Britain bled itself dry as well as the sons of its commonwealth.
The Yanks saved the Brits.
Alone... well... not really.
As the saying goes...
"England has always been willing to fight to the last American."
BOOM!
LIGHTS OUT!
Imprison the Royal Family and Abolish the Monarchy
- Thread starter Sons of Liberty
- Start date
Britain bled itself dry as well as the sons of its commonwealth.
The Yanks saved the Brits.
Alone... well... not really.
As the saying goes...
"England has always been willing to fight to the last American."
BOOM!
LIGHTS OUT!
During WWII, the Royal Navy's Pacific Fleet alone, just one part of the entire Royal Navy (which had been the mightiest naval force on the planet for 200 years), consisted of 21 aircraft carriers, 11 cruisers, numerous smaller warships and numerous submarines.
In fact, the British Pacific Fleet was about to invade Japan, before Japan surrendered.
So I hardly think the British were "lying low".
Read some history.
Only in the romantic version of history that you get taught in your schools and other educational establishments.
The US Navy was bigger than all the worlds navies combined in 1943.
The Brits avoided the Japanese... once the Japanese sank two of their capital ships in 1941 the Brits retreated. They didn't show up with their fleet till 1945. By then it was all over.
Heck they avoided the Germans for that matter except for providing support to the Americans.
In 1945, the US Navy had 18 aircraft carriers.
The Royal Navy had 21 aircraft carriers in the Pacific Fleet alone.
Come off it.
The British fought the Japanese in places like Burma in 1942 and 1943, when the Japs were enviously eyeing our imperial possessions.
It was during that campaign that there were cases of single British Gurkhas (the most fearsome warriors on the planet, of which thousands still serve in the British Army) - just one Gurkha - taking on many Japanese at once, and beating them (beheading them with their kukris, to be more precise).
The British (without the Yanks) fought the Japanese at the Battle of Imphal in 1944 in British India. The British routed them, inflicting on the Japanese what was then their largest defeat in their history. Almost 54,000 Japs were killed but just 17,000 British.
Yeah? So what happened during the Battle of Britain and the North Africa Campaign? I don't recall there being too many Yanks involved in any of those. Where were the Yanks when the British were defeating Rommel?
You fail...
By 1943, the Navy's size was larger than the combined fleets of all the other combatant nations in World War II.[5] By war's end in 1945, the United States Navy had added hundreds of new ships, including 18 aircraft carriers and 8 battleships, and had over 70% of the world's total numbers and total tonnage of naval vessels of 1,000 tons or greater.[6][7] At its peak, the U.S. Navy was operating 6,768 ships on V-J Day in August 1945, including 28 aircraft carriers, 23 battleships, 71 escort carriers, 72 cruisers, over 232 submarines, 377 destroyers, and thousands of amphibious, supply and auxiliary ships.
28>21 (and those 21 carriers that the Brits have INCLUDED their escort carriers.)
I repeat... you FAIL/
And were defeated until the Americans relieved the pressure.
And they're not British! LMAO
A side show to most US wins in the Pacific.
We were there and won the N. African Campaign.
The Brits didn't. The Americans and Patton did.
there are thousands and thousands of people who 'won't' work, won't be responsible for anything, take
money from the public all of their lives, will never lead anything, and live like the genuuine poor
pretending they belong there, when they are actually just lazy and greedy. they are allowed to exist,
we continue to care for them financially, so what should we do with them i ask.
when i see the royal family doing different things out in public, and i see hundreds of thousands of
people happy, cheering and wanting to see them eagerly, i see that as a positive thing, a happy time,
and if that were taken away it would take away that feeling of security for their royal family they
seem to adore. that is not 'our' business to interfere with, and the few dollars canada puts out when
royalty visits here also obviously brings out cheering happy people, i wouldn't deny that many people what
they love.
we live 'now' not hundreds of years ago, i see the royal family changing with time, they are gradually
becoming more in tune with the people, the grandsons work hard and reach very responsible positions in
life, and that will continue as little prince george grows up, i think his parents will see that he also
contributes to society by paying his dues just as his dad is doing.
tradition is very strong, they are peaceful people, the country is peaceful, that is the message they send
in this time we live, i wish more countries would follow, it is the violence in the world we all should be
concerned about, not the peaceful.
money from the public all of their lives, will never lead anything, and live like the genuuine poor
pretending they belong there, when they are actually just lazy and greedy. they are allowed to exist,
we continue to care for them financially, so what should we do with them i ask.
when i see the royal family doing different things out in public, and i see hundreds of thousands of
people happy, cheering and wanting to see them eagerly, i see that as a positive thing, a happy time,
and if that were taken away it would take away that feeling of security for their royal family they
seem to adore. that is not 'our' business to interfere with, and the few dollars canada puts out when
royalty visits here also obviously brings out cheering happy people, i wouldn't deny that many people what
they love.
we live 'now' not hundreds of years ago, i see the royal family changing with time, they are gradually
becoming more in tune with the people, the grandsons work hard and reach very responsible positions in
life, and that will continue as little prince george grows up, i think his parents will see that he also
contributes to society by paying his dues just as his dad is doing.
tradition is very strong, they are peaceful people, the country is peaceful, that is the message they send
in this time we live, i wish more countries would follow, it is the violence in the world we all should be
concerned about, not the peaceful.
British Pacific Fleet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I'm afraid all Britain really did was TRAIN Japan's navy fliers before the war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Japanese_Navy_Air_Service
Last edited:
BATTLE OF IMPHAL
8 MARCH - 3 JULY 1944
BRITAIN VS JAPAN
DECISIVE BRITISH VICTORY
The Battle of Imphal took place in the region around the city of Imphal, the capital of the state of Manipur in north east British India from March until July 1944. Japanese armies attempted to destroy the British forces at Imphal and invade India, but were driven back into Burma with heavy losses. Together with the simultaneous Battle of Kohima on the road by which the encircled British forces at Imphal were relieved by more British troops, the battle was the turning point of the Burma Campaign, part of the South East Asian Theatre of the Second World War.
The defeat at Kohima and Imphal was the largest defeat to that date in Japanese history.
British Gurkhas advancing with Lee tanks to clear the Japanese from Imphal-Kohima road [N.E. India]
By 1944 the Japanese were already beaten and on the run because of the US. Then the Brits decided to show up.
You fail...
By 1943, the Navy's size was larger than the combined fleets of all the other combatant nations in World War II.[5] By war's end in 1945, the United States Navy had added hundreds of new ships, including 18 aircraft carriers and 8 battleships, and had over 70% of the world's total numbers and total tonnage of naval vessels of 1,000 tons or greater.[6][7] At its peak, the U.S. Navy was operating 6,768 ships on V-J Day in August 1945, including 28 aircraft carriers, 23 battleships, 71 escort carriers, 72 cruisers, over 232 submarines, 377 destroyers, and thousands of amphibious, supply and auxiliary ships.
28>21 (and those 21 carriers that the Brits have INCLUDED their escort carriers.)
I repeat... you FAIL/
Remember this: 'Neptune', the maritime side of Operation 'Overlord', the landings in Normandy that began on 6 June 1944, was commanded by the Royal Navy's greatest exponent of amphibious warfare, Admiral Bertram Ramsay, and most of the warships that took part in the Normandy Landings, from battleships to infantry landing craft, were British.
Bull****.
The British were the only ones who did any good in the Burma Campaign and in the whole of Asia.
American historian Raymond Callahan concluded "(British Commander William) Slim's great victory (at Imphal) ... helped the British, unlike the French, Dutch or, later, the Americans, to leave Asia with some dignity."
As for the Yanks - American goals in Burma had been to aid the Nationalist Chinese regime. Apart from the "Hump" airlift, these bore no fruit until so near the end of the war that they made little contribution to the defeat of Japan. These efforts have also been criticised as fruitless because of the self-interest and corruption of Chiang Kai-Shek's regime.
The Gurkhas are British troops. And they're the deadliest and most fearless troops in the world.
Yet more rubbish.
The British defeat of the Japs at Imphal - what was Japan's largest defeat in her history - was the turning point in the Burma Campaign.
The siege of Imphal and the resulted failure of the Japanese to take Imphal in 1944 was to have a major impact on the war in the Far East. Imphal, along with the unsuccessful attack on the nearby garrison town of Kohima ended the Japanese drive to Delhi. The failure of the Japanese to take Imphal and Kohima also signalled the start of the Allied re-conquest of Burma.
The Japanese had sustained 53,000 casualties while the British had lost 17,000 men killed and wounded.
“The disaster at Imphal was perhaps the worst of its kind yet chronicled in the annals of war.” Kase Toshikazu, Japanese Foreign Office official.
General Slim could concentrate his resources on the re-conquest of Burma now that the invincibility of the Japanese Army had been shattered.
The British were fighting the Germans in North Africa in 1940 and 1941, before the Yanks even entered the war. It wasn't until 1942 - just a year before the campaign ended - that the Yanks entered the North African Campaign. America's contribution to the North African Campaign was negligible.
The campaign was won by three years of heavy fighting by the British. Information gleaned via British Ultra code-breaking intelligence at Bletchley Park proved critical to Allied success in North Africa.
As for Patton, he actually reported to British Commander Harold Alexander. Alexander was Patton's boss and he controlled Patton's Seventh United States Army during the Invasion of Sicily. Omar Bradley, an American general on the Tunisian Campaign, credited Alexander's patience and experience with helping an inexperienced United States "field command mature and eventually come of age."
Last edited:
Eisenhower was in charge of the whole thing.
You FAIL
Showed up in 1944... it was over.
From Nepal. lmao
FAIL.
Not even close.
The UK was in a stalemate in N. Africa.
The Americans turned the tide.
Alexander... the Brit General that retreated from the Japanese in Burma? lmao
And Alexander was COMMANDED by who in Sicily? Why Dwight D. Eisenhower!
Which is the Brit way of saying "the battle, one of the greatest in British history was a pimple on the **** of WWII Pacific battles, all the significant examples of which were the Yanks v. the Japanese. But we're still pretending to be meaningful in the world, so we'll find clever circumlocutions to dodge the fact that we're a third-rate power and a vassal state of the Yanks."
Once the IJN immediately dispatched the Prince of Wales and Repulse to the bottom in 1941 the Brit Navy didn't make an noticeable appearance in the Pacific until 1945.
Bobbing along in the wake of the USN like the bathtub toys they are.
Don't get me wrong. The Royal Navy and the Brit Army were great in their day. It's just that their day ended right about the time Queen Vicky went toes up.
They had their moments in the 19th. But kinda like Rod Stewart and Keith Moon, they insist they're still awesome well into the "pathetic old grampaw pretending to be cool" period.
Bertram Ramsay was in charge of the Normandy Landings, which were planned by British Lieutenant-General Frederick Morgan.
The Normandy Landings were the brainchild of a Brit and were led by a Brit and it was overwhelmingly British ships which took part in the operation.
American historian Raymond Callahan concluded "(British Commander William) Slim's great victory (at Imphal) ... helped the British, unlike the French, Dutch or, later, the Americans, to leave Asia with some dignity."
As for the Yanks - American goals in Burma had been to aid the Nationalist Chinese regime. Apart from the "Hump" airlift, these bore no fruit until so near the end of the war that they made little contribution to the defeat of Japan.
What army do they fight in?
The British defeat of the Japs at Imphal (and Kohima) was, at the time, Japan's largest defeat in her history.
Codswallop.
The British were so dominant in North Africa in 1940 and 1941 (before the US joined the war), including defeating the Italians and capturing 130,000 of them as prisoners after they invaded Egypt, that Hitler formed the Afrika Korps, led by Rommel, to help the Italians in North Africa against the British.
The Afrika Korps was formed only because the British were winning. If the British hadn't been successful against the Axis in North Africa - at a time when they were fighting Nazi Germany ALONE - then the Afrika Korps would never have been formed.
Several long, brutal pushes back and forth across Libya and Egypt reached a turning point in the Second Battle of El Alamein in late 1942, when Lieutenant-General Bernard Montgomery's British Eighth Army broke out and drove the Axis forces all the way from Egypt to Tunisia. There wasn't a Yank in sight.
You make it sound as though he was a coward and ordered his army to retreat from the Japanese in the whole of Burma for no good reason. In fact, he abandoned Rangoon in a FIGHTING RETREAT in March 1942 after trying hard, but failing, to keep a British hold on it.
Alexander would later become the Governor of Canada.
Alexander was the Land Forces / Army Group commander during the Invasion of Sicily and controlled two armies, including George S. Patton's Seventh United States Army. Patton reported to Alexander.
The overall Naval Force Commander of the campaign was the British Admiral Andrew Cunningham.
No.
It's the British way of saying that The defeat at Kohima and Imphal was the largest defeat to that date in Japanese history and was the turning point of the Burma Campaign.
You can't put it any other way. It's there in black and white.
The Japanese didn't think the great defeat inflicted on them by the British was a mere "pimple on the **** of WWII Pacific battles".
Kase Toshikazu, Japanese Foreign Office official, said after the defeat: “The disaster at Imphal was perhaps the worst of its kind yet chronicled in the annals of war.”
To play down that massive defeat of the Japanese at the hands of the British as a mere "pimple" compared to the supposed hardman heroics of the Americans elsewhere in the Far East just make it look like you are deluded.
You and your mate really need to heads out of your Stars-and-Stripes-painted butts and realise that the US campaign in the far East wasn't as effectual as you were led to believe in your history classes
There's only so many times I am willing to repeat these words of wisdom:
American historian Raymond Callahan concluded "(British Commander William) Slim's great victory (at Imphal) ... helped the British, unlike the French, Dutch or, later, the Americans, to leave Asia with some dignity."
As for the Yanks - American goals in Burma had been to aid the Nationalist Chinese regime. Apart from the "Hump" airlift, these bore no fruit until so near the end of the war that they made little contribution to the defeat of Japan.
If you are still willing to ignore these then you really are brainwashed by your pro-American romantic propaganda.
[/COLOR][COLOR=black said:
You just ignore the fact that, when the Pacific War started, the British were, unlike the Americans, drained of personnel and matériel by already having had two years of war with Germany and, unlike the Americans, were heavily committed in the Middle East, North Africa and elsewhere, and so were unable to provide much more than token resistance to the battle-hardened Japanese at the start of the Pacific War.
The Americans entered WWII straight into the Pacific War and so were fresh and fully equipped, whereas the British had already been fighting in WWII for the last TWO YEARS whilst the Yanks sat on the sidelines and so were already drained of equipment and personnel.
You forget such things as this.