"What is the point of NATO anymore?" Topic

China is now Greenland's 2nd largest trade partner and growing,

That is unsettling … That is how they worm their way into a nation's economy, culture, etc.

Yes just saw Canada's PM(?) saying the great deal has just been made with China. Much too close for comfort, IMO. With the Chicoms infiltrating into the Great White North across our Northern border.

China may win their war with the West without firing a shot …

China may win their war with the West without firing a shot …

That's why Trump is acting as he is, trying to put the brakes on and switch tracks before we all end up in a ravine

Legion 4

As long as EU wants to dictate NATO's objectives and strategies the US should leave NATO.

China's growth was accelerated by very unwise US policies.
China was granted Most Favored Nation (MFN) status in 1980 (Pres. Carter). This status allowed China to receive the same trade advantages as other countries, which included lower tariffs and better trade terms. One of the many reasons I consider Pres. Carter to be one of 3 worst presidents in my life time.

As long as EU wants to dictate NATO's objectives and strategies the US should leave NATO.

I do see that point. And I'm not seeing anything really wrong with it.

FWIW – I wonder without the organization, SOPs, membership funding requirements, etc., of NATO. What will happen if we all of "former" NATO members need to form an alliance, e.g. like the Allies of WWII ?

I.e.:
Strength in numbers

Peace thru strength

Will the former NATO members downsize their militaries, as they had before, making them weaker, more vulnerable, etc.? Spending more of their Tax, etc. $ on the various initiatives. That many of which will not make it easier to for them to create an effective military.

Will the EU actually work like NATO did and band together to mitigate the threat ?

Frankly in the short run if NATO does not want to have NATO … than they should be left to their own devises. With will not really help stopping the Russians for continuing their war in Ukraine. Or even going after the Baltic states, etc. As the trip wire of Art.5 is gone.

Will the EU be able to effectively confront the Russians if they want to reclaim their former Imperial Empire ? Which seems to be the long-range plan of the troglodytes like we see in Russia's leadership currently…

And yes, "Only Nixon can go to China" … at the time that may have made sense … then. However, we didn't realize, that the Chicoms were playing the long game. And eventually would take advantage of the USA's dependency on their less expensive goods. That can only be made by a Communist nation along with their almost endless supply of workers.

Sadly Legion… and many did not see that our business leaders and business leaders around the world, would sell out the west's technology and industry, in exchange for slave labor and maximum profits.

They should have, but did not. Yes the politicians are equally to blame.

Result: China employees its people, gets new factories and machinery, loads of money and access to the most advanced technology. Closes decades of military tech in a very short time.

SB, China sells lots to US, bad. Greenland sells lots to China, also bad ? You don't think the Greenlanders are taking the jobs of all those Chinese fishermen ?

If Canada deals more with China, it is mainly to do with the disruption of trade caused by US tariffs. Who's fault could that be, I wonder 🤔.

And now threatening another trade war if the EU doesn't roll over over Greenland ?

The tariffs are not an answer. Trump did his job and got a decent deal from the EU, both sides got something. But everyday Americans absorb tariff costs. They end up a tax levied by one man rule, apparently at will. I have paid tariff charges from several companies.

Greenland is the fastest warming region in the world, believe it or not. We can barely track conditions there now with NOAA gutted and earth science defunded. There is going to be a price to pay for this kind of needless bullying in place of diplomacy, in resources and consequences. We can get what we need there and do what we have to without forcing people to give up their sovereignty against their will.

Let's just say that this whole situation is an unforced error.
I weep to see how our foreign policy has deteriorated.
And don't give me any "Yeah, but what about…" BS. I surrender.

Ah, tariffs.

OVI +1 … IIRC Marx[[Karl not Groucho!] said, something like "The failure of Capitalism is the greed of the entrepreneur." We see that in some situations … he may have been on to something. But like democracy it is the best system so far. Even if somewhat imperfect in some cases.

I may have posted this before, regardless, the Chicoms are IIRC, Greenland's 2d biggest trade partner … If Greenlander's are taking jobs from Chinese fishermen … I'm pretty sure those in charge, e.g. Xi, the CCP don't really give a . They were more than willing to lose e.g. around a million[?, we many never really know] of their own along with North Koreans during the Korean war, '50-'53 then the truce took place. We the ROKs, and even the UN has been in a state of Cold War since then. We flew the UN flag along with ours and the ROKs on are compounds, Camps, FOB, Guard Posts, etc. While I served there with the 2ID, 22 months '84-'85. The war is technically not over … And the Chicoms like it that way … So does the North's Un …

If Canada want's to do biz with the Chicoms … it is there right per se. However, every place that does business with them has to deal with them little by little of them infiltrating into their society, culture, etc. As they certainly may have been doing with Greenland. And many other places in the world. And again, they play the long game. It could take decades to maybe have this technique come into reality … That's OK … they'll wait.

As we see, some of that has already happened in the USA. Even before the 4 years of open borders. Reports state around 10,000 + came across the open border for that horrific 4 years. Yes, I'm sure all of those illegal Chinese aliens are just innocent refugees fleeing the draconian CCP regime. Yeah … right …

Chief of the US armed forces

Yes and those tariffs will go to 25% after that. As is reported from the WH and some in the media. Some still doubt the effectiveness of those tariffs. However, reports vary … and this is only the end of the 1st Quarter … 3 more to play …

Greenland is the fastest warming region in the world,

That may be, but it is one of the most key/decisive pieces of terrain in that region. Starting in WWII.

Standing between North America, and the Chicoms and the Russians. With the advent of hypersonic nuclear armed missiles. It is even more important that US high tech ADA systems, e.g. Gold Doom, etc. get stationed there.

I will freely admit and have said it before, why the POTUS chose this type of deal making/diplomacy is beyond my understanding ? Maybe he wants to get out of NATO ? But I'd think with Denmark being part of NATO and our agreement with them since '51. Putting high tech ADA on Greenland would have been easier … FWIW, as I have said we really don't know what the classified intel says and what is going on behind closed. We may never know.

Denmark and the EU can't hand over Greenland – it won't be the last "polite request from the reasonable old sleepy headed man".

Scapa Flow is a nice place to park a navy.

Malta would be handy in the Med'.

If the usa wanted a bigger buffer between its territory and Russia, rather than worrying about Greenland maybe they should give Alaska to the Canadians. That makes sense.

And Greenland – it has the whole of NATO to defend it so no problems there. I bet the Danes are just so chuffed they backed up the usa in Iraq and Afghanistan, spending money, taking injuries and losing lives. Always nice to be appreciated.

Always nice to be appreciated.

Isn't it, though???

"AN OUNCE OF BLOOD – War Room – U.S. Army War College
Denmark suffered significant losses in Afghanistan and Iraq, with around 43-44 soldiers killed in Afghanistan and 7-8 in Iraq, totaling over 50 fatalities, making them one of the highest per capita contributors among NATO allies, experiencing devastating losses relative to their small population, primarily from combat injuries like IEDs and ambushes."

"Around 250,000 American soldiers died in the European Theater during World War II, with figures varying slightly by source but generally placing most U.S. combat deaths in Europe rather than the Pacific. This total includes significant losses from ground combat and the Army Air Forces, with major battles like the Battle of the Bulge contributing heavily to these casualties, making it a deadlier theater for U.S. troops overall. "

"U.S. men suffered significant losses in Europe during World War I, with over 116,000 deaths and 204,000"

Yes "appreciation" is a fickle bit#h. 😏

SBm +1

OVI +1

From reports, interviews, etc. it does appear that there are talks going on. And as I had said, a deal will be brokered, to the satisfaction of all involved. But right now, there is still more moves to occur. And Chess is not being played but GO … More appropriate, if one understands how GO in played.

The POTUS's deal making is more about shock & awe, or realpolitik, than just the usual diplomacy. Maybe using this concept, "You have to escalate to deescalate" …

He asks for more than he wants, then has some maneuver room. Plus, he is known to make comments he probably doesn't intend to really do. Or will he ?

The ball is still in play …

Europe should have accepted Putin's 2007 proposal for a "United Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok." Such a Europe would have been the third hegemon in the modern world, with unique opportunities for development. A self-sufficient, culturally unified, Christian, well-armed superpower… Who could encroach on Greenland or any other part of it in such a Europe? The United States? China? But Europe fell victim to inertia and stupid left-liberal policies.
Trump is smarter. Much smarter. It weakened both Russia and Europe for a long time. He is taking control of South America… He is preparing for a future war with China. And here Europe is of little interest to him as an ally, and he needs Russia to be sufficiently independent from China, with freedom of political maneuver. Russia's defeat in Ukraine is not advantageous to the United States, as it could ultimately subjugate it to China.
Trump's way of doing business is shocking, but he is, in my opinion, a good businessman, and he conducts his politics exactly like a business in an aggressive manner. And yes, the era of illusions about a global democratic order is over. A new redivision of the world begins. A jungle world: "Every man for himself."

U.S. men suffered significant losses in Europe during World War I, with over 116,000 deaths

US Population ~92M; Deaths (KIA, WIA, MIA and DoW) 53,402; Deaths (all causes) 116,708.

Australia Population ~5M; Deaths (KIA, WIA, MIA and DoW) 61,527; Deaths (all causes) 62,149.

Belgium Population ~7.4M; Deaths (KIA, WIA, MIA and DoW) 38,170; Deaths (all causes) 38,170 to 58,637.

Canada Population ~7.2M; Deaths (KIA, WIA, MIA and DoW) 64,996; Deaths (all causes) 56,638.

France Population ~7.2M; Deaths (KIA, WIA, MIA and DoW) 1,150,000; Deaths (all causes) 1,357,000 to 1,397,800.

India Population ~315.1M; Deaths (KIA, WIA, MIA and DoW) 64,449; Deaths (all causes) 64,449 to 73,905.

Italy Population ~35.6; Deaths (KIA, WIA, MIA and DoW) 60,000; Deaths (all causes) 460,000.

Etcetera ad nauseum.

….HISTORY OF WWI AS A BAR FIGHT….

Germany, Austria and Italy are standing together in the middle of a pub when Serbia bumps into Austria and spills Austria's pint. Austria demands Serbia buy it a whole new suit because of the new beer stains on its trouser leg. Germany expresses its support of Austria's point of view.

Britain recommends that everyone calm down a bit.

Serbia points out that it can't afford a whole new suit, but offers to pay for the cleaning of Austria's trousers. Russia and Serbia look at Austria. Austria asks Serbia who they're looking at. Russia suggests that Austria should leave its little brother alone. Austria inquires as to whose army will help Russia make them do so.

Germany appeals to Britain that France has been eyeing Britain, and that it's unwise for Britain not to intervene. Britain replies that France can look at whoever it wants to, and that Britain has been watching Germany too, and what is Germany going to do about it? Germany tells Russia to stop looking at Austria, or Germany will render Russia incapable of such action any more. Britain and France ask Germany whether it's looking at Belgium.

Turkey and Germany go off into a corner and whisper. When they come back, Turkey makes a show of not looking at anyone.

Germany rolls up its sleeves, looks at France, and punches Belgium and Luxembourg, who had been minding their own business at the end of the bar. France and Britain punch Germany; Austria punches Bosnia and Herzegovina (which Russia and Serbia took personally); Germany punches Britain and France with one fist and Russia with the other. Russia throws a punch at Germany, but misses and nearly falls over.

Japan calls from the other side of the room that it's on Britain's side, but stays there.

Italy surprises everyone by punching Austria. Australia punches Turkey and gets punched back. There are no hard feelings, however, because Britain made Australia do it.

France gets thrown through a plate-glass window, but gets back up and carries on fighting. Russia gets thrown through another one, gets knocked out, suffers brain damage, and wakes up with a complete personality change.

Italy throws a punch at Austria and misses, but Austria falls over anyway. Italy raises both fists in the air and runs around the room chanting.

America waits until Germany is about to fall over from sustained punching from Britain and France, then walks over and smashes it with a barstool and cries out that it won the fight all by itself.

By now all the chairs are broken and the big mirror over the bar is shattered. Britain, France and America agree that Germany threw the first punch, so the whole thing is Germany's fault. While Germany is still unconscious, they go through its pockets, steal its wallet, and buy drinks for all their friends.

Everyone went home, leaving Germany to mutter on the floor, planning on how to get even.
-----------------------------------------------------------

However, the USA's efforts meant the war was over in 1918, not 1919, saving thousands of lives, civilians as well as service personnel. For that I am grateful and the USA does and should take the credit for that.

Typo above. The French population should read "~39.6M".

If we want to go further back – the revolution in the colonies would have failed without the support of France.

You can say thanks if you like.

Dal the point of my comment was in reply to 20th post of US lack of "appreciation". Many of us feel the same about what we have done, with little to no appreciation.

Your analogy is cute. But I believe you are wrong about the ending without the influx of US lives.

French troops were collapsing, with multiple mutinies. Russia was gone. I believe it would have drug on, just like the Ukraine, with the economies of all still fighting finally collapsing. So yes the U.S. was the weight that caused the table to collapse.

Or to your barroom fight.

A tough but handsome looking US gentleman sitting there quietly drinking his whiskey at his table in the bar.

Quiet and Handsome US Gent: "GD! Every time I sit here trying to have a nice peaceful drink, these a##holes get into another brawl!! Eventually the same thing always happens! They knock my f-ing drink on the floor!! I never get to finish it!!"
….
French, Brit and German men fighting get closer to his table, until they are almost on top of him.
….
Quiet and Handsome US Gent: "GD NOT THIS TIME!!"
…
He picks up a table and hits the German over the head. Knocking him out cold. But his whiskey is once again lying broken on the floor. :(

Brit and Frenchman pat each other on the back. Congratulating each other on what a great job they did. Go through the German's pockets (doing the same to a dead Turk, on their way back to the bar). Walk off without even buying the Handsome US gent another drink.

😉

20th

"If we want to go further back – the revolution in the colonies would have failed without the support of France.

You can say thanks if you like."

But you see, we did and still do.

WWI " Lafayette we are here!"
WW2
80 plus years of US forces helping to protect Europe.
I'll skip the same in Asia.

You can say thanks if you want.

As Patton tells Monty in "Patton" when Monty says I shan't kiss you.
"I shaved very close this morning in preparation for getting smacked by you,"

If we want to go further back – the revolution in the colonies would have failed without the support of France.

Yes we know that plus even Spain assisted too. But not to the level France did …

Regardless, the AWI was successful …

Dal – I believe those figures you posted are correct. And your Bar scenario is as well … 😎

OVI +1

You can say thanks if you like.

I thought we did with all the US losses suffered in WWI and WWII. Along with all the other allies, etc. losses. As well as in WWII many French units were rearmed by the US.

Debt paid …

Next …

French troops were collapsing, with multiple mutinies

or how to illustrate the usual fully ignorant way to rewrite History made in USA
the French troops didn't "collapse" at all and didn't left their lines of defence them contrary to our greatest ally, Russia
your are very 'touchy' concerning the Memories of yours sacrifices but the quantity and level of insults concerning the sacrifices and Memories of others…

the Canadians them for example had already landed troops in Europe and fought 4 years before the US in both world wars and we don't see them insult the others here curiously

Allow me to recall that after the great mutiny and so-called "collapse" (so around mid-1917) early 1918 there were still more Belgian Divisions than US Divisions for so-called "collapsed" France (125 Divisions) and Commonwealth (60 Divisions) not to mention the usually forgotten Italian Divisions against Austria-Hungary
the on line 2 US Divisions only, then 6 (summer), then 16 US divisions (of a total of around 30 who have been landed before 11th november) were also largely armed and equipped in weapons and ammunitions by so-called "collapsed" France (100% of its field 75mm and heavy 155mm artillery, 100 % of its tanks, 81% of its planes, 57% of its long range artillery…)

following figures give for summer 1918
2 744 962 French (including 9714 Poles and Russians) in both fronts in France and Italy (there was also the Armée d'Orient reaching around 220 000 men in 1918, actually the whole total of French Army in 1918, combatant front, rear, etc reached 4 980 000 men)
1 968 000 Italians mainly in Italy of course but the 2nd Army Corps in France
1 849 505 British and Commonwealth
. 854 896 United States
. 167 232 Belgians
. . 56 104 Portuguese

Keep your insults and your lessons in gratitude, recognition, and reliability in alliance with a such selective and hemiplegic memory, not to mention the hypocrisy and cynism to be very satisfied very very happy to keep several European countries as vassals plateformes for 80 years beginning by Germany castrated militarily and today totally orphan of its german-US relationships or even the British very prouds of their "special" relationships

Yes we know that plus even Spain assisted too. But not to the level France did …

another good way in both USA and Spain to minimize the hard historical fact that United States had only one ally : France
Spain was never ally to USA and didn't want to be allied with some insurgents against a Crown even enemy
by the way a partner not resentful to have traumatically relieved of her last Asian and American possessions thanks to her "ally"…

Stability creates the conditions for prosperity. NATO has and still does aid stability. The US, with the world's largest GDP, has arguably benefited more than any other nation from this stability.
To reduce each relationship to a micro transaction misses the larger macro-economic benefit that the US has received.

Now at some point in the near future, China's GDP will exceed the GDP of the US. This transfer of the world's richest nation will occur with or without tariffs. In fact China's exports are growing.
As GDP is one of the key factors in Military potential, eventually this will translate to China becoming the number one Superpower. Initially China will achieve dominance in its own region, later this will expand to global dominance. Arguably they already have control within 1000nm of their own coastline. The US fighting their way in would at the very least already be a very costly proposition.

In this future world of the US losing its number one superpower status, the path of isolationism should at least be questioned. At this point I am unsure of which nations truly regard themselves as an ally of the US. Certainly Israel, but that may be due to the huge funding they receive. Beyond that I think that other nations are questioning how much of an ally the US is, or will be.
I remain unconvinced that isolationism is in either the short or long term best interests of the US.

Lillian I know English is not your language, reread the thread. I am not insulting the French. I'm saying without the arrival of the U.S., I believe the French troops and economy would have collapsed.

From AI

"In 1918, the morale of French troops evolved from a state of fragile recovery to "splendid" enthusiasm as the year progressed. After the widespread mutinies of 1917, which left the army on the edge of disintegration, the psychological state of the Poilus (French infantrymen) was carefully managed and eventually revitalized by shifting strategic and logistical conditions.

Factors Influencing Morale in 1918

Pétain's Reforms: General Philippe Pétain rebuilt morale following the 1917 mutinies by introducing more regular leave, better food, and improved rest rotations. Crucially, he promised to avoid "butchery" by halting massive, futile infantry offensives until "the arrival of tanks and Americans".

The "American Factor": The physical arrival and active entry of U.S. troops into battle in March 1918 acted as a "magical transfusion of blood". While early 1918 saw some French anxiety about whether American help would arrive in time, the sight of fresh, well-equipped American units by mid-year significantly boosted French confidence."

Without the arrival, I and obviously others believe that 1917 would have played out.

I believe all sides would have eventually collapsed. Not personal to the French.

I won't go into WW2.

Lastly:

"Keep your insults and your lessons in gratitude, recognition, and reliability in alliance with a such selective and hemiplegic memory, not to mention the hypocrisy and cynism to be very satisfied to keep several European countries as vassals for 80 years beginning by Germany castrated militarily and today totally orphan of its german-US relationships or even the British very prouds of their "special" relationships"

I did not insult France, although on numerous occasions you have insulted the U.S. on TMP. So we should keep our mouths shut, but accept the insults from overseas?

I think not.

"hemiplegic"? No, no spinal cord damage.

As many of us have said previously: Spend your tax money. Increase the taxes. Build your forces and by all means defend yourselves. Many are all for it.

Most in the U.S. did not want to enter WW1. It was not our war. It was another in a long line of wars in Europe that they've had against each other, over and over. We (the everyday people) just wanted to be left alone.

In the case of that war, duplicitous politicians and media on both sides of the ocean got us involved.

Oh great the english-speaking IA is profesor of French History and US-French relationships from the treason of the Jay treaty to the AUKUS passing by the thirty years secret war we can hope a great objectivity concerning the lessons of gratitude, recognition, and reliability in alliance for sure…

As many of us have said previously: Spend your tax money. Increase the taxes. Build your forces and by all means defend yourselves. Many are all for it.

?? I can't interpret that other than another proof of ignorance
who you are talking to?
and as already said we don't need and don't want any US protectorate, we paid for our own defence for decades and in particular since 1966 to avoid to receive this kind of sentence from USA

why not to ask that rather to your British German and others true friends that you were very very very pleased to maintain into military adolescence and dependence for decades you are heaping with reproaches today, even the british nuclear capacity is under US supervision
uupps that is already and still done throughout this thread across TMP and the world…

It's "AI" Lilian.

Lilian there seems to be a burr in your saddle. 😏

It always amazes me how individuals in other countries get upset and defensive when they perceive an insult to their honor, but have no problem issuing the same of others.

The French especially seem sensitive.

Where was the insult? I made nothing up. I have read the mutinies and moral failures of 1917. Who can blame the average soldier, when their superiors used them as cannon fodder? While too, those who started it all, sat home by their fires sipping cognac and schnapps.

But again understand, the war was yours (France/Britain/Germany/Austria/Russia and a host of others), not ours. Mexico and the U.S. did not start a war and drag you into ours.

Also understand, my cousins, uncles, fathers and many other relatives would have loved to have stayed in the U.S. rather then serve in Europe and even die there in "your" wars from 1918 to today.

I don't want your thanks, but I also don't want the bloody insults to my country either, that permeate TMP from many overseas.

Trump asks Putin to join Gaza ‘board of peace' even as Ukraine war rages

link

Putin invited to join Trump's global ‘Board of Peace'

link

Putin?????… Seriously???…. Putin!!!???

Armand

well coming from someone very sensitive who launched a curious assault when I opened a thread about skirmishes in the Mexican border of the 19th century such reaction is funny,
for other part being largely absent for a while as well as my compatriots for obvious reasons in this part of the forum, I don't think you suffered a lot from our so-called "sensitive" reactions here…
we don't want and don't accept at all to receive lessons of gratitude recognition, and "reliability in alliance" from the United States, that's all, you don't know at all the realities of the history of US French relationships to legitimize such a morale position, and I am not speaking only about my provincial deputy and commander of our National Guard in 1789 or the hard fact that without France United States would be nothing more than 13 eastern coastal Atlantic provinces of Canada and the Mexican border on the Mississippi, France was the black sheep of the NATO and didn't cease to advocate for an European defence that the others members didn't want to hear because the US didn't cease to oppose to that, there were many others deep military and historical reasons why we didn't want to be treated like one of your vassals, and not only this one and it is better to not recall them they belong to the past

Lilian there seems to be a burr in your saddle.

I don't blame Lilian. Hearing and reading the same old refrain- "We did it all and you did nothing"- gets boring very quickly. It really peeves me to read comments such as "We protected Europe for over 100 years." Heaped BS. The US' motive was pure money, not being the altruistic cop out to stop bullies. Up until later 1916 and then the return of unrestricted submarine warfare, the US was 50-50 on whether to support the Central Powers or the Entente.

French troops were collapsing, with multiple mutinies.

I've read that in a couple of histories, 35th, and it is an exaggeration of the mutinies aimed at Nivelle. The troops refused to undertake another poorly planned, bound-to-fail attack and wanted Nivelle dismissed. They continued to hold their trenches against German attacks and raids, and even carried out small level actions, such as trench raids and patrols.

Saying the French were on the point of collapse is an exaggeration, probably designed to big-up the arrival of the US or the need for the British to extend their front of the line (by a couple of miles, not tens as had been implied). As for collapsing economies, a major reason the US entered the war was because its economy would be ruined, had the Entente lost the war. And for a time in 1917, especially after Arras, Passchendaele and the collapse of Russia, that looked very possible. The US was not a White Knight riding to rescue and protect the European princess from the wicked German dragon, it was panicking bankers and underwriters hoping to rescue their dollars from a bad investment.

Militarily the US forces weren't in the line in enough strength to influence events until mid-1918- and that was deliberate on Pershing's part. He didn't want to see US troops under foreign commands and have US lives wasted in Somme type attacks. Considering the inept Entente leadership at work in 1917, I don't blame him. However, US histories tend to play down the help the AEF received from the French and British, too. The Entente had to supply all the US' heavy weapons, aircraft and much ammunition. Unlike WWII, the US was not the arsenal of victory, it was barely a small country hunting and fishing store. But it was the (now dry) Entente's money well. A very profitable one, too, unless the Entente collapsed and couldn't repay those loans.

On the plus side the US forces were fit, fresh and generally eager to get into the fight. Their presence also prompted the Germans to launch Operation Michael in late March 1918, hoping to get a decisive victory before the US could bring its strength to bear on the front. A major strategic mistake on the German's part, Michael, Georgette and other, minor operations bled Germany dry of manpower reserves.

In short the US military impact was helpful, not decisive, on the Western Front. It was non-existent in Italian, the Balkan, Greek and Mesopotamian fronts. When Turkey, Austria-Hungary and Bulgaria all collapsed Germany knew it was finished. Without the US divisions the 100 Days campaign would not have been as decisive and Germany may have tried to continue the war.

They would have lost, though, as they didn't have the manpower to match the Entente forces, which were released by the collapse of the other three Central Powers. For a start, the bulk of the troops on the Russian front stayed there to garrison the occupied Russian territory ceded by the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk , to make sure the Bolshies didn't break the treaty. They also needed the Ukrainian agriculture to avoid, or at least reduce, another Turnip Winter. The artillery and aircraft were the main reinforcements for the Western Front. But with their southern and south-eastern borders now open to Entente attack, where would they get the troops? If they evacuate Ukraine then the Bolshies will move in and they'll lose the Ukrainian agriculture, at least, and perhaps Russia would re-enter the war to regain their lost territories (a bit like a modern-day Russian leader). If they weaken the Western Front then the Entente troops will be in Germany by mid-1919, even without the US troops. Lastly, another Turnip Winter will probably see a popular uprising in Germany- and where will they get the manpower to control that?

So the US didn't single-handedly win WWI. It did something far more important than raking in all the Victor's "Glory"- it saved tens of thousands of lives by making sure the war ended in November 1918, not October 1919. Unfortunately it also brought the "Spanish" 'flu from Kansas, which could have been less deadly if the Entente governments weren't playing secrecy and political games, and actually tried to do something when it first broke out in Europe. The ‘flu would have got to Europe fairly quickly, in any case, travelling in passengers and ships' crews.

Dal I'll ignore Lillian .. for now.

Reread this post from the original post of 20thMaine, which was the first lack of US appreciation (Denmark).

First I did not claim the U.S. won WW1, I said our weight was what caused the final collapse of the western front. You can disagree, but I have read enough to believe that true.

You all can dispute the AI quotes, but that was not me saying that, that was direct quotes from the engine.

I also said the average U.S. citizen did not want in that war. U.S. and British politicians got us in, along with the Germans own stupidity. We had many German and Hungarian immigrants who opposed the Allies. It was not our war. All started by Europeans.

I still believe it would have drug on and both sides after millions more wasted lives, would have collapsed.

And for what ultimately? What did all that sacrifice accomplish? Another even worse war 20 years later.

As much as you may not like our responses, we don't like the constant barrage at us. No where in "my" response did I say "you all did nothing". I've actually never said that. Lilian took insult to my French collapse statement, which I do believe would have happened if the added U.S. manpower had not arrived when it did.

FYI one of your countryman is one of the 3 worse at doing the insults almost daily. You know of whom I speak. 😉

Lilian,

Yes your Mexican/American article was exactly what you intended it be. A backhanded attempt at a slap at the United States. Authored by a leftist Mexican anti Anglo hater of the U.S. nothing about scenarios or gaming. So you knew exactly what you were doing. Please don't play innocent.

The US also supplied explosives for shells . The UK paid for it partly by selling all the ICI factories in the US to American buyers at cut price, the foundation of the US chemical industry.

And we have only just finished paying for the WW2 lend-lease.

35th, I wasn't aiming specifically at your post. I should have made that more clear. It's a general disgruntlement about two opposing views on a particular part of history- both sides shaped by their national histories.

First I did not claim the U.S. won WW1, I said our weight was what caused the final collapse of the western front.

I agree. The US made sure the war finished in 1918. I stated that. Without the US the war would have dragged on into 1919, at least. The US stopped that happening.

AI gives answers you ask for, in my limited experience, so how the questions are framed will influence the answer more than any evidence. Also I think which engine you use, where you are and other factors will all influence the questions and answers. As regards the French mutinies, when I get a chance I'll get to my books in storage and get the title of a rather good, even, study on the mutinies (and those in the Oz and UK armies, as well).

I've read several official histories- not the US one- as well as some well-regarded and recommended books about it. There's also an excellent, American, board with a similar discussion. There's less "emotion" on that one, too. link

Yes, and it's not just one Aussie who likes to put itching powder in Uncle Sam's jocks, mate. By the same token, I wasn't saying you said you believe your allies did nothing, but others on this board (and other boards) and in print, have and do. I should have written that more clearly, and I honestly apologise for offending you, 35th.

I still believe it would have drug on and both sides after millions more wasted lives, would have collapsed.

Once Austria and Turkey collapsed then it was end of game, mate. Germany was already conscripting from ages 17 to 45 and had reduced the number of essential service exemptions. When Austria collapsed then Germany's southern border was open. They would have to redeploy troops to secure it. The terrain meant they wouldn't need as many troops, but there were no more reserves. If they reduced the garrisons in Ukraine, Belorussia, etc, then the Bolshie raids would probably turn into a full on offensive, even if the White Russians were becoming more effective.

If they reduced the Western Front then the Franco-British forces would be in Germany in 1919. Tank-artillery-infantry cooperation had been learned and put to good use, and the tanks were more reliable. But a lot more civvie casualties would be caused.

That's why I think that the US being instrumental in stopping the war in 1918 is a major win, 35th. They gave the weight for the Entente to finally smash through the mud and the blood and break the German will for war- and saved thousands of lives doing it. They didn't do it by themselves, though. They had French planes and artillery, British LMG (once they ditched the Chauchat) and mortars, and allies on either side.

PS Legion:

And your Bar scenario is as well …

I think that skit is older than both of us, mate.

Lilian,
Yes your Mexican/American article was exactly what you intended it be. A backhanded attempt at a slap at the United States. Authored by a leftist Mexican anti Anglo hater of the U.S. nothing about scenarios or gaming. So you knew exactly what you were doing. Please don't play innocent.

given the low level of knowledge about others countries and societies to not say a total lack of knowledge, I dispute your entire legitimacy to interpret what others foreigners think, you don't know nothing to the french mentality and culture, codes and social interactions, so be sure and reassured if I have a problem and an opinion I will expose it clearly, we don't use convolutions and detours, here we don't give "hugs" nor directed the "you are wonderful" to antagonists people we met in our everyday life, meditate on this before any exegesis…

Oh, we're on this again, are we?

During the Cold War period the United States incurred 2.1 MILLION casualties and expended $52 USD TRILLION on defense spending to protect ourselves and our allies. Since 1991 the US has spent about $12 USD TRILLION solely on the Defense of Europe since the fall of the USSR… protecting Europe from what, I don't know, while Europe and NATO collectively spent only $8 USD Trillion on it's own defense over the same time period. So our one country outspent 44 European countries on THEIR DEFENSE, not it's own.

So, you can say thanks if you like…

Lilian trust me, I have no illusions about the French, especially those in Paris.

I stand by what I said and unlike you, I will not insult your knowledge or lack of it.

I will leave at that……

PS 35th, here's a couple of titles about the 1917 mutiny that may be of interest and, hopefully, available through a library. I can't remember reading the top two, though the title of the first seems familiar.

1. Dare Call It Treason; Watt, R.M; Chatto & Windus; London 1964. Review link

2. French Generals of the Great War; Krause, J; Pen and Sword; South Yorks 2023. Review link

3. Mutiny 1917. Williams, J; Heinemann; London, 1962. IIRC, dry as dusty dust, but it's neither a hatchet nor a sing-the-praises job. I found it because it's referenced on the Mutiny Wiki page link .

So, you can say thanks if you like…

After you.

Dal I understand. It had my name, so assumed you were referring to my posts. You are normally reasonable, more so than me. 😉

Your points about the fall of Turkey and Austria are well taken. Germany would have to have brought the troops from the East to cover, leaving only a skeleton there. But the Russians were pretty occupied with killing each other.

Agree Germany was tittering. But I honestly don't believe France or Britain on the fronts were much better off. The troops had been used poorly in meat grinder offensives on both sides. You can only take that for so long. They also had to be asking "for what?". I am surprised they took it for 4 years. More surprised the Russians were the first to break from it.

Again we did not win WW1, we were just the stone that Finally broke the table. But also, it is a war opposed by many in the U.S. as not our war. So the fact we did go, should be seen as a positive thing.

"American public opinion on entering World War I was divided, shifting from strong support for President Woodrow Wilson's initial policy of neutrality and isolationism (1914-1915) towards reluctant acceptance of war after German aggression like the Lusitania sinking and the Zimmermann Telegram, with sentiment reflecting resignation more than enthusiasm, though significant opposition and differing ethnic viewpoints persisted. "

Dal thanks for the book titles.

"So, you can say thanks if you like…"

You can ask 20thMaine to thank you, but I doubt he will.

That was his original line. Not even sure where he is from.

I don't think anybody "helped" anybody without a primary motive related to self interest. Now we question the value of our interdependence based on grievance and chest thumping.

The powerful US economy will succumb to the Chinese? We can stop them with one man rule? By going after Canada and Mexico, Europe with tariffs? Did we forget how immensely good the US has had it since WW2? And the economic role our allies have played? Did I miss us being overtaken as the most powerful economy and military on earth? Are we just sitting around letting everybody take advantage of us? I wonder where we got all the @[ money from?

You are normally reasonable, more so than me.

??
I doubt that. I have some strong points of view on some subjects. I might even be right about a couple of them.

But also, it is a war opposed by many in the U.S. as not our war.

They were basically right, too, until the war started directly impacting the US. It was Vol CMXCIX in the series of intra-European stoushes, so why should the US or other non-Empire states get involved? (Thanks for the reminder- I'd forgotten about the Zimmerman faux pas.)

There was a similar feeling here, particularly with the large body of Irish and German immigrants and their decedents, which Archbishop Mannix tried to exploit. My main interest, apart from the military history and customs and traditions that the war introduced into our army, is what could have been done to prevent the next round (Vol M). But avoiding inter-state conflict in Europe seems to be easier to imagine than achieve, though things have been relatively quiet since '45.

I don't think anybody "helped" anybody without a primary motive related to self interest.

Tort, isn't that Rule 1 in the Realpolitik- How It Works manual? Self interest has nearly always trumped altruism at the international level.

PS Sorry, there was no pun intended. "trumped" is a very common slang term in Strine.

@dagwood

SB, China sells lots to US, bad. Greenland sells lots to China, also bad ? You don't think the Greenlanders are taking the jobs of all those Chinese fishermen ?

China is selling LESS to the US and MORE to Europe. The US purchased 20% less Chinese goods in 2025, but unfortunately the Europeans offset this by purchasing about 10% MORE Chinese goods in 2025. And for some reason the two nations that buy the most from China and have the most Chinese $$$ flowing through their economy -- France and Germany, are also the most vocal critics of Trump and Greenland…Germany is the most frucked. They deindustrialized themselves with Green Energy to where a significant portion of their heavy industry has shut down and relocated to China. China's trade surplus with Germany has grown by 108% – it accounts for 1/3rd of China's surplus with the EU (which surpassed the US trade imbalance in 2025). China continues to dump cheap crap onto the German market with German leadership's approval – like BYD cars. Sales of Chinese cars in Germany rose by 700% in 2024-2025…

With the Greenland issue, Trump basically poked an anthill with a stick and now he sees where nations' real alignments are.

Increasingly we see countries like Germany, France and Britain become more authoritarian and intolerant of political speech that jeopardizes democratic society. The UK arrests 12,000 people a year for social media posts, Germany almost 4,000 arrests per year, and in contrast France is like a Free Speech zone, arresting less than 1000 per year for social media posts. How many in the US? Zero.

Their leadship are culturally aligned with China. They don't seem to care about their domestic manufacturing base and they would rather oppose Trump than do anything productive to stall China's rise. Indeed, like Canada, they seem to welcome it as an alternative to all the nagging from the US -- stop oppressing your people! Stop buying so much from China! Stop buying Russian oil and clean up your economies!

Shut up dad, I hate you! China never criticizes me for putting facebook Memers into jail, banning opposition parties and over-turning election results by judicial fiat!

I struggled to count 44 countries in Europe, until I realised that countries such as Russia and Belarus were included, as well as neutral countries such as Eire, Switzerland, and until recently, Sweden, Finland, plus such mighty giants as Vatican City, Monaco, Andorra and Liechtenstein.

And before, when was it ? 1991 ? Half of Europe was on the other side.

Dal, yes that was my point. And being trumped, in cards or in politics is a perfectly normal use of a common noun/verb.

Stephen Miller is said to be the architect of the massive changes in US policies and a good examples of Realpolitik in practice. POTUS seems to operate more on a sort of personal transactional basis. But that's my opinion. Clearly, American political leadership has changed a great deal in a short time. The schism is even more out in the open, and the apple cart not just dumped out, but dismantled.

Half of Europe was on the other side.

Yes many were in the USSR's version of NATO, the Warsaw Pact. And if one is "keeping score", most of the WP belongs to NATO currently. Guess they didn't like being under the Russian boots.

OVI +1
Dal +1
SBm +1

You can ask 20thMaine to thank you, but I doubt he will.

Indeed …

Lilian trust me, I have no illusions about the French, especially those in Paris.

I stand by what I said and unlike you, I will not insult your knowledge or lack of it.

I will leave at that……

Agreed … 'nuff said …

We can count the Gentleman from France comments as a "NO" vote …

Much more bullying tactics and maybe we'll see Europeans form their own defensive pact. The TDF ?

"Much more bullying tactics and maybe we'll see Europeans form their own defensive pact. The TDF "

It is always possible that that may be the exact aim. Get the U.S. military off the continent and out of NATO. Re-concentrate money and military on a strategy of home defense and China. Leaving Europe to defend against… Russia(no longer the Soviet Union)?

Just thoughts.

No one can absorb the cost of a 3 front defensive (China, Russia and home defense). One could add the Middle East as well.

after the Danes the turn of the Brits, the most pro-NATO and insular neighbours are less accustomed to insults by their own cousins than the French and Latinoamericans

Amazingly, our "brilliant" NATO ally, the United Kingdom, is currently planning to give the island of Diego Garcia, site of a vital US military base, to Mauritius, and to do so WITHOUT ANY REASON. There is no doubt that China and Russia have noticed this act of total weakness.

These are International Powers that know only STRENGTH, which is why the United States of America, under my leadership, is now, after just one year, respected as never before. The United Kingdom's giving up of vitally important land is an act of GREAT STUPIDITY and is another in a very long line of National Security reasons why Greenland should be purchased. Denmark and its European allies must DO THE RIGHT THING.

Donald, President of United States

…"respected as never"…!

next
Iceland, Faklands/Malvinas/Malouines, Saint Pierre & Miquelon, Curaçao etc…non-exhaustive list of Trumpist predation and hubris

Increasingly we see countries like Germany, France and Britain become more authoritarian and intolerant of political speech that jeopardizes democratic society. The UK arrests 12,000 people a year for social media posts, Germany almost 4,000 arrests per year, and in contrast France is like a Free Speech zone, arresting less than 1000 per year for social media posts. How many in the US? Zero.

but obviously not counting two Irish members on TMP dawghoused this last week after a participation in this thread

Vive l'Irlande libre

for sure that in some countries, to see and allow neo-nazis or far-leftists guys totally free to claim their negationism and hate to the jews, it not the same "tolerance" than in the US, that is another cultural difference among many others

Much more bullying tactics and maybe we'll see Europeans form their own defensive pact. The TDF ?

Or maybe the W.T.F. — With The French (This Time)… a short-lived coalition that lasts until the next press conference.

@SB curious to see if both sides come back from Europe with some sort of compromise on Greenland and both sides declaring victory.

Somewhat like Panama.

We will see.

but obviously not counting two Irish members on TMP dawghoused this last week after a participation in this thread

No only one from Ireland was DH'd … or did I miss something? And you may want to address your concerns with Bill. However, AFAIK one's home nation has never been why someone is DH'd …

I'll ignore Lillian

The best CoA IMO …

Yeah John is from the Commonwealth of PA, USA …