Armstrong?

[marin1]

So all the riders who gave Armstrong even a little competion are getting caught doping and the best they could do is 1-9 minutes back. Forget your admiration or dislike of Lance and look at this objectively, it seems a little to good to be true that he was clean as well.

[adamastor]

So all the riders who gave Armstrong even a little competion are getting caught doping and the best they could do is 1-9 minutes back. Forget your admiration or dislike of Lance and look at this objectively, it seems a little to good to be true that he was clean as well.

Bingo!

1. Armstrong was the best.
2. He had the best preparation
3. He was not riding the 98 Tour with the big cleanup in the peloton
4. He was packed with EPO in 99, but that couldn't be detected back then
5. He won 7 Tours in a row without being caught (true professional, with splendid team)
6. He got out just in time, before the big cleanup AGAIN
7. EPO was identified in his Burine samples after his retirement (sigh)
8. He's a hero in the States
9. French are *******s
10. WADA stinks

God bless Armstrong

[adamfresno]

Bingo!

1. Armstrong was the best.
2. He had the best preparation
3. He was not riding the 98 Tour with the big cleanup in the peloton
4. He was packed with EPO in 99, but that couldn't be detected back then
5. He won 7 Tours in a row without being caught (true professional, with splendid team)
6. He got out just in time, before the big cleanup AGAIN
7. EPO was identified in his Burine samples after his retirement (sigh)
8. He's a hero in the States
9. French are *******s
10. WADA stinks

God bless Armstrong


Dont forget a lot of his former teammates have tested positive and had a pad in Spain...

I have a feeling he doped, but I still think he was the best in all the TDF races.

Regardless of any scandal I will always be a cycling fan and it is nice to know our sport goes after dopers and hands down a hard punishment, unlike toher sports.

[harlond]

If you're saying LA achieved his victories on a level playing field, I think you're right.

[johnnny]

If you're saying LA achieved his victories on a level playing field, I think you're right.

I love the whole "level playing field" concept now. As if cycling tactics weren't complicated enough, a whole new concept of tactics can now be seen. For example:
- What day of the Tour do you inject your blood bag? If I wait a day but <insert biggest rival's name here> injects today I could lose time... etc etc
- How much at one go? Should I save some for the Alps?
- Which teammate can I sacrifice by taking his blood tomorrow?

And so on

[Blaireau]

So all the riders who gave Armstrong even a little competion are getting caught doping and the best they could do is 1-9 minutes back. Forget your admiration or dislike of Lance and look at this objectively, it seems a little to good to be true that he was clean as well.

No question about it, Lance doped.
Its just that because of patriotism -- really a form of delusion -- people here seem to think he's innocent and everyone else guitly. Except, Landis, of course.... and any other american rider.... I :D but its really pretty :(

[CyLowe97]

.... and the scales begin to fall from the eyes of the unbelievers....

[DogBoy]

I think Armstrong is an ***** and probably did dope. I also think Floyd doped. I also think most of the peleton dopes. By that comparison, Armstrong kicked their collective doped TDF butts and should be recognized as a heck-uv-a cyclist even if you dislike him as a person.

[bac]

Except, Landis, of course.... and any other american rider....

Not Tyler! :eek:

... Brad

[Blaireau]

I think Armstrong is an ***** and probably did dope. I also think Floyd doped. I also think most of the peleton dopes. By that comparison, Armstrong kicked their collective doped TDF butts and should be recognized as a heck-uv-a cyclist even if you dislike him as a person.

No one is saying he's not a world class cyclist. But he's also a cheat, a liar, and truly a world class vindictive hypocrite.

[Keith99]

I just want to point out the 1 minute and one second back is the 6th closest TDF ever and that year Ullrich did not have much of a team for support.

Also Armstrongs largest winning margin was 7 minutes and 37 seconds not 9 minutes. Sorry to intrude with facts.

[marin1]

I just want to point out the 1 minute and one second back is the 6th closest TDF ever and that year Ullrich did not have much of a team for support.

Also Armstrongs largest winning margin was 7 minutes and 37 seconds not 9 minutes. Sorry to intrude with facts.
Sorry I didn't feel like looking it up. I guess he must be clean. He's a doper, but you keep making your point about 1 min 23 sec.

[Blaireau]

Sorry I didn't feel like looking it up. I guess he must be clean. He's a doper, but you keep making your point about 1 min 23 sec.


+1

[Keith99]

Sorry I didn't feel like looking it up. I guess he must be clean. He's a doper, but you keep making your point about 1 min 23 sec.

I hardly think he was clean, but I also don't think his results are nearly as outstanding as many make them. He was NOT trouncing the competition each year. He quite legally tilted the playing field his way by working exclusively toward one race. No one else did for most of his wins. A couple of years Telekom was aiming at both Green and Yellow.

9 sounds much more impressive than 7+ and Lance never won by 7+ in a Tour with Ullrich in it. Now I'm not saying Lances wins were not solid, they were, but not dominating. He also was a much beter tactition than Jan. Lance screwed up a coiuple of times in hte Tour, he did an excellent job of limiting his losses. Jan screwed up against Pantani and did a poor job of limiting his losses and lost a Tour in one day.


Oh guess I should add that Lance clearly is a liar when it comes to doping. He has said he never used performance enhancing drugs, but it is documented that he did use EPO as part of cancer recovery. While that use was legit, it was still a performance enhancing drug that he used.

[USAZorro]

You guys have dragged out the heavy equipment, and have dug up a horse that is not only dead, but which has almost completely decomposed. If you want to continue beating on it, knock yourselves out. :rolleyes:

[NotAsFat]

So all the riders who gave Armstrong even a little competion are getting caught doping and the best they could do is 1-9 minutes back. Forget your admiration or dislike of Lance and look at this objectively, it seems a little to good to be true that he was clean as well.

Why do we even bother with drug tests? We don't believe the negative results, and given the cluster fcuk handling of Landis' samples, I'm not sure we should believe the positive results, either.

[Blaireau]

You guys have dragged out the heavy equipment, and have dug up a horse that is not only dead, but which has almost completely decomposed. If you want to continue beating on it, knock yourselves out. :rolleyes:


Horse is not dead until Lance admits to doping.........................
:D It may take a while.................:o

[Bakemono]

I personally believe that Armstrong was doping, but Id be willing to bet that all of the other top riders were as well.
I personally cant stand Lance Armstrong. I think he was an amazing athlete and I have a lot of respect for him as a cyclist, but he's definetely not a role model.
I personally think the French press had it out for Armstrong because they resented an American coming in and dominating what they viewed as, "their" race. It seemed like they always stemmed the rumors that he was doping.

[tcs]

Some doctor did a biometric study and determined that males bike racers would be 0.2% faster with just one testical. But wait....Lance....hmmm.

So, how bad do you want to win?

TCS

[GGDub]

I personally believe that Armstrong was doping, but Id be willing to bet that all of the other top riders were as well.
I personally cant stand Lance Armstrong. I think he was an amazing athlete and I have a lot of respect for him as a cyclist, but he's definetely not a role model.
I personally think the French press had it out for Armstrong because they resented an American coming in and dominating what they viewed as, "their" race. It seemed like they always stemmed the rumors that he was doping.

Actually, the French loved Lemond, I seem to recall him being American.

The french went after LA because after the Festina affair when their own heroes (Virenque, Jalabert, Moreau) were exposed, the American media came along and put this guy on such a high pedestal, when they knew better.

I went to numerous stages during Armstrong's reign and saw many French fans who loved LA. The French media on the other hand, didn't hate LA at all, but knew there was a story to be found there, especially on the heals of Festina.

[Hezz]

My understanding is that EPO was not a banned substance in 99'. Or at least I read this somewhere in an internet article.

So if it was not a banned substance then what right do they have to go back and test his old samples for it?

[bellweatherman]

My understanding is that EPO was not a banned substance in 99'. Or at least I read this somewhere in an internet article.

So if it was not a banned substance then what right do they have to go back and test his old samples for it?


That isn't true. EPO was banned, but there was not an effective way to measure synthetic EPO in the body. A effective test for EPO blood doping wasn't developed yet.

To understand this, you have to know what EPO is. EPO is a naturally occuring hormone in the body produced by the kidneys to signal the bone marrow to make more red blood cells which carry oxygen. For an athlete more red blood cells = better performance. There are drugs used to increase your body's natural EPO production. Ex: Actovegin, which is now on the banned substance list. There are also other methods to put synthetic EPO into a person's body. In the past, the testing couldn't differentiate between your body's own natural EPO and synthetic EPO. I don't know about the research on today's methods or future advances.

Lance tested positive for Actovegin in '99 or 2000 if I recall correctly. For research purposes, the Tour saves blood sample dating back a few years. Using more current testing than they had back in '99, the samples showed that Armstrong had evidence of EPO usage in his blood samples. The Armstrong camp misrepresented the facts and came out with the French lab bias conspiracy theory. The Lance Armstrong Foundation Cancer Foundation is a very large organization and nobody wanted to believe the truth about their superhero. That Armstrong did, in fact, test positive for both Actovegin and EPO.

[erader]

Dont forget a lot of his former teammates have tested positive and had a pad in Spain...

I have a feeling he doped, but I still think he was the best in all the TDF races.

Regardless of any scandal I will always be a cycling fan and it is nice to know our sport goes after dopers and hands down a hard punishment, unlike toher sports.

doping levels the playing field. that's why none of the riders who are capable of winning the big races complain.

and i agree Lance was the best with a level playing field.

ed rader

[Hezz]

That isn't true. EPO was banned, but there was not an effective way to measure synthetic EPO in the body. A effective test for EPO blood doping wasn't developed yet.

To understand this, you have to know what EPO is. EPO is a naturally occuring hormone in the body produced by the kidneys to signal the bone marrow to make more red blood cells which carry oxygen. For an athlete more red blood cells = better performance. There are drugs used to increase your body's natural EPO production. Ex: Actovegin, which is now on the banned substance list. There are also other methods to put synthetic EPO into a person's body. In the past, the testing couldn't differentiate between your body's own natural EPO and synthetic EPO. I don't know about the research on today's methods or future advances.

Lance tested positive for Actovegin in '99 or 2000 if I recall correctly. For research purposes, the Tour saves blood sample dating back a few years. Using more current testing than they had back in '99, the samples showed that Armstrong had evidence of EPO usage in his blood samples. The Armstrong camp misrepresented the facts and came out with the French lab bias conspiracy theory. The Lance Armstrong Foundation Cancer Foundation is a very large organization and nobody wanted to believe the truth about their superhero. That Armstrong did, in fact, test positive for both Actovegin and EPO.


Thanks for the clarification. It goes to show that so much of the Internet news is of the lowest quality.

I had no idea that the power climbs were so much. But now I see that the doping enforcement agencies are in a bind. Because until they have some better and inexpensive method of testing the doping doctors will always be ahead of them.

It is also an issue for the athlete because an althlete with good potential cannot hope to win unless he dope's if nearly the whole field is doping. So basically why would you be willing to be a professional bike racer unless you were also a total gambler.

[a77impala]

I think anyone who ever raced a bicycle is on dope of somekind and don't try to tell me otherwise. They are all guilty.

[NotAsFat]

snip...

For research purposes, the Tour saves blood sample dating back a few years. Using more current testing than they had back in '99, the samples showed that Armstrong had evidence of EPO usage in his blood samples.
More like they save samples in order to smear riders they don't like, several years after the fact.

In view of the procedural errors they made with Landis' samples when they were new, I'm not sure how they could have known whose samples they were really testing, years later.

I also think it's interesting that Armstrong was the only rider named as a result of this "research" program. Are we to believe that he had the only positive sample from that era? Or were his samples the only ones tested? If his samples were the only ones tested, it makes you wonder about the lab's motives. They seem to like leaking damaging info about American champions.

Sorry, but I have no confidence in that lab.

[Trouduc]

They seem to like leaking damaging info about American champions.

Sorry, but I have no confidence in that lab.

Here we go again....:rolleyes: Its all an anti-US conspiracy theory...

[Hezz]

More like they save samples in order to smear riders they don't like, several years after the fact.

In view of the procedural errors they made with Landis' samples when they were new, I'm not sure how they could have known whose samples they were really testing, years later.

I also think it's interesting that Armstrong was the only rider named as a result of this "research" program. Are we to believe that he had the only positive sample from that era? Or were his samples the only ones tested? If his samples were the only ones tested, it makes you wonder about the lab's motives. They seem to like leaking damaging info about American champions.

Sorry, but I have no confidence in that lab.


I am reasonably confident that if a French rider had won and gotten the same test results that Landis did the test would have been considered a negative test. They would have done everything that they could have to disgard the test results under WADA protocols. Instead with Landis they have ignored WADA testing protocols for the test to describe the original stage 17 test as valid.

Who can be sure of the backup tests. Since they destroyed much of the data.

The problem is that most of the riders are doping and the labs know this so they can manipulate the test a little to show what result that they want to. Then do a more accurate test to validate the test.

This basically means the lab and WADA has power to destroy anyone they want. The big problem I have is that the lab and WADA and USADA don't have to answer to anyone for misconduct. But they should have to.

The fact that they are trying to get dirt on Armstrong and not any other riders who were bound to have been doping is proof of the agenda. Or they want to know how Armstrong's doctors were so good as to allude all the tests.

[Bakemono]

More like they save samples in order to smear riders they don't like, several years after the fact.

In view of the procedural errors they made with Landis' samples when they were new, I'm not sure how they could have known whose samples they were really testing, years later.

I also think it's interesting that Armstrong was the only rider named as a result of this "research" program. Are we to believe that he had the only positive sample from that era? Or were his samples the only ones tested? If his samples were the only ones tested, it makes you wonder about the lab's motives. They seem to like leaking damaging info about American champions.

Sorry, but I have no confidence in that lab.
I agree. IMO, the French dont like ANOTHER American (talking about Landis here) coming in and winning what they consider to be "their" race. I think its an anti-American smear campaign. They cant beat us physically, so they use propaganda to try and beat us mentally by painting Americans as cheaters.
Id love to see Armstrong come back and stick it to 'em one more time or to see Tyler Hamilton step it up and win the Tour (does he even still race???).
Bottom line, the French think they are better than us and just cant stand it when we come in and kick their butts. I guess they have forgotten the fact that if it were for us they would probably be speaking German today...

[adamastor]

More like they save samples in order to smear riders they don't like, several years after the fact.

In view of the procedural errors they made with Landis' samples when they were new, I'm not sure how they could have known whose samples they were really testing, years later.

I also think it's interesting that Armstrong was the only rider named as a result of this "research" program. Are we to believe that he had the only positive sample from that era? Or were his samples the only ones tested? If his samples were the only ones tested, it makes you wonder about the lab's motives. They seem to like leaking damaging info about American champions.

Sorry, but I have no confidence in that lab.

Sorry to say, but your comments are a bit easy to make:

"I'm not sure how they could have known whose samples they were really testing, years later."
"I also think it's interesting that Armstrong was the only rider named as a result of this "research" program. "
"...the only positive sample from that era..."
"...were his samples the only ones tested..."
"...it makes you wonder about the lab's motives..."

All those questions have been answered. I won't explain again, because you'll find enough posts and newspaper articles (also American !!) confirming them. So if you don't know your stuff, how can you come up with a "...I have no confidence in that lab..."?

I read everything I could (in Spanish, French, German, English) over the last 10 years about doping in cycling, and I have made up my mind.

Have a nice day

[Trouduc]

I guess they have forgotten the fact that if it were for us they would probably be speaking German today...

;) So its back to that, uh? If you wanna talk history, and play the speculation game, perhaps you read about a guy called Lafayette who'se timely arrival (along with a few ships) was decisive in beating the English and made sure you are not a subject of Her Majesty the Queen anymore.....:eek:

[adamastor]

;) So its back to that, uh? If you wanna talk history, and play the speculation game, perhaps you read about a guy called Lafayette who'se timely arrival (along with a few ships) was decisive in beating the English and made sure you are not a subject of Her Majesty the Queen anymore.....:eek:

"Off Topic": I love your nickname :o)

[Keith99]

I am reasonably confident that if a French rider had won and gotten the same test results that Landis did the test would have been considered a negative test. They would have done everything that they could have to disgard the test results under WADA protocols. Instead with Landis they have ignored WADA testing protocols for the test to describe the original stage 17 test as valid.



Yea those d@mn Frenchmen. They always let their own and the rest of the Euros go and cheat to go after the Americans. If this had been a Frenchman like Richard Virenque they would have figured out a way to let him off!

99ers bite.

[iluvfreebeer]

I used to believe in Floyd . . .
But after reading what happened at the hearing (so far) it's getting pretty difficult.

[kc0bbq]

;) So its back to that, uh? If you wanna talk history, and play the speculation game, perhaps you read about a guy called Lafayette who'se timely arrival (along with a few ships) was decisive in beating the English and made sure you are not a subject of Her Majesty the Queen anymore.....:eek:
If you are claiming that the France of the 1770s is the same France as today and should be considered as a whole, than the Vichy needs to be held in the same regard. Both were different governments as today. Held to that standard... Oooo, an indirect nazi reference? (I mean really, realistically, how many Frances have there been since the late 18th century? 5? more?) ;)

As for the ships, they accomplished nothing for America. They were held back until after the colonial separatists were the foregone victors (English writing off the New World colonies and focusing elsewhere due to other wars). They merely kept certain officers contained tactical advantages on the other side of the ocean.

It is true that Lafayette was an advisor of major importance, and is recognized as such in the US. There are nearly as many roads, bridges, etc., named for him as there are for Washington. He is embedded in the culture. Though he wouldn't have been too keen on DeGaulle's modern France. But his arrival wasn't particularly timely, nor was his assignment to the colonies anything more than a small concession that worked out far better than it might have. The US owes more to Hessians and the British Monarchy needing the cash elsewhere than modern France for it's existance.

If I wanted to be snarky, I'd point out the seemingly French way of things. Re: Royale - "If I lose the election, get out there and riot!"

[adamastor]

Re: Royale - "If I lose the election, get out there and riot!"

Excuse me, but when did she say that???

[Trouduc]

Excuse me, but when did she say that???


Don't bother looking it up mate, like most of what he wrote, its not accurate. Talk about negating history....;)

[kc0bbq]

Excuse me, but when did she say that???Right before the elections when she wasn't making up any ground. The statement was, paraphrased a little, 'If I lose there will be riots.' It's an implied threat.

Don't bother looking it up mate, like most of what he wrote, its not accurate. Talk about negating history....;)Which parts? The existance of Vichy France? The fact that France has had quite a handful of governments between then and now?

[adamastor]

Right before the elections when she wasn't making up any ground. The statement was, paraphrased a little, 'If I lose there will be riots.' It's an implied threat.

What the hell are you talking about? Every Frenchman knew, that if Sarkozy was elected, there would be riots by youth from the suburbs. That's exactly what happened, then it calmed down. Royale never said what you pretend she said. Reporters and anyone with a common sense said it.

So take it easy with your "implied threat". I apologise because this discussion went off topic, but I hate worthless insinuations. They are the direct cause for complete misunderstandings between people and nations.

Example from the U.S.: They went after Landis because French hate Americans.
Or from the French side: All Americans dope, because they are not controlled in the States.

[kc0bbq]

What the hell are you talking about?Whether anyone expected it or not is immaterial. If she had really had any interest in mitigating the situation she would have put even a little effort into stopping it before the fact instead of after it had started.

If she's campaigning on the fact that there will be riots, she is using that to try to sway voters. How is that not a threat?

Stop being so defensive.

[Trouduc]

Whether anyone expected it or not is immaterial. If she had really had any interest in mitigating the situation she would have put even a little effort into stopping it before the fact instead of after it had started.

If she's campaigning on the fact that there will be riots, she is using that to try to sway voters. How is that not a threat?

Stop being so defensive.

It hard not to react strongly to such utter nonsense and total mean-spirited ignorance about French history and politics. I'm working on it though. ;)

[marin1]

Just let "bakemono" have his glory from 60 years ago. We all know the USA saved the world and the only battles won by the allies were fought by americans. If there were any justice the entire world would be speaking "american" just like the french are now. Everytime you see an american you should thank them repeatedly for all the great things they have done throughout history so that people like "bakemono" can have their egos stroked and feel a little bit better about themselves.

[Trouduc]

Just let "bakemono" have his glory from 60 years ago. We all know the USA saved the world and the only battles won by the allies were fought by americans. If there were any justice the entire world would be speaking "american" just like the french are now. Everytime you see an american you should thank them repeatedly for all the great things they have done throughout history so that people like "bakemono" can have their egos stroked and feel a little bit better about themselves.


Ok. Does that apply also for the people of Vietnam, Chile, and Irak too? Or just to us Europeans? ;)
I guess, come to think of it, the whole world should be grateful....:D

[marin1]

Ok. Does that apply also for the people of Vietnam, Chile, and Irak too? Or just to us Europeans? ;)
I guess, come to think of it, the whole world should be grateful....:D
Hey, anywhere where you have killed hundreds of thousands of people in the process of libertating them should be grateful. Who cares if you wiped out entire villages and families in Veitam and Iraq, if they're not grateful then they're just ignorant.:p

[kc0bbq]

It hard not to react strongly to such utter nonsense and total mean-spirited ignorance about French history and politics. I'm working on it though. ;)The Vichy France was a tongue in cheek jab at the idea that modern (5th Republic) France has anything to do with the existance of the USA as a separate country. Meaning you can't pick and choose, if you want Louix XIV to represent modern France, you have to take Philippe Petaine. And as for how many Frances do you get to count, there have been two since the end of WWII alone, 4th and 5th Republics. :) Three, if you count DeGaulle's provisional government.

As for the history stuff, I never claimed France didn't benefit the colonies, just not so much militarily as people seem to want to believe. Politically, they were very helpful. On the military side, France was hurting for money due to the 7 Year's War/French and Indian War whatever you want to call it. There was a psychological need to give England a black eye. They did send troops in a few years after the start of the war, but they weren't well led and didn't account for much. Bad performance at the Battle of... umm... Savannah I think, 6000 French vs. 3000 English and nothing positive to show from it. Didn't start seeing elite troops for over a year after that particular battle, and by then England had started giving up on maintaining control.

Which isn't to say Louis didn't want to help militarily. He tried strange approaches at first like trying to lock up the British Navy in the channel or whatever because he didn't have much support from other western European countries. Once they started falling in line we started seeing Rochambeau and other elite forces, but at that stage is was a lot of mopping up. The blockade of Cornwallis did kill a lot of retreating British soldiers and shortened an already forgone conclusion.

And since you did bring up Vietnam, France started that fiasco, hehe. :P

I don't have a problem with France, or it's people in general, just elements inside it, which I would expect a reasonable French person to believe of the US. France has a lot to be proud of, and some things to not be proud of. The US and modern France are more like bratty siblings than anything, both being cut from the same Enlightenment coin, just taking it somewhat different directions. Like all good Americans I do think Parisians need to get over the fact that French is no longer the lingua franca. ( ;) needle, needle.)

[DogBoy]

I may be wrong here, but I think the French owe more to the Russians than the USA for their independance from Germany. Unless my recollection of history is wrong (quite possible), Germany was completely bogged down on the eastern front, and Russia was making swift progress towards Berlin. This preoccupation and the massive resources required to continue fighting on the eastern front, along with a tactical mistake by the Germans opened the door allowing D-day to be successful, thereby liberating France.

At any rate, I'm an American, I have nothing against France, but I question the results of the lab. I do not think it was politically motivated. I think it is more along the lines of: Procedure X is pretty mundane, the protocols are strict, but violating them doesn't do much to impact analysis. As such, work may have gotten a bit sloppy (This I think has been fairly well established in the hearings and in the other cases). For the most part, the results are valid, but protocol wasn't followed. The problem with that, is that the US public view of sloppy lab work is that its not valid. The US also likes to stand behind its athletes. The result is that uninvolved interested parties start saying things that move a bit further from reality until we end up with Pound's Nazi Frogmen and the alternate Blind Ignorant American viewpoints. Both are equally extreme, and neither accurate. If the voices on these extremes would listen to most of the people on this board, I think they would hear..."hmm...that lab sure did screw up enough to cause me a bit of doubt, but for the most part, I bet Floyd is guilty."

[Keith99]

I may be wrong here, but I think the French owe more to the Russians than the USA for their independance from Germany.
...
At any rate, I'm an American, I have nothing against France, but I question the results of the lab. I do not think it was politically motivated.
...
The US also likes to stand behind its athletes. The result is that uninvolved interested parties start saying things that move a bit further from reality until we end up with Pound's Nazi Frogmen and the alternate Blind Ignorant American viewpoints.

Well since the Nazi Era has already been brought up I thought I'd point out the U.S. didn't have too good a record of standing up for its athletes if they happened to be Jewish back then.

[urodacus]

How is this pointless discussion in the tiniest way relevant to the Tour de France and doping in cycling in general?

Take your "America the beautiful" rant to some other forum where its appreciated.

Puh-leeze.

[kc0bbq]

Well since the Nazi Era has already been brought up I thought I'd point out the U.S. didn't have too good a record of standing up for its athletes if they happened to be Jewish back then.Did anyone?

I may be wrong here, but I think the French owe more to the Russians than the USA for their independance from Germany. Unless my recollection of history is wrong (quite possible), Germany was completely bogged down on the eastern front, and Russia was making swift progress towards Berlin.At that point no one was making swift progress anywhere, really, but that's neither here nor there. All of the allies were intertwined. Without one piece no one would have won. D-Day couldn't have happened without the Russian grittines in throwing so many people at the Germans, but that couldn't have happened without Lend-Lease supplying them with tanks, tank designs, and machine tools to get production rolling in Siberia. None of that would have meant anything if Germany hadn't abandoned the idea of heavy bombers long before. Without the British ingenuity at using limited resources in defense and attack, both at home and in Africa there would have been no place to launch an attack from. Without the French resistance fighters providing intelligence/intelligence materiel and spreading misinformation, German defenses would have been organized correctly. British intelligence allowed the US to focus more of their intelligence capabilities towards the Pacific.

The only statement that can be made is the Allies owe their existance to the Allies. Remove one piece and everything crumbles. Maybe the western hemisphere would have survived, but who knows. Every side was getting close to the bomb and across the board technology was developing really fast.

[USAZorro]

I'm generally a tolerant person, but this thread is as far off topic as any I can recall having seen here. I was under the impression that this was a bicycle-related forum. I'm certain there are wonderful sites where you can debate history ad nauseum. Perhaps you should go find one of them - or meet up at a bar somewhere and present your cases face-face. :rolleyes: