US saves Europe.

[Caninope]

Hey all you guys who keep saying "oh it was multiple banks, horrible thread title gnd" I need to point something out. The Federal Reserve brokered the deal. It took the lead.

The US led the effort into Afghanistan it does not mean that other nations like the United Kingdom, Estonia and Poland do not deserve praise or recognition for their involvement.

Yes. He does so in the OP. But that's like saying the US "saved" Afghanistan. It certainly did the most, and any "saving" of Afghanistan/Europe would not have happened without US leadership.

[Sunny Marionette]

This is really good and really bad. I mean, we're (the US) taking a hit for the team, but this will only escalate the Occupy situation.

[North Calaveras]

This is really good and really bad. I mean, we're (the US) taking a hit for the team, but this will only escalate the Occupy situation.

Don't we always take a hit for the "team" and the get yelled at?

[The Former Duchy of Lancaster]

Everybody is missing one key point about Germany in World War 1.

It wasn't the land war that won it, the German army was ENTIRELY capable of fighting on for a good while longer.

It was the state of the German economy, and the effectiveness of the British naval blockade that did it. Germany had no food, disease was rampant, the countries civilian population had lost all stomach for the war, hell their entire navy mutinied.

America getting involved may have been the final nail in the coffin, but Germany was on her way down long before the yanks stepped in.

[The Matthew Islands]

Isn't it really the US saving themselves?

In fact IIRC during the last round of talks amongst Euro members, when it was announced that they hadn't decided on anything the US stock exchange fell 500 points. So its not as though the US is doing this out of the goodness of their hearts.

[Greed and Death]

Everybody is missing one key point about Germany in World War 1.

It wasn't the land war that won it, the German army was ENTIRELY capable of fighting on for a good while longer.

It was the state of the German economy, and the effectiveness of the British naval blockade that did it. Germany had no food, disease was rampant, the countries civilian population had lost all stomach for the war, hell their entire navy mutinied.

America getting involved may have been the final nail in the coffin, but Germany was on her way down long before the yanks stepped in.

To this I would point out with the collapse of Russia the Germans then controlled Ukrainian, the bread basket of Europe their food problem thereafter would be short term.

[The Matthew Islands]

Everybody is missing one key point about Germany in World War 1.

It wasn't the land war that won it, the German army was ENTIRELY capable of fighting on for a good while longer.

It was the state of the German economy, and the effectiveness of the British naval blockade that did it. Germany had no food, disease was rampant, the countries civilian population had lost all stomach for the war, hell their entire navy mutinied.

America getting involved may have been the final nail in the coffin, but Germany was on her way down long before the yanks stepped in.

Actually I thought Germany was on the verge of hitting Paris by that point, since they had managed to swing all of their soldiers from Russia and adopted new Trench busting tactics.

[Ergalion]

Honestly, us Europeans don't generally like you Americans.
With your wars
Absurd accents
Self-righteousness
Stealing of the English language and horrible justice and constitution systems.Not to mention how most of you are
Not to mention you and your bankers are also responsible for a depression through Europe.
over weight...So No you will not get any ass kissing America, we would prefer if you went back to isolation.
Love Europe

Obviously we will have to resort to gun boat diplomacy.
Marines seize European ports and collect export Tariffs until our good will and the cost of occupying the ports has been paid off.

You know the US has done many but things over europe and your banks are the cause of all this.But we can't say that these are faults of the american people.and even if your goverment is behind many things the US is the only country which can support EU right now.But this can cause americans end too and the next more powerfull country will likely be China.(and that is bad because i hven't learned chinese! )

[Ethel mermania]

Then why did you put save in the title?

change title to "US, Japan, Canada, UK, Switzerland and Europe give money to Europe".

tia

Too long, and I don't know if Europe agreeing to accept money constitutes giving.

it is a loan, the interest rate is quite low, but like the american TARP it is a loan. The central banks will make money on it if it is paid back, not a lot but it will be profitable to them. Since the chinese had turned the europeans down, and the FED is taking the lead the title is fair.

[Ethel mermania]

the US did nothing in WW1, you only lost 100,000 men against a dying Germany.

In ww2, your right in that we couldn't have done D-Day, but otherwise we were fine, and besides, the Russians won WW2 anyway.

And there was no-one for you to save us from in the Cold War! There was no combat!

You leave out why Germany was dying. OH wait was it because they conducted one last major do or die offensives in an attempt to beat the allies before the US could fully mobilize. Without US involvement they never would have launched such desperate attack. Also they would not have gotten out of their trenches so Easily if the US had not become involved and promised a peace based off the 14 points. But hey keep looking very short term in history.

WWII is more laughable, sure Russia won the war, 50% of their equipment and raw materials( and they were already at 2 soldiers per rifle) came from the US, starting before we even got into the war. A Soviet army at half size would have lost Stalingrad and everything between that and Vladivostok.

THe battle of moscow was won before the lend lease was signed. The battle for stalingrad was before much of the mobilization of american and british goods could hit the battlefields. Russian equipment particularly tanks and rockets were much better than what the americans or british had.

As i said earlier in world war I it was not the 150,000 americans in the field that worried the german high command, it was the 2.1 million americans training in france that had them shitting their pants. Once the michael offensive failed, the war was effectively over.

All that said, the american presence had a great effect on both wars and while we were not the only force invovled in both wars, without american involvement (including arms and food production) both outcomes may have been different.

THe marshal plan helped stablize europe and put it on its present course today.

But all that is so last millennium and has nothing to do with the current bailout.

[Greed and Death]

You leave out why Germany was dying. OH wait was it because they conducted one last major do or die offensives in an attempt to beat the allies before the US could fully mobilize. Without US involvement they never would have launched such desperate attack. Also they would not have gotten out of their trenches so Easily if the US had not become involved and promised a peace based off the 14 points. But hey keep looking very short term in history.

WWII is more laughable, sure Russia won the war, 50% of their equipment and raw materials( and they were already at 2 soldiers per rifle) came from the US, starting before we even got into the war. A Soviet army at half size would have lost Stalingrad and everything between that and Vladivostok.

THe battle of moscow was won before the lend lease was signed. The battle for stalingrad was before much of the mobilization of american and british goods could hit the battlefields. Russian equipment particularly tanks and rockets were much better than what the americans or british had.

As i said earlier in world war I it was not the 150,000 americans in the field that worried the german high command, it was the 2.1 million americans training in france that had them shitting their pants. Once the michael offensive failed, the war was effectively over.

All that said, the american presence had a great effect on both wars and while we were not the only force invovled in both wars, without american involvement (including arms and food production) both outcomes may have been different.

THe marshal plan helped stablize europe and put it on its present course today.

But all that is so last millennium and has nothing to do with the current bailout.

You leave out material.
Russia had a hard time getting steel for their tanks, oil to run them. Things that are hard to come by when you have to draft the entire population to fight the Germans.
Lend Lease was signed March 11 1941,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease
the battle of Moscow ended January 1942, a month after the Americans entered the war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Moscow

[Evigglaede]

Only grees has an dept as procent off bnp that is sicnificantly than the amarican the rest offf the pigg is around amarican. That being said they have a bigger problem with interest raits as they are prehaps three times the amarican. Gress has been de focto deault for atleast 2 years. But that is bacicly irrelevent as their ecconommy is tiny. The resson they US and a majority off european nations i might add is trying to keep Grees "afloat" is in ordre to try an carm investers. So the interest pressure on the Sain and Italy can hopfully be reduced. Becausse if Spain and Italy defult it will result in a global crisis. In that way the US. and the rest off the countrys are just taking care of their own interests. Nevertheless it is important to understand that it is not all of Euroup that has skreved up. Germany still has a strong econnomy and has payed the majority off the cost. The ecvonnomy of Switserland, Holand, Beligen, Franse, Britan, Skandinawia, Eastern Euroup (want more countrys) is still fine. So saying the US. is saving Euroup migth be the overstatement off a century. But any tthing that is done to stabalise the globale ecconomy i greatly appresiate.

[Call to power]

11+pages of asspain. Well done Greed and/or Death!

But yeah like other people have said this provides at best time with which to solve the crisis, barring a Christmas miracle the Eurozone has a very small amount of time with which to unfuck itself with the worst case scenario now being prepared for.

[North Calaveras]

wait were spending money we don't have? how is that possible...

(don't take this to literally lol)

[Malgrave]

The US led the effort into Afghanistan it does not mean that other nations like the United Kingdom, Estonia and Poland do not deserve praise or recognition for their involvement.

Yes. He does so in the OP. But that's like saying the US "saved" Afghanistan. It certainly did the most, and any "saving" of Afghanistan/Europe would not have happened without US leadership.

I still find the title misleading. Afghanistan was a conflict led by the Americans obviously however it still does negate the effort of the other countries in the coalition. The Americans hardly had an impact in the First World War however their sacrifice in 1918 is still witnessed, just like the Soviet Unions effect on the Japanese surrender during the second world war should be recognized.

[Farnhamia]

wait were spending money we don't have? how is that possible...

(don't take this to literally lol)

As soon as the ink dries ...

[Malgrave]

THe battle of moscow was won before the lend lease was signed. The battle for stalingrad was before much of the mobilization of american and british goods could hit the battlefields. Russian equipment particularly tanks and rockets were much better than what the americans or british had.

As i said earlier in world war I it was not the 150,000 americans in the field that worried the german high command, it was the 2.1 million americans training in france that had them shitting their pants. Once the michael offensive failed, the war was effectively over.

All that said, the american presence had a great effect on both wars and while we were not the only force invovled in both wars, without american involvement (including arms and food production) both outcomes may have been different.

THe marshal plan helped stablize europe and put it on its present course today.

But all that is so last millennium and has nothing to do with the current bailout.

You leave out material.
Russia had a hard time getting steel for their tanks, oil to run them. Things that are hard to come by when you have to draft the entire population to fight the Germans.
Lend Lease was signed March 11 1941,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease
the battle of Moscow ended January 1942, a month after the Americans entered the war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Moscow

Exactly.
Lend a lease hardly had any effect on the Battle of Moscow as the supplies were just beginning to trickle into the Soviet Union. The lease began to have an effect when the Soviet Union went on the offensive and American trucks were used for transport and the basis for rocket artillery.

[Xanixi]

Only grees has an dept as procent off bnp that is sicnificantly than the amarican the rest offf the pigg is around amarican. That being said they have a bigger problem with interest raits as they are prehaps three times the amarican. Gress has been de focto deault for atleast 2 years. But that is bacicly irrelevent as their ecconommy is tiny. The resson they US and a majority off european nations i might add is trying to keep Grees "afloat" is in ordre to try an carm investers. So the interest pressure on the Sain and Italy can hopfully be reduced. Becausse if Spain and Italy defult it will result in a global crisis. In that way the US. and the rest off the countrys are just taking care of their own interests. Nevertheless it is important to understand that it is not all of Euroup that has skreved up. Germany still has a strong econnomy and has payed the majority off the cost. The ecvonnomy of Switserland, Holand, Beligen, Franse, Britan, Skandinawia, Eastern Euroup (want more countrys) is still fine. So saying the US. is saving Euroup migth be the overstatement off a century. But any tthing that is done to stabalise the globale ecconomy i greatly appresiate.

I would appreciate a post that actually made some sort of sense.

[Caninope]

Yes. He does so in the OP. But that's like saying the US "saved" Afghanistan. It certainly did the most, and any "saving" of Afghanistan/Europe would not have happened without US leadership.

I still find the title misleading. Afghanistan was a conflict led by the Americans obviously however it still does negate the effort of the other countries in the coalition. The Americans hardly had an impact in the First World War however their sacrifice in 1918 is still witnessed, just like the Soviet Unions effect on the Japanese surrender during the second world war should be recognized.

The Soviet Union had an effect on the Japanese surrender in World War II?

It was going to be another several months before the Soviets could have even mounted anything close to an offensive on the Japanese front.

[Keronians]

This is really good and really bad. I mean, we're (the US) taking a hit for the team, but this will only escalate the Occupy situation.

Don't we always take a hit for the "team" and the get yelled at?

Fine.

Don't help and see the lack of a recovery due to contagion from Europe.

[The Black Plains]

US can't even save themselves, that just put US in more financle troubles, taking United statescitizens hard earned money to just give away to economies that's all part of a Global mission, NEW WORLD ORDER

Actually, no. Because the interest rates on these loans are above the rate of inflation (low, but still a good bit above inflation), the loans are considered solid assets so we can partition them and sell them to investors for a profit or just hang onto them. It's like selling national debt, but better.

[Keronians]

I still find the title misleading. Afghanistan was a conflict led by the Americans obviously however it still does negate the effort of the other countries in the coalition. The Americans hardly had an impact in the First World War however their sacrifice in 1918 is still witnessed, just like the Soviet Unions effect on the Japanese surrender during the second world war should be recognized.

The Soviet Union had an effect on the Japanese surrender in World War II?

It was going to be another several months before the Soviets could have even mounted anything close to an offensive on the Japanese front.

To be honest, it probably did have a bit of influence. Though nothing significant.

One of the reasons for dropping the nuclear bombs was exactly to prevent the USSR getting a significant hold on that front, and then having to split Japan up the same way as Germany.

[Malgrave]

I still find the title misleading. Afghanistan was a conflict led by the Americans obviously however it still does negate the effort of the other countries in the coalition. The Americans hardly had an impact in the First World War however their sacrifice in 1918 is still witnessed, just like the Soviet Unions effect on the Japanese surrender during the second world war should be recognized.

The Soviet Union had an effect on the Japanese surrender in World War II?

It was going to be another several months before the Soviets could have even mounted anything close to an offensive on the Japanese front.

The offensive into Manchuria ring any bells? The Soviet Union managed to transport over 1 million men and thousands of artillery and other military equipment across Russia without the Japanese noticing and launched an invasion that crushed a similar sized force. The entrance of the Soviet Union into the war against Japan more then likely had an equal impact as the one caused by the dropping of the nuclear bomb.

[Malgrave]

The Soviet Union had an effect on the Japanese surrender in World War II?

It was going to be another several months before the Soviets could have even mounted anything close to an offensive on the Japanese front.

To be honest, it probably did have a bit of influence. Though nothing significant.

One of the reasons for dropping the nuclear bombs was exactly to prevent the USSR getting a significant hold on that front, and then having to split Japan up the same way as Germany.

I'd say around 1 million men appearing and smashing an entire front within a few weeks would make an impact.

[Keronians]

The Soviet Union had an effect on the Japanese surrender in World War II?

It was going to be another several months before the Soviets could have even mounted anything close to an offensive on the Japanese front.

The offensive into Manchuria ring any bells? The Soviet Union managed to transport over 1 million men and thousands of artillery and other military equipment across Russia without the Japanese noticing and launched an invasion that crushed a similar sized force. The entrance of the Soviet Union into the war against Japan more then likely had an equal impact as the one caused by the dropping of the nuclear bomb.

Yes, but you forget Japan's fanaticism.

You can bet your ass that without the atomic bomb, even with the USSR pressing on, tens of millions of Japanese, and millions of Americans would die.

In the words of the Premier himself, all 100 million Japanese people would sacrifice themselves for the Motherland.

Now, probably not all of them, but still a decent number would willingly go to war, and go on fighting until they were dead.