• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fort Hood Report: No Mention of Islam, Hasan Not Named

Damn filty stinkin draft dodging hippies.

Are you familiar with the draft lottery back then. If so, you will understand the significance my receiving a 275 draft number.

Yet, still I volunteered two years to serve my country. Where is the dodge in that????
 
You keep invoking the US as being partially responsible for a European problem (the rise of Hitler), so if there's illogic, it's yours.

The US was as responsible for the rise of Hitler as any European country. The US was a signatory to the Treaty of Versailles which can be seen as the root cause of the problem, and the US was as inactive in stopping the early Nazi encroachments as any European nation. We all share culpability, and there is nothing illogical about those statements.

It's been declared "debunked" by the usual apologists, sure. Funnily enough, at the time, it was the exact translation offered by official Iranian sources. That, of course, has all gone down the memory hole by now.

The exact words spoken by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad were - "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."

The translation from the Farsi is - "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".

Do you deny that this is so? Both the statement and the translation are matters of record, and there is no mention of wiping anyone off the map.
 
Are you familiar with the draft lottery back then. If so, you will understand the significance my receiving a 275 draft number.

Yet, still I volunteered two years to serve my country. Where is the dodge in that????

What makes you think I was refering to you?
 
Why should the US need to come to Europe's rescue?... We weren't being attacked, but we came and saved their ass, didn't we.

Saved their ass from Russia for 50 years too….. Still are.

Europe is not one homogenous mass, it is a sub-continent consisting of sovereign states. There is as much obligation for these individual nations to come to each other's rescue as there is for the US to do so.

You were attacked, first by Japan, and then by Germany (who declared war upon the US) and you contributed significantly to the outcome of WW2, but your involvement was not obviously motivated by a desire to save anyone. War was declared upon you, and you had no choice but to participate.

Your rivalry with the USSR for the next fifty years was also a matter of choice. European nations in concert would have been quite capable of resisting any Russian attempts to dominate the continent. You were merely competing with a rival superpower in your own interests.

Just stop these childish claims of superiority and this faux concern for the welfare of the world, and you will gain the respect and recognition you seemingly desire.
 
The US was as responsible for the rise of Hitler as any European country. The US was a signatory to the Treaty of Versailles which can be seen as the root cause of the problem, and the US was as inactive in stopping the early Nazi encroachments as any European nation. We all share culpability, and there is nothing illogical about those statements.

The US never ratified the Treaty of Versailles. Not that it was the "root cause" anyway. A factor, sure. Cause? No.

The US had no place in, or responsibility for, stopping early encroachments. It was purely a European matter.


The exact words spoken by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad were - "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."

The translation from the Farsi is - "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".

Do you deny that this is so? Both the statement and the translation are matters of record, and there is no mention of wiping anyone off the map.

I don't speak Farsi, but the official translations offered by the Iranians at the time differ from what you say here. Those, of course, are gone now.
 
European nations in concert would have been quite capable of resisting any Russian attempts to dominate the continent.

With what? They were all piles of rubble. The only European nation with any semblance of a military was the UK, and the UK could not have held off the Soviets alone.
 
Are you familiar with the draft lottery back then. If so, you will understand the significance my receiving a 275 draft number.

Yet, still I volunteered two years to serve my country. Where is the dodge in that????

Never got involved with the draft......already served my country 10 years when I went to Nam...
 
The US never ratified the Treaty of Versailles. Not that it was the "root cause" anyway. A factor, sure. Cause? No.

The US had no place in, or responsibility for, stopping early encroachments. It was purely a European matter.

You are correct, the US signed, but did not ratify the Treaty of Versailles. In fact, President Wilson was against many of the stipulations contained in the treaty, and his was one of the very few voices calling for moderation and humanity in the conditions imposed upon Germany. Unfortunately he did not prevail. But the Treaty of Versailles was a major contributor, if not the root cause, in the rise of Nazism.

I don't speak Farsi, but the official translations offered by the Iranians at the time differ from what you say here. Those, of course, are gone now.

Neither do I, but the translation is well documented and easily verified amongst Farsi speakers. Irrespective of what Iranians may have said in the past, that is what Amadinejad said, so it is not legitimate to claim otherwise today.
 
We won every battle in Nam but we lost the war......Go Figure....:confused::roll:

I guess you weren't at this battle:
Ambush at Hoc Mon

In perhaps the Vietnam War’s deadliest single engagement, 49 men of C Co., 4th Bn., 9th Inf., 25th Div., were KIA by the Viet Cong in just 8 minutes on March 2, 1968, north of Saigon.

Battles won were like removing pails of sand from the beach only to have the next tide bring in new sand.

The same company that runs every government program also runs the US military. It should be no surprize of the mistakes we make.




Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) :: VFW Magazine
 
With what? They were all piles of rubble. The only European nation with any semblance of a military was the UK, and the UK could not have held off the Soviets alone.

Not AFIK, by the mid fifties to early sixties. The economic miracle of Germany had got going, Britain was very strong militarily, and so was France by then. The Russians had their hands full with Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Romania, etc. and I doubt the T55s would have rolled through the Fulda Gap. They could not have secured air supremacy to start with. The real danger of that era was a nuclear exchange between the USA and the USSR.
 
What makes you think I was refering to you?

Given the context and chronology of the thread when you posted, it was very clear who you meant!
 
Not AFIK, by the mid fifties to early sixties. The economic miracle of Germany had got going, Britain was very strong militarily, and so was France by then.

Yeah, and who put up the bulk of the money to rebuild, and protected them while they did so?
 
Damn filty stinkin draft dodging hippies.
How dare you insult your ex commander in chief, Dubya did a very valid job defending the sky's above Texas from the very real threat of those dastardly long range North Vietnamese tactical nuclear rickshaw bombers.
 
Back
Top Bottom