Israel forced to apologise over offensive Hiroshima comments

Really ?

I suggest that your painful and boring rhetoric is, effectively, cut-and-paste guff.

 

Before I get on with examining your claim, Face Your, may I post a short message to thank you most sincerely for the wealth of supporting evidence that you provided. I did not want this sentiment to be mixed up in a technical reply.

It is really refreshing to receive a proper rebuttal from a Zionist supporter as opposed to the one-liner POVs such as “Israel was justified; there were rockets raining down on her” and nationalistic fervour-driven mantras like “Israel never attacks; Israel just responds” – both bereft of any supporting substance.

…. (to be continued) ….

 

For those keeping score that's a total of 58,988 fighters, bombers, and attack aircraft, not counting trainers and recon aircraft which could have been used for Kamikaze attacks as well, now the minimum amount of destroyed Japanese aircraft is a minimum 35,000 and a maximum 50,000 leaving at least 8,988 aircraft left alive to defend the home islands, so what's nonsense again moon?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_of_Japan_during_World_War_II
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equipment_losses_in_World_War_II

 

I believe that my understanding of human nature trumps your ...er...understanding of the Japenese martial mind.

True or false, 10,000 aircraft were not available in 1945. Your cut-and-pastes are guff.

That doesn't ' evidence ' anything You are yapping for the sake of yapping.

 

Imperial Japan had a group of physicists who attempted to build a nuclear weapon independently and it was known at the time that nuclear chain reactions could produce enough energy to flatten an entire city. After Hiroshima, a leading physicist inspected the aftermass of the atomic bombing from a transport plane and he realised that America used the atomic bomb and it was reported to Emperor Hirohito to help him decide to end the war.

 

Yes, really:

"Objectivity is impossible, and it is also undesirable. That is, if it were possible it would be undesirable, because if you have any kind of a social aim, if you think history should serve society in some way; should serve the progress of the human race; should serve justice in some way, then it requires that you make your selection on the basis of what you think will advance causes of humanity.” -- Howard Zinn

The study of history is not about social justice it is about historical fact with an aim at being as objective as possible.

WTF ever, it was a response to a copy paste post and it contained numerous facts.

 

I suggest that you stop your stupid bluster;

Further;

Judging by your clangers to date you'd best enrol somewhere.

 

Explain that to the Japanese mothers on Okinawa who jumped off of cliffs babies in hand in mass in preference to surrender to the Americans.

False:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_of_Japan_during_World_War_II
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equipment_losses_in_World_War_II

For those keeping score that's a total of 58,988 fighters, bombers, and attack aircraft, not counting trainers and recon aircraft which could have been used for Kamikaze attacks as well, now the amount of destroyed Japanese aircraft is a minimum 35,000 and a maximum 50,000 leaving at least 8,988 aircraft left alive to defend the home islands, so what's nonsense again moon?

Yes we understand that in your world that while dropping the bomb on Hiroshima did not prompt the Japanese to surrender and even a second dropping of the bomb on Nagasaki required a direct intervention on behalf of Hirohito to break the deadlock between the militarist hawks and civilian doves on the question of surrender as it required a unanimous decision of the cabinet to enter into a cease fire or surrender and even then it prompted no less than 3 coup attempts against the emperor to prevent a surrender, that somehow dropping the bomb on an uninhabited island would have magically resulted in a Japanese surrender.

 

I suggest you admit that you don't have a clue about what you are talking about, and stop shifting the (*)(*)(*)(*)ing goal posts, the defensive strategy for the Japanese air forces of the imperial army and navy were to be shifted from defense against aerial assault by allied bombers to Kamikaze attack under Operation Ketsu-Go. Tell us again how these ten thousand aircraft didn't exist moon. Brilliant you are.

Provide a factually incorrect statement which I have made and not retracted when confronted with my error.

 

Again, 10,000 aircraft were not available for defence. You should stop spouting your cut-and-paste crap and think as an altenative .

Your-cut-and-pastes don't even claim- unlike you- that 10,000 aircraft were available at the time.

 

Nowhere does your source even remotely say that.

Edit/personal insult the excerpt you quoted was in regards to defense against aerial bombardment and had absolutely (*)(*)(*)(*) all to do with Kamikaze attacks on war ships or infantry landing craft or attacks on infantry or mobilized invasion forces, there were a minimum of 9 thousand fighters, bombers, and attack aircraft available for Kamikaze attacks against any potential invasion along with tens of thousands more transport, recon, and trainer aircraft available to be packed with high explosives and used as Kamikaze.

WTF are you blathering about, you've been given the exact numbers of produced aircraft and the minimum and maximum of Japanese aircraft destroyed your statements have once again been conclusively proven to be the unmitigated bull(*)(*)(*)(*) that they are through facts and evidence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_of_Japan_during_World_War_II
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equipment_losses_in_World_War_II

Thanks for coming out sport but you epically fail once again.

 

Nothing, you have nothing. You have no proof that a thing which did not happen happened .........blaa blaa blaaa is nothing. It did not happen and so there is no bloody proof, course there isn't It DID NOT HAPPEN.

 

Love joy and freedom of thought ........... the illegality of Holocaust denial, the beatings and burnings and murders of scholars who question the Lie ..................... Why? Why the Lie? The Zionists wanted Israel not Madagasca ........why? ;cos they are fruit and nut cases is why? And why they are I do not know ask Freud ......................for much to Freuds' horror, even though he did not like man kind, the Freudians have been running the show since the twenties ................. Edward Bernays.

 

You like Hitler. I guess that really does explain everything. Like I said, at least you admit to it, as opposed to almost the rest of the UK contingent.

Snake, are you the ONLY sane poster from Brit-Cit?

We know. The problem is where you're looking. Remember THIS little tidbit from one of your links?

 

You've been shown plenty of proof, you just don't like the idiotic fantasies you post shoved back in your face with ample evidence of their utter stupidity. Furthermore you lied about examining the Bad Arolsen archives. Next you'll be telling us that Pol Pot was a kind and likeable genocidist! I'd love to put you on 'ignore', but I enjoy countering your daft assertions with truth and reality; concepts with which you're evidently unfamiliar.

 

Almost the UK contingent does not support Hitler. just two I know of. Heard people from the US doing it too. Seems to be mainly WN.

why would he be?

 

No I don't LIKE Hitler, I just want the record straight. You ever play Cricket? Not that Cricket is Cricket any more anyway. Well I can tell you Snake hasn't either .............. I have no problem with it but his ancestry isn't English. His allegence is otherwise.

 

Anyone who speaks of Hitler either sympathetically or supportively is clearly as clinically insane as he was. Either that or childishly naive-or terminally stupid. Or all three...

 

Well there is a non British poster who has an admiration for him who is none of those things - he is an anti islamist. He may be antisemite as well I think a few of them got to stormfront or similar and developed views from that or maybe they were there and became anti Muslim

Basically people who believe we should all live with our own ethnicity seem drawn to him. Prior to WW2 he was very popular in the West even with his views on Jews. It was the mass killing of them which went too far.

As you will know with the laws which were set in motion after the Battle of Cable Street, the UK had already said no to this sort of behaviour prior to WW2

 

Which is it, Allegorical?

So Snake isn't a real Brit like you because he doesn't play Cricket - and because he doesn't, his ancestry isn't English. So, playing Cricket makes one British.

Makes perfect (non)sense to me.

 

As I mentioned in another thread the poster seems a little 'confused'...

 

I have started reading Hitler as a human being that is all, 'I almost begin to quite like Hitler and he was sometimes quite amusing I especially thought he was funny about the wife of the American Prez' is probably what I should have said because we must all be so bloody careful about what we PC say now a days! ............. He was as much a player on the World stage as were all the rest ............ and he dragged Germany up from the boot straps and gave it 12 years of prosperity which is more than any US bloody Prez of the time did for their country as Hitler said then,I paraphrase ... why don't you sort your own probs out halt the misery of your own citizens poverty, use money for them instead of using it on making war on us? And is it any different now? have you ever read Hitlers words has anyone? ............... He wasn't actually my cuppa tea but with all this fuss about him I thought a while back perhaps I ought to actually read up on the fella. Those who met him liked him.

As for Snake his people came from Poland he tells us, War time, so it is not that I judge or mind, it is that his perspective of whether we should have fought WWII or not comes from the Polish pov not the British, that is all ...............

 

Prevarication.

So's Obama. So was Pol Pot. So was Mao. So was Stalin. That make them great guys too? False logic.

This may come as a shock to some, but it was Germany that declared war on the US, not the other way around. False narrative.

I have had to read his stuff, along with what many world leaders, both good and bad, have written and said, so yes. Attempted deflection from the main point.

But he is now.

I should imagine so, since if you DIDN'T like him, the SS had a few words with you.

You just DID judge him. You've stated that since his ancestry was Polish, he could not have the same UK POV as you. And for the record, I have played cricket in college. I guess following your logic, I'm now as much a Britisher as you. Maybe more, since I don't know if you have.

 

Don't take it personally alexa, it isn't personal.

 

It is as well that you italicised the word 'almost', but I nevertheless take exception to your implications. I do agree that Snakestretcher is an excellent member of this discussion group, and I agree with many of his conclusions, but to imply that he is the only sane poster from the British Isles is a bit much.

Apart from some level of incomprehensible satisfaction this gratuitous and unnecessary national insult might have afforded you, what is your motivation and justification for these allegations?

I have been a member of this board for some years, and I cannot think of one British contributor who has expressed admiration for the late, certifiable, Reich Chancellor. Do you really think a people whose ancestors suffered the Blitz and the attendant loss of civilian life would feel warmth towards the architect of their misfortune? Not to mention the loss of life involved in our armed forces, or the horrors of the concentration camps our troops liberated in Germany.

The fact that the specific poster whom you were criticising holds certain views (not all of which you have characterised accurately) is not evidence of a national ethos - something of which a first former would probably be aware.

I consider that you owe the British contributors to this board an apology.

As for the topic concerned, I think that Israel should indeed have apologised for the insensitivity of her representative's comments.