[eameece]

Originally Posted by highlife

Well the keiser of WW1 was not much better than hitler lol. I think if we had not interveined we would have been forced into the war on our own soil after britain was taken over. Then the fight would be over malta, the azores and other islands to stage out of since all of our carriers were in the pacific.

I don't think so. The Germans stopped in the East when they got as far as they wanted, and settled with the Soviets; they would have stopped when they conquered Paris and forced a surrender, and perhaps taken some land in a settlement. The Kaiser was not a compulsive world conquerer like Hitler.

[highlife]

Originally Posted by eameece

I don't think so. The Germans stopped in the East when they got as far as they wanted, and settled with the Soviets; they would have stopped when they conquered Paris and forced a surrender, and perhaps taken some land in a settlement. The Kaiser was not a compulsive world conquerer like Hitler.

The keiser was just as ruthless, unless the movie war horse was totally inaccurate and a made up fantasy with absolutly zero truth.

[eameece]

Originally Posted by highlife

The keiser was just as ruthless, unless the movie war horse was totally inaccurate and a made up fantasy with absolutly zero truth.

Bingo. fantasy.

[highlife]

Originally Posted by eameece

Bingo. fantasy.

So the keiser did not ransack their own peoples farms and execute 14 year olds for "desertion"?

[lightbringer]

Originally Posted by highlife

The keiser was just as ruthless, unless the movie war horse was totally inaccurate and a made up fantasy with absolutly zero truth.

"Hollywood" the historical society?

The study of history will never be the same!