Did anyone in your family fight or help WWII?

Should we start rationing things for our troops again like we did in World War II?

My Dad, my uncles, my friends fathers and uncles.  War as they knew it and war as we know it are different. 

Did anyone in your family fight or help WWII?

Should we start rationing things for our troops again like we did in World War II?


Both of my grandfathers fought.  My paternal grandfather was in the Army, and was an MP in Europe.

My maternal grandfather was in the Navy, and served on a destroyer in the Pacific.

And no, there is no need for rationing.  Mostly because there is no major interruption in trade, and there is little to nothing in short supply.  WWII was very different, because almost all imports were cut off.  Things like Sugar, Oil, Rubber, and Metal were mostly being used by the military, so there was little left for civilian use.

In fact, while the current military budget looks high, it is a fraction of the GDP compared to 1942-1946.  During that time, military spending accounted for 38% of the annual GDP.  Today, we average from 3.1% annual GDP spending on the military.

And no, there is no need for rationing.  Mostly because there is no major interruption in trade, and there is little to nothing in short supply.  WWII was very different, because almost all imports were cut off.  Things like Sugar, Oil, Rubber, and Metal were mostly being used by the military, so there was little left for civilian use.


It's the catch-22 of modern warfare.

The good news is that we no longer require 1000 bombers (100 of which will be shot down, but we have 100,000 people to build replacement bombers every day) and 3000- 250-lb unguided bombs (4000 tons of explosives, but we have 10,000 people to build those cheap unguided bombs every day) to take out a single enemy ball bearing factory that makes a vital component for the bad guys' war effort. 

The bad news is that without the omnilethality and overkill associated with dumping of a third of a Hiroshima, per city, per day, upon the bad guys, we can never break the will of the enemy's civilian population, and we therefore end up losing the war.

The good news is that by losing the war, we save a billion civilians.

The bad news is that we haven't won a war since WW2.

The good news is that we haven't fought a war that's been worth a billion civilians since WW2.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other.  The jury's still out as to whether we're better off fighting a "global war" like a real global war ought to be fought, or fighting a sitzkreig until we find out whether one has to be fought. 

One thing's for sure, this game, as currently coded, sucks.  It desperately needs "save/restore game" and "fast forward 20 years" feature.  As it's coded, it's unplayable.  Might as well flip a coin and see what happens.

The bad news is that we haven't won a war since WW2.


Not quite true.  We have won 2 wars since WWII.

The Korean War, and the Cold War.  Thankfully, we have not had a major "Hot War" since WWII.

And I pray every day that humanity never has to face another one.  Not now, not 50 years in the future, not 500.

In fact, in a bit of good news, South and North Korea are actually engaging in peace talks!  Believe it or not, both countries are still tecnically in a state of war (the last 50+ years have merely been a cease fire).

Not quite true.  We have won 2 wars since WWII.


I mean no disrespect to the Marines (and others who served), but Korea was a draw.  The fact that we're only having peace talks now is proof that it was a draw.

And while I originally meant "hot" wars, I'm not entirely convinced that we won the Cold War.  Consider Putin's biography -- can we honestly claim that those who fought for the old Soviet system didn't just take a few years off to regroup and upon their return to power, rename the respective bureaucracies?  (Although I'll grant you that the West gained a hell of a lot of territory from 1989-2001, effectively reducing Russia back to its pre-WW2 borders :)

Something that keeps me up at night: Putin's cult of personality, and the way a certain politician fell for it.  "Knew his heart"?  Takes one to know one, I guess.  I'm not gonna go so far as to suggest he's a Manchurian Candidate, but I point out that the FSB is gonna wind up the ultimate beneficiary of our misadventures in the mideast. Doubly ironic, given that we used the same bunch of ignoramuses to drain the USSR of its economic might and credibility a mere 20 years ago. I suppose it's fair ball that they do the same to us, but it still sucks to lose a war.

My grandfather was an Army doctor stationed state-side. Little did anyone know, there were P.O.W. camps here in the states and my grandfather served at them. Yes, there were German soldiers on U.S. soil.

My step-father was also in the service. I'm not too sure where he served during the war but he was a musician and didn't see combat either. He was entertaining the troops.

My father-in-law was a cook in the Coast Guard. He served in combat and was there during the invasion of Normandy during D-Day. He was on the ship and was pulling guys out of the water. Who knows how many lives he saved that day.




Cat

wow..never knew ther were POW camps here in the states..
we usually try to keep our wars elsewhere.

And while I originally meant "hot" wars, I'm not entirely convinced that we won the Cold War.  Consider Putin's biography -- can we honestly claim that those who fought for the old Soviet system didn't just take a few years off to regroup and upon their return to power, rename the respective bureaucracies?  (Although I'll grant you that the West gained a hell of a lot of territory from 1989-2001, effectively reducing Russia back to its pre-WW2 borders :)


I would state that we did win the Cold War, because nobody has taken up the former USSR's chant of "World Socialism".  For the most part, the people that used to chant that are now either keeping quiet, or are much more moderate in their views.

Personally, I have never had a problem with Communism, Socialism, or any other political philosophy.  The problem with the USSR was that they were willing to export it to anybody.  And they suported a lot of out-right terrorist groups all over the world who thought they could convince others to believe it.

So yes, I would say that we (as in democracy) won the Cold War, and look at Poland, Hungary, former East Germany, and a lot of other countries.  And even if Russia does slip back into Communism, I seriously doubt that the people there would stand for things like they were under Stalin, Kruschev, or Brezhnev.  And I doubt that any of their former satellite states would even consider returning to the benovelent protection of the Soviet Union.


wow..never knew ther were POW camps here in the states..
we usually try to keep our wars elsewhere.


Oh there were a great number of camps here in the US.  And we not only held our own prisoners, but those from England.  This is mostly because of the Geneva Convention.  Part of the requirements is that the country that captures the soldiers must ensure their safety.  And since the US was never seriously attacked, it was considered the safest place to keep them.

Not only that, but it prevented escape attempts.  As the Germans discovered, once an allied POW got a safe distance away, they could often hide away and return to Allied lines.  By bringing Italian and German prisoners to the US, it was asured that this would not happen.

In fact, a great many former POWs returned to the US after the war and became citizens.  A great many did not even want to return home, but because of Geneva Repatriation laws, they were forced to go home.  It is rather ironic, since you rarely hear of US POWs wanting to remain (or returning to live) to the countries where they were held prisoner.

I would state that we did win the Cold War, because nobody has taken up the former USSR's chant of "World Socialism". 


OK, that I'll buy.  We beat the USSR's stated ideology fair and square.  I still think it's an open question of whether or not freedom (as preached and practised in the 40s) will win. 

The most interesting post-Cold War development in Russia has been Putin's cultivation of a personality cult.  The two expatriate Russians I know are separated by about 20 years in age.  The 40something one isn't too thrilled with Putin.  The 20something one is delighted, and holds the opinion that Putin isn't going far enough in taking out domestic opposition, because (and I quote) "Russia needs a strong leader".  I don't really fault the 20something one for holding those views -- it's been that way since Peter the Great.  Whenever Russia is governed by anything "weaker" than an iron-fisted dictatorship, chaos ensues, and that's all the 20something has known.  It is, however, a worrisome development for the 40something one, whose parents grew up under a Man of Steel.

It's the catch-22 of modern warfare.

The good news is that we no longer require 1000 bombers (100 of which will be shot down, but we have 100,000 people to build replacement bombers every day) and 3000- 250-lb unguided bombs (4000 tons of explosives, but we have 10,000 people to build those cheap unguided bombs every day) to take out a single enemy ball bearing factory that makes a vital component for the bad guys' war effort. 

The bad news is that without the omnilethality and overkill associated with dumping of a third of a Hiroshima, per city, per day, upon the bad guys, we can never break the will of the enemy's civilian population, and we therefore end up losing the war.

The good news is that by losing the war, we save a billion civilians.

The bad news is that we haven't won a war since WW2.

The good news is that we haven't fought a war that's been worth a billion civilians since WW2.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other.  The jury's still out as to whether we're better off fighting a "global war" like a real global war ought to be fought, or fighting a sitzkreig until we find out whether one has to be fought. 

One thing's for sure, this game, as currently coded, sucks.  It desperately needs "save/restore game" and "fast forward 20 years" feature.  As it's coded, it's unplayable.  Might as well flip a coin and see what happens.


  My solution to reducing the needless carnage of a needless war would be implemented much earlier:  The U.S. should have stayed the hell out of WWI.  Woodrow Wilson, the lying, conniving bastard, manipulated American sentiment by secretly loading armaments onto the British passenger ship Lusitania, in violation of an agreement that had been painstakingly worked out by cooler heads in America and Germany.  They agreed not to fire on any non-military ship carrying American civilians, if we agreed to make sure those ships did not carry military cargo...

  The S.O.B. didn't even tell the passengers.  He just let them board the ship in order to sacrifice their lives so he could have the glory of leading the U.S. into one of Europe's endless series of incomprehensible wars, one of which is the subject of this thread...

  I believe that the war would have been much shorter, with many fewer casualties, without our participation.  Sure Germany would have won, but a victorious Germany would never have brought Hitler to power.  Without Hitler, Stalin would never have turned the USSR into a military machine at the sacrifice of the civilian economy.  France, in defeat, would not have been able to hang onto its colonies in Indochina which would therefore not have turned to communism in desperation.  Britain, in defeat, would not have had the power to redraw the maps of the Middle East and Africa, which resulted in the squalor and ethnic violence that we are now dealing with.  WWII would never have happened so Japan would not have been driven out of China, and Mao would be a farmer...

  The entire course of the 20th century would be different.  No Hiroshima, no Holocaust, no Cold War, no Little Red Book, no Perestroika, no 9/11...

  My paternal granfather was drafted and served with the Army Corps of Engineers in Alaska groove ;) on...

If anyone is interested in this subject, get "Band of Brothers" on DVD. The best!

   My solution to reducing the needless carnage of a needless war would be implemented much earlier:  The U.S. should have stayed the hell out of WWI.  Woodrow Wilson, the lying, conniving bastard, manipulated American sentiment by secretly loading armaments onto the British passenger ship Lusitania, in violation of an agreement that had been painstakingly worked out by cooler heads in America and Germany.  They agreed not to fire on any non-military ship carrying American civilians, if we agreed to make sure those ships did not carry military cargo...

   The S.O.B. didn't even tell the passengers.  He just let them board the ship in order to sacrifice their lives so he could have the glory of leading the U.S. into one of Europe's endless series of incomprehensible wars, one of which is the subject of this thread...

   I believe that the war would have been much shorter, with many fewer casualties, without our participation.  Sure Germany would have won, but a victorious Germany would never have brought Hitler to power.  Without Hitler, Stalin would never have turned the USSR into a military machine at the sacrifice of the civilian economy.  France, in defeat, would not have been able to hang onto its colonies in Indochina which would therefore not have turned to communism in desperation.  Britain, in defeat, would not have had the power to redraw the maps of the Middle East and Africa, which resulted in the squalor and ethnic violence that we are now dealing with.  WWII would never have happened so Japan would not have been driven out of China, and Mao would be a farmer...

   The entire course of the 20th century would be different.  No Hiroshima, no Holocaust, no Cold War, no Little Red Book, no Perestroika, no 9/11...

   My paternal granfather was drafted and served with the Army Corps of Engineers in Alaska groove ;) on...




YES!! http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/hello2.gif .  I wouldn't go so far to say that none of this stuff would have happened. I think the whole premise of WWI should have caused the people to overthrow the Tsar, the Kaiser, The King, and the Presidents of the USA and France. 

The most interesting post-Cold War development in Russia has been Putin's cultivation of a personality cult. 


Bad form to follow up to my own post, but I finally remembered the name of the youth group that constitutes the vanguard of the personality cult. 

For a good time, google "Nashi".  It's Russian for "ours".  Draw your own WW2-era parallels.  And your 21st-century ones.

Bad form to follow up to my own post, but I finally remembered the name of the youth group that constitutes the vanguard of the personality cult. 

For a good time, google "Nashi".  It's Russian for "ours".  Draw your own WW2-era parallels.  And your 21st-century ones.


  Yet more proof that whatever happens, democracy and Russia are not exactly on speaking terms...

It's the catch-22 of modern warfare.

The good news is that we no longer require 1000 bombers (100 of which will be shot down, but we have 100,000 people to build replacement bombers every day) and 3000- 250-lb unguided bombs (4000 tons of explosives, but we have 10,000 people to build those cheap unguided bombs every day) to take out a single enemy ball bearing factory that makes a vital component for the bad guys' war effort. 

The bad news is that without the omnilethality and overkill associated with dumping of a third of a Hiroshima, per city, per day, upon the bad guys, we can never break the will of the enemy's civilian population, and we therefore end up losing the war.

The good news is that by losing the war, we save a billion civilians.

The bad news is that we haven't won a war since WW2.

The good news is that we haven't fought a war that's been worth a billion civilians since WW2.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other.  The jury's still out as to whether we're better off fighting a "global war" like a real global war ought to be fought, or fighting a sitzkreig until we find out whether one has to be fought. 

One thing's for sure, this game, as currently coded, sucks.  It desperately needs "save/restore game" and "fast forward 20 years" feature.  As it's coded, it's unplayable.  Might as well flip a coin and see what happens.
Who is this "We"? It's not America, they have won Both Gulf wars and Korea was a standstill.

Not quite true.  We have won 2 wars since WWII.

The Korean War, and the Cold War.  Thankfully, we have not had a major "Hot War" since WWII.

And I pray every day that humanity never has to face another one.  Not now, not 50 years in the future, not 500.

In fact, in a bit of good news, South and North Korea are actually engaging in peace talks!  Believe it or not, both countries are still tecnically in a state of war (the last 50+ years have merely been a cease fire).
The Cold War Wasn't Really a War, just a bunch of Spying and wasteing money.