rc-combat
Member
+1|7045
SlartyBartFast,
The Aussies are more than a match for the Indos,  but I am 100% certain that the US and UK would come and help take all of the loses off of you guys. Speaking of the Aussie Army you guys were some bad MoFos in Korea. Alot of people see the Korean Conflict as a US thing, it was not it was a UN thing with the US supply the brunt of the burden. With that said the Aussies and Turks were the badest MoFos in that conflict, almost evilly so. Not a lot is written about their contributions but the North Koreans would go to great Lenghts to directly confront American Lines before the Aussie/Turks. The Chinese were not so scared but they were brain washed by their sheer numbers. The sad truth is, and most historians agree, that if MacArthur had not been pulled from command their would be one free country of Korea and not a seperated nation.
At the time our intelligence on Russia and China was severlly limited, but now we know China/Russo relations at that time were severly strained. The Chinese more than likely would have bailed at the sign of the first Arty Nuke. And the Russians although boisterous, did not have the Nuke capacity to even respond as Korea was manily like every other war Russia had a hand in just a place for them to test technologies.
I have tried to stay out of the Iraq debates as I support the War but not the reasons originally for the war. I support the Kurds, this people have been crapped on (like the Jews) fr centuries. It is about time the Kurds catch a break. Sadam Gone is a good thing, I do not think there is one intelligent person in the world who really has much of a debate for this. But the Kurds are the biggest winners from this and for once I hope they can lead normal prosperous lives. Those two positive things, for me personally justify what we are doing. As far as WMDs, He had them, and He ditched them somewhere I would say most likely Iran since he ditched his air force there too. I am sorry we did not find any when we went in, but we did find delivery systems for them. Why have the delivery systems if you never had them. I will stop rambling now, I hope all of our boys return soon and I can understand the worlds point of view with the exception of one country.
France, The US has backed and bailed out France in twice and took over for them after they failed In Vietnam (Which was a French Colony). Now they have been caught with their hands in the cookie Jar as the primary players in the Oil for Food scandal. If one country other than the UK in Europe should side with the US on everything it should be France. I have friends from France I have visited there and can say once outside of Paris the French people are some of the most genuine in the world, but their politicos should realize they owe the US a debt they can never fully repay and thumbing there noses at us is not beneficial for them in anyway. Chirac should be ashamed
Hakula
Member
+1|7015|Turku - Finland
I just need to say that US posesses a major thread to the world at the time. They start wars with no cause or with this terrorist exuse. Yes the torrorists are a problem but does it help if YOU INVADE OR BOMB THEIR COUNTRYES?!? NO!
And for the starting question we just have to wait and soo who is going to be the aggressor of this century but US was the worst and biggest aggressor of last century.
FeloniousMonk
Member
+0|7006

SharkyMcshark wrote:

They blew up TWO Japanese cities, whilst the Japanese were on their way to surrender.
Sorry, you're wrong. The only reason the Japanese surrendered was because of those bombs. They were offered a warning before the first one was dropped, which they ignored. They were given a second chance to surrender before the second bomb was dropped, which they also denied.

They killed civilians in Pearl Harbor. They started it.

Yes it was a pretty horrible thing to do but it was necessary to prevent the loss of more lives on both sides.
KillerAFET
Member
+3|7051|Abilene, Texas

SharkyMcshark wrote:

BOTH NUCLEAR SITES WERE LEGIT MILITARY TARGETS??

GET F***ED YOU MORON

What the US did then was atrocious, just to recap what they did for you:


They blew up TWO Japanese cities, whilst the Japanese were on their way to surrender. HOW IS THAT RIGHT YOU FOOLS!!

America: Land of the amazingly stupid and patriotic
The Target Committee at Los Alamos on May 10–11, 1945, selected in order the following targets: Kyoto, Hiroshima, Yokohama, Kokura arsenal, Niigata, and possibly the Emperor's Palace. Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson struck Kyoto off the list because of its cultural significance, over the objections of Gen. Leslie Groves, the head of the Manhattan project. According to Professor Edwin O. Reischauer, Stimson "had known and admired Kyoto ever since his honeymoon there several decades earlier."

Its a shame comrade that you are poorly educated.  Hiroshima had military camps were located nearby such as the headquarters of the Fifth Division and Field Marshal Shunroku Hata's 2nd General Army Headquarters, which commanded the defense of all of southern Japan. Hiroshima was a minor supply and logistics base for the Japanese military. The city was a communications center, a storage point, and an assembly area for troops.

The city of Nagasaki had been one of the largest sea ports in southern Japan and was of great wartime importance because of its wide-ranging industrial activity, including the production of ordnance, ships, military equipment, and other war materials.

But then again, all this is know.  Again you most likely adore Nazi Germany for the gassing of the Jews and others and the slaughter of millions of Russians.
^*AlphA*^
F*ckers
+3,135|7009|The Hague, Netherlands

German Commanders sended Adolf Hilter away from the front in WW1, Stupid thing to do isn't it (when you look back at it now)
https://bf3s.com/sigs/36eac2cb6af70a43508fd8d1c93d3201f4e23435.png
Hakula
Member
+1|7015|Turku - Finland

FeloniousMonk wrote:

They killed civilians in Pearl Harbor. They started it.

Yes it was a pretty horrible thing to do but it was necessary to prevent the loss of more lives on both sides.
And you morons continued it.
Dropping a nuke will save lives on both sides? HOW?!?
aqu1la
Member
+0|7001
I'm from the united kingdom and feel that if America did not help in WWII then you'd have an even bigger problem of A German army that ruled over the whole of Europe!
Just a quick post but my thoughts
rc-combat
Member
+1|7045

Hakula wrote:

FeloniousMonk wrote:

They killed civilians in Pearl Harbor. They started it.

Yes it was a pretty horrible thing to do but it was necessary to prevent the loss of more lives on both sides.
And you morons continued it.
Dropping a nuke will save lives on both sides? HOW?!?
You my friend are an uneducated moron. Dropping the Bombs on the Japenese mailand saved an estimted 5 to 7 million lives. The main reason we dropped the first bomb is all strategic estimates at that time told Truman that the Allied Military would lose 1.5 to 2 million lives invading the Japenese mainland the Jap toll would be roughly 3 to 5 million military and civilian dead.

You ask how is this, and the answer is simple. Iwo Jima was a small island defended by a realitively small contingent on Jap Soldiers. But we payed a steep price for it and the Japs did the same trying to defend it. Same thing happened at every other Japenese Island we captured.

Now we move on to invading the Japense homeland, Have you ever seen it. Invading Japan makes the D-Day landings look like a picnic, insect free on a nice sunny spring day. Our estimated loses would have been 75% of the total losses in the first 3 days alone if we could even get a foothold. Invading Japan is not even close to invading europe. The japenese had 30 Divisions plus an armed civilian populace that had been preparing for 30 years for someone to invade their island. I am not even going to continue as I just came to realize that trying to explain this to a dumbass like you is a total waste of my time and intelligence.
^*AlphA*^
F*ckers
+3,135|7009|The Hague, Netherlands

Well ok the US helped allot in WW2 but i don't think that Germany would have ruled over whole Europe, things allready went wrong for Germany in 1944 so , i think the war maybe would have been longer.
https://bf3s.com/sigs/36eac2cb6af70a43508fd8d1c93d3201f4e23435.png
FeloniousMonk
Member
+0|7006

Hakula wrote:

FeloniousMonk wrote:

They killed civilians in Pearl Harbor. They started it.

Yes it was a pretty horrible thing to do but it was necessary to prevent the loss of more lives on both sides.
And you morons continued it.
Dropping a nuke will save lives on both sides? HOW?!?
Because it ended the war. I thought that was obvious. Yeah, we continued it....because if we hadn't fought the Japanese they would've just turned around and gone home. It's not like the whole purpose of the Pearl Harbor attack was to draw us INTO a war with them. Nah, they just wanted to target practice, right?
KillerAFET
Member
+3|7051|Abilene, Texas

Hakula wrote:

FeloniousMonk wrote:

They killed civilians in Pearl Harbor. They started it.

Yes it was a pretty horrible thing to do but it was necessary to prevent the loss of more lives on both sides.
And you morons continued it.
Dropping a nuke will save lives on both sides? HOW?!?
Again with the display of your limited education in world history.  The nuclear bombing missions forced Japan to surrender.  That stopped a planned 1945/1946 invastion of the home islands - Operation Olympic - would have made the Normandy invasion a picnic by comparison.  The Allies would have suffered with suicide attacks from the air, sea, and land.  The Japanese would have suffered MASSIVE casualties to prevent the Bushido attacks. 

Also, do not apply 60 year old morals in today's conversation.  With your line of thought you'd condemn the Spanish for their domination of the Americas in the 1500s and the English for bringing slavery to their new colonies in the Americas.  Both events were acceptable for their times as was the attacks on Japan during that time.  War is war, and people die as a result of their government's decisions.  Wars do get cleaner as time goes by.  The American Civil War was savage compared to World War I and that one was savage compared to World War II.  It took hundreds to bombers to ensure a bridge destruction in WWII, not the surgical stuff we do today.

Last edited by KillerAFET (2005-11-23 08:13:33)

Hakula
Member
+1|7015|Turku - Finland

aqu1la wrote:

I'm from the united kingdom and feel that if America did not help in WWII then you'd have an even bigger problem of A German army that ruled over the whole of Europe!
Just a quick post but my thoughts
Now don't take this in the wrong way but did the German people ever complain when Adolf was in power?
Would it be a bad thing if German had won the war except for the mass murders and rasism this things are quite bad? (I know the Americans would not like it... they don't like nothing that dosen't represent their way of life).
rc-combat
Member
+1|7045

-=>cSc<=-*RunDje*cT| wrote:

Well ok the US helped allot in WW2 but i don't think that Germany would have ruled over whole Europe, things allready went wrong for Germany in 1944 so , i think the war maybe would have been longer.
I would like to agree with you, but the German Industry was failing due to continous Bombing that began in 42 due to the Americans getting involve. Lend Lease provided the supplies for Germans enemies Starting in 40. Without these two aids to the Allied effort Germany would still have been rolling strong in 44. Imagine if you will the Germans still having the industrial capacty to turn out the same numbers of equipment they did in 41 in Airplanes (Stukas, FW-190s, ME-109s, HE-111s), Tanks (PzIV, and OMG Tigers I & II), and other deadly weapons. Without the bombing and donation of war materials all US supplied Germany would have bombed and Starved the UK and most likely stalemated the russians taking Moscow in the Process.

I love this thread BTW, I know you guys hate having a History Teacher in you midst with a Minor in Military History.
KillerAFET
Member
+3|7051|Abilene, Texas

Hakula wrote:

aqu1la wrote:

I'm from the united kingdom and feel that if America did not help in WWII then you'd have an even bigger problem of A German army that ruled over the whole of Europe!
Just a quick post but my thoughts
Now don't take this in the wrong way but did the German people ever complain when Adolf was in power?
Would it be a bad thing if German had won the war except for the mass murders and rasism this things are quite bad? (I know the Americans would not like it... they don't like nothing that dosen't represent their way of life).
Wow, thought Finland was an educated nation.  So, nobody in Nazi Germany complained?  What would happen if they did?  OK, remidial education time, THE GESTAPO!!!!!
KillerAFET
Member
+3|7051|Abilene, Texas

rc-combat wrote:

I love this thread BTW, I know you guys hate having a History Teacher in you midst with a Minor in Military History.
That makes two with degrees in History.  My minor is also in Military History combined with 25 years military experience in strategic bombers.  Also, that makes two articulate people on this thread.  It seems that the anti American crowds are either very young or are poorly educated.

I'm just amazed that it took only 60 years for Europeans to forget the sadism Nazi Germany thrust upon thier nations.
Hakula
Member
+1|7015|Turku - Finland
Thank god I'm not a historian
There is always someone who complains but the majority of the population did not complain in German or is it just propaganda? For instance we need to lear swedish as a second lanquage in schools because Finland was once under Swedish influence and now is now why should we have to lear swedish. So I do also complain
And in the second answer KillerAFET you did not answer my question. How does a nuclear bomb save lives for BOTH sides?
I don't condemn nothing I'm just making ideas, thought to build a conversation. So I'm realy open minded
freebirdpat
Base Rapist
+5|7024

-=>cSc<=-*RunDje*cT| wrote:

Well ok the US helped allot in WW2 but i don't think that Germany would have ruled over whole Europe, things allready went wrong for Germany in 1944 so , i think the war maybe would have been longer.
Germany would have easily ruled Europe. Lets pretend D-Day never happened, all those supplies the bombings of Germany wouldn't have gone as well without the B-17s. 300k men, 50k vehicles and tons and tons of supplies were landed in the first week after D-day. Imagine if Britain didn't have the industrial capacity of the US of A. (Surely you understand the industrial output of a large nation the size of a small continent is vastly superior to that of an island nation.)
Imagine a few things: Pearl Harbor never happened, the US stayed out and didn't give any supplies to either war efforts in the Pacific or the Europe and Africa.

Now lets take a look at the timeline.
American Involvement in WWII

Now imagine what would happen if the US didn't do what they did on all these significant events. Germany easily could have ruled over all over Europe. 1944 things went south because we invaded them! Without the Americans the taking of Italy through North Africa would not have happened. Brits would have suffered HEAVY losses trying to fight the Germans there, and taking sicily and then later Italy would have been a difficult uphill battle. The aussies would have been fighting the Japanese because of the Battle of Coral Sea. And you can't forget Battle of the Bulge or the Battle of Leyte(leyte was pacific battle 60 Japanese ships destroyed in largest naval conflict in history)

Australians would be probably eventually speaking Japanese without the involvement of the Americans. Russia sure as heck didn't want to fights the Japanese, They declared war on Japan 2 days after we dropped the atomic bomb.

Western Europe would have stayed pretty much conquered. Britain would have eventually faltered.

Russia would probably fall soon after Britain lost their battle.


If it weren't for Britain, the US couldn't have played the part it did in the European front, if there was no Britain on the map. It was a mutally beneficial relationship, one could not have existed without the other.
Yellow 13
Member
+2|7005|Plano Texas

kilroy0097 wrote:

Nehil wrote:

FeloniousMonk wrote:

The Japanese mind is a very different one from the rest of the world. They tend to enjoy living in police states and subjecting to harsh authority. While I'm not saying that any one of those innocent civilians deserved to die or in any way suffer for the actions of their government, they really did bring it upon themselves. At the very least no one can deny that the Japanese government deserved the devastation it was given for commiting such a cowardly act as the Pearl Harbor attack.

Hey, they started it. :p
Well, I think that no matter how coward an attack is you can never counter attack civilians (well you didn't kill civilians for the Pearl Harbor, Im aware of that). You can't really blame the civilians either becuse Japan was not a democracy during the war therefor not everyone was pro war. Altho Japanese people were fucked in the head on an average during the WWII.
These two posts irk me so much on such a huge level I can't even fathom replying to this for my own sanity!
Civilians are the back bones of a military, with out civilians the military has nothing to fight for and cannot function, by attacking civilians you end war

In the civil war sherman made a march east to the ocean destroyin everything in his path including civilians, this crippled the south and made civilians terrified, making them want to end the war
Yellow 13
Member
+2|7005|Plano Texas
Actually if Germany hadnt turned around and attacked russia they probably would have stood a decent chance of winning. If hitler hadnt been such a idiot we could be living in a very diffrent world
Nehil
Member
+3|7002|South Sweden (NOT SWITZERLAND)
Some people don't seem to care about the facts behind the bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Before that Japan was ready to surrender without any demands, except to keep the emperior. TO KEEP A FUCKING EMPERIOR. But hell no! The Almighty USA had to defeat and humiliate Japan, so they dropped some nukes to convince the japanese government and emperior to surrender and give up his power. WAS IT REALLY NECESSARY TO SACRIFICE 100.000 LIVES TO KEEP YOUR PRIDE? If you support this reason chances are big that you have your head up your ass.
rc-combat
Member
+1|7045
I don't know what communist history books you have read. But only a small faction of Admirality wanted to surrender. Ther Japenese Imperial Army was in it to the last man, because of the Bushido Code the men followed. If you do not know what you are talking about please stop trying debate us.

Hakula,
Read my response to you I provided you all the feeble explanation you brain can handle.
Nehil
Member
+3|7002|South Sweden (NOT SWITZERLAND)

rc-combat wrote:

I don't know what communist history books you have read. But only a small faction of Admirality wanted to surrender. Ther Japenese Imperial Army was in it to the last man, because of the Bushido Code the men followed. If you do not know what you are talking about please stop trying debate us.
Well then I'll try to find some nazi sources for you to back me up, hold on with that Hitler salute and joining the KKK and I'll be back.
rc-combat
Member
+1|7045
I will just answer you with one sentence. I am an African-American Male, I am Black, I am educated and I can buy plane tickets to Sweden and break my American size 13 foot off into your ass if you ever accuse me of being racist or affiliated with the KKK or Nazis. As a matter of fact I am going to the admin of this site and have your IP baned for Harrasing me with Racism.
KillerAFET
Member
+3|7051|Abilene, Texas

Nehil wrote:

rc-combat wrote:

I don't know what communist history books you have read. But only a small faction of Admirality wanted to surrender. Ther Japenese Imperial Army was in it to the last man, because of the Bushido Code the men followed. If you do not know what you are talking about please stop trying debate us.
Well then I'll try to find some nazi sources for you to back me up, hold on with that Hitler salute and joining the KKK and I'll be back.
Ah, the typical response of the less educated.   Maybe this is why the Nordic countries are but a mere blip on the world stage.
rc-combat
Member
+1|7045
I actually like the Nordic Contries I have been to Oslo and it was very very beautiful. I have always wanted to go to Sweden, and if that jackass has his way I will be making a special trip. Actually I have calmed down abit since then, but I did email Chuy telling him about the post. I am not a NAACP supporter or a big fan of people like Rev. Jesse Jackson, but come on when people are having a serious historical debate bring your "A" game if someone proves you wrong, roll with it. At least he did not come up with the typical "your ghay" response most of these kids do. He had to do worse than that, my family has always lived in Louisiana, I got the hell out of there and did something with my life. But the fact is I am 35 years old, I have seen the KKK, we had a man run for Governor and Senate who was a Grand WIzard in the KKK. I do not need some foreigner who thinks he is cute ramming that down my throat. If he said that to my face, I would most likely be in Jail right now because people like him don't take a beating they deserve and walk away. They go crying to the police.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard