The French kind of helped out a bit.
Back before surrender fries were a thing.
The age of consent in Canada is, like, 14? So they are confused?
That was WW1.
Corregidor and the Battle of the Philippines comes to mind…
" During World War II, Corregidor was the site of two costly sieges and pitched battles—the first during the first months of 1942, and the second in January 1945—between the Imperial Japanese Army and the U.S. Army, along with its smaller subsidiary force, the Philippine Army.
.jpeg)
The surrender of U.S. forces at the Malinta Tunnel on May 6, 1942.
During the [Battle of the Philippines (1941–42)](Philippines campaign (1941–1942) - Wikipedia), the Imperial Japanese Army invaded Luzon from the north (at Lingayen Gulf) in early 1942 and attacked Manila from its landward side. American and Filipino troops under the command of General Douglas MacArthur, retreated to the Bataan Peninsula, west of Manila Bay. The fall of Bataan on April 9, 1942, ended all organized opposition by the U.S. Armed Forces in the Far East (USAFFE) and gave way to the invading Japanese forces in Luzon in the northern Philippines. They were forced to surrender due to the lack of food and ammunition, leaving Corregidor and its adjacent islets at Manila Bay as the only areas in the region under U.S. control."
Between December 24, 1941, and February 19, 1942, Corregidor was the temporary location for the Government of the Philippines. On December 30, 1941, outside the Malinta Tunnel, Manuel L. Quezon and Sergio Osmeña were inaugurated respectively as president and vice-president of the Philippines Commonwealth for a second term. General Douglas MacArthur also used Corregidor as Allied headquarters until March 11, 1942. The Voice of Freedom, the radio station of USAFFE broadcast from Corregidor, aired the infamous announcement of the fall of Bataan. In April 1942, one battalion of the Fourth Marines was sent to reinforce the island’s beach defenses.
Inanimate Carbon Rod for President
Nope. This is a very romantic take often touted in American school history books. Feudalism was long gone before 1776, Britain was empire building and people left to the colonies (and then America in the form of the US) to make money, not to escape tyranny. The Empire wasn’t even close to its peak and Britain as a country was making obscene amounts of money from its world-wide empire. More of its it’s people were travelling to Asia, Africa, the Pacific and India as well as being in an almost permanent state of war with other European nations. America simply wasn’t that important at that time.
Even American law was largely lifted from British Law anyway, so the Patriots were just paying taxes to a different rich dude who didn’t wear a crown. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights were arguably an improvement though (and I’d agree to that), it made the US a more attractive place to settle further down the line and benefitted the country without a doubt.
I’m not sure why grope bringing slavery up, Britain’s abolished it before the states did.
As for Canada, I thought that was a US state annexed by the commies?
Feudalism traditions formally continued in England until 1660, well past when people were leaving England for the Americas, and elsewhere, to get away from that shit hole.
Feudalism was not even a popularized term until 1748.
Because one cannot discuss early American history without plainly acknowledging the evils of slavery.
More specifically, Canada lost its chance to be a US State due to an abundance of commies, and Canada’s abundant White Supremacy practices.
Again, nope. Feudalism ended in the 1500’s, post Black Death. No one was going to America to seek fame and fortune, there wasn’t any at that time, money was pouring in from other corners of the globe so no none really cared. North America (not even ‘America’, as you seem to see it), was a sideline to the age of conquest, South America was more profitable and therefore more interesting but the real money was being made elsewhere.
Fair enough about slavery but I was joking about Cananda, I don’t care about Canada.
Odd that Parliament would see the need to pass the Tenures Abolition Act of 1660, then…
(Laughing with you, not at you.)
There’s nothing to really say. It’s all true. After it was no longer going to affect the outcome of the 2020 election it has been confirmed as true by people who were either silent in the face of accusations or making accusations that it was a “Russian disinfo operation” or had “the hallmarks of a Russian disinfo operation”.
You’re never going to see it because the guy who completely made it up in a bar to a sub source in the Steele dossier admitted to the FBI it was just an off hand joke.
You’re thinking of WWI. Which the majority of the American public wanted nothing to do with. UK pressured Wilson into entering the war with the threat that if America remained neutral per public wishes that the post war world order would not be a good one for American trade.
WWII was also not a popular war with the American public. And opinion polling of returning troops would be enlightening to the modern liberal who watches Saving Private Ryan and thinks “they’re just like me!”.
1 Like
Well I was thinking even WW2 they were basically hanging out untill Pearl Harbor got bombed.
And then they be like this is a war we might actually have to get involved in.
And then for some unknown reason spends the next hundred years expecting some sort of reach around for that.
Compred to Australia who was already in italy by that stage. And actually declared war on japan a bit later.
And has then fought in every war since.
A lot of the issue with arguing with Americans over America in WWII is that since Pearl Harbor and the war, WWII has retroactively become THE most popular war in American history to invoke. One significant reason is the Boomer Truth Regime our culture created post war that means the person or faction that can claim political descendance from the allied forces gets a huge inherent moral correctness bonus to their politics.
The nature of why the US joined the war and the kind of war the American public and troops were being told they were going to fight has been basically erased and covered up as well due to the post war Holocaust focus. If you look at actual propaganda during the war meant to influence public and military opinion it was all focused on the physical security threat “the Hun” and “the Jap” posed to the American homeland.
This is why you see a bunch of upper middle class over educated ANTIFA kids claiming that the chuds who stormed the beaches of Normandy (who said after the war they would have surrendered if they knew victory would lead to desegregation and the civil rights movement) were also ANTIFA. This is also why every political enemy has to be some version of Hitler.
But at the time, both I and II, the American public was not in favor of joining the war and there were significant German immigrant and German American populations that were genocided going into and during the wars.
2 Likes
It has an easy enemy and we basically won. Which hasn’t been the case since. And may never be the case again. (I have even seen sympathy for Russia in this new one.)
There is pro Russian sentiment but I think that’s primarily coming from the same place as the anti US criticism in that the critics tend to be anti imperialist, anti GAE, or IR Realists who are saying “told you so” (like John Mearsheimer who called this back in the 90’s). And being Pro Russia vocally is a subversive position to take. And it’s important to remember that some people are “into politics” simply to be subversive.
I’m not pro Russia but I am anti the current regime of the GAE and I am apt to point out the moves the US (ahem “NATO leadership” but let’s be clear, the US is “NATO leadership”) has made to goad Russia into this. TBQH Russia is 100x more justified in invading Ukraine than we were in invading Iraq, and I participated in that war.
I thought it was pro russian propaganda that has been inserted in to right wing rhetoric. The pro guns, anti homosexual, at least putin is a manly man kind of stuff.
Which as a fan of ideology i find kind of hysterical.
Actually it comes back to that friend enemy distinction. If you want to use Russia to support you in banning lesbians. Then you can’t exactly bitch when they invade the Ukrane.
Who claimed or told you that was happening, or did you come up with that bit of nonsense on your own?
See it reflected in the chats. You can generally tell when a team comes in and starts pushing an agenda.
At a quick look. The guardian has done a piece on it.
Al-Jazeera with a different take.
But it is like everything Buzz lightyear at the moment gets bombed with the go woke go broke slogan.
That is generated by specific teams of trolls hitting every media site they can to pretend that the general public has these views.
I even spoke to a guy once who was actively doing it. He honked on about how liberals had all these views for something.
I went and had a look and it was all opposite views in the comments.
And he was like yeah. But that is only because it got the attention of right wings are us and we all jumped on. Otherwise the views would have been totally biased.
Here we go. Russians don’t like the Gays in the Ukrane.
And it is all about gaining that piece of common ground. If you hate the gays then you want to be on board with the biggest dogs in the fight.
Russia has a huge amount of influence in those circles.
Greg, did you ever consider that the media, including the Guardian, and Aljazeera, like Tucker Carlson are not really reporting news, but all selling spin, and have been for some time.
There may be a small minority of “right wing” people who might fall into the categories you describe.
Just as there may be a small minority of “left wing” people that are fans of real communist regimes.
But sensationalism sells, and the stupid, and naive love to buy it, whether it’s the crap that the Guardian and Aljazeera or Tucker put out.