@SuperbattleshipYamato hard to argue against any of this really. The IJN was so far gone by this point in the war that there’s not really much they could have done to salvage their situation one way or another. The bit about the allies not having many LSTs in general is something I never knew before though.
Who was the GREATEST
-
lol i need to lean how to qoute + man i was stating that hitler won the war of showing that the germans have some spice. also in a&a any games germany should have more ipcs then u.s.a ok i think that is super cheap i know its out of topic just saying.
also hitler won the war in theory of taking many lives and such but didnt win the military war thats all and your right i messed up lol :-P -
well it looks like Adolf won this poll after all.
Damm Vegans!
-
lol sorry man i hate hitler but he was a good leader
-
If he was that great of a leader should he had won the war?
-
Not when they are fighting basically every nation on earth with help from Italy. :-D
-
If Hitler had finished the war in the west before attacking the U.S.S.R there would be no debate over this issue. Hitler between 1933-1941 was an awesome leader; however between 1942-1945 he was a failure.
-
lol i need to lean how to qoute + man i was stating that hitler won the war of showing that the germans have some spice. also in a&a any games germany should have more ipcs then u.s.a ok i think that is super cheap i know its out of topic just saying.
also hitler won the war in theory of taking many lives and such but didnt win the military war thats all and your right i messed up lol :-PI’m trying to understand what you mean exactly, but I don’t see how Hitler won anything. At the end of the war, Hitler, the Axis, and the Nazi party (effectively) were no more. I agree that he did show that Germany still had a warrior’s bone in its body.
-
hitler (EDITED OUT)… showing some back bone many still after wer nazi
the battles germans lost were not the battle of hope really.EDIT: Please proof your language before posting. Its really hard to follow what you say, and sometimes your using inappropriate language
-
who ever edited it to me thankyou i have received it from many people and i will control the language that i dont think is unappropriate but because i want to stay
i apologize and say that i will try my best to not say those things i said ad ill restate the reason why i chose hitler i chose him because in his early years he a rallied up and showed the world power (thank god the allies won id be 1 of the rebels) (hope thats very apropriate answer) want the person who edited em to answer!also this is why my karma has gone many negitives at the moment
-
I gave you +2 Karma. I never gave you bad karma, but i think if you posted more clearly and thoughtfully, your credits will roll up and other posters will respect your take on the issues.
-
who ever edited it to me thankyou i have received it from many people and i will control the language that i dont think is unappropriate but because i want to stay
i apologize and say that i will try my best to not say those things i said ad ill restate the reason why i chose hitler i chose him because in his early years he a rallied up and showed the world power (thank god the allies won id be 1 of the rebels) (hope thats very apropriate answer) want the person who edited em to answer!also this is why my karma has gone many negitives at the moment
Don’t worry so much about Karma. Just say what you have to say. I have no idea who keeps taking mine and I dont care either. I just care about giving positive Karma to everyone here that demonstrates non biased, introspective view points. Also friendly people. I love friendly people.
-
imperious ty and other guy thanks i am going to edit a bit more because im use to not type full sentences on the internet(msn)
so i will edit a bit better and be careful what i say -
Yes you need to type completely and make sure the sentence makes sence. This is not texting on a phone. These posts are not idle chat and people take time to provide coherent thoughts and we respect others by writing in a manner that is clear.
-
imperious i actually thought you gave me -1 karma.
Anyways hitler won the best military award but
Church Hill probably won the determined award -
no i did not.
-
i didnt know until today also i have givn u +1 karma also we are getting off topic :-P
-
I voted Stalin. He not only fought Hitler he expanded his empire in the process. You can pretend the Warsaw Pact was an alliance for Soviet friendly countries if you like. The reality is they were an actual part of the Soviet Empire. Look how long it stayed that way.
Stalin exported his brand of politics globally to an extent no other individual has in history. There are still communist nations on this planet that Iosef helped make commie. The massive effect on the world psyche and economics the Cold War had. The Korean War, and communist insurgencies that lost but still drained western powers of men and material. Stalin’s policies even effected the movies made in Hollywood. I think his world impact is under rated by most people.
Being an independent I’m able to think about politics. Being dense I’m not able to think about economics. I let Alan Greenspan do that for me. In an interview Mr. Greenspan said Clinton did very little positive for the American economy. According to Greenspan Clinton “rode on the coat tails of the previous two administrations economic policies”.
Those policies were started by Reagan. Ask any economist and they will tell you it takes a good decade for a policy to fully effect the multi-trillion dollar engine that is the American economy. Reagan bashers should not take my word for it. Read up a little about how our economy really works then re-access your politics. Thank Reagan for the '90’s, thank Clinton for now, thank Bush for what’s soon to come, and thank the next guy for the 2020’s.
-
Being an independent I’m able to think about politics. Being dense I’m not able to think about economics. I let Alan Greenspan do that for me. In an interview Mr. Greenspan said Clinton did very little positive for the American economy. According to Greenspan Clinton “rode on the coat tails of the previous two administrations economic policies”.
Those policies were started by Reagan. Ask any economist and they will tell you it takes a good decade for a policy to fully effect the multi-trillion dollar engine that is the American economy. Reagan bashers should not take my word for it. Read up a little about how our economy really works then re-access your politics. Thank Reagan for the '90’s, thank Clinton for now, thank Bush for what’s soon to come, and thank the next guy for the 2020’s.
Let’s look at a quote from Greenspan (Ben Bernanke has replaced him, by the way) concerning Clinton and Reagan (from the Washington Post):
During Clinton’s first weeks as president, Greenspan went to the Oval Office and explained the danger of not confronting the federal deficit. Unless the deficits were cut, there could be “a financial crisis,” Greenspan told the president. “The hard truth was that Reagan had borrowed from Clinton, and Clinton was having to pay it back. I was impressed that he did not seem to be trying to fudge reality to the extent politicians ordinarily do. He was forcing himself to live in the real world.”
Dealing with a budget surplus in his second term, Clinton proposed devoting the extra money to “save Social Security first.” Greenspan writes, “I played no role in finding the answer, but I had to admire the one Clinton and his policymakers came up with.”
Does this sound like the same Greenspan that you allege is critical of Clinton?
The reality is that Reagan’s economic policies created real problems. Policies do not take a decade to enact and take effect. Reagan created the largest deficit since WW2, shifted the tax burden to the middle class, perpetuated the S&L crisis, changed the US from an export and creditor nation to an import and debtor nation, etc.
I’m not saying he didn’t do anything good…I’m sure there is. But to say he gets credit for what Clinton and the Republican Congress did during Clintons terms is ridiculous.
In that case you could say the benefit during Reagan’s terms came from Ford and Carter (which some argue anyway concerning deregulation).
-
I voted Stalin. He not only fought Hitler he expanded his empire in the process. You can pretend the Warsaw Pact was an alliance for Soviet friendly countries if you like. The reality is they were an actual part of the Soviet Empire. Look how long it stayed that way.
Stalin exported his brand of politics globally to an extent no other individual has in history. There are still communist nations on this planet that Iosef helped make commie. The massive effect on the world psyche and economics the Cold War had. The Korean War, and communist insurgencies that lost but still drained western powers of men and material. Stalin’s policies even effected the movies made in Hollywood. I think his world impact is under rated by most people.
Being an independent I’m able to think about politics. Being dense I’m not able to think about economics. I let Alan Greenspan do that for me. In an interview Mr. Greenspan said Clinton did very little positive for the American economy. According to Greenspan Clinton “rode on the coat tails of the previous two administrations economic policies”.
Those policies were started by Reagan. Ask any economist and they will tell you it takes a good decade for a policy to fully effect the multi-trillion dollar engine that is the American economy. Reagan bashers should not take my word for it. Read up a little about how our economy really works then re-access your politics. Thank Reagan for the '90’s, thank Clinton for now, thank Bush for what’s soon to come, and thank the next guy for the 2020’s.
It’s about time Stalin gets some love in this poll.
-
@ABWorsham:
Stalin gets some love in this poll.
Yes Stalin did well and the only thing the russians thought of when the germans attacked and after usa came was kill nazis before the western allies.
Suggested Topics
