Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
And which has one of the highest violent gun death rates in the country[
Ahhh but it is. You claim that you can prevent violent people from committing crimes by disarming the regular civilian population. How exactly is that supposed to work?
Actually no. Pro gunners in the US claim that being armed to the teeth keeps your crime down. Stats clearly show that the US has more homicides that other Western Countries (note I say western - compared to third-world countries, it's a paradise). You would think with such a proliferation of guns your country would be one of the least violent first-world countries. It's not. So it's clearly not the guns...
Do you know how big america is, its population ? Its as big as Australia and it's population is not centered on the coast, it's a melting pool of all the immigrants around the world.
Contrary to what you think I never in 51 years seen anyone carry a side arm, except for the occasional cop, Guns are not around as much as you think they are.
Guess you've never been to Montana where open carry is legal, and damn near every pickup truck has a gun rack with at least one rifle in the back.
The cities with the strictest gun control laws...Chicago, D.C., Baltimore.......
Actually, the Soviet Union won World War II.
The Soviet Union eliminated about 90 percent of the German Army. The British and U.S forces in France and Italy were just a sideshow to the main action in central Europe
Don’t forget how the Soviet Union saved the world from Hitler
YOU helped OUR ARSE there? You REALLY think we NEEDED your help? WWII? If it wasn't for the U.S. a large part of Europe would be Germany. Japan would be ruling the Pacific... Vietnam? Everyone lost there, so you didn't help our arse at all. Korea? Uh... maybe you need to go read some more about that. The U.S. Navy ruled that war.
The Soviet union would have easily lost the war if it wasn't for the United States.....the left wing lie about Russia winning the war is exactly that...a lie....
This article looks at the Soviets during world war 2, their intention to invade the west, which was beaten by Germany invading two weeks early and why they lost so quickly at first...
Russia In World War 2
But what Russian historiography censored for decades, is the large scale of total morale collapse of Soviet armed forces and Communist party establishments which escaped, 'disappeared', or surrendered before they even were engaged in battle. Millions, from privates to Generals, individually or as entire units, abandoned their tanks, guns, air bases, without battle, and escaped on vehicles or on foot, or simply disappeared into the nearby villages and forests.
Fighting and then losing is one thing. Massive and rapid escape without a fight and massive voluntary surrender, are another, and Soviet censorship tried to hide that, by further intensifying the myth of the destructiveness of the German attack, and by further intensifying the belief that the entire red army was right on the border. There are reports of entire unit staffs which escaped without battle and were found again hundreds of kilometers to the East. There were tens of Generals who disappeared and were never located again. There are reports of tank divisions which, although they were not right on the border and were not engaged in fighting in the first day, miraculously 'lost' 100% of their tanks and other fighting equipment in the second day of fighting, without actually being engaged in battle, and then escaped hundreds of kilometers eastwards almost without losing a single truck even to technical malfunction. There are reports of entire Air Force regiments which reported that they suffered negligible or no losses in the air or on the ground at the first day, and then simply abandoned their air bases and escaped by trucks and on foot. In 1941 Russia lost millions of soldiers. Only 32% of the reported losses were the dead and wounded. Millions surrendered, many of them as fast as they could, and so many others escaped from the front, either disappeared or remained in service, but only after a distant escape and after abandoning every weapon or equipment, even rifles and light mortars, that could force them to stay and fight.
The apparent reasons for this mass unwillingness to fight were:
Click to expand...
- A further intensified mental shock of those who were always trained educated and taught others that attack and victory are the only possible option, and suddenly found themselves under massive surprise attack for which they never planned or prepared.
- Stalin, the murderous dictator, was surrounded with people who told him much too often what he wanted to hear about Russia's preparations for war. The enormous reported numbers of material production and manpower training were perhaps correct. For example the figures of vast mass-training of pilots (which, by the way, were NOT volunteers, unlike pilots anywhere else in the world), and received minimal training, in order to keep up with the enormous training quotas dictated by Stalin.But what Stalin never suspected, was the possibility that in his regime of mass terror and fear, where so many millions were imprisoned and millions others killed by the police, and where tens of millions starved for years in order to pay for the enormous cost of the vast effort to convert Russia with a period of just two decades from a mostly agricultural country to an industrial militarist super-power with gigantic military power. Stalin never suspected that under a massive attack on his brutal regime, the people, the millions of soldiers who previously suffered from the regime, millions were former political prisoners of which many were recruited from hard labor prisons directly to war front military service, will favor surrender to defending their homeland, or will have no willingness to fight immediately as they realized that since they're country is being massively attacked there's a good chance that they can escape from the war without being punished by the formidable regime. Given the possibility that for the first time in their life non-cooperation with the Communist regime will NOT be severely punished, so many favored that option, and that's something the Russian censorship could never admit.
So while in all material aspects Russia was enormously prepared for war, and could therefore theoretically manage much better than it did, even under a massive surprise attack, in morale terms, the Russian people in the front (which rapidly moved East all across the long front), were generally unwilling to fight for their terrible terror regime once fear of it was lost since the regime itself was being attacked and in danger.
Also...The Biggest Mistakes In World War 2
- In 1941, Stalin received a stream of information from military intelligence and spies, that Germany is going to invade Russia, as Hitler promised since the 1920s. After discussions, Stalin decided that the information was inconclusive and perhaps deliberate disinformation, and decided that there will be no invasion. As the invasion came nearer, the stream of information indicating invasion intensified, but then Stalin forbid his advisors from further disturbing him with it. Anyone who still suggested that there might be a German invasion, risked execution. Fear was such that when the invasion started, no one dared to awake Stalin and tell him about it, until Zhukov, the deputy supreme commander, told Stalin's bodyguards that he takes responsibility for awakening the dictator and telling him the bad news.
Until April 1941, Russia was at war with Japan in the far East, and in 1941-1942 it fought desperately against the German invasion. But since the end of the battle of Stalingrad in Feb. 1943, Russia knew that it was going to win the war, and that Germany and Japan were losing it. It was convenient for Russia to focus entirely on defeating Germany and leave the war against Japan entirely to the US, which also provided Russia with enormous material support. During the war, Russia provided air bases for British heavy bombers which bombed Germany, but refused to provide such bases for American bombers in the Russian far East, apparently in return for a quiet Japanese agreement not to attack American supply convoys sailing to Russia's far East ports.
- Both Hitler and Stalin refused to allow retreats, as a matter of principle and regardless of the military situation. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers in each side died in vain because they were not allowed to retreat when was necessary. Russia almost lost the war because of that in 1941, and Hitler's army suffered horrible losses because of that, mainly in the winter of 1942 and in Stalingrad a year later.
And from wikipedia...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union_in_World_War_II
In the initial hours after the German attack commenced, Stalin hesitated, wanting to ensure that the German attack was sanctioned by Hitler, rather than the unauthorized action of a rogue general.[SUP][53][/SUP] Accounts by Nikita Khrushchev and Anastas Mikoyan claim that, after the invasion, Stalin retreated to his dacha in despair for several days and did not participate in leadership decisions.[SUP][54][/SUP]
However, some documentary evidence of orders given by Stalin contradicts these accounts, leading some historians to speculate that Khrushchev's account is inaccurate.[SUP][55][/SUP]
In the first three weeks of the invasion, attempting to defend against large German advances, the Soviet Union suffered 750,000 casualties, and lost 10,000 tanks and 4,000 aircraft.[SUP][56][/SUP] In July 1940, Stalin completely reorganized the Soviet military, placing himself directly in charge of several military organizations, which gave him complete control of his country's entire war effort; more control than any other leader in World War II.[SUP][57][/SUP]
A pattern soon emerged where Stalin embraced the Red Army's strategy of conducting multiple offensives, while the Germans soon overran each of the resulting small newly gained grounds, dealing the Soviets severe casualties.[SUP][58][/SUP] The most notable example of this was the Battle of Kiev, where over 600,000 Soviet troops were quickly killed, captured or had gone missing.[SUP][58][/SUP]
By the end of 1941, the Soviet military had suffered 4.3 million casualties[SUP][59][/SUP] and the Germans had captured 3.0 million Soviet prisoners, 2.0 million of which would die in German captivity by February 1942.[SUP][56][/SUP] German forces had advanced c. 1,700 kilometers, and maintained a linearly-measured front of 3,000 kilometers.[SUP][60][/SUP] The Red Army put up fierce resistance during the war's early stages. Even so, according to Glantz, they were plagued by an ineffective defense doctrine against well-trained and experienced German forces, despite possessing some modern Soviet equipment such as theKV-1 and T-34 tanks.
Click to expand...
At the same time, worried by the possibility of American support after their entry into the war following the Attack on Pearl Harbor, and a potential Anglo-American invasion on the Western Front in 1942 (which would not actually happen until 1944), Hitler shifted his primary goal from an immediate victory in the East, to the more long-term goal of securing the southern Soviet Union to protect oil fields vital to the long-term German war effort.[SUP][69[/SUP]
The Germans did attempt an encirclement attack at Kursk, which was successfully repulsed by the Soviets[SUP][78][/SUP] after Hitler canceled the offensive, in part, because of the Allied invasion of Sicily,[SUP][79][/SUP] though the Soviets suffered over 800,000 casualties.[SUP][80][/SUP]
Yeah, it is hard to understand the Soviets...
also from wikipedia on the Red Army...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army#The_Great_Patriotic_War
The unprepared Soviet forces suffered much damage in the field because of mediocre officers, partial mobilization, an incomplete reorganization and mainly because they were arranged to attack Central Europe, and not to defend Soviet territory.[SUP][39][/SUP] The hasty pre-war forces expansion and the over-promotion of inexperienced officers (owing to the purging of experienced officers) favored the Wehrmacht in combat.[SUP][39][/SUP]
And another great mistake by Stalin that almost lost the war for the Soviets...
Purges
Further information: Case of Trotskyist Anti-Soviet Military Organization
The late 1930s saw the so-called Purges of the Red Army Cadres, which occurred concurrently with Stalin's Great Purge of Soviet society. In 1936 and 1937, at the orders of Stalin, thousands of Red Army officers were dismissed from their commands. The purges had the objective of cleansing the Red Army of the "politically unreliable elements", mainly among higher-ranking officers. This inevitably provided a convenient pretext for the settling of personal vendettas or to eliminate competition by officers seeking the same command. Many army, corps, and divisional commanders were sacked, most were imprisoned or sent to labor camps; others were executed. Among the victims was the Red Army's primary military theorist, Marshal Mikhail Tukhachevsky, perceived by Stalin as a potential political rival. Officers who remained soon found all of their decisions being closely examined by political officers, even in mundane matters such as record-keeping and field training exercises.[SUP][72][/SUP] An atmosphere of fear and unwillingness to take the initiative soon pervaded the Red Army; suicide rates among junior officers rose to record levels.[SUP][72][/SUP] Most historians believe that the purges significantly impaired the combat capabilities of the Red Army. However, the extent of the consequential damage attributable to them is still debated.
Recently declassified data indicate that in 1937, at the height of the Purges, the Red Army had 114,300 officers, of whom 11,034 were dismissed. In 1938, the Red Army had 179,000 officers, 56% more than in 1937, of whom a further 6,742 were sacked. In the highest echelons of the Red Army the Purges removed 3 of 5 marshals, 13 of 15 army generals, 8 of 9 admirals, 50 of 57 army corps generals, 154 out of 186 division generals, 16 of 16 army commissars, and 25 of 28 army corps commissars.[SUP][73][/SUP]
The result was that the Red Army officer corps in 1941 had many inexperienced senior officers. While 60% of regimental commanders had two years or more of command experience in June 1941, and almost 80% of rifle division commanders, only 20% of corps commanders, and 5% or fewer army and military district commanders, had the same level of experience.[SUP][74][/SUP]
The Red Army faced 90 percent of Germany's armed power, and destroyed that 90 percent.
The US, ALONGSIDE the UK, Free French forces, Belgian resistance, etc. faced the remaining 10
The USSR suffered the most in the entire war, but also did the most to stop Hitler
Here you go...
At the same time, worried by the possibility of American support after their entry into the war following the Attack on Pearl Harbor, and a potential Anglo-American invasion on the Western Front in 1942 (which would not actually happen until 1944), Hitler shifted his primary goal from an immediate victory in the East, to the more long-term goal of securing the southern Soviet Union to protect oil fields vital to the long-term German war effort.[SUP][69[/SUP]
The Germans did attempt an encirclement attack at Kursk, which was successfully repulsed by the Soviets[SUP][78][/SUP] after Hitler canceled the offensive, in part, because of the Allied invasion of Sicily,[SUP][79][/SUP] though the Soviets suffered over 800,000 casualties.[SUP][80][/SUP]
Yeah, it is hard to understand the Soviets...
So you're telling me that the US and UK distracted Hitler and diverted his attention just enough that the USSR was able to regroup its forces, and then do the actual heavy punching in defeating Germany? That's what most historians say anyways.
You know that the USSR liberated more territory than the US did, right? You know that the USSR were the ones who took Berlin, right? You know that while the US faced just Italy and Germany, the USSR had to punch through Hitler's allies of Romania, Bulgaria, and Hungary and then attack Germany itself, right?
[Q
You don't know crap about the United states in f
.
What don't I know?
Save it.And then the next type, and then...[]No need to. No right is absolute, like yelling fire in a crowded movie theater. No child has the right to carry a firearm onto the playground. Government has a role to play but denying citizens the right to bear arms violates the intent. Otherwise why even have the second?
Nobody is denying you your right, just the type. There is a difference..
I disagree. We have strict gun laws in NZ, and you have to have a firearms license. People still own guns. No handguns, but rifles and shotguns.
I was listening to ABC radio (our equivalent of PBS) and they had Philip Alpers on there (a NZer who is very anti-gun - i have been on US boards and even some pro-gunners know his name). He says that since the Australian gun ban in 1996 there are more guns than ever in Australia. He said more guns were imported into Australia in 2015 than in the history of gun importation - and that's NOT including those for the military. However, it is the type of gun that was imported that is the difference. No assault-type rifles or fully autos.
Actually, the Soviet Union won World War II.
The Soviet Union eliminated about 90 percent of the German Army. The British and U.S forces in France and Italy were just a sideshow to the main action in central Europe
Don’t forget how the Soviet Union saved the world from Hitler
The Soviet union would have easily lost the war if it wasn't for the United States.....the left wing lie about Russia winning the war is exactly that...a lie....
This article looks at the Soviets during world war 2, their intention to invade the west, which was beaten by Germany invading two weeks early and why they lost so quickly at first...
Russia In World War 2
But what Russian historiography censored for decades, is the large scale of total morale collapse of Soviet armed forces and Communist party establishments which escaped, 'disappeared', or surrendered before they even were engaged in battle. Millions, from privates to Generals, individually or as entire units, abandoned their tanks, guns, air bases, without battle, and escaped on vehicles or on foot, or simply disappeared into the nearby villages and forests.
Fighting and then losing is one thing. Massive and rapid escape without a fight and massive voluntary surrender, are another, and Soviet censorship tried to hide that, by further intensifying the myth of the destructiveness of the German attack, and by further intensifying the belief that the entire red army was right on the border. There are reports of entire unit staffs which escaped without battle and were found again hundreds of kilometers to the East. There were tens of Generals who disappeared and were never located again. There are reports of tank divisions which, although they were not right on the border and were not engaged in fighting in the first day, miraculously 'lost' 100% of their tanks and other fighting equipment in the second day of fighting, without actually being engaged in battle, and then escaped hundreds of kilometers eastwards almost without losing a single truck even to technical malfunction. There are reports of entire Air Force regiments which reported that they suffered negligible or no losses in the air or on the ground at the first day, and then simply abandoned their air bases and escaped by trucks and on foot. In 1941 Russia lost millions of soldiers. Only 32% of the reported losses were the dead and wounded. Millions surrendered, many of them as fast as they could, and so many others escaped from the front, either disappeared or remained in service, but only after a distant escape and after abandoning every weapon or equipment, even rifles and light mortars, that could force them to stay and fight.
The apparent reasons for this mass unwillingness to fight were:
Click to expand...
- A further intensified mental shock of those who were always trained educated and taught others that attack and victory are the only possible option, and suddenly found themselves under massive surprise attack for which they never planned or prepared.
- Stalin, the murderous dictator, was surrounded with people who told him much too often what he wanted to hear about Russia's preparations for war. The enormous reported numbers of material production and manpower training were perhaps correct. For example the figures of vast mass-training of pilots (which, by the way, were NOT volunteers, unlike pilots anywhere else in the world), and received minimal training, in order to keep up with the enormous training quotas dictated by Stalin.But what Stalin never suspected, was the possibility that in his regime of mass terror and fear, where so many millions were imprisoned and millions others killed by the police, and where tens of millions starved for years in order to pay for the enormous cost of the vast effort to convert Russia with a period of just two decades from a mostly agricultural country to an industrial militarist super-power with gigantic military power. Stalin never suspected that under a massive attack on his brutal regime, the people, the millions of soldiers who previously suffered from the regime, millions were former political prisoners of which many were recruited from hard labor prisons directly to war front military service, will favor surrender to defending their homeland, or will have no willingness to fight immediately as they realized that since they're country is being massively attacked there's a good chance that they can escape from the war without being punished by the formidable regime. Given the possibility that for the first time in their life non-cooperation with the Communist regime will NOT be severely punished, so many favored that option, and that's something the Russian censorship could never admit.
So while in all material aspects Russia was enormously prepared for war, and could therefore theoretically manage much better than it did, even under a massive surprise attack, in morale terms, the Russian people in the front (which rapidly moved East all across the long front), were generally unwilling to fight for their terrible terror regime once fear of it was lost since the regime itself was being attacked and in danger.
Also...The Biggest Mistakes In World War 2
- In 1941, Stalin received a stream of information from military intelligence and spies, that Germany is going to invade Russia, as Hitler promised since the 1920s. After discussions, Stalin decided that the information was inconclusive and perhaps deliberate disinformation, and decided that there will be no invasion. As the invasion came nearer, the stream of information indicating invasion intensified, but then Stalin forbid his advisors from further disturbing him with it. Anyone who still suggested that there might be a German invasion, risked execution. Fear was such that when the invasion started, no one dared to awake Stalin and tell him about it, until Zhukov, the deputy supreme commander, told Stalin's bodyguards that he takes responsibility for awakening the dictator and telling him the bad news.
Until April 1941, Russia was at war with Japan in the far East, and in 1941-1942 it fought desperately against the German invasion. But since the end of the battle of Stalingrad in Feb. 1943, Russia knew that it was going to win the war, and that Germany and Japan were losing it. It was convenient for Russia to focus entirely on defeating Germany and leave the war against Japan entirely to the US, which also provided Russia with enormous material support. During the war, Russia provided air bases for British heavy bombers which bombed Germany, but refused to provide such bases for American bombers in the Russian far East, apparently in return for a quiet Japanese agreement not to attack American supply convoys sailing to Russia's far East ports.
- Both Hitler and Stalin refused to allow retreats, as a matter of principle and regardless of the military situation. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers in each side died in vain because they were not allowed to retreat when was necessary. Russia almost lost the war because of that in 1941, and Hitler's army suffered horrible losses because of that, mainly in the winter of 1942 and in Stalingrad a year later.
And from wikipedia...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union_in_World_War_II
In the initial hours after the German attack commenced, Stalin hesitated, wanting to ensure that the German attack was sanctioned by Hitler, rather than the unauthorized action of a rogue general.[SUP][53][/SUP] Accounts by Nikita Khrushchev and Anastas Mikoyan claim that, after the invasion, Stalin retreated to his dacha in despair for several days and did not participate in leadership decisions.[SUP][54][/SUP]
However, some documentary evidence of orders given by Stalin contradicts these accounts, leading some historians to speculate that Khrushchev's account is inaccurate.[SUP][55][/SUP]
In the first three weeks of the invasion, attempting to defend against large German advances, the Soviet Union suffered 750,000 casualties, and lost 10,000 tanks and 4,000 aircraft.[SUP][56][/SUP] In July 1940, Stalin completely reorganized the Soviet military, placing himself directly in charge of several military organizations, which gave him complete control of his country's entire war effort; more control than any other leader in World War II.[SUP][57][/SUP]
A pattern soon emerged where Stalin embraced the Red Army's strategy of conducting multiple offensives, while the Germans soon overran each of the resulting small newly gained grounds, dealing the Soviets severe casualties.[SUP][58][/SUP] The most notable example of this was the Battle of Kiev, where over 600,000 Soviet troops were quickly killed, captured or had gone missing.[SUP][58][/SUP]
By the end of 1941, the Soviet military had suffered 4.3 million casualties[SUP][59][/SUP] and the Germans had captured 3.0 million Soviet prisoners, 2.0 million of which would die in German captivity by February 1942.[SUP][56][/SUP] German forces had advanced c. 1,700 kilometers, and maintained a linearly-measured front of 3,000 kilometers.[SUP][60][/SUP] The Red Army put up fierce resistance during the war's early stages. Even so, according to Glantz, they were plagued by an ineffective defense doctrine against well-trained and experienced German forces, despite possessing some modern Soviet equipment such as theKV-1 and T-34 tanks.
Click to expand...
At the same time, worried by the possibility of American support after their entry into the war following the Attack on Pearl Harbor, and a potential Anglo-American invasion on the Western Front in 1942 (which would not actually happen until 1944), Hitler shifted his primary goal from an immediate victory in the East, to the more long-term goal of securing the southern Soviet Union to protect oil fields vital to the long-term German war effort.[SUP][69[/SUP]
The Germans did attempt an encirclement attack at Kursk, which was successfully repulsed by the Soviets[SUP][78][/SUP] after Hitler canceled the offensive, in part, because of the Allied invasion of Sicily,[SUP][79][/SUP] though the Soviets suffered over 800,000 casualties.[SUP][80][/SUP]
Yeah, it is hard to understand the Soviets...
also from wikipedia on the Red Army...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army#The_Great_Patriotic_War
The unprepared Soviet forces suffered much damage in the field because of mediocre officers, partial mobilization, an incomplete reorganization and mainly because they were arranged to attack Central Europe, and not to defend Soviet territory.[SUP][39][/SUP] The hasty pre-war forces expansion and the over-promotion of inexperienced officers (owing to the purging of experienced officers) favored the Wehrmacht in combat.[SUP][39][/SUP]
And another great mistake by Stalin that almost lost the war for the Soviets...
Purges
Further information: Case of Trotskyist Anti-Soviet Military Organization
The late 1930s saw the so-called Purges of the Red Army Cadres, which occurred concurrently with Stalin's Great Purge of Soviet society. In 1936 and 1937, at the orders of Stalin, thousands of Red Army officers were dismissed from their commands. The purges had the objective of cleansing the Red Army of the "politically unreliable elements", mainly among higher-ranking officers. This inevitably provided a convenient pretext for the settling of personal vendettas or to eliminate competition by officers seeking the same command. Many army, corps, and divisional commanders were sacked, most were imprisoned or sent to labor camps; others were executed. Among the victims was the Red Army's primary military theorist, Marshal Mikhail Tukhachevsky, perceived by Stalin as a potential political rival. Officers who remained soon found all of their decisions being closely examined by political officers, even in mundane matters such as record-keeping and field training exercises.[SUP][72][/SUP] An atmosphere of fear and unwillingness to take the initiative soon pervaded the Red Army; suicide rates among junior officers rose to record levels.[SUP][72][/SUP] Most historians believe that the purges significantly impaired the combat capabilities of the Red Army. However, the extent of the consequential damage attributable to them is still debated.
Recently declassified data indicate that in 1937, at the height of the Purges, the Red Army had 114,300 officers, of whom 11,034 were dismissed. In 1938, the Red Army had 179,000 officers, 56% more than in 1937, of whom a further 6,742 were sacked. In the highest echelons of the Red Army the Purges removed 3 of 5 marshals, 13 of 15 army generals, 8 of 9 admirals, 50 of 57 army corps generals, 154 out of 186 division generals, 16 of 16 army commissars, and 25 of 28 army corps commissars.[SUP][73][/SUP]
The result was that the Red Army officer corps in 1941 had many inexperienced senior officers. While 60% of regimental commanders had two years or more of command experience in June 1941, and almost 80% of rifle division commanders, only 20% of corps commanders, and 5% or fewer army and military district commanders, had the same level of experience.[SUP][74][/SUP]
The Red Army faced 90 percent of Germany's armed power, and destroyed that 90 percent.
The US, ALONGSIDE the UK, Free French forces, Belgian resistance, etc. faced the remaining 10
The USSR suffered the most in the entire war, but also did the most to stop Hitler
Here you go...
At the same time, worried by the possibility of American support after their entry into the war following the Attack on Pearl Harbor, and a potential Anglo-American invasion on the Western Front in 1942 (which would not actually happen until 1944), Hitler shifted his primary goal from an immediate victory in the East, to the more long-term goal of securing the southern Soviet Union to protect oil fields vital to the long-term German war effort.[SUP][69[/SUP]
The Germans did attempt an encirclement attack at Kursk, which was successfully repulsed by the Soviets[SUP][78][/SUP] after Hitler canceled the offensive, in part, because of the Allied invasion of Sicily,[SUP][79][/SUP] though the Soviets suffered over 800,000 casualties.[SUP][80][/SUP]
Yeah, it is hard to understand the Soviets...
So you're telling me that the US and UK distracted Hitler and diverted his attention just enough that the USSR was able to regroup its forces, and then do the actual heavy punching in defeating Germany? That's what most historians say anyways.
You know that the USSR liberated more territory than the US did, right? You know that the USSR were the ones who took Berlin, right? You know that while the US faced just Italy and Germany, the USSR had to punch through Hitler's allies of Romania, Bulgaria, and Hungary and then attack Germany itself, right?
You Fucking moron FDR told the U.S. military to hold back and let Stalin take Berlin.
Russia God damn military couldn't of won shit with out the U.S.A. lend lease program..they needed our military trucks and supplies to beat back the Germans.
.
Original thought?He we know who wears the pants in his family.
Grumpy wears a tutu.
Is that you Donald?
Original thought?He we know who wears the pants in his family.
Grumpy wears a tutu.
Is that you Donald?
And which has one of the highest violent gun death rates in the countryActually no. Pro gunners in the US claim that being armed to the teeth keeps your crime down. Stats clearly show that the US has more homicides that other Western Countries (note I say western - compared to third-world countries, it's a paradise). You would think with such a proliferation of guns your country would be one of the least violent first-world countries. It's not. So it's clearly not the guns...
Do you know how big america is, its population ? Its as big as Australia and it's population is not centered on the coast, it's a melting pool of all the immigrants around the world.
Contrary to what you think I never in 51 years seen anyone carry a side arm, except for the occasional cop, Guns are not around as much as you think they are.
Guess you've never been to Montana where open carry is legal, and damn near every pickup truck has a gun rack with at least one rifle in the back.
The cities with the strictest gun control laws...Chicago, D.C., Baltimore.......
Yeah..............and gun runners go to places like GA, AL, TX and other places where the gun laws are lax, take them to Chicago, D.C., Baltimore, etc, and triple their money.
There are no checks on the borders between states, which is why it's so easy to transport weapons from a place where they're easy to buy to a place where the gun laws are strict.
Federalize the gun laws and you could take care of that.
And which has one of the highest violent gun death rates in the countryDo you know how big america is, its population ? Its as big as Australia and it's population is not centered on the coast, it's a melting pool of all the immigrants around the world.
Contrary to what you think I never in 51 years seen anyone carry a side arm, except for the occasional cop, Guns are not around as much as you think they are.
Guess you've never been to Montana where open carry is legal, and damn near every pickup truck has a gun rack with at least one rifle in the back.
The cities with the strictest gun control laws...Chicago, D.C., Baltimore.......
Yeah..............and gun runners go to places like GA, AL, TX and other places where the gun laws are lax, take them to Chicago, D.C., Baltimore, etc, and triple their money.
There are no checks on the borders between states, which is why it's so easy to transport weapons from a place where they're easy to buy to a place where the gun laws are strict.
Federalize the gun laws and you could take care of that.
So you are blaming states where not much gun crime occurs , not much moral decay is happing on your shit hole democrat blue city's ?
That's the problem now?
You Fucking created the moral decay don't blame us Jack asses
And which has one of the highest violent gun death rates in the countryGuess you've never been to Montana where open carry is legal, and damn near every pickup truck has a gun rack with at least one rifle in the back.
The cities with the strictest gun control laws...Chicago, D.C., Baltimore.......
Yeah..............and gun runners go to places like GA, AL, TX and other places where the gun laws are lax, take them to Chicago, D.C., Baltimore, etc, and triple their money.
There are no checks on the borders between states, which is why it's so easy to transport weapons from a place where they're easy to buy to a place where the gun laws are strict.
Federalize the gun laws and you could take care of that.
So you are blaming states where not much gun crime occurs , not much moral decay is happing on your shit hole democrat blue city's ?
That's the problem now?
You Fucking created the moral decay don't blame us Jack asses
Ummmmmmmmmm................hate to tell you, but the states where they have the most lax gun laws are the ones that are predominantly red states. GA, AL, and TX are definitely red states.
Besides................it's not the democratic cities that are supplying the guns, it's the runners that take them up to the cities after buying them at gun shows in red states that are the culprits.
And which has one of the highest violent gun death rates in the countryGuess you've never been to Montana where open carry is legal, and damn near every pickup truck has a gun rack with at least one rifle in the back.
The cities with the strictest gun control laws...Chicago, D.C., Baltimore.......
Yeah..............and gun runners go to places like GA, AL, TX and other places where the gun laws are lax, take them to Chicago, D.C., Baltimore, etc, and triple their money.
There are no checks on the borders between states, which is why it's so easy to transport weapons from a place where they're easy to buy to a place where the gun laws are strict.
Federalize the gun laws and you could take care of that.
So you are blaming states where not much gun crime occurs , not much moral decay is happing on your shit hole democrat blue city's ?
That's the problem now?
You Fucking created the moral decay don't blame us Jack asses
Ummmmmmmmmm................hate to tell you, but the states where they have the most lax gun laws are the ones that are predominantly red states. GA, AL, and TX are definitely red states.
Besides................it's not the democratic cities that are supplying the guns, it's the runners that take them up to the cities after buying them at gun shows in red states that are the culprits.
And which has one of the highest violent gun death rates in the country
The cities with the strictest gun control laws...Chicago, D.C., Baltimore.......
Yeah..............and gun runners go to places like GA, AL, TX and other places where the gun laws are lax, take them to Chicago, D.C., Baltimore, etc, and triple their money.
There are no checks on the borders between states, which is why it's so easy to transport weapons from a place where they're easy to buy to a place where the gun laws are strict.
Federalize the gun laws and you could take care of that.
So you are blaming states where not much gun crime occurs , not much moral decay is happing on your shit hole democrat blue city's ?
That's the problem now?
You Fucking created the moral decay don't blame us Jack asses
Ummmmmmmmmm................hate to tell you, but the states where they have the most lax gun laws are the ones that are predominantly red states. GA, AL, and TX are definitely red states.
Besides................it's not the democratic cities that are supplying the guns, it's the runners that take them up to the cities after buying them at gun shows in red states that are the culprits.
Agaign who is the damn problem?
Our society down here respects people, that's why gun laws are lax, your moral decay anything goes society up north is the Fucking problem ..
And which has one of the highest violent gun death rates in the country
The cities with the strictest gun control laws...Chicago, D.C., Baltimore.......
Yeah..............and gun runners go to places like GA, AL, TX and other places where the gun laws are lax, take them to Chicago, D.C., Baltimore, etc, and triple their money.
There are no checks on the borders between states, which is why it's so easy to transport weapons from a place where they're easy to buy to a place where the gun laws are strict.
Federalize the gun laws and you could take care of that.
So you are blaming states where not much gun crime occurs , not much moral decay is happing on your shit hole democrat blue city's ?
That's the problem now?
You Fucking created the moral decay don't blame us Jack asses
Ummmmmmmmmm................hate to tell you, but the states where they have the most lax gun laws are the ones that are predominantly red states. GA, AL, and TX are definitely red states.
Besides................it's not the democratic cities that are supplying the guns, it's the runners that take them up to the cities after buying them at gun shows in red states that are the culprits.
You aren't getting the point. The violence is so bad in these places like Chicago with strict gun laws, because the people with illegal guns can do what they want, because the people who live their lives legally can't have guns. That supports the idea that more lax gun laws allows for more guns, those people that can get them legally, to defend themselves and thus lower the crime rate by guns.
And which has one of the highest violent gun death rates in the countryActually no. Pro gunners in the US claim that being armed to the teeth keeps your crime down. Stats clearly show that the US has more homicides that other Western Countries (note I say western - compared to third-world countries, it's a paradise). You would think with such a proliferation of guns your country would be one of the least violent first-world countries. It's not. So it's clearly not the guns...
Do you know how big america is, its population ? Its as big as Australia and it's population is not centered on the coast, it's a melting pool of all the immigrants around the world.
Contrary to what you think I never in 51 years seen anyone carry a side arm, except for the occasional cop, Guns are not around as much as you think they are.
Guess you've never been to Montana where open carry is legal, and damn near every pickup truck has a gun rack with at least one rifle in the back.
The cities with the strictest gun control laws...Chicago, D.C., Baltimore.......
Yeah..............and gun runners go to places like GA, AL, TX and other places where the gun laws are lax, take them to Chicago, D.C., Baltimore, etc, and triple their money.
There are no checks on the borders between states, which is why it's so easy to transport weapons from a place where they're easy to buy to a place where the gun laws are strict.
Federalize the gun laws and you could take care of that.
And which has one of the highest violent gun death rates in the countryDo you know how big america is, its population ? Its as big as Australia and it's population is not centered on the coast, it's a melting pool of all the immigrants around the world.
Contrary to what you think I never in 51 years seen anyone carry a side arm, except for the occasional cop, Guns are not around as much as you think they are.
Guess you've never been to Montana where open carry is legal, and damn near every pickup truck has a gun rack with at least one rifle in the back.
The cities with the strictest gun control laws...Chicago, D.C., Baltimore.......
Yeah..............and gun runners go to places like GA, AL, TX and other places where the gun laws are lax, take them to Chicago, D.C., Baltimore, etc, and triple their money.
There are no checks on the borders between states, which is why it's so easy to transport weapons from a place where they're easy to buy to a place where the gun laws are strict.
Federalize the gun laws and you could take care of that.
Sure they do. My gosh you really don't know crap about how illegal guns are obtained. Think about how illegal drugs are moved from point A to point B. Then come back when you have a clue.
And which has one of the highest violent gun death rates in the countryGuess you've never been to Montana where open carry is legal, and damn near every pickup truck has a gun rack with at least one rifle in the back.
The cities with the strictest gun control laws...Chicago, D.C., Baltimore.......
Yeah..............and gun runners go to places like GA, AL, TX and other places where the gun laws are lax, take them to Chicago, D.C., Baltimore, etc, and triple their money.
There are no checks on the borders between states, which is why it's so easy to transport weapons from a place where they're easy to buy to a place where the gun laws are strict.
Federalize the gun laws and you could take care of that.
Sure they do. My gosh you really don't know crap about how illegal guns are obtained. Think about how illegal drugs are moved from point A to point B. Then come back when you have a clue.
So you're saying we're getting our guns from Mexico? Are you really that stupid?
And yeah.............I watched a documentary where gun runners were going to gun shows or having straw buyers pick the guns up from gun shops for them, they load them up and take them north where it's hard to get a gun and charge 3 to 4 times what they paid for them.
One of the runners said that he can't quit the business because the money is too good. Where you can buy a gun in TX or one of the other states for 300 bucks, you can take it to Chicago or someplace like that and get 750 to 1000 bucks for it.
And which has one of the highest violent gun death rates in the country
The cities with the strictest gun control laws...Chicago, D.C., Baltimore.......
Yeah..............and gun runners go to places like GA, AL, TX and other places where the gun laws are lax, take them to Chicago, D.C., Baltimore, etc, and triple their money.
There are no checks on the borders between states, which is why it's so easy to transport weapons from a place where they're easy to buy to a place where the gun laws are strict.
Federalize the gun laws and you could take care of that.
Sure they do. My gosh you really don't know crap about how illegal guns are obtained. Think about how illegal drugs are moved from point A to point B. Then come back when you have a clue.
So you're saying we're getting our guns from Mexico? Are you really that stupid?
And yeah.............I watched a documentary where gun runners were going to gun shows or having straw buyers pick the guns up from gun shops for them, they load them up and take them north where it's hard to get a gun and charge 3 to 4 times what they paid for them.
One of the runners said that he can't quit the business because the money is too good. Where you can buy a gun in TX or one of the other states for 300 bucks, you can take it to Chicago or someplace like that and get 750 to 1000 bucks for it.
Again why is it our problem?
It is yours making life and respect mean nothing..
The cities with the strictest gun control laws...Chicago, D.C., Baltimore.......
Yeah..............and gun runners go to places like GA, AL, TX and other places where the gun laws are lax, take them to Chicago, D.C., Baltimore, etc, and triple their money.
There are no checks on the borders between states, which is why it's so easy to transport weapons from a place where they're easy to buy to a place where the gun laws are strict.
Federalize the gun laws and you could take care of that.
Sure they do. My gosh you really don't know crap about how illegal guns are obtained. Think about how illegal drugs are moved from point A to point B. Then come back when you have a clue.
So you're saying we're getting our guns from Mexico? Are you really that stupid?
And yeah.............I watched a documentary where gun runners were going to gun shows or having straw buyers pick the guns up from gun shops for them, they load them up and take them north where it's hard to get a gun and charge 3 to 4 times what they paid for them.
One of the runners said that he can't quit the business because the money is too good. Where you can buy a gun in TX or one of the other states for 300 bucks, you can take it to Chicago or someplace like that and get 750 to 1000 bucks for it.
Again why is it our problem?
It is yours making life and respect mean nothing..
Jesus ..your the ones that are going atheist , guys in woman's bathrooms, gay marriage..and all now you are blaming us for not stopping your moral decay?
