It's 1984...
in [UK Motorcycles]
|
From: DR on 17 Sep 2009 14:37 darsy posted: >On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 19:26:54 +0100, DR ><motorbandit(a)hotmail.co.uk.invalid> wrote: > >>darsy posted: >>>On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:43:48 +0100, "Hog" <hogSPAM(a)freenetCHIPS.co.uk> >>>wrote: >>> >>>>darsy wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:17:43 +0100, "Hog" <hogSPAM(a)freenetCHIPS.co.uk> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> and obviously if Dresden and Hiroshima had been crimes there would >>>>>> have been trials. >>>>> >>>>> Dresden, I'd agree that plain and simple it was a War Crime. >>>> >>>>What a load of bollocks >>> >>>why was it necessary, at that stage of the war, to demonstrate "shock >>>and awe" (to use the modern parlance) by killing so many civilians? >> >>The Japanese wartime mentality was worlds apart from ours (some might >>say it still is). Practically the entire civilian population was, both >>through propaganda and culture, ready and willing to fight to the >>death against an Allied invasion (until the A-bombs, thought to be the >>only way to achieve surrender) by any means necessary; use of the >>Bombs was decided upon as a quick, decisive action endangering as few >>Allied (i.e. American) personnel as possible. If the Third Reich >>hadn't fallen when it did I believe Berlin was considered as a >>possible target. I'm not attempting to excuse it, merely repeating >>what I learned at school. > >when did they move Dresden to Japan? Ah, my misreading. I did wonder why you'd be asking a question I thought you'd know the answer to quite easily. Dresden: because they could. -- Darren GSF1200N K3
From: Andy Bonwick on 17 Sep 2009 18:21 On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 17:14:32 +0100, darsy <darsy(a)sticky.co.uk> wrote: >On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:43:48 +0100, "Hog" <hogSPAM(a)freenetCHIPS.co.uk> >wrote: > >>darsy wrote: >>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:17:43 +0100, "Hog" <hogSPAM(a)freenetCHIPS.co.uk> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> and obviously if Dresden and Hiroshima had been crimes there would >>>> have been trials. >>> >>> Dresden, I'd agree that plain and simple it was a War Crime. >> >>What a load of bollocks > >why was it necessary, at that stage of the war, to demonstrate "shock >and awe" (to use the modern parlance) by killing so many civilians? To demonstrate to the rest of the country exactly what they had coming to them? I accept that it wasn't strictly necessary to bomb Dresden until it was a smoking ruin but they started it by invading Poland.
From: ogden on 17 Sep 2009 19:18 Andy Bonwick wrote: > On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 17:14:32 +0100, darsy <darsy(a)sticky.co.uk> wrote: > > >On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:43:48 +0100, "Hog" <hogSPAM(a)freenetCHIPS.co.uk> > >wrote: > > > >>darsy wrote: > >>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:17:43 +0100, "Hog" <hogSPAM(a)freenetCHIPS.co.uk> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> Dresden, I'd agree that plain and simple it was a War Crime. > >> > >>What a load of bollocks > > > >why was it necessary, at that stage of the war, to demonstrate "shock > >and awe" (to use the modern parlance) by killing so many civilians? > > To demonstrate to the rest of the country exactly what they had coming > to them? > > I accept that it wasn't strictly necessary to bomb Dresden until it > was a smoking ruin but they started it by invading Poland. As far as I'm concerned, the war started again on the 3rd of September 2009. -- ogden
From: wessie on 17 Sep 2009 19:40 ogden <ogden(a)pre.org> wrote in news:MPG.251cd437f7deeecf989a30(a)news.eternal-september.org: > Andy Bonwick wrote: >> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 17:14:32 +0100, darsy <darsy(a)sticky.co.uk> wrote: >> >> >On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:43:48 +0100, "Hog" >> ><hogSPAM(a)freenetCHIPS.co.uk> wrote: >> > >> >>darsy wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:17:43 +0100, "Hog" >> >>> <hogSPAM(a)freenetCHIPS.co.uk> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Dresden, I'd agree that plain and simple it was a War Crime. >> >> >> >>What a load of bollocks >> > >> >why was it necessary, at that stage of the war, to demonstrate >> >"shock and awe" (to use the modern parlance) by killing so many >> >civilians? >> >> To demonstrate to the rest of the country exactly what they had >> coming to them? >> >> I accept that it wasn't strictly necessary to bomb Dresden until it >> was a smoking ruin but they started it by invading Poland. > > As far as I'm concerned, the war started again on the 3rd of September > 2009. > Started? All I saw was a defeatist attitude, "never coming back." The blitzkrieg assault is something they fuckers understand and can resisit. Solo, stealthy infiltration is the way to deal with them. -- wessie at tesco dot net BMW R1150GS
From: ogden on 17 Sep 2009 19:45
wessie wrote: > ogden <ogden(a)pre.org> wrote in > news:MPG.251cd437f7deeecf989a30(a)news.eternal-september.org: > > > Andy Bonwick wrote: > >> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 17:14:32 +0100, darsy <darsy(a)sticky.co.uk> wrote: > >> > >> >On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:43:48 +0100, "Hog" > >> ><hogSPAM(a)freenetCHIPS.co.uk> wrote: > >> > > >> >>darsy wrote: > >> >>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:17:43 +0100, "Hog" > >> >>> <hogSPAM(a)freenetCHIPS.co.uk> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> Dresden, I'd agree that plain and simple it was a War Crime. > >> >> > >> >>What a load of bollocks > >> > > >> >why was it necessary, at that stage of the war, to demonstrate > >> >"shock and awe" (to use the modern parlance) by killing so many > >> >civilians? > >> > >> To demonstrate to the rest of the country exactly what they had > >> coming to them? > >> > >> I accept that it wasn't strictly necessary to bomb Dresden until it > >> was a smoking ruin but they started it by invading Poland. > > > > As far as I'm concerned, the war started again on the 3rd of September > > 2009. > > Started? All I saw was a defeatist attitude, "never coming back." > > The blitzkrieg assault is something they fuckers understand and can > resisit. Solo, stealthy infiltration is the way to deal with them. If I'm ever there again, I'm crossing the border, hitting the autobahn and bouncing it off the speed limiter til I'm out of the country. -- ogden |