If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
The US were also as you suggest providing material support to Britain well before they committed to entering the war under the rather amusing name of lend/lease. How exactly do you get a plane you lent back after it's shot down?
The Canadian war effort was considerable. Particularly when you consider the population was only around 11 million in 1940 and take into consideration the conscription crisis. Areas in the GTA were pretty much mobilized toward the war effort. Bowmanville had a POW camp for captured officers as an example. Pickering and Ajax had munition factories. Ajax was, or so they say, a munitions factory which turned into a town.
Canada was also a major naval power by the end of the war.
If we made as many movies as the Americans, it would be easier to compare. American most decorated soldier became a movie star. Audie Murphy.
The Canadian war effort was considerable. Particularly when you consider the population was only around 11 million in 1940 and take into consideration the conscription crisis. Areas in the GTA were pretty much mobilized toward the war effort. Bowmanville had a POW camp for captured officers as an example. Pickering and Ajax had munition factories. Ajax was, or so they say, a munitions factory which turned into a town.
Canada was also a major naval power by the end of the war.
If we made as many movies as the Americans, it would be easier to compare. American most decorated soldier became a movie star. Audie Murphy.
Sure Canada did it's very best but when you compare the resources and troops that Canada could ultimately muster compared to what America mustered there is an obvious difference to the war effort
It appears to me that Mr. Kitich took a course and thinks he is an expert now, even though his posts suggest otherwise. I find it distasteful the way he minimalizes the war efforts of several countries that played a central role in these wars. His revisionist/subjective views on history are obvious to anyone doing the slightest bit of research on the topic. My current knowledge on wars is limited but it is abundantly clear to me the man has no clue what he is talking about.
Perhaps Churchill could have talked to this man, but it might be akin to visiting Hitler in the late 1930s and expecting a peace settlement.
Last edited by Duncan Smith; Saturday, 26th November, 2011, 04:17 PM.
Sure Canada did it's very best but when you compare the resources and troops that Canada could ultimately muster compared to what America mustered there is an obvious difference to the war effort
Now you're just shooting random ideas off the top of your head. You need to stop, it's exceedingly disrespectful of yesterday's troops. Canada was far more involved in the war then you seem to know.
America by and large works and has saved the world in at least two world wars.
Do World War One 1914 to 1918 and World War Two 1939 to 1945 ring any bells? Or did you think Britain was going to win WW2 on their own and reclaim Europe without any US material and military aid? Especially in light of the Nazi/Soviet non-agression pact. Do you know about Roosevelt's 'lend/lease' program? Or do you think the stalemate on the western front in World War One was somehow going to end itself before the Americans arrived?
The Americans were a significant factor, but not the one reason the Allies won. WW2 couldn't have been won without the Commies on the Eastern Front - 491 divisions! Over half of the German forces were tied up the Eastern Front. And yes, the Americans helped armed the 5 millions Russians.
Of course, the fascists couldn't have developed their military power without the support of US banks and industry (GM, Ford, DuPont, Standard Oil, ITT, GE, etc). By being neutral they were perhaps hoping that Hilter would take on dictator Stalin.
How may wars has American won?
- Mexican War (1846)
- Granada
- Civil War
- war on the car
Americans were more successful at assassination as the CIA protected corporate investments abroad by supporting dictators in Guatemala, Ecuador, Congo, Cambodia, Chile, Angola, Iran, El Salvador, Panama, etc.
One might think to balance their budget they might close many of their 1,000 military bases around the world. But war is so profitable to those politicians with military investments.
... what? I'm not even sure that qualifies as a tangent. My point was that USSR/UK could not have won the war without the USA.
So Dec 1941 - Aug 1945 is 5 minutes out of a 60 minute game?
They lost in Vietnam for a number of reasons but it really relates to the fact that they did not have the will to win. If they had really wanted to win, and had the public support to win, they would have won.
Iraq is similar in some ways - it was not a conventional invasion. Call it what you will, if they had wanted to seize full control (and become an international pariah), they could have - eventually, and with a lot more troops needed, however.
What do either of these examples have to do with World War 2, however?
My point is more current, that people tend to overestimate the strength and role of the US in the world. The overconfidance inside the US had a direct impact on their failure in those wars. It also illustrates the biggest danger to world peace, that a "super power" with the wrong leader ( someone like George W. Bush for example ) is a danger to both themselves and the world.
Why was the US in Iraq in the first place ? It was a morally reprehensable act of violence, and both sides are paying a price today. Bush should be indicated on war crimes; instead, he watches baseball games.
The only good thing about Bush and his cronies is they took things so far that even Americans question their system now. Thought I might try to bring this topic back to the original theme :).
Now you're just shooting random ideas off the top of your head. You need to stop, it's exceedingly disrespectful of yesterday's troops. Canada was far more involved in the war then you seem to know.
You can try to stop me voicing my opinion by attempting to make ridiculous accusations as to who I am insulting but it won't work with me. Historical analysis is about studying what happened; not about being a mindless propogandist for Canada or any other country. It is obvious to anyone that in total America's war effort was much larger in terms of material and troops involved. You seem to be anti-American and pro-Canadian and pro-English (not pro-British) and so think history should be a mindless exercise in excessive patriotism. Your type of history is why countries go to war time and time again with the same poorly thought out rationale. Germany went to WW2 because in part the lie Hitler gave them was that German troops had been stabbed in the back by the leadership at home and were thus prevented from winning. Your arguments could just as easily be made for the German side by a Dunkan Schmidt. There were millions of Dunkan Schmidts in Germany brooding after WW1.
I have no reason to consider your point of view to be either informed as you have not given any historical details to any of your arguments or useful s it is nothing but mindless patriotic drivel. Your history is as mindless and poorly based as your complaints about tournament conditions and chess organizers. Your constant demand that I stop discussing history is as ridiculous as your claim that US was not central to either WW1 or WW2.
However, you don't need to stop. In this country you have the right to freedom of speech without any test or qualification as to whether you actually know anything. However, why not come to Ryerson University some time, take a course in history and see what grade you get.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Saturday, 26th November, 2011, 04:19 PM.
Reason: yes Paul I still edit my posts
The Americans were a significant factor, but not the one reason the Allies won. WW2 couldn't have been won without the Commies on the Eastern Front - 491 divisions! Over half of the German forces were tied up the Eastern Front. And yes, the Americans helped armed the 5 millions Russians.
Of course, the fascists couldn't have developed their military power without the support of US banks and industry (GM, Ford, DuPont, Standard Oil, ITT, GE, etc). By being neutral they were perhaps hoping that Hilter would take on dictator Stalin.
How may wars has American won?
- Mexican War (1846)
- Granada
- Civil War
- war on the car
Americans were more successful at assassination as the CIA protected corporate investments abroad by supporting dictators in Guatemala, Ecuador, Congo, Cambodia, Chile, Angola, Iran, El Salvador, Panama, etc.
One might think to balance their budget they might close many of their 1,000 military bases around the world. But war is so profitable to those politicians with military investments.
The commies were in no significant way involved in the war against Japan. The US both took on Japan one on one and tipped the war in Europe and northern Africa. The European allies were not able to do anything but lose badly to Hitler everywhere until the US became involved. There would not have been a DDay without America. The commies initially lost badly to Hitler. Only because Russian lives were considered expendable and due to Russian winters were they able to stop Hitler finally. Did you know that all the Russians that eventually did make it into Germany were liquidated or imprisoned by Stalin because to his mind they had become contaminated by contact with the west?
At best England was able to hold off a German invasion with material and convoy support from America. One of England's best contributions was cracking the Enigma code otherwise the U-boats would have been able to cut off England's supplies from America. Their other contribution was holding on with American help so that England could remain a staging ground for DDay.
Also can you explain to me exactly how America won the civil war? There are no winners in a civil war or I guess by some twisted logic you can say there are no losers - as one of the sides has to win and they were both American.
As far as WW1 was concerned the commies left the field of battle after the Russian revolution. Although they did continue to fight for some weeks which did help in that Germany was not able to move troops from the eastern to western fronts as quickly as they would have hoped for. The other reason being the lack of rail resource. Germany was in desperate bid to finish Russia off and then shift focus to the western front to end the stalemate before America could arrive in force in Europe. The Germans knew that if the Americans entered the war they were doomed. Did you know that Germany assisted Lenin to get back into Russia with the explicit hope that he would take over and pull Russia out of the war? Lenin was fully aware of this and agreed to German assistance.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Saturday, 26th November, 2011, 04:35 PM.
One of England's best contributions was cracking the Enigma code otherwise the U-boats would have been able to cut off England's supplies from America. Their other contribution was holding on with American help so that England could remain a staging ground for DDay.
Also can you explain to me exactly how America won the civil war? There are no winners in a civil war or I guess by some twisted logic you can say there are no losers - as one of the sides has to win and they were both American.
Did you know that Germany assisted Lenin to get back into Russia with the explicit hope that he would take over and pull Russia out of the war? Lenin was fully aware of this and agreed to German assistance.
Thanks for the historical points. I guess it's hard for you to acknowledge that our allies, the godless commies, did any good.
Didn't a recent Hollywood movie make it look like the Americans cracked the Enigma code? They tend to overplay the Americans (Same thing in sci-fi, space aliens always have to face off against Americans).
Of course the Americans won the civic war - it's a twisted logic joke. In reality, all sides in all wars loses: lifes and resources (except for the arms manufacturers).
Did you know that Stalin assisted the Nazis by not supporting German communist revolutionaries as he was afraid that a German communist state would be more powerful that his dictatorship. So the people, the support of the industrial leaders (and their American investors) and the central Catholic party, gave power to the crackpot Hitler.
Thanks for the historical points. I guess it's hard for you to acknowledge that our allies, the godless commies, did any good.
Didn't a recent Hollywood movie make it look like the Americans cracked the Enigma code? They tend to overplay the Americans (Same thing in sci-fi, space aliens always have to face off against Americans).
Of course the Americans won the civic war - it's a twisted logic joke. In reality, all sides in all wars loses: lifes and resources (except for the arms manufacturers).
Did you know that Stalin assisted the Nazis by not supporting German communist revolutionaries as he was afraid that a German communist state would be more powerful that his dictatorship. So the people, the support of the industrial leaders (and their American investors) and the central Catholic party, gave power to the crackpot Hitler.
I tend not to learn my history from Hollywood; I don't find Hollywood movies educational. I don't relish discussuing history with those that do. I mean what point are you making? That Hollywood movies are not historically accurate? That's like complaining that Star Trek and Star Wars are fictional and not scientifically accurate.
Hitler threw all his communist enemies into concentration camps as soon as he took over and set his thugs upon them even before he took power. There was no German communists to assist into power by the time Hitler had come to power. Communists and other Nazi political enemies, homosexuals and mental patients were the first into the concentration camps.
America wasn't investing or trading much at all abroad as soon as the Great Depression hit. That was one of the things that created economic problems that allowed Hitler to come to power. It was German society that in one way or another put Hitler in power; never by voting him into office but by complicity and not speaking out.
I just acknowledged the importance of Russia in WW1 even though the commies withdrew from WW1 shortly after taking power. Of course Russia had a major role to play in WW2, some good, some bad. Killing half the Polish officer corps that was on the half of Poland that Stalin split with Hitler was one of the bad roles of the Soviet Union played. Those 20000 officers would have been very useful to the Allied war effort.
The Soviets did not play a role in the Pacific, which was what a great deal of what WW2 was about. They did not play a role in north Africa. They were very important in the European war for which they grabbed half of Europe and subjected the Poles, Czechoslovaks, Baltic states, Hungarians and anything else they could get their hands on for decades. This was while the US was rebuilding western Europe with the Marshal plan. The Soviets attacked Finland before the Hitler attacked the Soviet Union. This only emboldened Hitler when he saw how well Finland fared against them. He famously said that Russia was a completely rotten structure that only required kicking the front door down. The poor showing in Finland forced Stalin to get all the officers he had sent to gulags out so that the Red Army had some kind of leadership in future. The ones he liquidated of course were no longer available. So killing thousands of Polish officers, invading Finland and assisting Hitler any way he could was Stalin's idea of what the Soviet Union should be doing in WW2. The Soviets did play a role but it was because of the tenacity of the Soviet people's not the capability of their leadership that made the difference. Well other than the Ukranians welcoming Hitler with open arms until Nazi attrocities started to mount up.
I don't care whether anyone believes in g'd or not but I do care when the state systematically tramples the religious rights of the population. Unless you consider that insignificant or unimportant.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Saturday, 26th November, 2011, 09:04 PM.
I just acknowledged the importance of Russia in WW1 even though the commies withdrew from WW1 shortly after taking power. Of course Russia had a major role to play in WW2, some good, some bad. Killing half the Polish officer corps that was on the half of Poland that Stalin split with Hitler was one of the bad roles of the Soviet Union played. Those 20000 officers would have been very useful to the Allied war effort.
The Soviets did not play a role in the Pacific, which was what a great deal of what WW2 was about. They did not play a role in north Africa. They were very important in the European war for which they grabbed half of Europe and subjected the Poles, Czechoslovaks, Baltic states, Hungarians and anything else they could get their hands on for decades. This was while the US was rebuilding western Europe with the Marshal plan. The Soviets attacked Finland before the Hitler attacked the Soviet Union. This only emboldened Hitler when he saw how well Finland fared against them. He famously said that Russia was a completely rotten structure that only required kicking the front door down. The poor showing in Finland forced Stalin to get all the officers he had sent to gulags out so that the Red Army had some kind of leadership in future. The ones he liquidated of course were no longer available. So killing thousands of Polish officers, invading Finland and assisting Hitler any way he could was Stalin's idea of what the Soviet Union should be doing in WW2. The Soviets did play a role but it was because of the tenacity of the Soviet people's not the capability of their leadership that made the difference. Well other than the Ukranians welcoming Hitler with open arms until Nazi attrocities started to mount up.
I think I learned about the war strategies from people playing table-top war games.
The Germans and Russians weren't the only force to commit atrocies, the Americans bombed civilians such as the burning of Dresden. The Western Allies command made many bad decisions costing 1,000s of lives.
In 1937 among the millions killed by Stalin were 60% of the army officers whom he believed were pro-German. When war came in June 22, 1941 they were unprepared; They didn't have a strategy of defence, except for killing Russian soldiers who retreated. Western intelligence estimated the fall of Moscow in four weeks. http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com...orsuccess.aspx
"Churchill's Generals estimated the Russians would collapse in six weeks; the Americans gave a similar figure. If there ever was a stunning mismatch of forces in the history of warfare, it is the Wehrmacht and the Red Army in 1941." http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com...ingrussia.aspx
But, for the first time, the blitzkreig wasn't successful. The Germans needed Russian oil and had split their forces. So this failure was really the beginning of Germany's eventual defeat, before the Americans were even in the war. By early 1942 the relocated Russian industry was out-producing Germanies and Stalin let the Soviet High Command make the military decisions. Later (May 1943) the British, French, Australians and Americans kicked the Germans and Italians out of Africa, stopping the other source of oil for the Germans.
Russians defending Stalingrad (Nov 1942) is considered by many historians to be the turning point of the war. And the success of the t-34 Russian-built tanks in Kursk (July 1943), the greatest tank battle in history. The Russian air power and partisans blowing up rail lines also helped. (http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...e_of_kursk.htm)
The eastern front was over for the Germans, it was just a matter of time for Germany to be defeated. The Red Army captured Berlin and The Russians won Eastern Europe. Ironically, Britain and France entered the war to save Poland.
On the Pacific coast, the Russians fought and defeated the Japanese in 1939. After Germany invaded Russia, the Russians still left over 1,200 tanks and 1,00 aircraft to defend aginst against Japan. http://www.historynet.com/world-war-...alkhin-gol.htm
The Japanese didn't attack Russian ships. After victory in Europe, a million Russians attacked Japanese in Manchuria.
Yes the American navy was the major force in the Pacific. American subs were sinking merchant ships and stopped the Japanese from getting oil.The British and Canadians tried to defend Hong Kong and fought in Burma. Australians were involved in bloddy battles with Japanese in New Guinea, giving Japan their first defeat on land in Sep 1942. China, Filipino, Mongolia, Dutch Indian and other countries also contributed in the fight against Japan. It was a world war.
I think I learned about the war strategies from people playing table-top war games.
The Germans and Russians weren't the only force to commit atrocies, the Americans bombed civilians such as the burning of Dresden. The Western Allies command made many bad decisions costing 1,000s of lives.
In 1937 among the millions killed by Stalin were 60% of the army officers whom he believed were pro-German. When war came in June 22, 1941 they were unprepared; They didn't have a strategy of defence, except for killing Russian soldiers who retreated. Western intelligence estimated the fall of Moscow in four weeks. http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com...orsuccess.aspx
"Churchill's Generals estimated the Russians would collapse in six weeks; the Americans gave a similar figure. If there ever was a stunning mismatch of forces in the history of warfare, it is the Wehrmacht and the Red Army in 1941." http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com...ingrussia.aspx
But, for the first time, the blitzkreig wasn't successful. The Germans needed Russian oil and had split their forces. So this failure was really the beginning of Germany's eventual defeat, before the Americans were even in the war. By early 1942 the relocated Russian industry was out-producing Germanies and Stalin let the Soviet High Command make the military decisions. Later (May 1943) the British, French, Australians and Americans kicked the Germans and Italians out of Africa, stopping the other source of oil for the Germans.
Russians defending Stalingrad (Nov 1942) is considered by many historians to be the turning point of the war. And the success of the t-34 Russian-built tanks in Kursk (July 1943), the greatest tank battle in history. The Russian air power and partisans blowing up rail lines also helped. (http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...e_of_kursk.htm)
The eastern front was over for the Germans, it was just a matter of time for Germany to be defeated. The Red Army captured Berlin and The Russians won Eastern Europe. Ironically, Britain and France entered the war to save Poland.
On the Pacific coast, the Russians fought and defeated the Japanese in 1939. After Germany invaded Russia, the Russians still left over 1,200 tanks and 1,00 aircraft to defend aginst against Japan. http://www.historynet.com/world-war-...alkhin-gol.htm
The Japanese didn't attack Russian ships. After victory in Europe, a million Russians attacked Japanese in Manchuria.
Yes the American navy was the major force in the Pacific. American subs were sinking merchant ships and stopped the Japanese from getting oil.The British and Canadians tried to defend Hong Kong and fought in Burma. Australians were involved in bloddy battles with Japanese in New Guinea, giving Japan their first defeat on land in Sep 1942. China, Filipino, Mongolia, Dutch Indian and other countries also contributed in the fight against Japan. It was a world war.
I did a school project on Stalingrad. One of the few things I ever enjoyed doing in high school History class. Again, I'm no expert, but WW1 was even more about Europe wasn't it then WW2 ?
Its important to take Mr. Kitich with a grain of salt, he's posted wildly inaccurate opinions on a variety of topics, including charitable receipts and the CFC, the exercise value of Curling, and the need for policemen in every subway station. Once one gets down to facts though, it all gets pretty murky. For example, he posted something about the rapidly increasing crime rate in Toronto, when in fact that rate has slowly trended down.
I did a school project on Stalingrad. One of the few things I ever enjoyed doing in high school History class. Again, I'm no expert, but WW1 was even more about Europe wasn't it then WW2 ?
Its important to take Mr. Kitich with a grain of salt, he's posted wildly inaccurate opinions on a variety of topics, including charitable receipts and the CFC, the exercise value of Curling, and the need for policemen in every subway station. Once one gets down to facts though, it all gets pretty murky. For example, he posted something about the rapidly increasing crime rate in Toronto, when in fact that rate has slowly trended down.
Really? Now you are making stuff up wholesale. I have never posted anything about crime rates in Toronto, nor about their rapid increase. I have never suggested anything such as a policeman in every station. Are you proud of yourself when you lie? I'm a pretty big guy and can take care of myself. I have even been a special constable for the Hamilton police in the custody cells. I'm not some kind of 98 pound weakling who would be concerned about police in the subway.
The CFC has lost their charitable status, what more does anyone need to know? Perhaps you can explain to us why if you claim I am inaccurate. Give us the inside scoop Duncan. I'll bet you may know quite a bit about it. If you can't prove that my suggestions were inaccurate then I'll assume that either you don't know or don't want the full facts made public for some reason.
Curling I am not concerned with; didn't you make some kind of insulting obesity reference about me over that one? Curling is a pretty leisurely activity, lots of standing around with sporadic bouts of sweeping and typically lots of beer consumption afterwards. Yeah I said it. And yes I have curled in the past.
There is a reason why WW1 was called a world war. However, if your knowledge ends at high school I suggest you at least watch Lawrence of Arabia. Now you have insulted all the soldiers in India, Burma and all the other places outside Europe who fought in WW1. Not to mention the Canadians and Australians and Americans who were involved. If it was just a European war can you explain Gallipoli? I knew you couldn't. When the British Empire went to war the world went to war, end of story. I would also remind you that most of Russia is in Asia and that Japan was on the Allied side during WW1. Hardly a European power are they? That's got to rank with your statement that America was not a central power in either world war as one of the most bizzare comments ever.
Your knowledge of history amounts to accusing others of not knowing what they are talking about while at the same time offering no details yourself. What's the matter can't you at least wiki it and fake it?
Keep this up and you will be hearing from my lawyers, to borrow your favourite theme.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Monday, 28th November, 2011, 07:44 PM.
Tweet
Comment