Holocaust survivors are sueing the U.S?

[cphilip]

Some good points here

1) Liberation of camps was politicaly distributed by agreements by the Allies. Some countries had to be allowed to be liberators to keep eveyone happy.

2) America (as well as some others) ignored the genocide for quite some time. Isolationistic politics abounded in this country at the time. And it was only after direct attack that we woke up. Thank God we did wake up. We could have done just what the Japanese wanted at the time. Stayed out of it and in fact quit helping under cover.

Very much the same thing is happening today here. However many are calling for Isolationistic policies even today. There are some great similarities between then and now. A new enemy and a new thought on how its best to deal with it. A more shadowy undefined one at that. Very difficult to identify and pinpoint. However some feel intervention now is the right way. Some feel not. Which will be right? I don't know. But this coming next period is going to be a very dangerous and interesting time for our country. And other countries as well. We better be as right as possible. Mistakes will be made along the way. Just like they were in WWII. But overall we better get it right for the most part. If we forget history we are doomed to repeat it. Problem is figuring out what the real lesson was!

If people are identified as taking war prizes then they should be returned. Or if there is any debt left to the losers this should be used to satisfy them.

[FactsOfLife]

WTF are they teaching you children in school these days?

[Kevmaster]

not many americans died for their freedom, if any, if i recall correctly..

I can PROMISE you...were it not for America (both in terms of money given to the allies, money given to our army and our millions of soldiers and our massive amounts of supplies) the Allies would Not have won the war. We were the lifeline for Britian and Russia even before we officially entere the war. No way they would have made it if we remained 100% nuetral.

While it may not have been American GIs freeing camps, it was American GIs and it was American Dollars defending Europe from the Nazis and eventually overcoming the Nazi regime

[thecavemankevin]

not many americans died for their freedom, if any, if i recall correctly..

thats got to be one of the most ignorant statements ever made on AO....and thats saying a lot!

Had we not been there the Jewish faith would be next to nothing right now. Do you even know what happened on the beaches of Normandy? Have you not seen Saving Private Ryan? D-Day was a real event and thousands of American GI's died on that day alone....not to mention the entire European campaign. You can say none died for their freedom all you want but it doesn't change the fact that had it not been for the US all of those ungreatfull survivors would not be here today

[SlartyBartFast]

were it not for America (both in terms of money given to the allies, money given to our army and our millions of soldiers and our massive amounts of supplies) the Allies would Not have won the war.

In terms of US contribution in WWII yes of course their contribution was critical at many stages in the European theatre.

Even in before 1941 they were contributing in many ways. The Browning machine guns that armed the Spitfires and Hurricanes were American, the 100 Octane fuel that squeezed an extra few mph out of them came from refineries in the Americas (Albeit Shell owned). There was also their production of ammunition and other items.

All this was in the form of business transactions though rather than American altruism. We paid in cold hard cash, and their companies made a cold hard profit. The 1940's economic boom that established them as the worlds economic powerhouse had its foundation in our gold. It was only when the gold was in danger of running out that they implemented lend/lease. We paid on credit, and paid in full. Don't let any American tell you different. In fairness to the Americans this commercially hardnosed attitude was a result of our (and everyone elses save the Finns) failure to repay debts from WWI, although we did equip the American armies in WWI.

Once America entered the war the floodgates really opened, but by 1944 only 25% of our material came from America. Their production of transports, aircraft carriers and items such as Sherman tanks was crucial however and should not be overlooked.

It was far from one way traffic however. We gave them Radar, and the jet engine. The first American jet fighter used a British engine, as did the famous Sabre of the Korean war (the Russian MiG15 also used a British engine in a strange twist of history). We also gave them the Merlin engine that powered the famous P51 that allowed them to carry out their daylight bombing campaign. Half the American troops landed on D-Day landed from Royal Navy vessels. All of them were based in the UK prior to D-Day. A million Commonwealth troops fought the Japanese.

Its entirely true to say we could not have won without them, but we may not have lost.

Its also true that without us they would not have landed in Europe, and may not have defeated the Japanese.

It was a partnership, less equal as time went on but a partnership nonetheless and as previously noted some American 18 year old who thinks differently is showing his ignorance of the historical facts.

[Thordic]

The way I look at this, war sucks. People die, belongings get lost, destroyed, pillaged, whatever. Thats how war works.

Since when do the people who lost the war get to cry afterwards and sue for what they lost?

I agree it sucks, but I think the whole concept of "war reparations" is BS if you side won the war. And even the loser shouldn't have to account for every single penny. Its a friggin war. Theres nothing civilized about it. Its not some sort of corporate action where you all the checks and balances have to match up at the end.

I find the whole idea of reparations absolutely ridiculous.

[nastymag]

i think if the soldiers took somthing then they should give it back, if that means money reperations then so be it.

as many people have stated, we did save many jews by retaking france and in general joining the war. But we also condemmed many jews to their death by turning back many ships loaded with jews and by turning a blind eye to what was happening.
I dont think the welfare of the jews was really a top prority.

While our contribution war was immense and undeniable, i really do not believe that all of europe would have been lost if had not joined the fight. Germany(well more like ....was not reall able to wear donw the brits) had lost the battle of Britain . during the year of 1941 the RAF was stronger then it had ever been and Germany then invaded Russia. while i doubt England could have launched a ground offensive, i dont think they where in much danger after Germany invaded Russia. Also, it was in our best interest to support the british, it created jobs in our economy which was still realing after the depression.

my two cents

[Destructo6]

All this was in the form of business transactions though rather than American altruism. We paid in cold hard cash, and their companies made a cold hard profit.

Nonsense. Try "Lend-Lease" and debts forgiven at the end of the war.

was not reall able to wear donw the brits) had lost the battle of Britain .

Winning a defense does nothing more than maintain the status-quo. You can't really win anything unless you are on the offensive.

If these Hungarians can come up with itemized lists of missing belongings, who owned them, and which US servicemen took them, they may have a point. Otherwise, 50+ years a bit past the point of absurdity.

After the war, the British arrested and kept Jews in prison ships as they migrated en-mass to Palestine. Facing increasing numbers of Jews and no solution in sight, coupled with the guilt and desire for atonement after WWII, the newly UN was lobbied to split Palestine and create a Jewish homeland.

I wouldn't call it guilt. "Sympathy" is more like it. The push for a Jewish homeland in Palestine was begun much earlier than the end of WWII. Since the late 1800s, Zionist organizations had been looking for a suitable location for some tim, even considering places such as South America, but historical ties found Jews emigrating to Palestine in large numbers. The WWI Balfour Declaration, coupled with the Sykes-Pichot agreement, set the hard groundwork for a Jewish state.

[SlartyBartFast]

Nonsense. Try "Lend-Lease" and debts forgiven at the end of the war.

BS. The Russians didn't pay if I remember correctly, but lend lease payments were part of the British budget for a LONG time. Give me some links that show the British didn't pay.

But lend-lease payment asside, everything before that was paid for.

One source I found says that there is a specific line item in the 2003 budget saying when the lend-lease payments will end. Couldn't find anything that clear, but:
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk./media...7/debt_res.pdf

On Page 18, note 11: Still paying US war debt. I think I've spent enough time on government treasury websites now.

To that add the royalty free use of Radar, jet engine technology, nuclear technology, and others.

I wouldn't call it guilt. "Sympathy" is more like it..

No, guilt is the right word. Feeling too guilty to turn the Jews away from lands prommised back to the Arabs, but not guilty enough for many to change their discrimanatory immigraion policies.

Having the Jews go to a "homeland" was convenient because it absolved guilt AND they didn't go elsewhere.

[PyRo]

Nail on head!!!

but I don't think anyone is seriously considering suing the US over this issue. That would just be stupid.

What are you talking about, this is a case that has been filed and is currently in court.

[PyRo]

Its entirely true to say we could not have won without them, but we may not have lost.

Exactly.
Without the U.S. Germany would have had control of Europe (save the UK). The U.K. wouldn't have had enough troops to launch a sucessfull invasion (they might even have signed a neutrality agreement with Germany). This would allow the Germans to concentrate their troops in Russia. Once they had Russia (knowing how much a German neutrality agreement ment) they would have build up their forces a bit, hammered the UK with rockets and bombing missions untill they could invade a severley weakend UK (D-Day working the other way).


When he says 25% of supplies came from America, just think about how many supplies were used. 25% was a huge number.

So what if we were making them pay for equipment, we could have just as easially sold equipment exclusivly to the Germans, I bet they would have been perfectly willing to pay for it as well.

[PyRo]

i think if the soldiers took somthing then they should give it back, if that means money reperations then so be it.

my two cents

A few soldiers took things that didn't belong to them, but how many young men gave their lives, how many came home missing arms, and legs. Who returned those lives, and limbs, who undid the heartbreak of families who learned their loved ones were killed?

[PyRo]

Some good points here
We could have done just what the Japanese wanted at the time. Stayed out of it and in fact quit helping under cover. .

I think we became fairly open about our assistance.
I know in WWI we tried to cover it up but did a bad job. The Germans sank the Lusitania because they claimed it was carrying weapons. We said it wasn't so we used it for an excuse to go to war. I was told that years later the ship was checked and their actually were weapons on board.

[nastymag]

yea that should go into a not to do list.
Never load a cruise liner with weapons and paying passangers at the same time, and not tell them about it
the Luistania was a horrible disaster. the Sub fired one torp i believe. but there where more then one explosions, probably made the ship sink faster.

[SlartyBartFast]

When he says 25% of supplies came from America, just think about how many supplies were used. 25% was a huge number.

True. And nobody denies the great help provided and the necessity of the help.

But.....

From a reluctant, late arriving, 25% participation to claiming winning the war virtually single handedly and the continuous "defenders of the free world", "Europe owes us their freedom".

That's a bit of a leap.

Without Canada's participation, the US would never have had the chance to be all holier than thou about the help they gave.

Keep asking someone to kiss your backside, well it's only a matter of time till they want to give it a kick instead.

Nationally, the partnership between the other countries is a comradship. WWII was something we all went through and without each other we would have might not made it, or at least the world would be a far differnet place.

Why is it that generalised American ego destroys the comradeship and demands a larger than fair share of the reward and accolades?

As for Germany ruling Europe if the US hadn't helped? That's one possibility. One other possibility is that the Communist world would have been much larger.