So, the soldiers on the front, who have absolutely nothing to do with the politics behind the war, are stupid for serving their countries? I'm not saying you are stupid. The two posts I've read from you are two of the dumbest posts I've ever read. Yes, war is terrible, but war is a part of the human experience. However, I don't think that dying in a war is "just plain stupid." I think soldiers that die for their countries die an honorable death (even if I don't think their country is honorable for being in the war, such as Germans in WWII... German footsoldiers that weren't involved in making policy or gassing Jews were honorable soldiers in my opinion...).klassekock wrote:
Now, allow me to clearify some things here.kilgoretrout wrote:
That's probably the dumbest thing I've ever read...klassekock wrote:
Dying in a war is just plain stupid, no matter what the cause is!!!!!
1. I am not stupid. If you knew me (which you apparently don't) , that comment would never have seen the light of day.
2. As war is the dumbest thing invented on earth (disagree on that and you are the dumbest lifeform in the whole universe) people who do war must therefore be stupid too.
You may justify war and say it's for freedom, for stability and so on. But you can never look away from the fact that if we didn't make war against each other, the world would be SO much better
So hear me- WAR IS STUPID!
Agreed.Spark wrote:
Cos' if someone declares war on you, it's sensible to fight back? [/duh]deeznutz1245 wrote:
Then why did we go to Europe and fight instead of immediately going to Japan? Cuz we are so arrogant?Nicholas Langdon wrote:
and the japanese invaded pearl harbour... that is a threat.
In any case we could run this 'my country saved your ass'/'no it didnt this country did' debate for years and reach no conclusion. The simle truth is EVERY major country involved in WWII helped achieve victory in some crucial and irreplacable way - so EVERYONE saved EVERYONE's asses (including Germany - by making the idiotic decision to fight a war on two fronts. Which sorta lost them WWI.)
The US didn’t win the war by its self and was not the only one that changed the course of the war but the world certinly didn’t win the war without the US. All side suffered Hundreds of thousand of deaths and all sides deserve credit for fighting and dyeing and all need to honored equally. If anything we all owe Hitler for being a horrible commander.
We owe Hitler for being INSANE, not a horrible commander. His generals were, without a doubt, the most talented in the conflict.N.A.T.O wrote:
Agreed.Spark wrote:
Cos' if someone declares war on you, it's sensible to fight back? [/duh]deeznutz1245 wrote:
Then why did we go to Europe and fight instead of immediately going to Japan? Cuz we are so arrogant?
In any case we could run this 'my country saved your ass'/'no it didnt this country did' debate for years and reach no conclusion. The simle truth is EVERY major country involved in WWII helped achieve victory in some crucial and irreplacable way - so EVERYONE saved EVERYONE's asses (including Germany - by making the idiotic decision to fight a war on two fronts. Which sorta lost them WWI.)
The US didn’t win the war by its self and was not the only one that changed the course of the war but the world certinly didn’t win the war without the US. All side suffered Hundreds of thousand of deaths and all sides deserve credit for fighting and dyeing and all need to honored equally. If anything we all owe Hitler for being a horrible commander.
For example I have not heard a SINGLE mention of the USSR in this thread. Yet they could arguably be the most important entity in this whole conflict.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
There's no doubt about that, but an army is only as good as its head.blisteringsilence wrote:
We owe Hitler for being INSANE, not a horrible commander. His generals were, without a doubt, the most talented in the conflict.N.A.T.O wrote:
Agreed.Spark wrote:
Cos' if someone declares war on you, it's sensible to fight back? [/duh]
In any case we could run this 'my country saved your ass'/'no it didnt this country did' debate for years and reach no conclusion. The simle truth is EVERY major country involved in WWII helped achieve victory in some crucial and irreplacable way - so EVERYONE saved EVERYONE's asses (including Germany - by making the idiotic decision to fight a war on two fronts. Which sorta lost them WWI.)
The US didn’t win the war by its self and was not the only one that changed the course of the war but the world certinly didn’t win the war without the US. All side suffered Hundreds of thousand of deaths and all sides deserve credit for fighting and dyeing and all need to honored equally. If anything we all owe Hitler for being a horrible commander.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
True, but if Hitler had been a hands off commander along the lines of Churchill and Roosevelt, as opposed to the micromanager he was, mainland europe would be speaking German and having beer and sausages right now.Spark wrote:
There's no doubt about that, but an army is only as good as its head.blisteringsilence wrote:
We owe Hitler for being INSANE, not a horrible commander. His generals were, without a doubt, the most talented in the conflict.N.A.T.O wrote:
Agreed.
The US didn’t win the war by its self and was not the only one that changed the course of the war but the world certinly didn’t win the war without the US. All side suffered Hundreds of thousand of deaths and all sides deserve credit for fighting and dyeing and all need to honored equally. If anything we all owe Hitler for being a horrible commander.
Its because this thread is not about that, but it has taken many turns.Spark wrote:
For example I have not heard a SINGLE mention of the USSR in this thread. Yet they could arguably be the most important entity in this whole conflict.
Malloy must go
You have got to be kidding me! Was that the best reply you could come up with? So all weapons in the world are not considered inventions according to you? And if everybody could stick to vaging war with the use of words instead of guns, wouldn't that be better?deeznutz1245 wrote:
1) War is an action, it cant be invented.klassekock wrote:
Now, allow me to clearify some things here.kilgoretrout wrote:
That's probably the dumbest thing I've ever read...
1. I am not stupid. If you knew me (which you apparently don't) , that comment would never have seen the light of day.
2. As war is the dumbest thing invented on earth (disagree on that and you are the dumbest lifeform in the whole universe) people who do war must therefore be stupid too.
You may justify war and say it's for freedom, for stability and so on. But you can never look away from the fact that if we didn't make war against each other, the world would be SO much better
So hear me- WAR IS STUPID!
2) You are conducting a forum battle, thus it is a forum war.
3) That makes you the dumbest lifeform in the whole universe.
We now agree on something!
Disagree on that and there is absolutely no hope for you, my friend.....
I only pointed it out because the thread had turned into a who-saved-who's-ass-in-WWII debate.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Its because this thread is not about that, but it has taken many turns.Spark wrote:
For example I have not heard a SINGLE mention of the USSR in this thread. Yet they could arguably be the most important entity in this whole conflict.
You still haven't read about just ad bellum klassekock.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
When did he say weapons weren't inventions? He said war is an action... Yes, it would be better if we could all agree to wage war with words rather than bullets, but it's not going to happen. War has always been a part of human history, and will probably continue as long as humans are alive...klassekock wrote:
You have got to be kidding me! Was that the best reply you could come up with? So all weapons in the world are not considered inventions according to you? And if everybody could stick to vaging war with the use of words instead of guns, wouldn't that be better?deeznutz1245 wrote:
1) War is an action, it cant be invented.klassekock wrote:
Now, allow me to clearify some things here.
1. I am not stupid. If you knew me (which you apparently don't) , that comment would never have seen the light of day.
2. As war is the dumbest thing invented on earth (disagree on that and you are the dumbest lifeform in the whole universe) people who do war must therefore be stupid too.
You may justify war and say it's for freedom, for stability and so on. But you can never look away from the fact that if we didn't make war against each other, the world would be SO much better
So hear me- WAR IS STUPID!
2) You are conducting a forum battle, thus it is a forum war.
3) That makes you the dumbest lifeform in the whole universe.
We now agree on something!
Disagree on that and there is absolutely no hope for you, my friend.....
I've lost track of how many times I've said this...
...The US didn't win WW2...
...Russia didn't win WW2...
...The UK & Commonwealth didn't win WW2...
...The ALLIES, they are the ones who won WW2, and anyone who says otherwise is, to be perfectly honest, an idiot.
...The US didn't win WW2...
...Russia didn't win WW2...
...The UK & Commonwealth didn't win WW2...
...The ALLIES, they are the ones who won WW2, and anyone who says otherwise is, to be perfectly honest, an idiot.
I dont speak Latin very well...lolSpark wrote:
I only pointed it out because the thread had turned into a who-saved-who's-ass-in-WWII debate.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Its because this thread is not about that, but it has taken many turns.Spark wrote:
For example I have not heard a SINGLE mention of the USSR in this thread. Yet they could arguably be the most important entity in this whole conflict.
You still haven't read about just ad bellum klassekock.
Last edited by deeznutz1245 (2006-11-05 02:07:03)
Malloy must go
But would the ALLIES have been able to pull it out without the US and the USSR? Definitely not.Pubic wrote:
I've lost track of how many times I've said this...
...The US didn't win WW2...
...Russia didn't win WW2...
...The UK & Commonwealth didn't win WW2...
...The ALLIES, they are the ones who won WW2, and anyone who says otherwise is, to be perfectly honest, an idiot.
Thank you. I wasnt going to reply because he is an idiot, and I cant compete with his "idiotness" at 5 in the morning.kilgoretrout wrote:
When did he say weapons weren't inventions? He said war is an action... Yes, it would be better if we could all agree to wage war with words rather than bullets, but it's not going to happen. War has always been a part of human history, and will probably continue as long as humans are alive...klassekock wrote:
You have got to be kidding me! Was that the best reply you could come up with? So all weapons in the world are not considered inventions according to you? And if everybody could stick to vaging war with the use of words instead of guns, wouldn't that be better?deeznutz1245 wrote:
1) War is an action, it cant be invented.
2) You are conducting a forum battle, thus it is a forum war.
3) That makes you the dumbest lifeform in the whole universe.
We now agree on something!
Disagree on that and there is absolutely no hope for you, my friend.....
Malloy must go
OMG... let it go. Who cares? It's all history now and "what if's" are pointless. Every soldier deserves our respect. I think it's ok to not respect the bad guys but I do feel sorry for the German individuals who were lied to by Hitler.kilgoretrout wrote:
But would the ALLIES have been able to pull it out without the US and the USSR? Definitely not.Pubic wrote:
I've lost track of how many times I've said this...
...The US didn't win WW2...
...Russia didn't win WW2...
...The UK & Commonwealth didn't win WW2...
...The ALLIES, they are the ones who won WW2, and anyone who says otherwise is, to be perfectly honest, an idiot.
So I am a idiot?deeznutz1245 wrote:
Thank you. I wasnt going to reply because he is an idiot, and I cant compete with his "idiotness" at 5 in the morning.kilgoretrout wrote:
When did he say weapons weren't inventions? He said war is an action... Yes, it would be better if we could all agree to wage war with words rather than bullets, but it's not going to happen. War has always been a part of human history, and will probably continue as long as humans are alive...klassekock wrote:
You have got to be kidding me! Was that the best reply you could come up with? So all weapons in the world are not considered inventions according to you? And if everybody could stick to vaging war with the use of words instead of guns, wouldn't that be better?
Disagree on that and there is absolutely no hope for you, my friend.....
War is made by weapons that kill! Not freaking pillows.
An you are all missing the point here. I am talking about PEACE and LOVE
And how can that be called stupid? Help me out here because I am loosing faith in man.....
Last edited by klassekock (2006-11-05 02:28:00)
I feel compelled to post. Much has been said here and I think the original sentiment has been lost. Remind yourself who these men are and how they died. They were not dying for freedom, money, oil, or their countries. Some enlist for those reasons but in the heat of battle I believe that the only thing these men were concerned with was defending each other, they died for their friends. Regardless of the circumstance don't forget the role of a fighting man (or woman) which is not as a politician, or businessman.
Remember that all countries have given good people (for reasons UNCONCERNED with those of their perhaps corrupt or evil leaders) not just America. To use them as a measuring stick to other countries is to disrespect them. Remember that if any ideals exist here they exist on the level of people giving their lives for others, no more or less. Not for bolstering the image of their country. Soldiers don't decide when and where, that is another can of beans. Soldiers should never be used posthumously to prove that a country deserves more sympathy than another. All countries hurt. America, Canada, UK, Russian, German, Iraqi, Israeli etc all hurt from losing people that give their lives to save others. Forget the cause. A dead soldier demands respect regardless of the country. Look at these graves and remember that the graves of the Japanese and Germans command the same respect. I trust this post was made LEST WE FORGET that there is good in people, despite the fact that we kill each other. Forget the other bullshit.
The good die mostly over bullshit
just ad bellum does not exist unless you respect all human lives including those of your political enemies. Politics have nothing to do with respect for brave souls
Remember that all countries have given good people (for reasons UNCONCERNED with those of their perhaps corrupt or evil leaders) not just America. To use them as a measuring stick to other countries is to disrespect them. Remember that if any ideals exist here they exist on the level of people giving their lives for others, no more or less. Not for bolstering the image of their country. Soldiers don't decide when and where, that is another can of beans. Soldiers should never be used posthumously to prove that a country deserves more sympathy than another. All countries hurt. America, Canada, UK, Russian, German, Iraqi, Israeli etc all hurt from losing people that give their lives to save others. Forget the cause. A dead soldier demands respect regardless of the country. Look at these graves and remember that the graves of the Japanese and Germans command the same respect. I trust this post was made LEST WE FORGET that there is good in people, despite the fact that we kill each other. Forget the other bullshit.
The good die mostly over bullshit
just ad bellum does not exist unless you respect all human lives including those of your political enemies. Politics have nothing to do with respect for brave souls
Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-11-05 02:22:54)
Was it worth killing a man because he tried to take some of your material belongings? Please tell me you are joking....blisteringsilence wrote:
Dude, that is a very black and white statement. Here on planet earth where I live, there are indeed things worth fighting for. I once had to shoot a man that was breaking into my house. It was worth doing.klassekock wrote:
Now, allow me to clearify some things here.kilgoretrout wrote:
That's probably the dumbest thing I've ever read...
1. I am not stupid. If you knew me (which you apparently don't) , that comment would never have seen the light of day.
2. As war is the dumbest thing invented on earth (disagree on that and you are the dumbest lifeform in the whole universe) people who do war must therefore be stupid too.
You may justify war and say it's for freedom, for stability and so on. But you can never look away from the fact that if we didn't make war against each other, the world would be SO much better
So hear me- WAR IS STUPID!
Is war sad? Yes, immensly. Is it stupid? Perhaps. Is it necessary? Yes, sometimes it is.
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
~J S Mills
And that quote by J S Mills is just plain scary........
Last edited by klassekock (2006-11-05 02:31:29)
You missed the point entirely. I was trying to look at it less in terms of nations and more in terms of which side people were fighting on. Each allied country sent some of its men and women to fight, and each allied country lost some of the men and women it sent. To say the lives any one country gave were any more or less important is to insult the memory of every single allied soldier who fought, and the families and descendents of those soldiers.kilgoretrout wrote:
But would the ALLIES have been able to pull it out without the US and the USSR? Definitely not.Pubic wrote:
I've lost track of how many times I've said this...
...The US didn't win WW2...
...Russia didn't win WW2...
...The UK & Commonwealth didn't win WW2...
...The ALLIES, they are the ones who won WW2, and anyone who says otherwise is, to be perfectly honest, an idiot.
...
Why the fuck am I even bothering with this thread?
...
LEST WE FORGET
Last edited by Pubic (2006-11-05 02:34:42)
The burglar didnt have a chance to rob him, cuz he was shot. And it is exactly what I would do if someone broke into my house that my WIFE and toddler SON were in. Those are a "couple of things" nobody fucks with. Ever.klassekock wrote:
Was it worth killing a man because he tried to take some of your material belongings? Please tell me you are joking....blisteringsilence wrote:
Dude, that is a very black and white statement. Here on planet earth where I live, there are indeed things worth fighting for. I once had to shoot a man that was breaking into my house. It was worth doing.klassekock wrote:
Now, allow me to clearify some things here.
1. I am not stupid. If you knew me (which you apparently don't) , that comment would never have seen the light of day.
2. As war is the dumbest thing invented on earth (disagree on that and you are the dumbest lifeform in the whole universe) people who do war must therefore be stupid too.
You may justify war and say it's for freedom, for stability and so on. But you can never look away from the fact that if we didn't make war against each other, the world would be SO much better
So hear me- WAR IS STUPID!
Is war sad? Yes, immensly. Is it stupid? Perhaps. Is it necessary? Yes, sometimes it is.
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
~J S Mills
And that quote by J S Mills is just plain scary........
Malloy must go
this thread should not be about when and where it's right to take a life since it can oppose diametrically according to who you ask. Encountering a burgular is not the same as engaging in battle. You don't have the discipline that a soldier has and made no agreement to put your ass on the line, you may not even have had to shoot him, it's entirely different from stories of people who's trained profession it is to have to end another's life. It's nothing to brag about, as is not the number of soldiers a country gave up (or the construed reasons for why they did) If the burgular was trying to kill you that would be different, but still incomparable since noone commanded the two of you to fight each other.
Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-11-05 02:54:43)
Very true! The win against Nazi Germany was hugely aided by the Russians, no doubt about it!Spark wrote:
For example I have not heard a SINGLE mention of the USSR in this thread. Yet they could arguably be the most important entity in this whole conflict.
The Russians suffered staggering losses. . . .
I don't know why the Russians aren't given as much credit as they deserve??
I will say this, and you heard it here. . . .Stalingrad lost the war for the German's (Germany just could not recover from the losses they suffered there), NOT DDay!
Granted, Russia might not have lasted if it wasnt for allied shipments of supplies during the initial surprize attack by the Germans. But the fact remains, Russia should take as much credit as us Americans for winning the war in Europe.
ALL those who fight/die in the name of freedom, democracy and liberty should be prayed for, not just a select few!
First intelligent post I've seen you make. I salute you! +1fadedsteve wrote:
Very true! The win against Nazi Germany was hugely aided by the Russians, no doubt about it!Spark wrote:
For example I have not heard a SINGLE mention of the USSR in this thread. Yet they could arguably be the most important entity in this whole conflict.
The Russians suffered staggering losses. . . .
I don't know why the Russians aren't given as much credit as they deserve??
I will say this, and you heard it here. . . .Stalingrad lost the war for the German's (Germany just could not recover from the losses they suffered there), NOT DDay!
Granted, Russia might not have lasted if it wasnt for allied shipments of supplies during the initial surprize attack by the Germans. But the fact remains, Russia should take as much credit as us Americans for winning the war in Europe.
ALL those who fight/die in the name of freedom, democracy and liberty should be prayed for, not just a select few!
Russia ( Soviet Union ) didn't get the respect because there was a guy in power which was named : Stalin.....
the allies(CCCP excluded) already knew that the next enemy would be the Soviet Union
the allies(CCCP excluded) already knew that the next enemy would be the Soviet Union
Wikipedia wrote:
After the failure of Soviet and Franco-British talks on a mutual defense pact in Moscow, Stalin began to negotiate a non-aggression pact with Hitler's Germany. In his speech on August 19, 1939, Stalin prepared his comrades for the great turn in Soviet policy, the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact with Nazi Germany. According to a controversial Russian author living in the UK, Viktor Suvorov, Stalin expressed in the speech an expectation that the war would be the best opportunity to weaken both the Western nations and Nazi Germany
LOL. No disrespect to the fallen but Iraq will not be looked upon like WWII. It will be looked upon like Vietnam. A farcical misadventure that wasted many American lives.