June 6th 1944

Forum Sponsor
Red_Liner740 said:
I love how you cherry pick a persons response and focus in on it.

Americans didnt choose to use the nukes as a first time use, they fire bombed dozens of cities previously, carpet bombing campaign has been ongoing since 1942 in Europe. Somehow, i dont think being vaporized by an atom bomb vs being burned alive by "conventional" bombs makes a difference to those who perish...in fact, i'd much rather get vaporized by a nuke than being burned alive in a city wide inferno.

And the question of "combatants", again, the vast majority of Japanese citizenry was ready to commit suicide, so sure, land your troops and with no air force, no sea power just see how many casualties the Allied troops were going to suffer.
Click to expand...

And I love how you argue Military ethics with no formal Leadership and ethics training.

Casualties are expected when you invade a country that will defend itself.

Would you drop to your knees and start sucking dick or would you fight your invaders?

I'd like to think you would do the latter.

Is there a point in your post that you are trying to get across. Other than if it was up to you, you would ethnic clense an entire race of men, women and children?
 
America was reluctant to enter the war. The UK & Canada was pressuring them to enter the war but they insisted they were too far to be affected by that politics.

Only when they were bombed did they enter. After the war I guessed they learn the value of a puppet gov't.
 
Boom, D23 has officially became the first on my ignore list, i'm sure i'm not the last or first to have done so.

I cant have a conversation with that dude.
 
D23 said:
And I love how you argue Military ethics with no formal Leadership and ethics training.

Casualties are expected when you invade a country that will defend itself.

Would you drop to your knees and start sucking dick or would you fight your invaders?

I'd like to think you would do the latter.

Is there a point in your post that you are trying to get across. Other than if it was up to you, you would ethnic clense an entire race of men, women and children?
Click to expand...

1940's military ethics and tactics ≠ current military ethics and tactics

I don't want to get an infraction, so I won't call you a moron.
 
Red_Liner740 said:
i'm not the last or first to have done so.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure you were the last to do so at time of posting this.

You just said. D23 will never read a reply of mine again.....

We both win.

Now you have just read two of my posts. :)
 
kellen said:
1940's military ethics and tactics ≠ current military ethics and tactics

I don't want to get an infraction, so I won't call you a moron.
Click to expand...

Well done, lolz
 
RockerGuy said:
Well done, lolz
Click to expand...

Well done?

Makes dumb statement. Doesn't know how dumb statement is. Gets called on it.

Has nothing.

Runs away.

Yea, really well done.

I'd ignore the fact that Ethics and Tactics are two different things since Ethics is part of Leadership and Ethics and Tactics is it's own thing but given the "knoledge" shown here I'll let it slide.

So....

How about 1 of you experts answer for him?

What was the difference between the ROE's in WW II and today that made it acceptable to kill unarmed civilians?

Come on experts.

Educate me.

Pull out all your "I watched this movie once" expertise.

It's better than admitting you're told what to think and think it.
 
Last edited:
Very interesting....let's not go off topic from the OP's post .. To remember the sacrifices of all those who lost on our side...I prefer to remember all those who died in that war in general...this was a war created by politicians... Soldiers and civilians paid the price on both...correction on ALL sides

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom