1) Something is buggy with this site - I have tried multiple times to edit my post and turn it from the ridiculous megaparagraph the site turned it into, back into the long, but semi-manageable series of paragraphs that I originally wrote. However, I cannot even get an "Edit" icon to come up now.
2) My comments about hygiene were based upon my personal experiences as a 13 year-old of modest height riding the Tube who often found himself standing with an adult Brit's armpit in my face as he held on to the overhead bar or strap, which I would not wish upon even trollish Monte. I stand by my comments - in the early 1980's, the average Brit did not bathe daily or wash his clothes after each wearing. Now that was not true of the bulk of my neighbors in an upper-middle class suburb of London (and there was a definite correlation between higher socio-economic status and better hygiene) but I absolutely, positively remember vastly more B.O. amongst the British population than I encountered back in the States before or after we lived in the UK. I am confident that anyone denying the accuracy of my statements on this topic did not have the perspective I had of living in both England and the US at that time period. And I will say that when I visited the UK in the 1990's, hygiene had improved considerably compared to a decade previously and I imagine it's even better now.
3) I also stand by my comments on British food and let me clarify that my family visited nearly every part of Britain other than Cornwall - we traveled very extensively throughout the island during the three years we lived there and were not limited to London as someone suggested above. I tasted no beef the entire time I lived there that was above mediocre and we eventually stopped eating it because it was so bad. British sausages of any sort are disgusting, over-ground, mealy, mushy and lacking in seasonings. We ate a lot of pub fare throughout the country but most of what I enjoyed was ploughman's lunches (i.e. featuring the excellent breads and cheeses that I previously acknowledged). Oh, and let's mention that wonderful British meat industry,which instead of destroying cattle afflicted with BSE (mad cow disease), churned the infected animals into protein pellets that they then fed to - you guessed it - other cows, infecting them with the disease. Since I ate beef in England in the early 1980's, I may be carrying BSE and thus cannot donate blood to the Red Cross.
4) Thanks Nosevi for completely mischaracterizing what I wrote - you aren't much better than Monte and you're the one whose national pride and arrogance has usurped his intelligent and fair participation in this discussion. My point was never to present a thorough, balanced history of the entire Allied campaign against Japan in WW II, it was to refute Monte's ridiculous statement that but for the development of the atomic bomb (which I will concede was aided by the British Tube Alloys nuclear research project as well as the imput of numerous non-American born scientists), the Japanese would have won the war. Did I omit mention of the British, Aussie, Kiwi, Indian, etc... forces? Yes. That wasn't germain to the point that after May of 1942, the Japanese had no major victories and the war was assuredly won by August 1945 even without the development of the atomic bomb. If you notice, I did not discuss the war against Japan in general, I discussed the war in the Pacific, which, as someone else mentioned above, was predominantly fought by the US forces. The Commonwealth forces were more focused on the war in Asia proper. Certainly they did tie-up substantial numbers of Japanese forces that might have otherwise have made it more difficult to win the war in the Pacific - all of the Allies contributed, not just in terms of their military successes, but in terms of their loss of lives. However, Japan was defeated by the near-complete destruction of its navy and its army and naval air forces, which enabled the victories in the island hopping campaign that eventually led to a near-blockade of the Japanese islands and the intensive bombing of the Japanese mainland by the USAF.
5) I find it ironic that Nosevi is calling me arrogant and implying that my point of view is bigoted when a) I presented a very balanced assessment of both my experiences in the UK (i.e. while I stated that some British food was awful, some of it was excellent) and a summary of the British involvement in WWII (praising Britain's courage, mentioning the contribution of its intelligence services - I could go on at great length about that topic, but did not find it necessary to go into details given that this is a golf website, not an history website). I concluded by stating that it was silly so long after the war had ended for Americans to continue to hold our role in WWII over the heads of Europeans. But Nosevi, I guess you either didn't bother to read any of that part of my post or conveniently chose to ignore it. Incidentally, I had a great uncle who fought the Japanese in World War II and while he wasn't a prisoner of war, he fought in the brutally hot jungles of the Phillipines.
6) Notwithstanding that there are people like Monte and Nosevi living in the UK, my number one vacation plan, once my daughter is old enough to appreciate the trip, is to spend at least 10 days in Great Britain, including an inadequate 3-4 days in London, a day or two in York, and the remainder of the time in Wales. I'm afraid I won't be bringing my clubs nor going to Scotland, though, as I don't care for the links-style courses that are the most famous ones in the UK, I'd rather devote my time to sightseeing, and the week I spent in Scotland in my youth convinced me that that part of the British island was by far the least scenic or interesting to me.
7) The U.S. government in the decades since WWII, has engaged in enough unsavory conduct both domestic and throughout the world to occupy thousands of posts on dozens of websites. However, we also tend to be the first country, both via the federal government and through private individuals, to send aid to any other region of the world that suffers a catastrophe.