Well, let me make it a bit clearer what I mean. ;-) I said they had saved themselves by September 1940, which they had. I did not say they had defeated Germany by September 1940, they had merely prevented Germany from defeating them. They did not have the power alone to defeat Germany nor did Germany have the means to defeat them, as had already been amply proven. An alliance of the UK, Russia and the USA was required to defeat Germany.

Uncle Sam's original statement which I took issue with was "But the US did save the UK from the Nazis even after they fucked us over."

Wrong. The USA very much helped the British and Russians defeat the Germans...which took a lot of time and blood, and the American effort was fully appreciated by the British and Russians...but the USA did not save the British, because the British had quite handily already saved themselves in 1940, and Hitler knew it. He was confounded by the Luftwaffe's failure to defeat the RAF in 1940 and he reacted by doing absolutely the worst thing possible....he turned East and attacked Russia! He then did a further idiotic thing by immediately declaring war on the USA right after Pearl Harbour happened. He did NOT have to do that, because the Japanese had certainly given him no help in fighting anyone up to that point.

I fear that Bush may make a somewhat (if only vaguely) comparable mistake to Hitler's attack on Russia by reacting to the insoluble mess he has created in Iraq by next attacking Iran. If so, he will find, like Hitler, that enlarging an insoluble problem is the worst move you can make.

If he does it, though, I think it's a fair bet that the USA media will temporarily manage to convince a large proportion of the American public that "Iran has to be stopped now and we have to do it". I have faith in the gullibility of the American voter.