• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Republicans Shut Down the Federal Government Again & Suffer Humiliating Defeat

This shutdown is so weird. If you go to Fox, they say Trump is winning the shutout. Just about all other sources say the Dems are...partially because they say Americans blame Trump (which they should imo) or say that Pelosi is out playing Trump in their game of chess (well, Trump...let's say checkers).

what is the opinion here?

imo, the longer this continues Trump looks bad. he took responsibility for the shutdown. Trump turned down deals much better than what he is trying to get now. there is no incentive for the Dems to accept anything, Trump is BSing them in the deal. one thing we know about Trump, he doesn't pay in full for any deal (hence 3500 fraud lawsuits).
 
ImTheCaptain said:
is this something you actually believe or are you just trying to troll
Click to expand...

the French did not extend the Maginot line all along the Belgian border because they had a defense cooperation treaty with Belgium, at least until the mid 1930s

the French also felt that if the Germans attacked through Belgium, then Britain could not remain neutral and would have to support France
 
sailordeac said:
the French did not extend the Maginot line all along the Belgian border because they had a defense cooperation treaty with Belgium, at least until the mid 1930s

the French also felt that if the Germans attacked through Belgium, then Britain could not remain neutral and would have to support France
Click to expand...

Oh wait, you're continuing with this line of thought ?
 
sailordeac said:
the French did not extend the Maginot line all along the Belgian border because they had a defense cooperation treaty with Belgium, at least until the mid 1930s

the French also felt that if the Germans attacked through Belgium, then Britain could not remain neutral and would have to support France
Click to expand...

that's not at all how or why the Maginot Line was built. They never assumed the Germans would respect neutrality of Belgium (as many people believed might happen before WWI)

The Maginot Line was constructed to allow the French to mobilize and to "force" the Germans to die on fixed fortifications while meeting the bulk of the French army on the battlefield of the lowlands. The French anticipated a similar strategy of attack for Germany (and they were sort of right).

Setting aside French leadership incompetence, what they did not count on was the speed of German advance to the Channel, the wilting of the British and the power of the Luftwaffe

The idea the strongest of the fortifications were built only along the German border as basically a political decision is ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
sailordeac said:
the French did not extend the Maginot line all along the Belgian border because they had a defense cooperation treaty with Belgium, at least until the mid 1930s

the French also felt that if the Germans attacked through Belgium, then Britain could not remain neutral and would have to support France
Click to expand...

So you're saying world war 2 never would have happened if the French had just built a bigger/longer wall.
 
Highland Deac said:
Well, the French also built the Maginot Line along the German border after World War One to protect them from another German invasion. In World War Two, the Germans simply went around and over it. So, maybe the French aren't the best judges of whether walls work.
Click to expand...

sailordeac said:
the reason the Germans were easily able to go around it is because they played politics with their wall
Click to expand...

The French did not extend the Maginot line along the border with the neutral Belgium. Hence the "politics."

The French thought that the Ardennes Forest was so dense that the Germans could not attack effectively through it, and they could move troops to that area if the Germans attacked. The French were not prepared for the speed of the Blitzkrieg that went through the Ardennes Forest, through the low countries (The Netherlands, Luxembourg and Belgium) then into France around the end of the Maginot Line.

The French troops were quickly pushed to the sea, and then the evacuation from Dunkirk. The troops stationed in the forts along the Maginot line were surrendered when France surrendered soon thereafter.

Like all static defenses, the Maginot line was only as good as the weakest part. That was the unfortified "impenetrable" Ardennes Forest area.

By the way, it wasn't really a wall. It was a series of heavily armored forts with heavy artillery firepower. The forts were spaced so each on could send artillery fire in front of two on either side. It would have been effective against WWI style attacks. It wasn't effective at stopping the German Blitzkrieg around the end of it.
 
Last edited:
you are misrepresenting what I said

the decision not to build fortifications along the Belgian frontier was at least in part political, and when the political situation changed, they started to build fortifications there too

the French expected the Germans to attack through Belgium and felt they could stop them there with Belgian and British help; the Belgians obviously would have to join the French if the Germans attacked their country but the British could also not remain neutral if the Germans attacked through Belgium

the argument that the borders where the Maginot line was built and where it was not was not at least in part political is a loser argument

like the French, you lost, the French could not move on, you can
 
sailordeac said:
you are misrepresenting what I said

the decision not to build fortifications along the Belgian frontier was at least in part political, and when the political situation changed, they started to build fortifications there too

the French expected the Germans to attack through Belgium because they felt they could stop them there with Belgian and British help; the Belgians obviously would have to join the French if the Germans attacked their country but the British could also not remain neutral if the Germans attacked through Belgium

the argument that the borders where the Maginot line was built and where it was not was not at least in part political is a loser argument

like the French, you lost, the French could not move on, you can
Click to expand...

lol no that's still wrong. you certainly try hard but just can never get over the hill.

you may refer back to your musings on certain versions of history being more "correct/accurate" because the version you're using is just wrong.
 
the fact of the matter is that a wall is a waste of money and an imbecilic idea.
 
warak said:
the fact of the matter is that a wall is a waste of money and an imbecilic idea.
Click to expand...

Which should be obvious after giving a second thought to ladders.
 
PhDeac said:
Which should be obvious after giving a second thought to ladders.
Click to expand...

Just need some of these:

775f03f17bcd4fbfcfb90d868c00b567.gif
 
sailordeac said:
where is it wrong?
Click to expand...

the decision not to build fortifications along the Belgian frontier was at least in part political, and when the political situation changed, they started to build fortifications there too

the French expected the Germans to attack through Belgium because they felt they could stop them there with Belgian and British help; the Belgians obviously would have to join the French if the Germans attacked their country but the British could also not remain neutral if the Germans attacked through Belgium

the politics never changed. the plan was never to build 'maginot' type fortifications all the way to the sea. just because in the run up to actual war in the late 30s the french started to bolster the battle field doesn't mean they suddenly changed strategies.

it seems like you're confusing pre-wwi politics and pre-ww 2 politics. the british and french were already in agreement about fighting the germans. there wasn't a grand question of whether or not the Brits (or Beligians) would fight. The q
 
sailordeac said:
in fact, lots of walls do work, and everybody here knows it
Click to expand...

What a load of crap!

Hell, in El Chapo's trial yesterday, one of his lieutenants explained how they imported drugs into the U.S. In no way would any wall interrupt the flow of drugs into the U.S. Anyone who thinks a wall will stop cartel members or gangbangers from entering the U.S. is delusional. If a cartel or gang wants a member to enter the U.S., that person will be flown into our country or enter 100% legally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top