Yup...the original topic of this thread has died long ago... we now should call it "The multithematic thread... come on in and have fun"Spark wrote:
I'll just leave Reaper to do the talking, he knows more than me. And he has more patience.
--Read the rest of the topic and you'll see that issue was closed a long time agochuckle_hound wrote:
My god! That's awful. A country that supports known terrorists. That manipulates the world in such a way as to get the best deal. Next thing you'll be telling me that they illegally invaded another country and incarcerated innocent people outside of the law. I mean if they did that it'd be bad enough, but what happens if they had a leader who was so incompetent he had to ASK his staff to go to the toilet.yuck7777 wrote:
How France does the unthinkable? The war in Iraq has yelded infomation that France since the end of the first gulf war was supplying Saddam with over $20 billion worth of military equipment and spare parts which were smuggled in through Siria. In exchange France got 23% of the Iraqis oil. All this while Iraq was under sanctions from the UN. And of couse they didn't back the Iraq war, Because it would make them lose the sweet deal they had.
Now with Iran. The French have been investing alot of money in Iran. The Big automotive companies have invested a big chunk of money there.
How can we trust France in there talks with Iran over the nukes? Should we boycott France? Should the US and there true Allies label France as a terrorist supporter or even a Terriorist state?
What do you think?
I'm looking forward to Iran opening up their oil market to Europe properly, should start to balance the world out and help us say adios to the dollar
Why it would be chaos.
I have a sudden urge to cosh you round the back of the head and ask you to fetch my slippers. Which is silly, because I already have a retarded twerp to do that for me. Ah well, two's better than one.
You mean Dresden? Which was bombed to splinters by the USAF? And a few hundred thousand dead? On a festival day?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Well... not only Dresden, though this is one splendid example...Spark wrote:
You mean Dresden? Which was bombed to splinters by the USAF? And a few hundred thousand dead? On a festival day?
Also Hamburg, where the bombings created a Firestorm lasting a week
Or Cologne, where the only building left nearly unscathed was the Dome... the rest being more or less flat rubble... and there was not one piece of industrial facilities in the centre of that city (even now there isn't).
And one has to note, that the highest bombload/year that Germany managed to drop was app. 400.000 tonnes... The allies dropped over 5.000.000 tonnes of ordinance in 1944 alone.... and not all of them exploded.... when you go to a big city and there is a new construction site, chances are good, that some WW II bomb is found during the excavation works.
wie wind zaait zal storm oogsten.BEE_Grim_Reaper wrote:
Well... not only Dresden, though this is one splendid example...Spark wrote:
You mean Dresden? Which was bombed to splinters by the USAF? And a few hundred thousand dead? On a festival day?
Also Hamburg, where the bombings created a Firestorm lasting a week
Or Cologne, where the only building left nearly unscathed was the Dome... the rest being more or less flat rubble... and there was not one piece of industrial facilities in the centre of that city (even now there isn't).
And one has to note, that the highest bombload/year that Germany managed to drop was app. 400.000 tonnes... The allies dropped over 5.000.000 tonnes of ordinance in 1944 alone.... and not all of them exploded.... when you go to a big city and there is a new construction site, chances are good, that some WW II bomb is found during the excavation works.
koekje van eigen deeg.
oh, really ?TheMajorBummer wrote:
wie wind zaait zal storm oogsten.BEE_Grim_Reaper wrote:
Well... not only Dresden, though this is one splendid example...Spark wrote:
You mean Dresden? Which was bombed to splinters by the USAF? And a few hundred thousand dead? On a festival day?
Also Hamburg, where the bombings created a Firestorm lasting a week
Or Cologne, where the only building left nearly unscathed was the Dome... the rest being more or less flat rubble... and there was not one piece of industrial facilities in the centre of that city (even now there isn't).
And one has to note, that the highest bombload/year that Germany managed to drop was app. 400.000 tonnes... The allies dropped over 5.000.000 tonnes of ordinance in 1944 alone.... and not all of them exploded.... when you go to a big city and there is a new construction site, chances are good, that some WW II bomb is found during the excavation works.
koekje van eigen deeg.
how nice of you to say that. Let's not breed any more dutch-german hatred, shall we ?
Agreed.... that whole WWII thing was a very bad idea from the start... especially the start in 1933. I mean... Germany had it coming after levelling Rotterdam and Coventry and all the atrocities being committed....B.Schuss wrote:
oh, really ?TheMajorBummer wrote:
wie wind zaait zal storm oogsten.BEE_Grim_Reaper wrote:
Well... not only Dresden, though this is one splendid example...
Also Hamburg, where the bombings created a Firestorm lasting a week
Or Cologne, where the only building left nearly unscathed was the Dome... the rest being more or less flat rubble... and there was not one piece of industrial facilities in the centre of that city (even now there isn't).
And one has to note, that the highest bombload/year that Germany managed to drop was app. 400.000 tonnes... The allies dropped over 5.000.000 tonnes of ordinance in 1944 alone.... and not all of them exploded.... when you go to a big city and there is a new construction site, chances are good, that some WW II bomb is found during the excavation works.
koekje van eigen deeg.
how nice of you to say that. Let's not breed any more dutch-german hatred, shall we ?
My actual point was: It is a big difference suffering from war in a country that never experienced enemy activity within its own boarder or suffering from war while either living in a hailstorm of bombs or being occupied by hostile forces.
I thought the Brits did dresden am I not correct ?
And one has to note, that the highest bombload/year that Germany managed to drop was app. 400.000 tonnes...
( This is pretty silly to comment on, all it means is "thats the best they could do"
They would have dropped 687,897,000.76 million tons if they'd had the ability )
The allies dropped over 5.000.000 tonnes of ordinance in 1944 alone....
( There was something of a WAR on, )
and not all of them exploded.... ( Hey We tried at least.)
when you go to a big city and there is a new construction site, chances are good, that some WW II bomb is found during the excavation works.
( Carefull with that shovel ! )
Well you should Be Nice from now on. last I checked we never gassed anyone.
( This is pretty silly to comment on, all it means is "thats the best they could do"
They would have dropped 687,897,000.76 million tons if they'd had the ability )
The allies dropped over 5.000.000 tonnes of ordinance in 1944 alone....
( There was something of a WAR on, )
and not all of them exploded.... ( Hey We tried at least.)
when you go to a big city and there is a new construction site, chances are good, that some WW II bomb is found during the excavation works.
( Carefull with that shovel ! )
Well you should Be Nice from now on. last I checked we never gassed anyone.
More info at (where else) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of … ld_War_II.Horseman 77 wrote:
I thought the Brits did dresden am I not correct ?
Both did. And did it good, too.
One of many major bombing campaigns on German cities.
Last edited by Spark (2006-01-27 23:51:21)
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Sure takes a good military to bomb a civie city
You're right... Germany could not do better... as matter of fact, the reason is because the Luftwaffe was completely designed for ground support and air superiority but was without a strategic ar.Horseman 77 wrote:
And one has to note, that the highest bombload/year that Germany managed to drop was app. 400.000 tonnes...
( This is pretty silly to comment on, all it means is "thats the best they could do"
They would have dropped 687,897,000.76 million tons if they'd had the ability )
The allies dropped over 5.000.000 tonnes of ordinance in 1944 alone....
( There was something of a WAR on, )
and not all of them exploded.... ( Hey We tried at least.)
when you go to a big city and there is a new construction site, chances are good, that some WW II bomb is found during the excavation works.
( Carefull with that shovel ! )
Well you should Be Nice from now on. last I checked we never gassed anyone.
As for "There was something of a WAR on".... There is definitely a difference between bombing strategic targets and bombing civilian non-com targets into rubble. On the other hand, the phrase "collateral damage" (aka civilian casualties) was not yet in use.
As a matter of fact, we are nice now since we do not have a Hitler anymore (one of the very few things I thank God for being an Atheist), But I would like to correct your last statement a bit... it should read "Last I checked we never gassed people in that quantities".... Gaschamber is still legal mean of capital punishment in the US (at least in some of the states).
Yeah, they did... unfortunately, Dresden was a city without military value... it has been beautiful before though... one of the few baroque cities.... built even before the Brits actually thought of colonizing America.... well... there goes history and culture... in a hail of bombsSpark wrote:
More info at (where else) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of … ld_War_II.Horseman 77 wrote:
I thought the Brits did dresden am I not correct ?
Both did. And did it good, too.
One of many major bombing campaigns on German cities.
Symantics You couldnt leave without risking your life.BEE_Grim_Reaper wrote:
No, I am not...Horseman 77 wrote:
As for only East Germany haveing a Wall ...Are you really saying the USSR had open borders and allowed free travel ? Everyone I know from the USSR had to Excape? Including sevaral Soldiers who excaped while patroling the borders to prevent excapes.
Still, the only physical wall was in Germany, not USSR
By the way, Horseman, you might want to read this: http://forums.bf2s.com/help.php#bbcode
There it tells you, how to quote
The Irony about your tiff with renagade is that if The USA and GB had let the USSR have its way all Europe would have been eradicated Especially Germany, and with a vengence. Man if you think they had a rape fest after WWII than domt even think about what would have happend if The real Allies hadn't been there to face them down. You do recall theie attempt to starve Berlin or did they think everyone needed a little dieting ?
I could have sworn I read some where you posted something like
but I cant find it. Did you post something like that and what did it mean ? what would happen. ?BEE_Grim_Reaper wrote:
" all Europe might get together against the USA and You know what would happen ! "
HAHAHAHAH, are you for real? Seriously, are you? This post was so dumb it even made my lazy ass post here, I hope you realize how much I am laughing right now?yuck7777 wrote:
How France does the unthinkable? The war in Iraq has yelded infomation that France since the end of the first gulf war was supplying Saddam with over $20 billion worth of military equipment and spare parts which were smuggled in through Siria. In exchange France got 23% of the Iraqis oil. All this while Iraq was under sanctions from the UN. And of couse they didn't back the Iraq war, Because it would make them lose the sweet deal they had.
Now with Iran. The French have been investing alot of money in Iran. The Big automotive companies have invested a big chunk of money there.
How can we trust France in there talks with Iran over the nukes? Should we boycott France? Should the US and there true Allies label France as a terrorist supporter or even a Terriorist state?
What do you think?
Well don't start an other world war then. besides your 0 and 2 time to find another National pastime, No ?BEE_Grim_Reaper wrote:
Yeah, they did... unfortunately, Dresden was a city without military value...Spark wrote:
More info at (where else) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of … ld_War_II.Horseman 77 wrote:
I thought the Brits did dresden am I not correct ?
Both did. And did it good, too.
One of many major bombing campaigns on German cities.
Excuse me ? did Germans live there?
it has been beautiful before though... one of the few baroque cities.... built even before the Brits actually thought of colonizing America.... well... there goes history and culture... in a hail of bombs
" We barbeque and gas millions of people but pout when you topple an old building in retaleation."
The real Irony here is that Germany tried to do the same thing to London, they just couldn't get the job done.
They would have done it cheerfully to as many "old pretty cities " as it took to win the war.
This is quickly becoming Sureal.
Actually, Dresden, I believe, had a major railway station. Do I need to explain why this was important.BEE_Grim_Reaper wrote:
Yeah, they did... unfortunately, Dresden was a city without military value... it has been beautiful before though... one of the few baroque cities.... built even before the Brits actually thought of colonizing America.... well... there goes history and culture... in a hail of bombsSpark wrote:
More info at (where else) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of … ld_War_II.Horseman 77 wrote:
I thought the Brits did dresden am I not correct ?
Both did. And did it good, too.
One of many major bombing campaigns on German cities.
Anyhoo, the thing that made this attack even worse was that they didn't do squat the station (mabye a minor exaggeration, but you get what I mean). The trains were up and running the next day (the 16th), while Dresden burned.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Could you please read the last few posts. It has been said numerous times now that that paticular topic was ended some time ago.Nehil wrote:
HAHAHAHAH, are you for real? Seriously, are you? This post was so dumb it even made my lazy ass post here, I hope you realize how much I am laughing right now?yuck7777 wrote:
How France does the unthinkable? The war in Iraq has yelded infomation that France since the end of the first gulf war was supplying Saddam with over $20 billion worth of military equipment and spare parts which were smuggled in through Siria. In exchange France got 23% of the Iraqis oil. All this while Iraq was under sanctions from the UN. And of couse they didn't back the Iraq war, Because it would make them lose the sweet deal they had.
Now with Iran. The French have been investing alot of money in Iran. The Big automotive companies have invested a big chunk of money there.
How can we trust France in there talks with Iran over the nukes? Should we boycott France? Should the US and there true Allies label France as a terrorist supporter or even a Terriorist state?
What do you think?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
lol, stop generalizing about something you don't know. I live here, and I can tell you, 90% of things I hear on T.V. are about how bad our country is, which it isn't. And I know how much the "Neo-Cons" as you call them, Conservative to people who can say big words, love America, so only 9% of MEDIA is controlled by Conservatives.Spark wrote:
I only wish that isn't true (first fact). The problem is the MEDIA. People are so brainwashed (in America) nowadays that (because every TV station is neocon-controlled, as far as I know) they believe what ever is spewed out at them.
Once people start to speak up...
Last edited by piett55 (2006-01-29 01:42:14)
The majority of the (mainstream) media in the US is slightly liberal leaning (or more). About the only mainstream media outlet that is conservative leaning is Fox News.piett55 wrote:
lol, stop generalizing about something you don't know. I live here, and I can tell you, 90% of things I hear on T.V. are about how bad our country is, which it isn't. And I know how much the "Neo-Cons" as you call them, Conservative to people who can say big words, love America, so only 9% of MEDIA is controlled by Conservatives.Spark wrote:
I only wish that isn't true (first fact). The problem is the MEDIA. People are so brainwashed (in America) nowadays that (because every TV station is neocon-controlled, as far as I know) they believe what ever is spewed out at them.
Once people start to speak up...
Then why were you 25 times more likely to see a pro-war person than a anti-war person? Why were there very few detailed interviews with people opposing the Iraq War?atlvolunteer wrote:
The majority of the (mainstream) media in the US is slightly liberal leaning (or more). About the only mainstream media outlet that is conservative leaning is Fox News.piett55 wrote:
lol, stop generalizing about something you don't know. I live here, and I can tell you, 90% of things I hear on T.V. are about how bad our country is, which it isn't. And I know how much the "Neo-Cons" as you call them, Conservative to people who can say big words, love America, so only 9% of MEDIA is controlled by Conservatives.Spark wrote:
I only wish that isn't true (first fact). The problem is the MEDIA. People are so brainwashed (in America) nowadays that (because every TV station is neocon-controlled, as far as I know) they believe what ever is spewed out at them.
Once people start to speak up...
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
I'm not sure where you're getting that. I would say about 90% of the war coverage is negative.Spark wrote:
Then why were you 25 times more likely to see a pro-war person than a anti-war person? Why were there very few detailed interviews with people opposing the Iraq War?
Gaschamber is still legal mean of capital punishment in the US...BEE_Grim_Reaper wrote:
You're right... Germany could not do better... as matter of fact, the reason is because the Luftwaffe was completely designed for ground support and air superiority but was without a strategic ar.Horseman 77 wrote:
And one has to note, that the highest bombload/year that Germany managed to drop was app. 400.000 tonnes...
( This is pretty silly to comment on, all it means is "thats the best they could do"
They would have dropped 687,897,000.76 million tons if they'd had the ability )
The allies dropped over 5.000.000 tonnes of ordinance in 1944 alone....
( There was something of a WAR on, )
and not all of them exploded.... ( Hey We tried at least.)
when you go to a big city and there is a new construction site, chances are good, that some WW II bomb is found during the excavation works.
( Carefull with that shovel ! )
Well you should Be Nice from now on. last I checked we never gassed anyone.
As for "There was something of a WAR on".... There is definitely a difference between bombing strategic targets and bombing civilian non-com targets into rubble. On the other hand, the phrase "collateral damage" (aka civilian casualties) was not yet in use.
As a matter of fact, we are nice now since we do not have a Hitler anymore (one of the very few things I thank God for being an Atheist), But I would like to correct your last statement a bit... it should read "Last I checked we never gassed people in that quantities".... Gaschamber is still legal mean of capital punishment in the US (at least in some of the states).
So do you think you will be visiting soon. We have a really cool looking Aquarium we want to show you.
You sit inside it!
Really, total bs, its all " We lost " cant win " Etc..Spark wrote:
Then why were you 25 times more likely to see a pro-war person than a anti-war person? Why were there very few detailed interviews with people opposing the Iraq War?atlvolunteer wrote:
The majority of the (mainstream) media in the US is slightly liberal leaning (or more). About the only mainstream media outlet that is conservative leaning is Fox News.piett55 wrote:
lol, stop generalizing about something you don't know. I live here, and I can tell you, 90% of things I hear on T.V. are about how bad our country is, which it isn't. And I know how much the "Neo-Cons" as you call them, Conservative to people who can say big words, love America, so only 9% of MEDIA is controlled by Conservatives.
lol ? you lost me there...Horseman 77 wrote:
Gaschamber is still legal mean of capital punishment in the US...BEE_Grim_Reaper wrote:
You're right... Germany could not do better... as matter of fact, the reason is because the Luftwaffe was completely designed for ground support and air superiority but was without a strategic ar.Horseman 77 wrote:
And one has to note, that the highest bombload/year that Germany managed to drop was app. 400.000 tonnes...
( This is pretty silly to comment on, all it means is "thats the best they could do"
They would have dropped 687,897,000.76 million tons if they'd had the ability )
The allies dropped over 5.000.000 tonnes of ordinance in 1944 alone....
( There was something of a WAR on, )
and not all of them exploded.... ( Hey We tried at least.)
when you go to a big city and there is a new construction site, chances are good, that some WW II bomb is found during the excavation works.
( Carefull with that shovel ! )
Well you should Be Nice from now on. last I checked we never gassed anyone.
As for "There was something of a WAR on".... There is definitely a difference between bombing strategic targets and bombing civilian non-com targets into rubble. On the other hand, the phrase "collateral damage" (aka civilian casualties) was not yet in use.
As a matter of fact, we are nice now since we do not have a Hitler anymore (one of the very few things I thank God for being an Atheist), But I would like to correct your last statement a bit... it should read "Last I checked we never gassed people in that quantities".... Gaschamber is still legal mean of capital punishment in the US (at least in some of the states).
So do you think you will be visiting soon. We have a really cool looking Aquarium we want to show you.
You sit inside it!
can we please stop taking WWII as a basis for comparing the US and Germany today ? Those were different times and very different countries. All of us were born way after WWII. Horseman can not take credit for what US soldiers two generations ago did and Reaper didn't fight for Hitler and shouldn't be blamed for gassing jews or invading poland.
that discussion is pointless.
I agree with you Schuss (doesn't that mean shoot?), just like people should quit bringing up slavery and what happened to the indians when they talk about America. Its all ancient history.B.Schuss wrote:
can we please stop taking WWII as a basis for comparing the US and Germany today ? Those were different times and very different countries. All of us were born way after WWII. Horseman can not take credit for what US soldiers two generations ago did and Reaper didn't fight for Hitler and shouldn't be blamed for gassing jews or invading poland.
that discussion is pointless.