Call it bias, but I'm with Merdiolu....I never hear any Brits boasting of without us you lot would be under the Nazi yoke still or speaking Russian when they kicked the Nazis out in 47. I do though constantlhy and it is constant on lots of forums hear the old if it was not for us you lot would be speaking German by Americans..but I've heard the same from a Ministry of Defence policeman too. And our prime minister got a funny education as his understanding is somewhat askew. Which is why after any interviews he gives now you see him as advised by his string pullers to immediately turn and leave before any questions or comments.
Perhaps that's because it's so obvious they don't consider it necessary. For those that don't see it .... well therei's that old saying about teaching pigs to sing. Actually I'm not sure it's true it's just on a lot firmer ground than any other such claim that I've heard.
For those that remember the goons. Neddy Seagoon: You! You were at Eton? Eccles: Yeah... Neddy Seagoon; What were you doing there? Eccles: Buyin' a tie...
Hey give us some credit we saved Granada too !!! and when we saved England, what happened to Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland ????, we saved the playing fields of Eton too ! If this thread goes on much longer we , and Canada,( Our new and only bf) will sick the NSA on you. Gaines
Actually, immediately after that line Otto does the "you'd all be speaking German" line, but I couldn't find that.
In a forlorn hope to get this thread back on track, no America did not "save" Britain from having to learn German (though it might have been worse for those poor Huns having to listen to their language being mauled by a Cockney accent), I would not entirely discount the premiss out of hand. It is quite possible that the Soviet Union and the British Commonwealth would have eventually vanquished the Nazi Reich, but the question is when, and at what cost to each of these powers and to Europe itself. Churchill is quoted (I believe) that US wartime aid allowed his nation of 50 million to fight as one of 60 million and aid to Russia (UK and USA) is credited to equate to 10-15 % of her war economy. A passive US would have greatly reduced both of this figures and led to considerably higher casualties for both nations. UK casualties would have been higher still without 60 odd divisions sent to Europe to fight alongside the gallant Tommies. Without the third leg of the alliance the war might(probably) have dragged into 1946 or 47 in an extreme worst case scenario, with greater loss of civilian life and destruction to Europe's already devastated landscape. The final victory would almost surely have seen a greater swath fall into the clutches of Stalin, leaving Britain to exchange a Nazi controlled Europe for one that was Communist controlled. Without American blood spilled on European soil, how likely would there be a post war Marshall plan? While there still might have been some kind of aid sent, the need would have been more acute and fall far short of the levels needed to allow Europe to recover in a scant generation (Germany and Italy too). America did not win the war in Europe, but it is fair to say she was crucial for winning the peace that followed.
I don't know about the Welsh, but the Scottish and Irish are beyond saving. Seriously. Whoever tried to invade them, ever? Only the English. You can't count the half-hearted Roman attempts: 1) they were using English, 2) in the end they said "eff it, just build a freakin' wall!" And you all know what they say about Mad dogs & Englishmen...
Hold on Gaines! One of these days I'll send an NKVD unit to Alafuckingbama to teach you which countries would have spoken Russian with Cockney accent just if comrade Stalin wanted to.
Well, maybe we didn't save England, but we liberated Auschwitz. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SV1sxq8mqvA