern Front. German soldiers dreaded assignment there; it was almost a death sentence. Remember, the turning point on the Eastern Front came at Stalingrad in 1943. How much impact do you think we or the Brits were having at that point? All of Europe, except for the "unsinkable aircraft carrier" was under their thumb; North Africa was an irritating distraction for them, not a major clash. I fully support your right to make such uninformed statements... Perhaps you are the one who should spend some time with the history books.