If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Mary Shafer wrote: On 21 Dec 2003 23:00:36 -0800, (cave fish) wrote: You are right. However, anyone who justifies the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki based purely on estimates are on shaky ground. They keep saying how it saved lives. But, how do they know? Because the US is still using Purple Hearts from those struck for the invasion of the Japanese homeland? And there's no foreseeable end to the supply at the rate they're being used? Mary -- Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer The Army ordered at least 370,000 Purple Hearts in June of '45, expecting to award those to KIA and WIA from the invasion of Japan. Navy ordered at least 100,000 for Navy and Marine casualties. Still lots in storage. Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access! |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"Alan Minyard" wrote in message ... On 22 Dec 2003 23:00:35 GMT, nt (Krztalizer) wrote: All parts of the "Mosquito" myth. The A-20, B-25, B-26, etc all had the same bombing capabilities. Early in the war, the Mossy was all that the Brits had, so it was useful for them to portray it as a "super weapon" There are a couple of slight problems here 1) The Mosquito wasnt available in the early part of the war 2) The RAF operated all of the US types you mention and replaced many of them with the Mosquito 3) There are very few aircraft of WW2 that were succesful in as many roles as the Mosquito. Fighter, maritime strike, night fighter, fighter bomber and night bomber. 4) The RAF never depicted it as a super weapon, the major types used in the bomber offensive were the Lancaster and Halifax. Don't get me wrong, the Mossy was a fine a/c, but it was NOT a "precision" weapon. It certainly was on occasion as in the raid on the Gestapo prison at Amiens and the HQ in Copenhagen. The problem was in such raids the losses were heavy as at such low altitude German light flak was deadly. It was not of course a wonder weapon but the Luftwaffe certainly came to fear it by night every bit as much as they did the P-51 by day. Keith |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
devil wrote: On Thu, 25 Dec 2003 20:46:54 +0000, Charles Gray wrote: On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 16:54:04 -0000, "freeda" wrote: Bear in mind America could forcast the impending cold war, so what better way to scare the Russians ****less. Um, not as clear as you believe-- because if we could "Forcast" the coming cold war, why was our military allowed to decline so quickly before Korea? Forecast? The US started it in the first place. And make no mistake, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the first shot. Even mo then why the drastic drawdown in forces after WW2? |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Richard Periut wrote: Steve Hix wrote: In article , Richard Periut wrote: Steve Hix wrote: Richard Periut wrote: Linda Terrell wrote: So let me get this straight; in order to clear a country of a despotism, you have to try to annihilate at least two cities full of thousands of civilians? I'm really intrigued. It ended the war. Yeah, and the cost of human lives and the suffering? Significantly less than the alternatives of blockade or invasion. Note Periut's dancing as he dodges the issue: Well if you consider Cuba, it can freely trade with the European Union, just as any other country blockaded by another country. Not much of a blockade, then, is it? Have someone explain the difference between a blockade and a boycott sometime. Do you spend much time figuring out how to dodge and issue, or is it a natural talent on your part? Oh, your post speaks volumes of wisdom and knowledge. Noting, once again, that you dodge the issue. The boycott of Cuba by the U.S. is *nothing* like the proposed blockage of Japan that was considered as one of the options of ending the war in the Pacific. Have someone explain to you, that Castro considers it both a blockade and a boycott. A boycott it clearly is; the U.S. officially bars U.S. entities from doing business with Cuba. As a blockade, it pretty much misses the mark, since just about anyone else on earth can do business with Cuba. And Cuba's economy is *still* in the tank. Have you ever attempted to remove the anal probe stuck high up yer rectum? You're apparently projecting some deeply hidden desire of your own on someone else. Weird. You really don't want to face the fact that you *still* haven't acknowledged that the blockade of Japan would have resulted in more Japanese deaths than did using the two atomic bombs that drove the Japanese finally to unconditional surrender. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Richard Periut wrote:
Seems to me to sell off these possessions might, in the short run be helpful but would, in the long run, be detrimental to the well-being of the membership and therefore the world. -- -Gord. You mean, continue to be the opium of the people. Didn't C. Marx say that? Rich Pretty impressive argument there Richard... -- -Gord. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
(B2431) wrote: From: Steve Hix NVALID Date: 12/28/2003 10:29 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , Richard Periut wrote: Steve Hix wrote: In article , Richard Periut wrote: Steve Hix wrote: Richard Periut wrote: Linda Terrell wrote: So let me get this straight; in order to clear a country of a despotism, you have to try to annihilate at least two cities full of thousands of civilians? I'm really intrigued. It ended the war. Yeah, and the cost of human lives and the suffering? Significantly less than the alternatives of blockade or invasion. Note Periut's dancing as he dodges the issue: Well if you consider Cuba, it can freely trade with the European Union, just as any other country blockaded by another country. Not much of a blockade, then, is it? Have someone explain the difference between a blockade and a boycott sometime. Do you spend much time figuring out how to dodge and issue, or is it a natural talent on your part? Oh, your post speaks volumes of wisdom and knowledge. Noting, once again, that you dodge the issue. The boycott of Cuba by the U.S. is *nothing* like the proposed blockage of Japan that was considered as one of the options of ending the war in the Pacific. Have someone explain to you, that Castro considers it both a blockade and a boycott. A boycott it clearly is; the U.S. officially bars U.S. entities from doing business with Cuba. As a blockade, it pretty much misses the mark, since just about anyone else on earth can do business with Cuba. And Cuba's economy is *still* in the tank. A blockade is an act of war. Why do you think JFK called his act a quarantine?" Because fuses were short enough, what with Russian freighters inbound, at the time. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Enola Gay: Burnt flesh and other magnificent technological achievements | me | Military Aviation | 146 | January 15th 04 10:13 PM |
Enola Gay: Burnt flesh and other magnificent technological achievements | Alan Minyard | Military Aviation | 6 | December 21st 03 01:17 PM |
Enola Gay: Burnt flesh and other magnificent | B2431 | Military Aviation | 1 | December 20th 03 01:19 PM |
Enola Gay: Burnt flesh and other magnificent technological | ArtKramr | Military Aviation | 19 | December 20th 03 02:47 AM |
Japanese Whine Over Enola Gay Display | [email protected] | Military Aviation | 42 | December 19th 03 11:32 PM |