Viewing Thread:
"Where did british war games go to?"

Is it me or do nearly all war games have Americans characters? The only one I can think of with British soldires is Hidden and Dangerous - why are the yanks always taking the glory? My Grandad is always telling me that the Yanks think they won the war and when he sees me playing Medal of Honour he thinks it looks good - until they start talking. And I'm starting to think the same. Whatever happened to English Tommies? Have they been written out of history? Is it offensive to use proper English in a game? No, it's not, and I want to see more games with English cockney, not American. And so does Grandpa.

I agree with Cipro on that one. If the UK had falled, it would have been the early 50's by the time the US had a bomber that could get to Germany. But there's no guarantee the they would still be there, what with Japan closing in and all. So what if we were a permenant aircraft carrier, the US would have been the only one if we were defeated. If the UK fell, so would Canada in the North, Australlia in the West and India in the East. If India fell, Germany and Japan would have met up, then Russia would have been in a world of hurt.

Basically, this would be in German now if it wasn't for Great Britain and her Empire.

I've gone through enough arguments with cocky Americans with their jaded opinions about WW2 to know what went on. Russia could have taken the entire war themselves if needed, they sure had enough troops to pull it off, and they didn't care about the losses. So even without the American forces, the aliies could still have won the war. But the fact is, a large portion of our weapons came from the Americans. They were supplying us right from the start almost, as they even supplied the French, and we all know how quickly they bowed out, heh

Russia did have enough troops, but I couldn't see them winning the entire war. Stalin was so paranoid he killed all his generals who commanded his armies, which where properly organised before they where killed. This sent the Russian army into disarray.

The army wasn't organised or prepared enough to launch a full-scale invasion on Europe, even with the amount of soldiers they had. Plus there's the fact that they didn't have enough weapons to go around their soldiers, so had to scavenge ones off dead soldiers, enemy or otherwise.

That said, many believe the battle at Stalingrad was the most important battle in the entire war, and one of the turning points of the conflict, so maybe the Russian would have played an much more important part in the campaign if the good old USA continued to ignore what was going on. It's just hard to try and predict what the future may have been like if what really happened didn't happen.

As for the French, well no matter how many weapons or troops they get, they can never seem to manage to win one of their own wars. They always need another country to bail them out. Pah.

And anyway, because the yanks supplied the weapons doesn't mean they won the won the war for us. It's not weapons, which win wars, it's a thing called tactics, and that's one of the reasons Germany lost. Germany had the best weapons of any country in the Second World War; they just didn't have the leader to use them properly.

If Hitler had been any smarter or any saner, he would have won the war. After all, the country did develop the first jet fighter, flying bombs and was on it's way to making the very first atomic weapons, all of which could have been used on America had it not joined the war and England fallen.

Don't forget, supplies from the US also went to Russia through out the war, along the coast of German held Norway. This also led to mounting British merchant Navy losses. But Russia couldn't have won the war on their own. Yes, they had the men and material to keep up a conflict for several years. But ever since they began fighting back at the Germans, six weeks after the start of Barberossa, they were begging Churchill to open up a second front. This could only be done in 1944(D-Day). But without Russia, not even the good old US of A could have won.
70% of German troops were tied up the Russian Front. 5% in Italy, and 25% in France. It was hard enough against 25% of Germans, if all 95% were on us, we wouldn't have had a chance. Plus Japan, they couldn't be ignored. They were only a few miles away from Australia at one point. If that went, you could have kissed a 1945 victory goodbye. Plus, if Japan attacked Russia from the East, the world would be a lot different today.

Nice to see someone who know's their history, and to think most people these days forget what went on in WW2, one of the most important battles of recent time.

Well thank's. I am only 15, so there are bound to be flaws in my knowledge, but for the most part, i know my stuff. Your right, most people today don't know what went on back then. It seems especially relevent today as the US and co. are in a fight against tyranny and oppression, just as we were back then. It's a shame that the only people who know the horrors and hardships of the War are dieing off quite rapidly now.

I never took history at school, but I still like to find out what happened back in world war 2, after all it was perhaps one of the single most important events of the last hundred years.

It's just a shame so many people these days seem to forget quiet easily what the war was fought for, and get their infomation about the conflict from movies which always tend to be about the american struggle, leaving out the other countries who also fought in the war.

Couldn't agree more. It's a shame Hollywood is in the US. If it were in the UK, it probably would be a lot more neutral, or at least tell the story of the UK's role more than the US films do at the moment.

i think that the us can't make anything like the first object to go over the speed of sound was UKS IDEA THATS OURS AND THEY STOLE IT DOWN WITH US OF COPYING A.American football JUST A LOAD OF MEN PLAYING FOOT BALL WITH WORSE PADS BASEBALL ROUNDERS WITH CRICKET! THERE ARE MANY UK INVENTED FOOTY BUT WE'RE CRAP AT IT US STEAL EVEY DAMN THING THEY THINK OF.DOWN WITH US OF COPY LAND A.i thank you for reading this message!

Skarra wrote:
> Couldn't agree more. It's a shame Hollywood is in the US. If it were
> in the UK, it probably would be a lot more neutral, or at least tell
> the story of the UK's role more than the US films do at the moment.

The old war films are much better for telling how the Second World War was fought, movies like 'The Longest Day' about the D-Day landings. One of the best war films of all time in my opinion, and rather than sticking to one side in the battle, it told the story of all countries who took part. The American's, the English, the franc and even the Germans.

I admit recent films like Saving Private Ryan and U-571 are great and entertaining, they all seem to sacrifice the other countries involved in the war to show the American difficulties in the conflict. Hollywood always uses the excuse 'It's only a movie' but to some people it isn't. There are more people now who chose to watch films of past events rather than reading about them, and it doesn't help that most of these films are terribly inaccurate.

That's Hollywood though, more concerned about audiences in their own country to give a damn about the history of others.