On Tue, 03 Jun 2003 16:44:17 -0700, (paghat) wrote:

}Actually, a pretty good argument could be made that without the Patten in
}Africa & without the US's hard-won liberation especially of France,
}Germany might still have taken Europe down, & most certainly England
}couldn't've stopped them. But I'm not up to that particular argument just
}now, as I have trouble drumming up much jingoism even where it might
}belong.
}
}-paghat the ratgirl

Britain had already stopped Germany in the Battle of Britain and Russia had
already stopped Germany cold (that's a pun). England began daily (weather
permitting) bombing of Germany in 1943 and Russia had opened up the Eastern
front. Germany borders on the Atlantic with a major port at Hamburg (second
largest city in Germany), which England devastated in one night's bombing.
Hitler was so preoccupied with the eastern front that he issued mis-informed
orders to Rommel that caused Rommel to lose his armour and any chance he had
to conduct an attack against Montgomery's eighth army. I bring this up only
to show how concerned Hitler was in 1942 with the eastern front.

What do you think would happen to the German forces in Africa when Germany
fell? What would the Germans in France have done when Germany fell?

Europe would be a very different place today without American involvement,
no argument. I would very much like to see your pretty good argument for
Germany taking down Europe if the United States were not involved.

The jingoism started with "the country that saved your up-tight asses in two
world wars." Are you going to finish it with--"& most certainly England
couldn't've stopped them?"

Why are Americans not talking about lend/lease? That prevented the fall of
England as much as Patton did.