Jon in Pasadena Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Really, it's the fall of Singapore that changed the world more than anything. Really? I could barely tell one season from the next in that place... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted May 28, 2016 Share Posted May 28, 2016 Arthur Percival's surrender is still stunning to this day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 28, 2016 Author Share Posted May 28, 2016 Arthur Percival's surrender is still stunning to this day. Churchill's instructions to fight to the last man were pretty unrealistic. The men were not going to die to ensure Singapore remaind British Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 28, 2016 Author Share Posted May 28, 2016 Hey look, old Walrus face still thinks the Japanese are our enemies!! http://nypost.com/2016/05/26/obamas-shameful-apology-tour-lands-in-hiroshima/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 28, 2016 Share Posted May 28, 2016 Hey look, old Walrus face still thinks the Japanese are our enemies!! http://nypost.com/2016/05/26/obamas-shameful-apology-tour-lands-in-hiroshima/ What is it with you SoProgs that you are so focused on what someone looks like? Is there a reason you need to do that? If you're not pointing out how white or black someone is, you're pointing out how silly or ugly they look. Party of tolerancy, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted May 28, 2016 Share Posted May 28, 2016 (edited) What is it with you SoProgs that you are so focused on what someone looks like? Is there a reason you need to do that? If you're not pointing out how white or black someone is, you're pointing out how silly or ugly they look. Party of tolerancy, I guess. Not only that, Gator's whole post doesn't make sense........................I hope you were sitting down when you read that......... Ambassador Bolton's entire article is about President Obama's actions in the past 7 years......................not Japan back to the thread........................ Will Obama mention how Hiroshima has never recovered since A-Bomb? Oh wait, nevermind that's Detroit . Edited May 28, 2016 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted May 28, 2016 Share Posted May 28, 2016 What is it with you SoProgs that you are so focused on what someone looks like? Is there a reason you need to do that? If you're not pointing out how white or black someone is, you're pointing out how silly or ugly they look. Party of tolerancy, I guess. Gator is not a progressive. He's a fascist, he admitted it when he spelled out how his policies would work in the other thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 28, 2016 Share Posted May 28, 2016 Arthur Percival's surrender is still stunning to this day. Not really. British policies in the Far East were bankrupt for years preceding. As thoroughly !@#$ed-up as their command and control was, there was no particular reason the British should have been able to defend Malaya. And the "fortress" of Singapore was indefensible on its own, for the simple reason that the city's fresh water came from the mainland. But none of that overcomes the "imagery" of the world's greatest imperial power surrendering it's main imperial base to "wogs," basically. To a culture brought up on Omdurman, Rorke's Drift, Dehli, Balaclava, etc., losing a war to natives was unimaginable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted May 28, 2016 Share Posted May 28, 2016 (edited) What is it with you SoProgs that you are so focused on what someone looks like? Is there a reason you need to do that? If you're not pointing out how white or black someone is, you're pointing out how silly or ugly they look. Party of tolerancy, I guess. When you've got nothing of substance...... Edited May 28, 2016 by Azalin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted May 30, 2016 Share Posted May 30, 2016 Obama’s Hiroshima visit panned by critics on left, right by Dave Boyer Original Article Obama’s Childish Attempt to Undermine Israel’s New Government This week, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu struck a deal with an Israeli opposition party to expand his parliamentary majority from one to six — a substantial victory for the stability of the government. Unlike Netanyahu’s dominant Likud party, the new coalition party — called “Yisrael Beiteinu,” which means “Israel Is Our Home” — supports a two-state solution as part of its platform. Surely the Obama administration, which has made a two-state solution a singular focus of its Israel policy, welcomed the news as a major step toward its long-term vision for peace in the Middle East? No, it didn’t. Through a State Department spokesman, the administration said the new coalition deal “raises legitimate questions” about the Israeli government’s commitment to a two-state solution, adding that, “ultimately, we’re going to judge this government based on its actions.” {snip} What this plan would do is give Palestinians sovereignty over Palestinian areas of Israel. No deportations or Brownshirts were called for. Just a land swap to ensure the success of “two states for two peoples.” Surely President Obama knows this. Surely it’s exactly what he wants. So what possible motive could his administration have for responding to something he’s hoped for with so obviously misleading a press statement? Other than sticking it to Obama’s least favorite world leader, Mr. Netanyahu? Is that a way to run a foreign policy? By churlishly trying to undermine a friendly democracy’s government on its first day in office? And we talk about Trump being childish. Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/435955/obama-benjamin-netanyahu-israel-united-states-foreign-policy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 30, 2016 Share Posted May 30, 2016 And we talk about Trump being childish. The only difference between Trump and Obama is one is white and worked for a living. Otherwise, Trump and Obama are flip sides of the same crybaby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Obama’s Hiroshima visit panned by critics on left, right by Dave Boyer Original Article Obama’s Childish Attempt to Undermine Israel’s New Government This week, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu struck a deal with an Israeli opposition party to expand his parliamentary majority from one to six — a substantial victory for the stability of the government. Unlike Netanyahu’s dominant Likud party, the new coalition party — called “Yisrael Beiteinu,” which means “Israel Is Our Home” — supports a two-state solution as part of its platform. Surely the Obama administration, which has made a two-state solution a singular focus of its Israel policy, welcomed the news as a major step toward its long-term vision for peace in the Middle East? No, it didn’t. Through a State Department spokesman, the administration said the new coalition deal “raises legitimate questions” about the Israeli government’s commitment to a two-state solution, adding that, “ultimately, we’re going to judge this government based on its actions.” {snip} What this plan would do is give Palestinians sovereignty over Palestinian areas of Israel. No deportations or Brownshirts were called for. Just a land swap to ensure the success of “two states for two peoples.” Surely President Obama knows this. Surely it’s exactly what he wants. So what possible motive could his administration have for responding to something he’s hoped for with so obviously misleading a press statement? Other than sticking it to Obama’s least favorite world leader, Mr. Netanyahu? Is that a way to run a foreign policy? By churlishly trying to undermine a friendly democracy’s government on its first day in office? And we talk about Trump being childish. Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/435955/obama-benjamin-netanyahu-israel-united-states-foreign-policy He hates jews, and yet jews voted for him in droves. It boggles the mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 We've had this discussion before, but I wish we had never dropped the bombs in Japan. I don't support indiscriminately killing innocent civilians. Yes, I know they started it. Yes, I know that the bomb saved a more protracted costly war that saved more potential American casualties. Still doesn't justify in my view the means to this end. Having said that, as president of the United States, I think it is a slight on many of our veterans specially those that served in WWII to go to Japan and indirectly once again apologize for his perceived misdeeds of our country. Yes, I understand Obama didn't really "apologize" for Hiroshima and Nagasaki but when a sitting president publicly acknowledges the deaths caused by the country he represents, that is an indirect apology and it certainly was perceived that way not just by the usual opponents of the president but by others as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 (edited) We've had this discussion before, but I wish we had never dropped the bombs in Japan. I don't support indiscriminately killing innocent civilians. Yes, I know they started it. Yes, I know that the bomb saved a more protracted costly war that saved more potential American casualties. Still doesn't justify in my view the means to this end. Having said that, as president of the United States, I think it is a slight on many of our veterans specially those that served in WWII to go to Japan and indirectly once again apologize for his perceived misdeeds of our country. Yes, I understand Obama didn't really "apologize" for Hiroshima and Nagasaki but when a sitting president publicly acknowledges the deaths caused by the country he represents, that is an indirect apology and it certainly was perceived that way not just by the usual opponents of the president but by others as well. War should never be entered in to without absolute necessity, but when you must go to war, the only moral action a nation can take is to conduct total war against the enemy in a way the a) ends the war as quickly and decisively as possible, b) saves as many lives of the citizens and soldiers of your nation state as possible, and c) spends the least amount of your nation's treasure as possible. Any other actions taken are unjust abuses of government against it's own people. Nations survive by making examples of other nations. Edited May 31, 2016 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 31, 2016 Author Share Posted May 31, 2016 When you've got nothing of substance...... You post anyways.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 31, 2016 Author Share Posted May 31, 2016 War should never be entered in to without absolute necessity, but when you must go to war, the only moral action a nation can take is to conduct total war against the enemy in a way the a) ends the war as quickly and decisively as possible, b) saves as many lives of the citizens and soldiers of your nation state as possible, and c) spends the least amount of your nation's treasure as possible. Any other actions taken are unjust abuses of government against it's own people. Nations survive by making examples of other nations. Two things: 1) I think that the Nuremberg trials that had been planned made the Japanese worry the emperor would be put on trail and made HIM think he would be put on trial and so he was saving his own hide by holding out. I have no proof for this but did bring it up at a conference once and it started a discussion 2) Would we have used the bomb on Germany? I'm sure the British would have but not sure we would have especially if we were on the verge of victory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 There's no doubt at all that Hitler would have used the A-Bomb on London if he had one. He'd have nuked Stalingrad and Leningrad too if he had the chance. He might have left Moscow as a trophy. Back to the OT, Obama's foreign policy is to talk loudly and carry a toothpick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 His mouth writes checks his body can't cash. He's the guy that "the emperor has no clothes" was meant for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 31, 2016 Author Share Posted May 31, 2016 His mouth writes checks his body can't cash. He's the guy that "the emperor has no clothes" was meant for. Even one of Obama's most irrational critics has praise for him https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2014-05-22/netanyahu-says-obama-got-syria-right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Even one of Obama's most irrational critics has praise for him https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2014-05-22/netanyahu-says-obama-got-syria-right Blind squirrel finds a nut in congratulating blind squirrel for finding a nut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts