Defense Distributed Is The Greatest

[Greyblades]

(unless that ideal is how to conquer--just ask Hitler, he used the USA's treatment of the Indians as one of his justifications for the holocaust; he called the Jews "The Indians of Europe")

Hah! Good one! Conquer! Hillarious!

[Greyblades]

Yes. Conquer. Through ethnic cleansing and outright imperialism (Mexican-American War, Spanish-American War, Phillipene Insurgency, you name it) we had an empire Larger than the Continent of Europe before WWI even started. So, yeah. Its a good blue print.

Really?

America had one, maybe two bouts of successful conquest (a good part of the mexican land america took was occupied by people who were literally asking to join you, not exactly conquering) then stopped and went on to messy invasions and intentionally temporary occupations.

America is good at propaganda, great at beating up natives, but keeping the lands and peeved off indigenous peoples in your country for any length of time? Kinda lacking compared to European empires, its takings are comparable to belgium. America has a long way to go before it teaches master classes, if you know what I mean.

[Greyblades]

Results? America only had one successful conquest that lasted for more than fourty years and it was because half of them literaly asked you to do it. Since the thirties America as been too squeamish to annex anything that so much as lifts a finger against it and recently its become so self-righteous taking land by force has become unthinkable without a shed load of misinformation and a promise from the start of pulling out.
You're big, you're powerful, you're on top, but that means nothing here because we're comparing conquests not power, and when it comes to conquest you haven't even topped Belgium!

*Furthermore, Iraq, Vietnam, and pretty much every war in recent memory, was a war for something other than territorial conquest. Do you think we couldn't have gone Ghengis Khan on the entire middle east if we wanted to? Did you see what we did to Iraq's Army, TWICE!?

Um, are you under the impression I'm saying you arent powerful? Because I'm not, I'm saying your track record of conquest it kinda puny compared to europe's.

The rest of the world is just lucky our government isn't in the territorial conquest game any more.

I wish you were, I want my united world government now dangit!

[Greyblades]

No, you silly European. I'm explaining to you why Hitler used the USA (in small part) as a blueprint for expansion.

...He failed, hard

Because our method has worked where others haven't.

...Dude our methods worked pretty well, we took over the world didnt we? They failed for him, hard.

That has more to it than just acquiring territory, its about who's on the territory and how fast you can pacify or exterminate them.

...Yeah, europeans followed that method too, and even if we didnt; europe did better than america in spite of America's 'better methods'. Hitler also failed at that too, hard.

Now, as I recall, when Hitler had a technological and procedural advantage over Europe, he won. He won pretty hard. It took the combined efforts of the USA and (arguable the only country more ruthless than us) the USSR to beat them, so... Europe's not looking too good here.

Only France really, the germans and italians could say that it makes them really good.

Let go of that pride, and accept the fact that you're all stuck on that little continent with eachother, speaking different languages and getting all riled up about every little thing, because none of you could ever succeed at beating eachother up to the point of total conquest until Hitler came along

That's because every time someone tried Britain supported the opposition, keeping the balance of power was britain's schtick.

--and you're lucky the two big guys were there to help for that, or else you'd all be speaking German (and you'd probably be the world's largest power, too).

...ignoring that you just unfairly sidelined Britain, Hitler started with half of europe already his, a pact with russia not to kill eachother, a numbers advantage, tech advantage, and his generals were good enough to completely do over the french.

He still failed, hard.

So.. what I'm saying is that Hitler was right, and you should be afraid of America.

I wasnt arguing that point, I was saying that america has been a mediocre conqueror compared to europeans in spite of it's size and power, I am now saying that the guy who advocated america as a blueprint for territorial expansion himself sucked at it.

[Montmorency]

America has very rarely practiced outright territorial annexation and incorporation. It prefers vassalization.