Andy Schlafly #fundie

Andy Schlafly #fundie conservapedia.com

But FDR privately wanted the United States to enter into World War II to protect Britain against Germany. Britain had been badly weakened by decades of socialism, declining values, and rising atheism along with belief in evolution. Britain, weakened by decades of economic socialism and declining Christianity, was no match for the larger and much stronger Germany, and Britain needed America to save it.

49 comments

old comment by Robespierre

The British Labour Party was never in power before 1923, and even then it was in coalition with conservatives and for a total of 10 months.

The only time Labour alone was in power was between 1929 and 1931, the rest of the 1930s saw national governments (coalition).

A number of reasons may help explain British decline in the early 20th century. The United Kingdom was slow to adapt to new technologies, such as electricity, and slow to adopt fordism. Coal extraction in the UK peaked in 1913, despite the first world war increasing its demand, while WW1 saddled the country with an enormous public debt.

Despite all this, Britain managed to outproduce Germany on most categories of military equipment until 1942, mostly because German military mobilisation was astonishingly SLOW (yes, seriously), and, fighting alone, it managed to keep Germany at bay in 1940-1941.

old comment by UHM

So much wrong here:
1. Germany's welfare state was already 62 years old when Hitler took power, UK's was just being created. In fact, Bismarck had already implemented what would latter become the German welfare state in Prussia in the 1840s.
2. The reason why Germany was much stronger was quite simply it's population (double of the UK at the time) and it's centralization, different from the Empire as the Empire had colonies and had to supply troops to all of those colonies.
3. The reason why America was a big help was it's distance from the European and Pacific Theatre. The only attack to occure on American soil was Pearl Harbor. So while German, British and Russian factories were constantly bombed, none of the Axis bombers could reach American mainland and therefor American weaponary could be produced without having to rebuild the factories constantly.
4. Some of the same goes for the Soviet Union, which had enough land to fall back on and had no enemy in Japan.

old comment by farpadokly

But Germany also had socialism, including such people as Karl Marx, Freidrich Engels, Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxembourg. In point of fact, socialism had probably more influence in Germany before the war than in Britain, where it was dominated by the reformism of the Labour Party.

Scepticism and criticism of Christianity also had a strong influence in Germany, with such people as Ludwig Feuerbach and Friedrich Nietzsche, again arguably more so than in Britain.

"Britain needed America to save it". Britain saved itself thanks to the men who fought the Battle of Britain. The later turning of the war was a collaborative effort of all the allies, including the United States, Britain and troops from various parts of its empire, and Russia and let's not forget Poland. One country cannot claim the credit, but in terms of sheer manpower and size, Russia can claim an enormous amount of the effort in defeating Hitler as it defeated Napoleon. That's the conclusion I've come to from talking to men who actually fought in the war.

old comment by Hasan Prishtina

This is parahistory at best, certainly not history.

Britain had been the bastion of free trade until the 1930s. The Conservative government tried to introduce Empire Preference when the Tories split from Lloyd George's coalition in 1922, but they abandoned it after losing the general election of 1923. After a brief minority Labour government, supported by Asquith's Liberal faction, the Conservatives regained office until 1929, when they lost to Labour. The Labour minority government staggered on until sterling was forced off the gold standard in 1931. The Prime Minister, Ramsey MacDonald, and a few other senior Labour ministers then formed a National Government, largely backed by the Conservatives, something which still rankles with many Labour activists. The National Government, now largely Conservative, gained a massive majority in the 1931 general election and was re-elected in 1935, when MacDonald retired and was replaced by the Conservative leader, Stanley Baldwin who retired himself in 1937, to be replaced by Neville Chamberlain, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer. During the inter-war years, there were considerable reforms introduced in public health, housing and welfare, many of them by the Conservative government of 1924-29. As for Britain being much weaker, unlike Germany it did not have an economy entirely geared toward war production until 1940 and, by 1943, Britain alone exceeded war production in Germany.

Are we to take it, Andy, that Germany was so much stronger because it was less socialist and more faithful to Christianity? Because its values were so much better than that of the democracies where the government didn't tell the church what to say?

@LDM

Plenty of material help was sent by the US and the UK to the Soviet Union through the Murmansk convoys.

@DJjaffacake

How were Old Age Pensions a response to the 2nd Boer War?

old comment by Anon-e-moose

Battle of Britain. The 'Few' in their Spitfires & Hurricanes vs. Hitler's numerically - and technologically - superior Luftwaffe.

1940.

No USA required.

And who, pray, did North American Aviation go to for the engine to go in their new fighter then, the P-51 Mustang. Said engine being the V-12 Merlin. Yes, that's right, Andy Schaftafly: Rolls-Royce of Britain, who made the same engines in the Spitfires & Hurricanes that made Hitler cack himself at the thought of invading my country. In 1940, before that certain 'Date which will live in infamy'.

And of course, not forgetting - tucked away in a quiet corner of the English countryside - Bletchley Park. Where, if not for Alan Turing & co., initially via his 'Bombes' & later the first digital computer 'Colossus', certainly if Churchill hadn't shared the vital info on the Wehrmacht (via his 'Golden Goose that laid Golden Eggs - but never cackled') to the US, the War in Europe part of WWII would have lasted at least three years longer, and 600,000+ more US troops would've been killed.

'Lease Lend'? DEBT PAID.

Question: So why did your country need all those captured Messerschmitt Me-262s, V-1s & V-2s; also a certain Wehrner von Braun, o Andy Schaftafly? I'm sure - if your country had asked nicely - our Frank Whittle would have let you have a look at his invention...! [/Gloster Meteor, deHavilland Comet, Hawker Siddeley Harrier]

old comment by Anon-e-moose

(Part II):

With the impact Bletchley Park & Alan Turing had on history - certainly future generations of Americans - you owe this country far more than your souls.

And yet - despite being in economic ruins post-WWII (with rationing still in place, up to 1954) - in 1948, our government instituted a little something called the National Health Service. In that same year, we also hosted the London Olympics.

64 years later...:

image

...the National Health Service celebrated in the opening ceremony of our 2012 London Olympics. (Remember that, Andy? Of couuuuurse you do. The little matter of a certain Mr. Murray - your namesake - and what he did at said Olympics; also this year at Wimbledon, despite you saying he'd [i]under[/i]perform; he being from the 'imposing same-sex marriage & Atheistic' Britain, natch. [/Doug Piranha-levels of sarcasm]

The NHS is still here. Our Welfare State is still here. We're still here.

USA, weakened by decades of economic fascism and declining Christianity, was no match for the larger and much stronger China, and Bush needed their money to save it.

old comment by Anon-e-moose

@Jewnior Spokesman

Heinkel He-111s, Junkers JU-88s, Messerschmitt Me-111s, compared to planes the RAF had then (but after...!). Then the little matter of our high command rejecting Whittle's invention, and Hitler's enthusiasm for new technologies.

If not for the lack of vision in certain departments, then the Gloster Meteor could've been brought into production before the Me-262, instead of as an anti-V-1 interceptor later in the war.

...still, even the Luftwaffe had it's downsides, re. Hitler's technological enthusiasm: the Me-163 Komet. If so much as half a cupful of it's fuel remained in it's tanks prior to landing, it's ultra-volatility resulted in it effectively being the European equivalent of the Japanese Ohka (and there were piloted versions of the V-1: the Fieseler Fi-103 Reichenberg).

old comment by Warren McIntosh

Actually, there's a very good argument that england saved the USA. If England had not fought or had lost, Germany probably would have beaten the russians and ended up as a vast, multicontinental empire of absolute evil, which inevitably would have developed neuclear weapons, and certainly the missile technology to fire them at the US. How about you envisage the cold war with Hitler instead of the Russians, and then bow down and thank the good lord that plucky England slowed them down for long enough while you sorted out which side your bread was buttered on and the Japanese forced you to grow the balls necessary to do something about it.

Andy Schlafly #fundie conservapedia.com

49 comments

Confused?