That's why the ALLIES won the war...
 

Japanese Naval Videos:

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/0...again_wil.html

lol that's too funny. :)

It's the mighty morphin' power sailors!! :o :lol:

Previously discussed on this thread.

Where's Harry Truman when ya need him again!

whoops! Sorry.

I was under the impression the Allies won the war.

:D Chock

No really it was the Jeep that won the war....

No it was this lama.

http://im.super.cz/fun/33/02-lama.jpg

Too young.

It was the M1 Garand that won the war.

I wager it was the British Hurricanes and the few Spitfires that saved the UK in the Battle of Brittain which kept Germany's war on two fronts so they couldn't just focus on the Ruskies, which in turn led to Germany's defeat which allowed more resources to be sent to the pacific and more money for technologies which led to the completion of the atomic bomb.

So yeah, the dated but functional Hurricane allowed the allies to win the Second World War, in both theatres.

Edit- And the lama was the pilot.

No, it was the American supplies sent to the British in massive convoys during those times I tell ya!

Or possibly the Australians who declared war on day 1 and received those supplies while they gave their lives in a war that was a long way from home. Yet still hardly ever get mentioned in stories or movies. I swear, the next Battlefield game better be set in WW2 and have Aussies and Kiwis!

-edit: :)

Hey the Aussies kicked ass in Africa, that part is pretty well known isn't it? At least to me it is.

WW2 was won by the French.
If they didn't massively reduce the young militaristic male population in 1914-1918 then Germany would have been for more powerful!

^ Obviously this is bunk, but it shows what nonsense it is to ask who or what won the war.

Did the French win WW2 in 1914? Well, perhaps, but if they hadn't there wouldn't have been a WW2.
Did the Jeep shorten the war? Well, perhaps, but if it was never made than a better utility vehicle may have been made instead!

You can't make judgments about what caused past event 'B' with out asking "if event 'A' never happened, would event 'B' still have happened?".
Asking "what if" questions about the past like this can be no more accurate than trying to predict the future and far less useful.


Anyway, I know none of you where being serious so this is a pointless post.

[/Must have less coffee]