I lol'd at 9/11

    • Re: I lol'd at 9/11

      ~+ Bear +~ wrote:

      America gave them a chance to surrender. We told them what would happen if they didn't. They where in no position to argue anyfurther, but they still chose to.

      ---------- Post added at 09:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:48 PM ----------



      I think I sense a little jealously.


      And Japan answered with a rational, conditional surrender that was in no means unfair. Did America care? Fuck no, bomb the shit out of them cuz we're better than the rest of the world cuz we got nukes!

      Should I be jealous of your inhumane, barbaric actions?

      ---------- Post added at 09:27 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:25 AM ----------

      Sasha wrote:

      Fact? What fact? This is just a justification, a twist of numbers without any factual basis.


      The emperor offered a conditional surrender. Americans deliberately ignored it and the American people were never made aware of it.


      Fair enough. After what Americans did to 1,500,000 Austrian and Italian women in Europe after World War 2, the Japanese had a good reason to defend themselves.


      To someone neutral and objective, it means nothing. These are arbitary numbers to justify a cowardly mass murder. Which is no surprise since it comes from a nation formed by killing 20 million natives and a nation known for slavery and racism till the second half of 20th century.


      Using nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear warring weapon is cowardly. American men are ball-less wimps, who can't fight like men. They are as brave as the hunter who shoots a moose from a helicopter using a sniper rifle.


      Our soldiers fought like men and wiped out the German forces in the West and Japanese forces in the East.


      You can, but using nukes against a non-nuclear nation makes you a nation of wimps.


      My pleasure. :)


      If we have a combat between 10 female British troops and 10 male American troops, the Americans males will be tied up and taken by a strap-on by the end of the fight.


      The training of US Marines are a joke compared to what the Royal Marines go through. In the age of scalar and EMP weapons, reliance on too much technology against a first world military has its hazards...


      ...and a military that is as skilled and courageous as the SS Wehrmarcht was.


      Accepted the Japanese offer of conditional surrender. Honestly, if I were a Japanese then, there is no way I'd have given up my sovereignty to a nation that constitutes a majority of the world's child predators.


      The Germans didn't make an offer of surrender, even an unconditional one till the Reichstag was taken over by Russians. We took them like men, not like castrated wimps.


      Really? And where does that estimation come from?


      The Japanese offer a conditional surrender, but America wouldn't accept it. But you are obviously too stupid to know that, aren't you? Next time, don't act all offended when your oh-so-obvious idiocy gets called off.



      You took the words out of my mouth, my friend.
      [CENTER].::ANIME is DOPAMINE to me::.
      [/CENTER]

    • Re: I lol'd at 9/11

      Sasha wrote:

      The training of US Marines are a joke compared to what the Royal Marines go through. In the age of scalar and EMP weapons, reliance on too much technology against a first world military has its hazards...



      Quoted for two reasons:

      ~One: the personal bias of whose "Military is better". :rofl:

      ~Two: Neither training for either the Royal Marines, or the US Marines are made to be easy... Yes, slight variations. However, the result is remarkably similar.
      [CENTER][SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] [/CENTER]
      [CENTER]We're the first to fight, the last to leave. We're your worst nightmare, and your greatest blessing. We are the US Marines!
      [/CENTER]

    • Re: I lol'd at 9/11

      The Guardian wrote:

      Hmm, here's something for you to chew on when arguing the use of the atomic bombs during WWII; It was estimated to gain a beach-head on the japanese mainland.... it would cost the lives of over 1000000 men.

      Do the numbers yourself, the atomic bombs killed only a few hundred thousand. Compared to the few million in WWI, and many more in WWII.. It is rather small though sad that we had to resort to it.


      Had to? I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry at that. America didn't Have to do anything. It was the end of the war, and like the little retarded cousin that your mum makes you play with when they come around, America shat on everything. We would have won without killing all those people in Japan.
      [CENTER][SIGPIC][/SIGPIC][/CENTER]

    • Re: I lol'd at 9/11

      Sasha wrote:

      From what I have heard of first hand accounts, the Royal Marines stationed in Iraq actually did something. The Americans usually cowered in their bunkers or burned fuel driving around the safe zones, while lying to their superiors that they were 'patrolling the area'. And of course, raping local girls, either at gunpoint, threats or for a few trifles.


      Actually, I've not touched neither pc, cell-phone, phone, TV and any other electronic device you can name for over three months until yesterday sometime. Despite your opinion of where you think I get my news, and so on is irrelevant to this discussion. And further more if you wish to play the "I'm better than you game"

      That's fine your just showing that your going to great lengths to prove your immaturity, Great job buddy!

      At least we leave no man behind.

      Magical Teapot wrote:

      Had to? I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry at that. America didn't Have to do anything. It was the end of the war, and like the little retarded cousin that your mum makes you play with when they come around, America shat on everything. We would have won without killing all those people in Japan.


      I'm sure Britain, the ignorant and arrogant would still be here without us? Your trying to play this what if game, with the past. As far as I know there is no rewind button on time. What you think could have been done differently does not matter.

      Based on the experts and the leaders of the times, they made the choice the a million lives is more than a few hundred thousand, therefore making a sacrifice. A soldier does not join the military going yeah I'm in for the money, unless he/she is a total idiot.

      We, the Military do it for a bigger reason(Knowing full well our lives mean nothing anymore). We protect something much bigger than ourselves... the people, freedom so on. For the people there odds are no where near close.

      Here; read these articles.

      Article I: I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.

      Article II: I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.

      Article III: If I am captured I will continue to resist bt all means available. I will make every attempt to escapeand aid others to escape. I will neither accept parole or special favors from the enemy.

      And so on...

      Article VI: I Will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and deicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States Of America.

      Yes these are actuall articles. At times, there will be sacifice in mass numbers in seconds to save millions or slowly over time, as young men and women gladly sell their body, mind soul and time to protect the next generation.

      At times one must choose the lesser of two evils, or in the case of the atomic bombs two outcomes.
      [CENTER][SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] [/CENTER]
      [CENTER]We're the first to fight, the last to leave. We're your worst nightmare, and your greatest blessing. We are the US Marines!
      [/CENTER]

    • Re: I lol'd at 9/11

      Sasha wrote:




      First hand accounts from a number of people who actually worked with the US and Royal militaries.



      Really. First hand accounts. Basically, you're saying No, you weren't there, and have no real way to justify what you said.

      And OF COURSE they would say that, considering they're in favor of the RM
      [CENTER]To the dumb question, 'Why me?' the cosmos barely bothers to return the reply, 'Why not?[/CENTER]
      [CENTER]Hitchens[/CENTER]

    • Re: I lol'd at 9/11

      Sasha has been a member for 4 years, in the how ever long I have been here, I was never seen Sasha loose a debate, If Americans are as clever as they claim to be, Wouldn't it be wise to ignore Sasha if they don't want to be crushed by his intellectual skills, because he has an answer for everything. Well typical americans, they go rushing to war at the slightest mention of Jews, oil, threat, communism, and Sasha.


      I swear, if Sasha doesn't cause a war with America and doesn't defeat them all, I will eat my legs.
      [CENTER][SIGPIC][/SIGPIC][/CENTER]

    • Re: I lol'd at 9/11

      Sasha wrote:

      When the WTC and Pentagon attacks happened, were you there? Probably not. You believed it happened, based on accounts of fellow Americans either in person or on TV. You don't have to be there when something happens, for it to happen. (Can't believe I have to explain this to someone, even an American).

      I have very trustworthy first hand accounts from people in my field, detailing me on whats going on in there. I know about it more than you could find out.


      Even the US military persons I have spoken to?

      You really are a stubborn pindos, aren't you? If you really don't want to believe it, there is nothing I could do or say that would make you believe it. You are just a typical American in denial.



      No, I was not there. You're correct. And I never said you had to be there for anything to happen.

      But the fact that you where not there dictates that what you may have heard COULD have been false. Just like what I seen COULD have been false, even though I don't see how this relates to 9/11 in anyway.

      I'm simply asking you to practice what you preach; to back up what you say with evidence. Which you've not done.
      [CENTER]To the dumb question, 'Why me?' the cosmos barely bothers to return the reply, 'Why not?[/CENTER]
      [CENTER]Hitchens[/CENTER]

    • Re: I lol'd at 9/11

      Sasha wrote:

      I know I am better than you, without having to play a game about it. Having said that, it might interest you to know that I directed the TV comment against Bear and not you. Unless you are an alterego of Bear or actually draw your judgements from TV shows, you shouldn't pull that towards yourself.


      Oh really? If we have people like you judging my maturity, we might as well let retards judge for Nobel Prize.


      I thought Americans believed in the seperation of religion from politics.



      First, you more over did not just merely direct that at bear, but more of the entire American public. Also, the media in the United Kingdom area, is much more liberal and does not have the moderation that other nations have.


      I did not have to do a thing, but point it out. Remember, I even said it was a great job. Would you really continue these games?

      The separation of church and state, is not a law but just a mere letter. Now, let me ask you this in politics, do you bring to the table(like every other candidate) your personal beliefs?
      [CENTER][SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] [/CENTER]
      [CENTER]We're the first to fight, the last to leave. We're your worst nightmare, and your greatest blessing. We are the US Marines!
      [/CENTER]

    • Re: I lol'd at 9/11

      The Guardian wrote:

      Now, let me ask you this in politics, do you bring to the table(like every other candidate) your personal beliefs?


      The fact that he thinks he's better than everyone else sort of answers that :rolleyes:
      [CENTER]To the dumb question, 'Why me?' the cosmos barely bothers to return the reply, 'Why not?[/CENTER]
      [CENTER]Hitchens[/CENTER]

    • Re: I lol'd at 9/11

      Fact? What fact? This is just a justification, a twist of numbers without any factual basis.


      Well it is impossible to have a real factual basis because the invasion of Japan didn't actually happen. But that doesn't mean we can't use estimates to predict what probably would have happened.

      The emperor offered a conditional surrender. Americans deliberately ignored it and the American people were never made aware of it.


      And it was wrong of the government to keep that information from the people, but it doesn't change that the Japanese conditional surrender was unacceptable to the US because it suggested allowing Japan to disarm themselves. So obviously they wouldn't have disarmed themselves to the level that the US wanted them to. And since the US objective was to destroy Japan's ability to wage war, we had to make sure they were really going to disarm completely.


      Fair enough. After what Americans did to 1,500,000 Austrian and Italian women in Europe after World War 2, the Japanese had a good reason to defend themselves.


      Well that was after the war, so they wouldn't have known about that. Plus the Japanese didn't actually have to defend themselves because our objective was not to take over Japan and make it part of our country or anything like that, it was simply to make sure they could never wage a big war again. So basically the Japanese were never at risk of actually losing their country. All they had to do was surrender and agree to US terms of surrender when it was obvious the fight was already lost for them.

      To someone neutral and objective, it means nothing. These are arbitary numbers to justify a cowardly mass murder. Which is no surprise since it comes from a nation formed by killing 20 million natives and a nation known for slavery and racism till the second half of 20th century.


      But the numbers are clear: Invasion would have cost millions of lives, and the nuclear bombing cost 500,000 lives. Even from a neutral point of view you could see that the nuclear bombing is ideal because it costs less lives on BOTH sides.

      Using nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear warring weapon is cowardly. American men are ball-less wimps, who can't fight like men. They are as brave as the hunter who shoots a moose from a helicopter using a sniper rifle.


      Well the point of a war is not to be fair, it's simply to destroy or outdo the enemy. Using a weapon that the enemy doesn't have is commonplace in war. Think of the cold war as an example- the US and the Soviet Union were constantly striving to get new or improved weapons that the other side didn't have. Any military with the budget to do so always strives to get new weapons or improve their weapons to be better than that of their adversaries.

      I don't really see how you could say that Americans are ball-less wimps. I mean sure there are many of those in America (99% of them are in the civilian world, though) but American troops have always fought with bravery in any war.

      Just because those troops didn't end up invading Japan doesn't make them cowardly. They still fought in all the other islands controlled by Japan and took many casualties.

      You can, but using nukes against a non-nuclear nation makes you a nation of wimps.


      But like I said earlier, was is never about being fair.

      The training of US Marines are a joke compared to what the Royal Marines go through. In the age of scalar and EMP weapons, reliance on too much technology against a first world military has its hazards...


      What exactly do Royal Marines have to go through that US Marines do not? How is their training different?

      Also, as far as I know the UK relies just as much on technology as the US.

      Accepted the Japanese offer of conditional surrender. Honestly, if I were a Japanese then, there is no way I'd have given up my sovereignty to a nation that constitutes a majority of the world's child predators.


      But as I said earlier their conditions were unacceptable because letting Japan disarm themselves would have been unacceptable.

      The Germans didn't make an offer of surrender, even an unconditional one till the Reichstag was taken over by Russians. We took them like men, not like castrated wimps.


      Well the Japanese made an unreasonable one.


      From what I have heard of first hand accounts, the Royal Marines stationed in Iraq actually did something. The Americans usually cowered in their bunkers or burned fuel driving around the safe zones, while lying to their superiors that they were 'patrolling the area'. And of course, raping local girls, either at gunpoint, threats or for a few trifles.


      US Marines do constant patrols as well as house-to-house fighting and other engagements with insurgents in both Iraq and Afghanistan. They did most of the fighting in Fallujah, for example.
      [CENTER][SIGPIC][/SIGPIC][/CENTER]

    • Re: I lol'd at 9/11

      Sasha wrote:

      For a moment, I smelt another of this "it is not our fault" excuse till...


      ...you turned out to be no less savage than the majority of your fellow Americans are.

      And then I pointed out We the people don't run shit.
      What about that do you not understand?
      OUR Government controls the media which they use to try and make us retarded and from the looks of things it working.Who do you think elects the president?When bush was in office congress had a 9% approval rating.
      Now that obama is office people wanna pretend its gonna be ok.(its not)
      [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    • Re: I lol'd at 9/11

      Magical Teapot wrote:

      Sasha has been a member for 4 years, in the how ever long I have been here, I was never seen Sasha loose a debate, If Americans are as clever as they claim to be, Wouldn't it be wise to ignore Sasha if they don't want to be crushed by his intellectual skills, because he has an answer for everything. Well typical americans, they go rushing to war at the slightest mention of Jews, oil, threat, communism, and Sasha.


      I swear, if Sasha doesn't cause a war with America and doesn't defeat them all, I will eat my legs.


      Very rarely does one "win" or "lose" a debate.

      In the end everyone still feels exactly the same as they went in. Nothing is accomplished.
      [LEFT][SIZE=1][SIGPIC][/SIGPIC][/SIZE][/LEFT]

    • Re: I lol'd at 9/11

      Japan did not offer America to help them disarm because the fucking US soldiers would rape every woman and girl in Japan, just like they did with the Native Americans, like they did in Italy, they did in Japan, they did in Vietnam, and are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan.
      [CENTER].::ANIME is DOPAMINE to me::.
      [/CENTER]

    • Re: I lol'd at 9/11

      Sasha wrote:


      In the end, a few changes become noticable. Some of the Americans start resort to swearing and personal attacks, when they can't make a valid point. Happens all the time.


      Okay... I mean... doesn't change the fact that everyone's opinions remain the same.

      You will still hate every single American. And everyone else will... believe whatever they believed when we started.

      ---------- Post added at 08:42 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:40 AM ----------

      Magical Teapot wrote:

      9/11 was funny, end of.


      You shouldn't debate without understanding the concept of an "opinion" first.
      [LEFT][SIZE=1][SIGPIC][/SIGPIC][/SIZE][/LEFT]