Could this generation stomach the carnage of world war 2? - Page 2

independent_thinker2002 · 05-11-08, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tashah

I just can't picture today's generation and the Billo's of the world being okay with using flamethrowers and the like.

Why in the world would we need flamethrowers?

aegyptos · 05-11-08, 10:27 AM

Just guessing here. To turn the enemy into crispy critters?

independent_thinker2002 · 05-11-08, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aegyptos

Just guessing here. To turn the enemy into crispy critters?

White posphorous.

aegyptos · 05-11-08, 10:31 AM

What about it?

independent_thinker2002 · 05-11-08, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aegyptos

What about it?

It should make them crispy enough for your liking.

tecoyah · 05-11-08, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aegyptos

I don't believe that's true. Why do they have to backed into a corner before they'll do the right thing? We were attacked not long ago and more died than died at Pearl Harbor. 9/11 is mostly forgotten in this country and its totally forgotten among our "allies". Liberalism and the moral equivalance argument it advances has so sapped and attenuated the nationalist impulse that its impossible for young people to to see where their real interests lie. Young men should be thronging the recruiting stations right now if what you said was really true because we involved in a legitimate war with islamofascism but the places are mostly deserted.

Somehow...I very much doubt ANYONE who was alive on Sept, 11 has forgotten. Thing is...we all supported the Taliban Removal, even at the cost of invading Afghanistan simply because they refused to turn over the man who instigated the terror attacks.. Had we actually focused on this relatively accurate tie to the initial attack we would be well on our way to, if not finished with the destruction of those who attacked us. Instead we got off course and neglected to finish the goal at all....in fact we no longer mention Osama unless he releases a tape.
If you seriously need to tie these completely different conflicts together, very well...Imagine this:

Japan pulled off Pearl Harbor, and we responded by declaring war and blowing up a few of the ships in the Pacific....we even bombed a few cities with incidiaries. Then we decided to invade China because they look alot alike as a people, so they must be just as bad. Unfortunately, China got pretty pissed off and fought back, taking a large chunk of the military out of the Japanese theater, and allowing them to become strong enough to start hurting us again.

Do you think we would have won WW2 in this scenario?

Would you support the decisions that allowed the bastards that took out Pearl Harbor to remain a threat?

aegyptos · 05-11-08, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tecoyah

Somehow...I very much doubt ANYONE who was alive on Sept, 11 has forgotten. Thing is...we all supported the Taliban Removal, even at the cost of invading Afghanistan simply because they refused to turn over the man who instigated the terror attacks..

I don't buy this line. Our reasons were much larger. Geopolitical in nature. Not mere revenge.

Quote:

Had we actually focused on this relatively accurate tie to the initial attack we would be well on our way to, if not finished with the destruction of those who attacked us. Instead we got off course and neglected to finish the goal at all....in fact we no longer mention Osama unless he releases a tape.

Osama really isn't very relevant. He's no mmore relevant than Hirohito was in WW2. What counts is the destruction of Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Al Q is largely destroyed and the Taliban are on the ropes.

independent_thinker2002 · 05-11-08, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aegyptos

I don't buy this line. Our reasons were much larger. Geopolitical in nature. Not mere revenge.

Obama really isn't very relevant. He's no mmore relevant than Hirohito was in WW2. What counts is the destruction of Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Al Q is largely destroyed and the Taliban are on the ropes.

Was this a Freudian slip?

aegyptos · 05-11-08, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by independent_thinker2002

Was this a Freudian slip?

Oh dear. Yes, I apologize for that.

Mach · 05-11-08, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Awesome!

Hundreds of thousands died in World War 2. Could this generation handle that, or would our country be too divided to make such a sacrifice now?

Sacrifice for what? Oil? no.
Because we have a dumbass in the whitehouse? no.
Because we want to keep the military-industrial machine going? Hell no.

If our liberty was at stake? You'd have people lined up to defend it.

Try this experment. At 10:00pm, get a crowbar, and try to break into someones house and when you get inside (if), try to give the woman of the house a big hug just to say hi. See if people are willing to react violently to protect their liberties. I suspect people react the same now, as they did in WWII. People haven't changed much in thousands of years.

What we must realize is that we're a lot more sophisticated too, and just reacting with violence is a human emotion, but is demonstrably not always the best reaction. We think we choose, we act. We don't react. And sometimes that choice may be violence.

-Mach