Germans say Russia is more reliable than the United States

Like that will happen).

 

Most nations, European, East Asian, Middle Eastern, Latin American. Almost all of them aside from the Anglosphere (U.K., Canada, Australia/New Zealand) treat the U.S. military like a fire extinguisher. They really want to have it around. But they want it in the closet, or hidden in a corner. out of sight. They don't want it sitting in the living room even though its handier and thus more useful if it is. And they want to pretend they'll never actually need it even when several millennia of history says otherwise.

 

Yes true....I mentioned this earlier, the US sure comes in handy when there's a SOS call at 3AM...somewhere in the world. Whether asking for arms, mediators, military, or sending the Eisenhower carrier on a drive by to send a "message".

 

I will try to comment on it from what I know to be at least half as useful for you as your comments are for me. I don't believe that secret societies are ruling the world though. I do believe that only a group of people can really change world policies and they need to keep their actions a secret. But the ability of men is limited and the more complicated is the structure of a society the more vulnerable it gets. So the plans of secret societies exist and sometimes they have a success, but most times the plans of people don't reach their initial aims. Theoretically it must be true. Otherwise we would really have a race of superhumans who would perform the plans for humanity for centuries and milleniums. Of what I know about the history of politics I see it in practice as well.

It was possible to forecast judging on the speed of development and natural limits for the development. The New World is a big British Isles. Close enough for interaction and far enough for safety. Plenty of resources, nice climate etc. I mean there was no need to plan it. The plan could either prevent it or use it. There could have been a plan B among some representatives of elite. But obviously it wasn't a plan from the beginning. Otherwise there wouldn't have been any English-American wars for independence.

Thanks again for the links. Although I haven't finished the previous reading. Scanning in these cases is not enough and reading takes time.

Yes. Kolchak moved westwards from Pacific ocean crossing a huge country. The main problem was an absence of sane ideology. Kolchak united everyone except for the Bolsheviks, some of the far lefts, local separatists and anarchists. It gave a huge army in the beginning, but there was no understanding what for this army is fighting for and against whom they are fighting. The White Army performed terrorist activities, they were like invaders in their own land. So if there was virtually no Bolsheviks in Russian Asia before Kolchak, under him and after all the bloody suppression there emerged huge masses of Bolsheviks. This was for sure not planned. It cannot be planned.
The Bolsheviks proclaimed that the property of land goes to the peasants. Kolchak brought the landlords back with promises to solve this issue later. It worked against of him.
Besides, Kolchak headquarters consisted of different deputies who were too proud to think of alliance with the current enemies of the Bolsheviks. For instance when the workers of Izhevsk initiated revolt against the Bolsheviks, they didn't get any help from Kolchak. Just because some deputies thought that they cannot support workers and peasants.
And of course having so many sides of ambitious people united around nothing (no ideology, no idea) couldn't make a good and reliable coordination. Every general (almost every) was pursuing his own aims, every political party tried to get the better position. And they only could do so in opposition to Kolchak. This is why after the very first failures Kochak had to retreat to hostile land with no people who really supported him in a difficult situation.

Kolchak might not had all the weapons needed. True. But the disorder of transportation was a bad habit of his logistics. The Bolsheviks had fewer resources. They got the most of their weaponry from Kolchak. So that is not the point. At some point Kolchak could have been betrayed by his western allies. Especially at point when he started to lose. It could have been planned, but is senseless if we talk about such a plan from the very beginning. It might have looked to british people involved into activities just because they saw that when they were sending weapons - Kolchak was getting success and when they stopped - Kochak lost. This could be a deceptive impression, because the weapon supply could have been cancelled after Kolchak lost his chances.

 

Yes, I agree about that. Why he gave up on Operation Sea Lion is interesting. It may have had something to do with what appears to have been a test run which has become known as the Battle for Shingle Street, where a smaller force apparently tried to land on the east coast of England, but the British had laid pipelines of petroleum out to see and set fire to Nazi vessels.

 

I didnt know that

Interesting

 

From a very small locally printed book in Suffolk years ago. The author argues that both Hitler and Churchill had internal interests to keep it secret.

 

This is a strange statement, why the hell any army, US or Russian, or any other should be on the territory of Germany?

 

Suits me. I was just trying to help the Germans understand that, if Russia is more reliable than the U.S., they should move their allegiance to the Russians.

 

Read history to find out more.

Germany isn't trusted.
It is the least trusted society in history.

Who are you trying to kid. You know full well why.

 

As the saying goes:

NATO has three main purposes:

1) Keep the Americans in.
2) The Russians out.
3) And the Germans down.

 

Well, 30 years ago nobody asked this question...

 

I agree with #2...

 

We live now not in 19th century, or in the middle of 20th century. You can not extrapolate what has happened many years ago to predict what would happen now or in future. With the same success, one may say that there should be a foreign army in the UK now since this is the country that oppressed many nations thoughout the history (India, many African countries etc). It had much more colonies than the other countries all together.

 

Time goes on...

 

One may say whatever one likes.
The UK awaits your conquering army.



What happened, happened. Twice.
Forgiven but not forgotten.

And with all this EU **** going on... it pretty much looks like history is attempting to repeat itself to me.
I don't forsee too big a break before the UK army returns for another round of German oppression. I prefer that to the other way round.