Winston Churchill

[Guest alex]

Stevie's question dodging is pretty inventive tbf.

[ChezGiven 0]

Snakehips, the name of the man you were talking about is a lad called John Maynard Keynes. Considered at the time the most intelligent man in Britain, he was sent to the US to secure funding for the re-building of Britain who had bankrupted itself during the war. Marr's account of this on TV is brief, i recommend the first book for a better account.

 

The effort and stress (the man was possibly the greatest Economist that ever lived and was well aware of the implications of his personal failure) killed him.

[AgentAxeman 89]

If we were so technologically advanced I wonder why they had dishwashers, huge fridges and big cars while we were still using outdoor netties.

 

 

cos they could afford it. we couldnt as we'd just given them all wor cash (in a manner of speaking).

[Guest alex]

If we were so technologically advanced I wonder why they had dishwashers, huge fridges and big cars while we were still using outdoor netties.

 

 

cos they could afford it. we couldnt as we'd just given them all wor cash (in a manner of speaking).

How had we just given them all our cash if they'd just given us massive loans? Don't think too hard about that one btw.

[AgentAxeman 89]

If we were so technologically advanced I wonder why they had dishwashers, huge fridges and big cars while we were still using outdoor netties.

 

 

cos they could afford it. we couldnt as we'd just given them all wor cash (in a manner of speaking).

How had we just given them all our cash if they'd just given us massive loans? Don't think too hard about that one btw.

 

well duh! hark at you. at that point we were massively in debt to them. therefore they were flush (lots of assets you see) and we wernt. i was always told that the loans were in the form of material goods anyway, not cash. ie they then gave us material goods (tanks, bullets, food etc.) and we paid them back over the following 50 odd years. Still means they were solvent and we wernt. basic finances, you should try it sometimes!

[Park Life 71]

The British have been incredibly inventive and have contributed one hell of a lot to the world of Science and Technology, but to imply that this means the US somehow were reliant on us for these things is idiocy.

 

Of the top of my head, the Americans have been responsible for the first manned flight, first mass production of the car and many other consumer goods, most modern military technology, development of the computer and internet, and development of the first fission and fusion nuclear bombs. Not to mention the small feat of landing a man on the moon. They are also responsible for the majority of science and medical publications, although we punch above our weight on that score too.

 

All the rocket tech and nukes they got from Germans. The first road cars were also invented by Germans, Benz if I iirc..I thought Konrad Zuse (yes Renton not an american name ) the GERMAN invented the first computer in 1936...

 

Soooo, I'll give you consumer goods.

 

Is there really any point of the likes of you and tooner posting in this thread, it is beyond doubt you are both ridiculously knowledgeless...

 

Peace.

[Guest alex]

If we were so technologically advanced I wonder why they had dishwashers, huge fridges and big cars while we were still using outdoor netties.

 

 

cos they could afford it. we couldnt as we'd just given them all wor cash (in a manner of speaking).

How had we just given them all our cash if they'd just given us massive loans? Don't think too hard about that one btw.

 

well duh! hark at you. at that point we were massively in debt to them. therefore they were flush (lots of assets you see) and we wernt. i was always told that the loans were in the form of material goods anyway, not cash. ie they then gave us material goods (tanks, bullets, food etc.) and we paid them back over the following 50 odd years. Still means they were solvent and we wernt. basic finances, you should try it sometimes!

The previous post re: the dishwashers etc. was a flippant one but that doesn't alter the fact that the US made us financially better off after the war than we would have been had they not supplied the loans etc. They were richer than us, aye, but we were skint because of the war, not because we'd just given America all our money, which was what you said. They actually supplied us with stuff we needed at a fraction of its true cost. It was stuff we needed as well.

As an aside, I think a lot of the problems with post-War Britain was a resistance to modernisation. This stretched well beyond the immediate post-war years into the 60s and 70s. You have to wonder why so many other countries even more devastated by war were able to cope so much better in this period. Personally I put it down to the ruling classes clinging onto power, land and so on.

[Guest alex]

The British have been incredibly inventive and have contributed one hell of a lot to the world of Science and Technology, but to imply that this means the US somehow were reliant on us for these things is idiocy.

 

Of the top of my head, the Americans have been responsible for the first manned flight, first mass production of the car and many other consumer goods, most modern military technology, development of the computer and internet, and development of the first fission and fusion nuclear bombs. Not to mention the small feat of landing a man on the moon. They are also responsible for the majority of science and medical publications, although we punch above our weight on that score too.

 

All the rocket tech and nukes they got from Germans. The first road cars were also invented by Germans, Benz if I iirc..I thought Konrad Zuse (yes Renton not an american name ) the GERMAN invented the first computer in 1936...

 

Soooo, I'll give you consumer goods.

 

Is there really any point of the likes of you and tooner posting in this thread, it is beyond doubt you are both ridiculously knowledgeless...

 

Peace.

Virtually all Americans are basically immigrants anyway though so that's why you can argue idea 1) 2) or 3) originally came from x, y or z but it says a lot about the country that those ideas were able to flourish in America.

[Park Life 71]

If we were so technologically advanced I wonder why they had dishwashers, huge fridges and big cars while we were still using outdoor netties.

 

 

cos they could afford it. we couldnt as we'd just given them all wor cash (in a manner of speaking).

How had we just given them all our cash if they'd just given us massive loans? Don't think too hard about that one btw.

 

well duh! hark at you. at that point we were massively in debt to them. therefore they were flush (lots of assets you see) and we wernt. i was always told that the loans were in the form of material goods anyway, not cash. ie they then gave us material goods (tanks, bullets, food etc.) and we paid them back over the following 50 odd years. Still means they were solvent and we wernt. basic finances, you should try it sometimes!

The previous post re: the dishwashers etc. was a flippant one but that doesn't alter the fact that the US made us financially better off after the war than we would have been had they not supplied the loans etc. They were richer than us, aye, but we were skint because of the war, not because we'd just given America all our money, which was what you said. They actually supplied us with stuff we needed at a fraction of its true cost. It was stuff we needed as well.

As an aside, I think a lot of the problems with post-War Britain was a resistance to modernisation. This stretched well beyond the immediate post-war years into the 60s and 70s. You have to wonder why so many other countries even more devastated by war were able to cope so much better in this period. Personally I put it down to the ruling classes clinging onto power, land and so on.

 

That would be the same ruling classes who organised the war.

[Guest Barrack Road]

The British have been incredibly inventive and have contributed one hell of a lot to the world of Science and Technology, but to imply that this means the US somehow were reliant on us for these things is idiocy.

 

Of the top of my head, the Americans have been responsible for the first manned flight, first mass production of the car and many other consumer goods, most modern military technology, development of the computer and internet, and development of the first fission and fusion nuclear bombs. Not to mention the small feat of landing a man on the moon. They are also responsible for the majority of science and medical publications, although we punch above our weight on that score too.

 

All the rocket tech and nukes they got from Germans. The first road cars were also invented by Germans, Benz if I iirc..I thought Konrad Zuse (yes Renton not an american name ) the GERMAN invented the first computer in 1936...

 

Soooo, I'll give you consumer goods.

 

Is there really any point of the likes of you and tooner posting in this thread, it is beyond doubt you are both ridiculously knowledgeless...

 

Peace.

He should stick to the forlorn hope that one day he might be responsible for curing Aids or cancer, instead of stuff he is utterly clueless about.

[NJS 4017]

I think a lot of the problems with post-War Britain was a resistance to modernisation. This stretched well beyond the immediate post-war years into the 60s and 70s. You have to wonder why so many other countries even more devastated by war were able to cope so much better in this period. Personally I put it down to the ruling classes clinging onto power, land and so on.

 

I'd agree with that.

 

I think the UK was far too dependent on the empire and Britain's place in the world and it took decades to get over the shock of it not really existing anymore. In that context the ruling classes had no idea of how to cope with the change apart from ensuring their vision of a society where everyone knew their place persisted.

 

I've said before that the nostalgia for some golden era of morality in the 50s is something I particularly find offensive. Shit like sending poor kids off to Australia and putting single mothers and rape victims in asylums was only tolerated because far too many people were meek and afraid to question the authorities.

[Park Life 71]

The British have been incredibly inventive and have contributed one hell of a lot to the world of Science and Technology, but to imply that this means the US somehow were reliant on us for these things is idiocy.

 

Of the top of my head, the Americans have been responsible for the first manned flight, first mass production of the car and many other consumer goods, most modern military technology, development of the computer and internet, and development of the first fission and fusion nuclear bombs. Not to mention the small feat of landing a man on the moon. They are also responsible for the majority of science and medical publications, although we punch above our weight on that score too.

 

All the rocket tech and nukes they got from Germans. The first road cars were also invented by Germans, Benz if I iirc..I thought Konrad Zuse (yes Renton not an american name ) the GERMAN invented the first computer in 1936...

 

Soooo, I'll give you consumer goods.

 

Is there really any point of the likes of you and tooner posting in this thread, it is beyond doubt you are both ridiculously knowledgeless...

 

Peace.

Virtually all Americans are basically immigrants anyway though so that's why you can argue idea 1) 2) or 3) originally came from x, y or z but it says a lot about the country that those ideas were able to flourish in America.

 

Don't think Benz was an immigrant mate.

 

Nazi Germany was light years ahead of the rest of the world in terms of hi tech stuff hence Von Braun and the rocket programme and the heavy water plants in the mountains.

 

America on the other hand history records wiped out the native Americans and followed it with the use of mass slavery.

[ChezGiven 0]

If we were so technologically advanced I wonder why they had dishwashers, huge fridges and big cars while we were still using outdoor netties.

 

 

cos they could afford it. we couldnt as we'd just given them all wor cash (in a manner of speaking).

How had we just given them all our cash if they'd just given us massive loans? Don't think too hard about that one btw.

 

well duh! hark at you. at that point we were massively in debt to them. therefore they were flush (lots of assets you see) and we wernt. i was always told that the loans were in the form of material goods anyway, not cash. ie they then gave us material goods (tanks, bullets, food etc.) and we paid them back over the following 50 odd years. Still means they were solvent and we wernt. basic finances, you should try it sometimes!

The previous post re: the dishwashers etc. was a flippant one but that doesn't alter the fact that the US made us financially better off after the war than we would have been had they not supplied the loans etc. They were richer than us, aye, but we were skint because of the war, not because we'd just given America all our money, which was what you said. They actually supplied us with stuff we needed at a fraction of its true cost. It was stuff we needed as well.

As an aside, I think a lot of the problems with post-War Britain was a resistance to modernisation. This stretched well beyond the immediate post-war years into the 60s and 70s. You have to wonder why so many other countries even more devastated by war were able to cope so much better in this period. Personally I put it down to the ruling classes clinging onto power, land and so on.

 

Well, only 2 or 3 EU countries peform better than us economically in the post-war period and only for certain periods of time. The Germans dont have an army, so 30% of their tax revenues can be invested into other areas. The French position themselves at the heart of the new EU power structures and therefore benefit from protectionist policies and from close economic ties with the Germans. The EU project was all about keeping these two from war, so the economic gains for them (seen post 1950 onwards) were substantial. Its no coincidence that De Gaulle wanted us kept away form this new relationship. The Italians do ok for certain periods but only out perform us during the 70's when we were again bankrupt. It was in 1976 that we went to the IMF for money, an avenue the EU has been desperate to avoid with the Greeks.

 

I'd say from an economic perspective, the Dutch disease of the early 70s and the lack of participation in the EU projects of the 50s and 60s strained our overall economic performance.

[AgentAxeman 89]

but we were skint because of the war, not because we'd just given America all our money, which was what you said.

 

 

I actually said in a manner of speaking. it was not supposed to be taken literally. apologies for dumbing my posts down.

[Park Life 71]

but we were skint because of the war, not because we'd just given America all our money, which was what you said.

 

 

I actually said in a manner of speaking. it was not supposed to be taken literally. apologies for dumbing my posts down.

 

[Guest alex]

The British have been incredibly inventive and have contributed one hell of a lot to the world of Science and Technology, but to imply that this means the US somehow were reliant on us for these things is idiocy.

 

Of the top of my head, the Americans have been responsible for the first manned flight, first mass production of the car and many other consumer goods, most modern military technology, development of the computer and internet, and development of the first fission and fusion nuclear bombs. Not to mention the small feat of landing a man on the moon. They are also responsible for the majority of science and medical publications, although we punch above our weight on that score too.

 

All the rocket tech and nukes they got from Germans. The first road cars were also invented by Germans, Benz if I iirc..I thought Konrad Zuse (yes Renton not an american name ) the GERMAN invented the first computer in 1936...

 

Soooo, I'll give you consumer goods.

 

Is there really any point of the likes of you and tooner posting in this thread, it is beyond doubt you are both ridiculously knowledgeless...

 

Peace.

Virtually all Americans are basically immigrants anyway though so that's why you can argue idea 1) 2) or 3) originally came from x, y or z but it says a lot about the country that those ideas were able to flourish in America.

 

Don't think Benz was an immigrant mate.

 

Nazi Germany was light years ahead of the rest of the world in terms of hi tech stuff hence Von Braun and the rocket programme and the heavy water plants in the mountains.

 

America on the other hand history records wiped out the native Americans and followed it with the use of mass slavery.

Yeah, I was making a more general point. I'm not all pro-America by any means as you know but there is much to admire in the American dream and the embracing of different ideas from around the world etc. A lot of the success of America is a fluke based on its resources but it's also down to it being a young country which has always embraced immigration and hasn't had the shackles of a rigid class structure to overcome.

[Park Life 71]

If we were so technologically advanced I wonder why they had dishwashers, huge fridges and big cars while we were still using outdoor netties.

 

 

cos they could afford it. we couldnt as we'd just given them all wor cash (in a manner of speaking).

How had we just given them all our cash if they'd just given us massive loans? Don't think too hard about that one btw.

 

well duh! hark at you. at that point we were massively in debt to them. therefore they were flush (lots of assets you see) and we wernt. i was always told that the loans were in the form of material goods anyway, not cash. ie they then gave us material goods (tanks, bullets, food etc.) and we paid them back over the following 50 odd years. Still means they were solvent and we wernt. basic finances, you should try it sometimes!

The previous post re: the dishwashers etc. was a flippant one but that doesn't alter the fact that the US made us financially better off after the war than we would have been had they not supplied the loans etc. They were richer than us, aye, but we were skint because of the war, not because we'd just given America all our money, which was what you said. They actually supplied us with stuff we needed at a fraction of its true cost. It was stuff we needed as well.

As an aside, I think a lot of the problems with post-War Britain was a resistance to modernisation. This stretched well beyond the immediate post-war years into the 60s and 70s. You have to wonder why so many other countries even more devastated by war were able to cope so much better in this period. Personally I put it down to the ruling classes clinging onto power, land and so on.

 

Well, only 2 or 3 EU countries peform better than us economically in the post-war period and only for certain periods of time. The Germans dont have an army, so 30% of their tax revenues can be invested into other areas. The French position themselves at the heart of the new EU power structures and therefore benefit from protectionist policies and from close economic ties with the Germans. The EU project was all about keeping these two from war, so the economic gains for them (seen post 1950 onwards) were substantial. Its no coincidence that De Gaulle wanted us kept away form this new relationship. The Italians do ok for certain periods but only out perform us during the 70's when we were again bankrupt. It was in 1976 that we went to the IMF for money, an avenue the EU has been desperate to avoid with the Greeks.

 

I'd say from an economic perspective, the Dutch disease of the early 70s and the lack of participation in the EU projects of the 50s and 60s strained our overall economic performance.

 

The Germans and French also have the advantage of not getting involoved in Project America wars.

[Renton 18081]

The British have been incredibly inventive and have contributed one hell of a lot to the world of Science and Technology, but to imply that this means the US somehow were reliant on us for these things is idiocy.

 

Of the top of my head, the Americans have been responsible for the first manned flight, first mass production of the car and many other consumer goods, most modern military technology, development of the computer and internet, and development of the first fission and fusion nuclear bombs. Not to mention the small feat of landing a man on the moon. They are also responsible for the majority of science and medical publications, although we punch above our weight on that score too.

 

All the rocket tech and nukes they got from Germans. The first road cars were also invented by Germans, Benz if I iirc..I thought Konrad Zuse (yes Renton not an american name ) the GERMAN invented the first computer in 1936...

 

Soooo, I'll give you consumer goods.

 

Is there really any point of the likes of you and tooner posting in this thread, it is beyond doubt you are both ridiculously knowledgeless...

 

Peace.

Virtually all Americans are basically immigrants anyway though so that's why you can argue idea 1) 2) or 3) originally came from x, y or z but it says a lot about the country that those ideas were able to flourish in America.

 

Exactly. Nuclear weapons came from Germany did they? Why weren't they used then? Or are you arguing that because Oppenheimer was of German-Jewish decent that made the invention of the fission bomb a German one?

 

Also I've already mentioned that the US used German rocket technology and Von Braun was crucial to the Americans in the space race. But to not give the US credit for reaching the moon just underlines how ridiculous your anti-American stance is. That's if, of course, you now accept they went there.

 

Oh, I meant the modern computer, not some kind of ancient calculator made from brass cogs. And the internet, the medium you spread your bollocks on (ooh err), care to comment?

[Renton 18081]

The British have been incredibly inventive and have contributed one hell of a lot to the world of Science and Technology, but to imply that this means the US somehow were reliant on us for these things is idiocy.

 

Of the top of my head, the Americans have been responsible for the first manned flight, first mass production of the car and many other consumer goods, most modern military technology, development of the computer and internet, and development of the first fission and fusion nuclear bombs. Not to mention the small feat of landing a man on the moon. They are also responsible for the majority of science and medical publications, although we punch above our weight on that score too.

 

All the rocket tech and nukes they got from Germans. The first road cars were also invented by Germans, Benz if I iirc..I thought Konrad Zuse (yes Renton not an american name ) the GERMAN invented the first computer in 1936...

 

Soooo, I'll give you consumer goods.

 

Is there really any point of the likes of you and tooner posting in this thread, it is beyond doubt you are both ridiculously knowledgeless...

 

Peace.

He should stick to the forlorn hope that one day he might be responsible for curing Aids or cancer, instead of stuff he is utterly clueless about.

 

Are you willing to support any of your spurious arguments with actual evidence yet Stevie?

[Guest alex]

but we were skint because of the war, not because we'd just given America all our money, which was what you said.

 

 

I actually said in a manner of speaking. it was not supposed to be taken literally. apologies for dumbing my posts down.

What did you literally mean then?

[Park Life 71]

The British have been incredibly inventive and have contributed one hell of a lot to the world of Science and Technology, but to imply that this means the US somehow were reliant on us for these things is idiocy.

 

Of the top of my head, the Americans have been responsible for the first manned flight, first mass production of the car and many other consumer goods, most modern military technology, development of the computer and internet, and development of the first fission and fusion nuclear bombs. Not to mention the small feat of landing a man on the moon. They are also responsible for the majority of science and medical publications, although we punch above our weight on that score too.

 

All the rocket tech and nukes they got from Germans. The first road cars were also invented by Germans, Benz if I iirc..I thought Konrad Zuse (yes Renton not an american name ) the GERMAN invented the first computer in 1936...

 

Soooo, I'll give you consumer goods.

 

Is there really any point of the likes of you and tooner posting in this thread, it is beyond doubt you are both ridiculously knowledgeless...

 

Peace.

Virtually all Americans are basically immigrants anyway though so that's why you can argue idea 1) 2) or 3) originally came from x, y or z but it says a lot about the country that those ideas were able to flourish in America.

 

Don't think Benz was an immigrant mate.

 

Nazi Germany was light years ahead of the rest of the world in terms of hi tech stuff hence Von Braun and the rocket programme and the heavy water plants in the mountains.

 

America on the other hand history records wiped out the native Americans and followed it with the use of mass slavery.

Yeah, I was making a more general point. I'm not all pro-America by any means as you know but there is much to admire in the American dream and the embracing of different ideas from around the world etc. A lot of the success of America is a fluke based on its resources but it's also down to it being a young country which has always embraced immigration and hasn't had the shackles of a rigid class structure to overcome.

 

Fair enough.

 

I propose the American dream will be exosed as a myth in times to come, one certainly that had a very short shelf life. It is the case that the war itself destroyed all our fiancial might however and with that our ability to take the commonwealth to the next level as a worldwide trading and ideas board.

In the defence of America I will say that the PEOPLE often in times of trouble and need show a very big heart and genorosity.

[Guest alex]

If we were so technologically advanced I wonder why they had dishwashers, huge fridges and big cars while we were still using outdoor netties.

 

 

cos they could afford it. we couldnt as we'd just given them all wor cash (in a manner of speaking).

How had we just given them all our cash if they'd just given us massive loans? Don't think too hard about that one btw.

 

well duh! hark at you. at that point we were massively in debt to them. therefore they were flush (lots of assets you see) and we wernt. i was always told that the loans were in the form of material goods anyway, not cash. ie they then gave us material goods (tanks, bullets, food etc.) and we paid them back over the following 50 odd years. Still means they were solvent and we wernt. basic finances, you should try it sometimes!

The previous post re: the dishwashers etc. was a flippant one but that doesn't alter the fact that the US made us financially better off after the war than we would have been had they not supplied the loans etc. They were richer than us, aye, but we were skint because of the war, not because we'd just given America all our money, which was what you said. They actually supplied us with stuff we needed at a fraction of its true cost. It was stuff we needed as well.

As an aside, I think a lot of the problems with post-War Britain was a resistance to modernisation. This stretched well beyond the immediate post-war years into the 60s and 70s. You have to wonder why so many other countries even more devastated by war were able to cope so much better in this period. Personally I put it down to the ruling classes clinging onto power, land and so on.

 

Well, only 2 or 3 EU countries peform better than us economically in the post-war period and only for certain periods of time. The Germans dont have an army, so 30% of their tax revenues can be invested into other areas. The French position themselves at the heart of the new EU power structures and therefore benefit from protectionist policies and from close economic ties with the Germans. The EU project was all about keeping these two from war, so the economic gains for them (seen post 1950 onwards) were substantial. Its no coincidence that De Gaulle wanted us kept away form this new relationship. The Italians do ok for certain periods but only out perform us during the 70's when we were again bankrupt. It was in 1976 that we went to the IMF for money, an avenue the EU has been desperate to avoid with the Greeks.

 

I'd say from an economic perspective, the Dutch disease of the early 70s and the lack of participation in the EU projects of the 50s and 60s strained our overall economic performance.

I suppose there's a wider point I was getting at about class getting in the way of social mobility etc. The war got rid of this to an extent but not so much as in other countries. I guess they had a head start anyway though as a lot of that wasn't as evident before the war in any case. I think we've still got huge amounts of land owned by tiny amounts of the population though which, or so I've read, accounts for how expensive property and land in the UK is, relatively.

[Guest Barrack Road]

The British have been incredibly inventive and have contributed one hell of a lot to the world of Science and Technology, but to imply that this means the US somehow were reliant on us for these things is idiocy.

 

Of the top of my head, the Americans have been responsible for the first manned flight, first mass production of the car and many other consumer goods, most modern military technology, development of the computer and internet, and development of the first fission and fusion nuclear bombs. Not to mention the small feat of landing a man on the moon. They are also responsible for the majority of science and medical publications, although we punch above our weight on that score too.

 

All the rocket tech and nukes they got from Germans. The first road cars were also invented by Germans, Benz if I iirc..I thought Konrad Zuse (yes Renton not an american name ) the GERMAN invented the first computer in 1936...

 

Soooo, I'll give you consumer goods.

 

Is there really any point of the likes of you and tooner posting in this thread, it is beyond doubt you are both ridiculously knowledgeless...

 

Peace.

He should stick to the forlorn hope that one day he might be responsible for curing Aids or cancer, instead of stuff he is utterly clueless about.

 

Are you willing to support any of your spurious arguments with actual evidence yet Stevie?

Some cunts have work to do, not scouring the internet in working hours looking for evidence a monkey would know about anyway.

[Renton 18081]

The British have been incredibly inventive and have contributed one hell of a lot to the world of Science and Technology, but to imply that this means the US somehow were reliant on us for these things is idiocy.

 

Of the top of my head, the Americans have been responsible for the first manned flight, first mass production of the car and many other consumer goods, most modern military technology, development of the computer and internet, and development of the first fission and fusion nuclear bombs. Not to mention the small feat of landing a man on the moon. They are also responsible for the majority of science and medical publications, although we punch above our weight on that score too.

 

All the rocket tech and nukes they got from Germans. The first road cars were also invented by Germans, Benz if I iirc..I thought Konrad Zuse (yes Renton not an american name ) the GERMAN invented the first computer in 1936...

 

Soooo, I'll give you consumer goods.

 

Is there really any point of the likes of you and tooner posting in this thread, it is beyond doubt you are both ridiculously knowledgeless...

 

Peace.

He should stick to the forlorn hope that one day he might be responsible for curing Aids or cancer, instead of stuff he is utterly clueless about.

 

Are you willing to support any of your spurious arguments with actual evidence yet Stevie?

Some cunts have work to do, not scouring the internet in working hours looking for evidence a monkey would know about anyway.

 

Aye well, remember it was you who promised the evidence Stevie.

[tooner 243]

The British have been incredibly inventive and have contributed one hell of a lot to the world of Science and Technology, but to imply that this means the US somehow were reliant on us for these things is idiocy.

 

Of the top of my head, the Americans have been responsible for the first manned flight, first mass production of the car and many other consumer goods, most modern military technology, development of the computer and internet, and development of the first fission and fusion nuclear bombs. Not to mention the small feat of landing a man on the moon. They are also responsible for the majority of science and medical publications, although we punch above our weight on that score too.

 

All the rocket tech and nukes they got from Germans. The first road cars were also invented by Germans, Benz if I iirc..I thought Konrad Zuse (yes Renton not an american name ) the GERMAN invented the first computer in 1936...

 

Soooo, I'll give you consumer goods.

 

Is there really any point of the likes of you and tooner posting in this thread, it is beyond doubt you are both ridiculously knowledgeless...

 

Peace.

 

 

.....because I don't have the seething hatred of americans that you do, I am clueless?......ok, whatever.

Edited March 10, 2010 by tooner