What Pisses You Off?

[Slick Rick]

Smelly food on public transportation.

I know it must be wonderful for you, but your garlic fried tofu fartburger smells like shit.

 

[CP_Scouse]

Without US manufacturing and supplies early on Britain and Russia would have been annihilated.

Without US troops later on, Germany still would likely win.

.

the russians would have RAPED the Germans reguardless of US involvement. they had a grudge against socialists and germans in general.
The Russians also kinda ended the war in the pacfic as well. they declared war on Japan on august 9, and within 5 days they would surrender. The thing with the japanese is they have no problems with atomic bombs (fire bombings in Tokyo killed more people then both atomic bombs) it was the russians they feared. The russians also kind of had a grudge agaisnt the Japanese from the Russ-Japanese war, which russia lost.

heres an anology: you're beating someone up. you punch them in the groin. they get hurt but they dont surrender.now your friend is running towards the fight to help you, your friend sent 1 other guy to the hospital prior to that fight. while your friend (russia) is on there way, the kid (japan) surrenders in fear of being hospitalised (same fate of germany)

 

[NYCFCFan10]

LOL

There are not enough L's and O's for what you just said are worth.

What would Russia beat the Germans with? Throwing stones? They had NO SUPPLIES

There's a good British documentary on this subject on youtube, you might be interested in what Stalin says, in his own words, about the situation at the 3:45 mark:

"Stalin says he will no longer be able to continue the struggle against Hitlerism unless he has 400 aircraft per month, 500 tanks per month, and 30,000 tons of aluminum immediately."

 

[CP_Scouse]

[QUOTE="NYCFCFan10, post: 3487, member: 78"
What would Russia beat the Germans with? Throwing stones? They had NO SUPPLIES

There's a good British documentary on this subject on youtube, you might be interested in what Stalin says, in his own words, about the situation at the 3:45 mark:

"Stalin says he will no longer be able to continue the struggle against Hitlerism unless he has 400 aircraft per month, 500 tanks per month, and 30,000 tons of aluminum immediately."[/QUOTE]

you're right, absoleutely right about Russia and its supplies problems. But did Stalin ask Churchill for supplies, not FDR? Russia approached Britain for supplies. Didnt you originally say "Without US manufacturing and supplies early on Britain and Russia would have been annihilated."

You shouldve said without British manufacturing and supplies early on, Russia would not have done as well"

 

[BxLio91]

When people say "who cares about soccer?"
I'm like the people who make it the #1 sport worldwide and the World Cup the most watched sports event on the planet.

 

[Johnny]

When people say "red cows" when talking about the red bulls. It's the PINK cows people, COME ON.

 

[NYCFCFan10]

What would Russia beat the Germans with? Throwing stones? They had NO SUPPLIES

There's a good British documentary on this subject on youtube, you might be interested in what Stalin says, in his own words, about the situation at the 3:45 mark:

"Stalin says he will no longer be able to continue the struggle against Hitlerism unless he has 400 aircraft per month, 500 tanks per month, and 30,000 tons of aluminum immediately."

you're right, absoleutely right about Russia and its supplies problems. But did Stalin ask Churchill for supplies, not FDR? Russia approached Britain for supplies. Didnt you originally say "Without US manufacturing and supplies early on Britain and Russia would have been annihilated."

You shouldve said without British manufacturing and supplies early on, Russia would not have done as well"

No, first off, Clarkson has a penchant for bending the truth in British favor. When he says he wrote Britain, he did, but what Clarkson leaves out is that he's writing Britain about getting him American aide. These are the actual telegrams:

Sent on February 18, 1942
J. V. Stalin to F. Roosevelt
I have received your message about U.S. arms deliveries in January and February. I stress that it is now, when the peoples of the Soviet Union and their Army are bending their energies to throw the Hitler troops back by a tenacious offensive, that U.S. deliveries, including tanks and aircraft, are essential for our common cause and our further success.

May 6, 1942
J. V. Stalin to W. Churchill
I have a request to you. Up to 90 shiploads of essential war supplies for the U.S.S.R. have accumulated at present in Iceland and on the approaches to Iceland from America. I understand that the ships have been delayed for a long time owing to the difficulty British naval forces have in running a convoy.
I am conscious of the real difficulty involved and I know about the sacrifices which Britain has made in this matter. Nevertheless, I consider it possible to request you to do your utmost to ensure delivery of those cargoes to the U.S.S.R. during May, when we shall need them badly for the front.
Please accept my best regards and good wishes.

Grabbing the actual figures:

The policy whereby the U.S. supplied the allies was known as "Lend-Lease". In all, $31.4 billion went to Britain, $11.3 billion to the Soviet Union, $3.2 billion to France, $1.6 billion to China, and the remaining 2.6 to the other Allies. A total of $50.1 billion (equivalent to $656 billion today), which when you consider the cost to make things was cheaper back then, is even more than it sounds like in today's money.

For instance, a P-51 Mustang fighter plane, in 1942, cost about $51,000. That's $850,000 in today's money. An F-22 Raptor costs $150 million each. So for the total amount of goods the U.S. gave to the allies, they could have given them 771, 765 fighter planes. A Sherman tank could be had for $33,000. So you could buy well over a million tanks with that money. You get the idea.

By the end of the war, USA supplied Russia with 2,000 locomotives, 11,000 train cars, 51,000 jeeps, 375,000 trucks, 15 million pairs of boots, 15,000 aircraft, and 7,000 tanks. That's not even taking into account the guns and ammunition and perhaps most importantly, the food, that we were supplying.

We gave the British nearly 3x that amount, too.

I found a website that archived all of Stalin's telegrams to both Churchill and Roosevelt in World War 2.

What the telegram to Churchill really says is that Britain agreed to sell Russia 200 fighter planes and a further 200 in the future. Stalin was angered by the fact that the deliveries of these planes was sure to take awhile and not be anywhere near enough resources for him to keep the fight up against Germany. He even admits that Russia will be defeated without further supplies and an allied invasion in the West.

September 3, 1941

JV Stalin to W. Churchill

Please accept my thanks for the promise to sell to the Soviet, Union another 200 fighter aeroplanes in addition to the 200 fighters promised earlier. I have no doubt that Soviet pilots will succeed in mastering them and putting them to use.

I must say, however, that these aircraft, which it appears we shall not be able to use soon and not all at once, but at intervals and in groups, cannot seriously change the situation on the Eastern Front. They cannot do so not merely because of the scale of the war, which necessitates the continuous despatch of large numbers of aircraft, but also, and chiefly, because during the last three weeks the position of the Soviet troops has considerably deteriorated in such vital areas as the Ukraine and Leningrad.

The fact is that the relative stabilisation of the front, achieved some three weeks ago, has been upset in recent weeks by the arrival of 30-34 fresh German infantry divisions and enormous numbers of tanks and aircraft at the Eastern Front, and also by the activisation of 20 Finnish and 26 Roumanian divisions. The Germans look on the threat in the West as a bluff, so they are moving all their forces from the West to the East with impunity, knowing that there is no second front in the West nor is there likely to be one. They think it perfectly possible that they will be able to beat their enemies one at a time – first the Russians and then the British.

As a result we have lost more than half the Ukraine and, what is more, the enemy is now at the gates of Leningrad.

These circumstances have led to our loss of the Krivoi Rog iron ore area and a number of iron and steel works in the Ukraine, to the evacuation by us of an aluminium plant on the Dnieper and another in Tikhvin, a motor plant and two aircraft plants in the Ukraine and two motor and two aircraft plants in Leningrad, which cannot begin production on their new sites before seven or eight months.

This has resulted in a lessening of our defence capacity and has confronted the Soviet Union with mortal danger.

Here it is pertinent to ask – what is the way out of this more than unfavourable situation.

I think the only way is to open a second front this year somewhere in the Balkans or in France, one that would divert 30-40 German divisions from the Eastern Front, and simultaneously to supply the Soviet Union with 30,000 tons of aluminium by the beginning of October and a minimum monthly aid of 400 aeroplanes and 500 tanks (of small or medium size).

Without these two kinds of aid the Soviet Union will be either defeated or weakened to the extent that it will lose for a long time the ability to help its Allies by active operations at the front against Hitlerism.
I realise that this message will cause Your Excellency some vexation. But that cannot be helped. Experience has taught me to face up to reality, no matter how unpleasant it may be, and not to shrink from telling the truth, no matter how unpleasant.

The matter of Iran came off well indeed. Joint operations by the British and Soviet troops settled the issue. And so it will be in the future, as long as our forces operate jointly. But Iran is merely an episode. It is not in Iran, of course, that the outcome of the war will be decided.

The Soviet Union, like Britain, does not want war with Japan. The Soviet Union does not deem it possible to violate treaties, including the treaty of neutrality with Japan. But should Japan violate that treaty and attack the Soviet Union, she will be properly rebuffed by Soviet troops.

In conclusion allow me to thank you for the admiration you have expressed for the operations of the Soviet troops, who are waging a bloody war against Hitler’s robber hordes for our common liberation cause.

http://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/Stalin/v17_1941.htm

 

[Orange]

When people chew like a cow or slurp soup/drinks extremely loud.

 

[NYCFCFan10]

When Americans refer to the field as the "pitch"

Just call it the field.

 

[BToto920]

That one doesn't really bother me. Where basketball is played is a court, where football is played is a field, where hockey is played is a rink and where soccer is played is a pitch. It's just what it's called.

 

[NYCFCFan10]

That one doesn't really bother me. Where basketball is played is a court, where football is played is a field, where hockey is played is a rink and where soccer is played is a pitch. It's just what it's called.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

In soccer, they call it a "pitch" because that's just what the British call a "field". I have no freaking idea why but it is what it is. When they see an American football field with lines on it, a casual Brit calls that a "pitch" as well. Just as if you bring a casual American to a soccer game, they're going to call it a "field".

Both cultures just happen to agree on what constitutes a court or a rink but that's not the case with fields/pitch. Just as its not the case with pants(trousers), a car hood(bonnet), a car trunk(boot), chips(crisps), fries(chips), gas(petro), sedan(saloon), ect...

Its a cultural difference. I really hate the hardcore soccer fans that not only call it a "pitch" but have the audacity to say "sport" instead of "sports". Its so fake and forced, it kills me.

If you want the average American to take to the sport, let it flow naturally. Though I suspect some of the hardcores like it for its foreign-ness.

 

[Falastur]

The "field" is called a pitch in the UK because of the prevalence of the term pitch in cricket. Funnily enough, the cricket pitch is just the crease (the area between the two sets of stumps) and the whole field is known as a...field, actually. Nevertheless, the term pitch was the one that got transported into other sports usage. Football pitch, rugby pitch, hockey pitch. It even gets occasionally used for sports not played on grass - netball pitch, and so on.

It's funny, but it seems that back in the 19th century, we did use the word field. Then it just got abandoned, like many so-called Americanisations which are actually British terms we gave up on ("fall" for the season Autumn, the New England accent is the 18th Century British accent but ours has since evolved, the overprevalence of the letter Z, even the pronunciation of Z as "zee" (it's "zed" FYI ).

 

[BlueWolf]

People who complain too much.

Ironically, with that said: driving.
I love driving. I've driven in the USA, the UK, Ireland, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Czech Republic, Austria, Germany, and possibly other countries that at the moment allude me. I've driven pick-ups, saloons, compacts, executives, and sports cars. Manuals from 4 to 7 gears, and automatics. There's nothing like driving. However, driving is a privilege, not a right, it is also something not to be taken lightly. Too many people either believe that no matter what they should be driving when all logic tells them they shouldn't, or that they, and they alone, are the only one on the road and no-one else exists.

No indication, braking before indicating, not being aware of the surroundings, not understanding what causes accidents, not reading the road, finding other things they consider warrant their attention more whilst behind the wheel. Then there are the anti-drivers; speed kills, cars are a blemish upon society, etc, etc, etc.

When I drive, and I do virtually every day, I have fun, and a lot of it, but at the same time I am aware of what the vehicle, three cars in front, is doing. I know what is to my left and to my right, and behind me at all times. I read the traffic lights way into the distance. I notice the man on the sidewalk, the woman pushing a buggy, the bird pecking at the edge of the road. It's all done without having to think about it. In all my years no accident I have been involved in has been my fault, nor have I ever had a speeding ticket. I've avoided, many times, other drivers who weren't paying attention and were about to collide with me, because I was aware of the possibility of it happening before it did.

But I have driven at over 150mph on a public road. Does all this make me dangerous or overly confident? Neither. I am aware of my ability behind the wheel. Speed doesn't kill, disrespect and not paying attention does. And there are way too many of these sorts on the roads. They all need to wake the hell up and pay attention or ditch the car for good, because it is these sorts who cause accidents.

I would also add speed cameras to my rant. Nothing to do with safety, and everything to do with being a cash-cow. It is irresponsible to drive fast through a school-zone during school hours, it isn't on an open road on a clear day or night.

Pay clear attention to what is going on at all times, and you are very welcome on my road - if not, you can get the hell off it.

/rant over

 

[BossNYC]

The "field" is called a pitch in the UK because of the prevalence of the term pitch in cricket. Funnily enough, the cricket pitch is just the crease (the area between the two sets of stumps) and the whole field is known as a...field, actually. Nevertheless, the term pitch was the one that got transported into other sports usage. Football pitch, rugby pitch, hockey pitch. It even gets occasionally used for sports not played on grass - netball pitch, and so on.

It's funny, but it seems that back in the 19th century, we did use the word field. Then it just got abandoned, like many so-called Americanisations which are actually British terms we gave up on ("fall" for the season Autumn, the New England accent is the 18th Century British accent but ours has since evolved, the overprevalence of the letter Z, even the pronunciation of Z as "zee" (it's "zed" FYI ).

Sounds like we're speaking the proper English and you guys are ruining it

Zed sounds too much like a word to be a letter name. Zee fits in better with the rest of the alphabet. B, C, D, E,G,P,T,V,Z....

Zed is like that freak W

 

[BlueWolf]

Sounds like we're speaking the proper English and you guys are ruining it

Zed sounds too much like a word to be a letter name. Zee fits in better with the rest of the alphabet. B, C, D, E,G,P,T,V,Z....

Zed is like that freak W

There is a school of thought that American English is closer to real British English than the British would have you believe. When they left for the 'new land' in the 1600s they took with them Shakespeare's English of the day and there it remained, whilst British English began to change slowly over time.

 

[BossNYC]

There is a school of thought that American English is closer to real British English than the British would have you believe. When they left for the 'new land' in the 1600s they took with them Shakespeare's English of the day and there it remained, whilst British English began to change slowly over time.

Yeah but we've since seen a huge influx of Germans, Irish, Russians, Italians, Africans, Asians, Mexicans and whatever planet Southerners are from.

They all seem to speak their own version of English.

 

[Falastur]

Sounds like we're speaking the proper English and you guys are ruining it

Zed sounds too much like a word to be a letter name. Zee fits in better with the rest of the alphabet. B, C, D, E,G,P,T,V,Z....

Zed is like that freak W

Zed has class and distinction, just like its pronounciation, and doesn't mess around with the riff-raff letters. It only involves itself in highly cultured words, such as Zoo, Zebra, pizzazz, and...uh...pizza.

 

[Section1Guy]

When Americans refer to the field as the "pitch"

Just call it the field.

Oh thank God. You just became my best friend. Some of us are life long soccer fans. Others from 2002, 2010, however we got to this point... Either way, using european terminology (as opposed to soccer terminology) is a one-way street to unimportant in America.

It's not a kit, It's a uniform. It's not a pitch, it's a field. It's not a side, it's a team. Those aren't soccer-specific. Those are British/European specific.

 

[MyBoyVilla]

Another thing that pisses me off is when people make a big deal about what you call things in soccer. Who gives a shit, everybody knows what everybody is talking about. Relax with the snobbery.

 

[Hugo_PZ]

What really grinds my gears is gentrification.