60 year anniversary of V-E day.

[Imran Siddiqui]

But they hide in trenches all day. WW2 had tanks and planes and bombers... and Nazis and Commies. It was like some cheesy movie or something .

[Qilue]

Originally posted by BeBro
But it was a big war too!

It was, but the behavior of both sides is something of which most people don't like to be reminded.

Poison gas - used by both sides.
Biological weapons - used by both sides.

[Dauphin]

Many people in the UK are sadly ignorant of WW2 beyond Germany and Hitler.

Of those that know a bit more, its not really a feeling of Britain conquering Germany alone, but the feeling is of Britain standing up to Hitler pretty much alone for a couple of years and defeating him in the Battle of Britain.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
But they hide in trenches all day. WW2 had tanks and planes and bombers... and Nazis and Commies. It was like some cheesy movie or something .

I heard for the French WWI has still quite a big meaning, strange how things differ from country to country. For us obviously WWII, and the time before has a big meaning as well.

Oh and, if others associate Germany with WW2 I think there's not much to complain generally. I just sometimes wonder about things in the UK, for example how a part of the press reacted to Ratzinger's election as pope (and I'm not at all religious, so I don't care mcuh about him being pope). That seemed more like a bit cheap nationalism to me. OTOH our own tabloids aren't exactly known for great journalism, so maybe I overestimate it....

[Frozzy]

The British press are notoriously tasteless. Ratzinger's election of pope was standard knee-jerk which can be seen in its coverage of the Belgrano sinking, and to a larger extent its coverage of the Hillsborough tragedy.

Ratzi rhyming with Nazi makes for a good pun, combine that with him being in the Hitler Youth, bingo, you have a tabloid front page. The content inside is totally irrelevant to a tabloid top story, it's all about the shock factor to make you buy it.

[MarkG]

what did bush say about russia and the baltic states? i hear putin is furious or something...

[Lancer]

He said the Sovs "occupied" the Baltic countries at the end of WW2.

Then he said this:

GWB: "As we mark a victory of six days ago -- six decades ago, we are mindful of a paradox. For much of Germany, defeat led to freedom. For much of Eastern and Central Europe, victory brought the iron rule of another empire. V-E Day marked the end of fascism, but it did not end oppression. The agreement at Yalta followed in the unjust tradition of Munich and the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Once again, when powerful governments negotiated, the freedom of small nations was somehow expendable. Yet this attempt to sacrifice freedom for the sake of stability left a continent divided and unstable. The captivity of millions in Central and Eastern Europe will be remembered as one of the greatest wrongs of history."

That was taken from JohnT's post on page 6 of Saras Balitic states thread currently on pg 2 of the OT.

[Ted Striker]

I was ready to give Bush props for acknowledging history, but then I remembered he's just trying to use the situation to get people to his his current "freedom" and "liberty" crap is along the same lines as the GENUINELY historic situations.

[Lancer]

"props"?

[MarkG]

Originally posted by Lancer
The agreement at Yalta followed in the unjust tradition of Munich and the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

1) somehow i doubt gwb pronounced "ribbentrop" correctly

2) so did he go on to apologize for the result of his own "powerfull goverment's" negototiations with the evil iron empire? or just mention the wrong-doing as a simple fact of history that "just happened"?

That was taken from JohnT's post on page 6 of Saras Balitic states thread currently on pg 2 of the OT.

i cant imagine how i missed it

[Lancer]

He went on to discuss how the US and Russia should work together to commit forces to the Greek cause of liberating the Byzantine empire from the Turkish beast.

There, NOW do you like him better Markos?

[MarkG]

Originally posted by Lancer
He went on to discuss how the US and Russia should work together to commit forces to the Greek cause of liberating the Byzantine empire from the Turkish beast.

There, NOW do you like him better Markos?

they should commit their will (not forces) to have the turkish troops move out of the occupied part of Cyprus, like they did with Syria's troops in Lebanon....

then i would like him a lot better. i would even move to the US to vote him on the next elections!

[Lancer]

"they should commit their will (not forces) to have the turkish troops move out of the occupied part of Cyprus, like they did with Syria's troops in Lebanon...."

I'm down with this. I'll call my congressman tomorrow. Peter DeFazio...he might actually try to do something about it. Little guy with tons of attitude.

Don't hold your breath though Markos, but I will call.

[MarkG]

Tell him we're already running late. Syria occupied Lebanon for 29 years. Turkey is closing to 32 years now

[Lancer]

I'll tell him that, and that maybe we can trade Iraq to the Turks in exchange for Cyprus, and european areas occupied by the Turks (Constantinople) as well as that nice area on the coast there opposite europe that was historicly Greek.

Really, it would be nice as Iraq isn't quite as much fun as initially thought and Greece is a friend, sooo...

I'm sure they'll go for it.