Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize

monkey said:

...
The FACT is that roosevelt, stalin, and churchill, are responsible for the deaths of far more innocent people than Adolf Hitler could ever be blamed for.

Recommended reading: "Hitler, churchill and the Unnecessary War" by Patrick J. Buchanon.

Click to expand...

And to think...you volunteered to serve in a military with such a nefarious history. It's not like you were drafted or anything, like most men before who served their countries in such grand scale. If that were the case, your cynicism for the Art of War, might be better understood by them members of this forum that don't share your perspective.

Shame on you.

That being said, for your service and sacrifice on the field of duty, we all graciously and humbly respect you.

monkey said:

The Atomic bombings of Japan were completely unnecessary. Japan was the process of surrendering when these atrocities occurred.

That is a FACT.

The Atomic bombings of Japan, just as the deliberate fire bombings of tokyo, with the express purpose of killing as many non-combatants as possible, were an atrocity!

The deliberate firebombing of Dresden, Hamburg, and other German cities, was a War Crime of immense proportions.

When the Allies decided that, in order to win the war, they needed to massacre millions of innocent people, well, their credibility, and their cause loses any justification it may have had.

winston churchill actually wanted to infect the German population with ANTHRAX!!

FACT: Operation Vegetarian. Look it up!

Somewhere along the way, the "Allies" lost their moral compass.

Despite the huge loss of life in World War I, and every war before it, the loss of life among civilian non-combatants was very limited.

In World War II, "The Good War", civilians (Japanese and Germans.....the "bad guys") were deliberately targeted. It was the STRATEGY of the Allies to do this! This was against all the rules of war, and against all the morals of decency that Western Civilization had produced up until that time. It was a descent into barbarity.

The reason why the 'Allies' degenerated into mass murdering is because they were influenced by alien cultures that did not adhere to the concepts and culture of Western Civilization.

Bolshevism. Anti-Christian, Atheistic, Totalitarian.

The Bolsheviks controlled churchill and roosevelt through their agents who were deeply embedded in their governments.

Look it up.

So was Europe really "Liberated" in 1945?

Certainly Germany was NOT! In fact, it is estimated that more than 5 Million Germans were murdered AFTER they surrendered! Either through deliberate starvation, or "Ethnic Cleansing" from Eastern Europe.

SHAME on the Americans, British, and French (forever).

Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania.....all were sentenced to 50 years of slavery under Soviet Russia.

Is that "Liberation"?

Didn't Britain go to war to save Poland?

So who was "Liberated"?

Hmmm........I can say only France, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, and Norway.

And really, were these countries any worse under German influence???

Answer: NO!

These countries thrived under German influence.

And so did the Eastern Europeans countries, until their "Liberation" by the Soviet Bolsheviks.

In FACT, Germany LIBERATED the Baltic countries FROM the Bolsheviks.

The FACT is that roosevelt, stalin, and churchill, are responsible for the deaths of far more innocent people than Adolf Hitler could ever be blamed for.

Recommended reading: "Hitler, churchill and the Unnecessary War" by Patrick J. Buchanon.

Click to expand...

My response to this will take 2 postings:

You have totally lost you mind if you think ?France, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, and Norway? were better off under German control! Germany wasn?t even better off under the control of Hitler and the Nazi party. Tell the millions of Jews, disabled, mentally ill, and the so called ?non-pure? that were killed by the hands of the Nazis that they were better off under the Germans. If you understood what Hitler?s master plan was, you would agree that our leaders had to make the hard choices and do whatever it took to defeat him and end the war. You say that England went to war to liberate Poland, and you are wrong. England went to war to protect itself from what they new was an eventual invasion by Germany if they didn?t show some strength and backbone. They went to war to show Hitler that they were not just going to sit back and let him take whatever country he wanted including theirs. When you deal with bullies, you have to show strength or they will walk all over you and Churchill understood this. Also, if you really believe that FDR and Churchill were Bolshevik pawns, you have had too much ?cool-aid?, and as far as Germany liberating the Baltic countries, can that actually be called liberation? That?s going from bad to worse.

The following is a quote from you, and I can?t believe you actually had the gall to type these words!

?So who was "Liberated"?

Hmmm........I can say only France, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, and Norway.

And really, were these countries any worse under German influence???

Answer: NO!

These countries thrived under German influence.?

Do you actually believe that these countries ?thrived under German influence???? Is you view of history that distorted that you actually think any country was better off under the rule of Adolf Hitler. Again, tell that to the millions of Jews, disabled, mentally ill, and the so called ?non-pure? that he had killed.

I do agree with you on one point. How about that! The US and Britain should have never allowed the Soviets to have any part of Europe and if Ike had listened to Patton and rolled our troops into the East and taken down Stalin, the post war world would have been a much better place. FDR didn?t have the will to continue the war in Europe and wanted to focus on the Pacific, and Truman didn?t have the political clout to start a war with the Soviets once he took over. But you laying the blame for what Stalin did after the war on FDR, Truman and Churchill is way out of line. The only way they could have stopped Stalin was to attack him right after Berlin fell when we still had the bulk of our fighting force in the region. With one enemy defeated, FDR made the right choice to put all of our efforts into defeating Japan. Once that choice was made, we didn?t have the resources left in Europe to take on Stalin. We are just luck that Stalin didn?t come after the rest of Europe while we were in the Pacific. It would have been a cake walk for him.


You wrote:

?The reason why the 'Allies' degenerated into mass murdering is because they were influenced by alien cultures that did not adhere to the concepts and culture of Western Civilization.

Bolshevism. Anti-Christian, Atheistic, Totalitarian?

When you are up against mad men, sometimes you have to show them that you will stop at nothing to bring them down, because if you show any sign of weakness, they will exploit that weakness and use it against you. FDR, Truman and Churchill understood that they were up against enemies who would stop at nothing to get what they wanted and had the resourced to pull it off if they were not defeated at all cost. Yes, ALL COST. They understood that if we didn?t take extraordinary measures, it would be our cities and families getting bombed and burned, and Churchill knew this better than any of them after witnessing his country being bombed repeatedly. If these men had fought a polite war, by 1945, Germany would have had the ability to launch an atomic bomb mounted on one of its V2 rockets and wipe out London(fact). Our leaders knew that they were in a race against time, and if they didn?t do all they could to save their own people, the worst would happen!

Part 2:

This bring me to you comment:

The Atomic bombings of Japan were completely unnecessary. Japan was the process of surrendering when these atrocities occurred.

That is a FACT.


You don’t understand the Japanese culture of the time very well. Surrender was never acceptable to them and their leaders were not talking about a surrender. Your “fact” is wrong.
There was some political pressure from a small few asking for a surrender, but Japan was actually preparing to defend their homeland at all cost from what they knew was and inevitable invasion by the allies. Do the words Death with Honor mean anything to you? If that invasion had occurred, the number of dead would have been 10 times that of lives lost in the two atomic bombings. How any more U.S. troops would you have like to see die before we finally defeated Japan, 100,000, 200,000, etc?

That takes me back to Europe, and the same question there; how many more U.S. troops would you have been willing to loose if our leaders had not made the hard choices that they made to win the war. How many?


You also posted:

“Recommended reading: "Hitler, churchill and the Unnecessary War" by Patrick J. Buchanon.[/QUOTE]”


The problem with Pat Buchanan’s whole theory is that he believes that Hitler/Germany would have been content with just taking back the land that it lost in prior wars, and that the rest of the world could deal with Hitler diplomatically and keep him in check if they gave him what he wanted. Hitler would have only had more time to build his military and develop weapons that he could use later to take over the all of Europe. Think about this, if we had not gone to war with Germany, Hitler would have been the only country on earth with the Atomic Bomb. We would never have gotten the technology in time because we would never have gotten the scientist who could build it, they came from Germany. So lets just say, England didn’t go to war with Germany and dealt with Hitler diplomatically for the next 5 years. The U.S. would still be trying to dig out of the depression, England would be going about it days and if nothing were wrong and Japan would be building up its Navy and Army to a point of massive strength. Hitler decides its time to move and roll his Panzer Divisions into France. England issues a stern warning telling Hitler that he had better withdrawal his troops or else. Hitler just laughs and England is forced to use some sort of force against Germany. Once England uses force against Germany, Hitler, who now has the atomic bomb, launches an atomic V2, or by then it would probably be a V4 or 5, at Great Britain to show the world what he can do to them if they get in his way. England backs down and begs not to be invaded, but t no such luck. Since the US is still economically depressed or at least recessed, Japan takes the opportunity to launch and all out invasion on the West Coast of the U.S. and with their mighty Navy that they have been building for the last 5 years while the west was asleep, they are more than capable of pulling that off. Once Japan has defeated the U.S., Mexico and Canada, and Hitler has total control over Europe and North Africa, the 2 team up to take on the Russians. Since it has been proven that the only way to defeat Russia in a land war would be to attack from two fronts, east and west, they walk over the Russian handily and Hitler only has use one of his Bombs on Stalingrad for symbolism. Now all that is left is South America, and the Japanese don’t even have to fire a shot to take it.

Now, looking back on the way things actually played out and the way they could have, I think Buchanan’s theory that WWII was an “Unnecessary war” is completely without merit!

And I firmly believe our leaders did exactly what they need to do to insure that the scenario above didn’t play out, because it very well could have if the had none nothing.

Peru1936 said:

I think all this war talk is more than a little silly.

Comparing WWII with the War in Iraq is absurd. The Iraq War is nothing more than a relatively small coalition* of countries fighting an unnecessary - and, yes, very likely illegal* - war.

WWII was a series of operations that were in great hope of saving Europe, avoiding the spread of the war across the Atlantic (ie, the Battle of the Atlantic, which my grandfather participated in and lost his leg for), and eventually the Pacific Theatre. By the time the US decided it was lucrative to join the war in 1942 (it took nearly a year after 12/7/41 before US forces would see combat) - three years after it started - it was already long clear that the world was in real potential trouble.

The War in Iraq turned out to be a coalition of powerful politicians leading a hardy group of fools against a coalition of powerful fundamentalists leading a hardy group of fools. Either way, both sides use propaganda to sell their war. If there's any comparison between the Iraq War and WWII, it's in the use of propaganda to gain support.

Regarding the bombing of Hiroshima saving lives, that's untrue. By that interesting argument, it would've been the bombing of Nagasaki that saved lives. If there's a nuclear war in the future, in which likely millions upon millions will perish, would that argument still be "valid"?


*And much of that coalition consists of countries that were obligated to join the effort
*See the UN Charter

Click to expand...

I agree with you that the two war can not be compared, but I dispute your claim that the Iraq war is an illegal war. Saddam violated every UN resolution that was put in place after the first Gulf War and used military force against the UN peacekeeping forces and the U.S. forces who were part of the peacekeepers. Saddam should have been removed from power during the Clinton administration, but that didn?t happen for several reason, and non of which were legal ones. Saddam was given every opportunity to step down and avoid RE-STARTING the conflict, but chose not to. The removal of Saddam was fully legal under the UN guidelines and it was actually just the final resolution to the first Gulf War and it is what should have been done back when Bush, Sr. was in charge. It?s too bad that W. had to clean up his dad?s mess.

Rocket Surgeon said:

Wow, that is news to me Monk, everything I've ever read or heard points to Japan's indecisive great god-king Hirohito who ignored the Potsdam Declaration, (because he would have to give up rule of his evil empire), shy of two weeks later the bomb was dropped because of the mounting HEAVY casualties and STILL he did not act, (hell, it's got to be tough when you've got cabinet members advising death-before-dishonor and others advising mass suiside). THREE days after the first there came the second. More time then the pony express needed to deliver a letter...

Instead of dropping number three, we doubled our wait time and gave them another six days...

I don't have much sympathy for a leader who would let so many of his people die for Kokutai, (because he wanted to remain emperor).

Click to expand...

Some poeple like, MONKEY, want to re-write history to make their point. Good thing people like you are on here to call them on it. Nice post!

Jack Nelligan said:

Some poeple like, MONKEY, want to re-write history to make their point. Good thing people like you are on here to call them on it. Nice post!

Click to expand...

Thanks, I'm more interested in how Monkey assigns credibility...he seems no stranger to books, nor to impassioned opinion.

Rocket Surgeon said:

Thanks, I'm more interested in how Monkey assigns credibility...he seems no stranger to books, nor to impassioned opinion.

Click to expand...

I'd like to hear how he would have handle Hitler and Japan during that time period and what he would have done to stop Hitler from controlling Europe and maybe the world. He is quick to point the finger and place blame, but does not offer up any other viable solutions.

For the record, I hope I haven't been to harsh on the Scandinavians. They can award whomever they like, after all, we Californians have our hopelessly politicized Grammys. (At least they gave it to Raiders!) I've lived and worked in Sweden and think quite highly Swedes. Jag ar en Stockholmer!

Moedred said:

For the record, I hope I haven't been to harsh on the Scandinavians. They can award whomever they like, after all, we Californians have our hopelessly politicized Grammys. (At least they gave it to Raiders!) I've lived and worked in Sweden and think quite highly Swedes. Jag ar en Stockholmer!

Click to expand...

Always been a big fan of their bikini team!

Moedred said:

Jag ar en Stockholmer!

Click to expand...

You know, with the missing umlaut, är, you just said that you're going to drive over someone who lives in Stockholm...

Heh, all the better since it's a reference to JFK's "Ich bin ein Berliner" faux pas.
Clearly I'm mostly grateful for Scandinavians' mastery of English.

Jack Nelligan said:

I agree with you that the two war can not be compared, but I dispute your claim that the Iraq war is an illegal war. Saddam violated every UN resolution that was put in place after the first Gulf War and used military force against the UN peacekeeping forces and the U.S. forces who were part of the peacekeepers. Saddam should have been removed from power during the Clinton administration, but that didn?t happen for several reason, and non of which were legal ones. Saddam was given every opportunity to step down and avoid RE-STARTING the conflict, but chose not to. The removal of Saddam was fully legal under the UN guidelines and it was actually just the final resolution to the first Gulf War and it is what should have been done back when Bush, Sr. was in charge. It?s too bad that W. had to clean up his dad?s mess.

Click to expand...

The legality of the war will be disputed for years to come (as it seems it will be years to come before anything gets done in the country) because from day one there were political and (forced) patriotic issues attached to it. According to the UN itself, it was an illegal war. What Saddam did cannot be justified, but the means by which the war was started cannot either. The sole purpose of the war, the only thing that brought support - what little of it there was - turned out to be untrue, just like the UN said.

So, Saddam is out of power (and dead). Now what? There's a massive mess that the US tax payers are going to have to pay for generations. All for what? An Iraq free of Saddam, but not a free Iraq.

We cannot forget that war is a very profitable venture. Some people made millions of dollars from this war.

Did Monkey seriously say Roosevelt and Churchill were worse than Hitler??? I think he's just trying to mess with us now. At least I hope so...

Moedred said:

Heh, all the better since it's a reference to JFK's "Ich bin ein Berliner" faux pas.

Click to expand...

But it actually is a completely correct sentence in its meaning. The fact that he would have stated to be a pastry product is in fact, a mere urban legend. Or, not wholly. The sentence can be understood both ways, in fact.

But yeah, he got it right after all anyway.

Nelligan,

Your long-winded (and single spaced) post(s) only serve to prove your ignorance.

Heck, you can't even spell!

Knew........NOT 'New' OK?

Their......NOT 'There' OK?

Buy a dictionary, or take a class.

Learn to spell, but more importantly, educate yourself on true history.

You spout off with all of the propaganda that has been fed to the West since World War Two.

You are nothing more than a conduit, ....a pipe.....what is fed in ...is spouted out at the other end. There seems to be no assessment of the data at all.

You are a neutral machine.

You have only seen one side of the story, and you seem unwilling to even try to see the other side.

Remember the old saying "there are two sides to every story"? I guess you don't.

As to your "Millions" of Jews.............this is a tired old Fantasy.

Recommended reading: "Debating the Holocaust" by Thomas Dalton, also "The True History of the Holocaust" by Richard Harwood.

Anyway, I don't want to go too far into the whole "Holocaust" thing, lest I be branded with the "AS" Brand, and then no one will listen to anything I have to say.........because they have been ordered not to by their Masters.

But back to the true history of World War 2.

Why is it important?

It is MOST important because it was the first war in which the purposeful targeting of the civilian population of the "enemy" was accepted as a war tactic.

The Allies were the only ones to practice this in World War 2. The Germans and Japanese did NOT do this.

Ask yourself this: When you consider the MILLIONS (Real millions, not imagined) of innocent people who were murdered by the Allies in World War 2, ................was it worth it?

What did they win???

Certainly it was a great victory for Bolshevism, but what else??

And at the beginning of the 21st century we have "Shock and Awe"!! The DELIBERATE killing of innocent Iraqis, and the destruction of the infrastructure upon which their lives depend.

The Fire bombings of Tokyo, and Dresden, and countless other cities, .....and the Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki ......paved the way for "Shock and Awe"

PS: Nelligan, while I mean everything I say in my posts, I do want to apologize for my earlier post in which I said that what you had posted was a 'gross' insult to American Veterans. I was a little over the top there. I know that you are not that kind of person. I enjoy debating with you, and apologize for anything insulting that I have said in that regard.

monkey said:

As to your "Millions" of Jews.............this is a tired old Fantasy.

Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that the Holocaust never happened?

Pale Horse said:

And to think...you volunteered to serve in a military with such a nefarious history. It's not like you were drafted or anything, like most men before who served their countries in such grand scale. If that were the case, your cynicism for the Art of War, might be better understood by them members of this forum that don't share your perspective.

Shame on you.

That being said, for your service and sacrifice on the field of duty, we all graciously and humbly respect you.

Click to expand...

Not really sure what you are driving at here Pale Horse.

I respect you, and have always respected your opinions here on this forum.

Perhaps I was a Mercenary.

I won't disagree if you were to label me as such.

However, I will say emphatically that regardless of my opinions on matters out of my control, I was always and forever committed to my shipmates, my mission, and my Navy, and I always will be!!!

Peru1936 said:

Are you suggesting that the Holocaust never happened?

Click to expand...

We're opening a whole new chapter here.

Might be worthy of a whole 'nother thread.

I am not going to start it.

If you want to start it, I will participate.

monkey said:

We're opening a whole new chapter here.

Might be worthy of a whole 'nother thread.

I am not going to start it.

If you want to start it, I will participate.

Click to expand...

No, this thread is interesting enough.

monkey said:

As to your "Millions" of Jews.............this is a tired old Fantasy.

Recommended reading: "Debating the Holocaust" by Thomas Dalton, also "The True History of the Holocaust" by Richard Harwood.

Click to expand...

This is shocking to say the least Have you looked into the death camps the Nazi's had set up for the Jews? Or the torture chambers and experiments for the children? Cause guess what, Obama did have a look at them.. Monkey you seem to have a real lack of sympathy for Jews in general and it's very upsetting... The Holocaust was and IS a very real thing, and for you to call it a tired old fantasy makes me very upset. You seem to be upset about all other people except for the Jews? Perhaps you should have a talk with some of the Holocaust survivors.

I've always been very torn about the Hiroshima bombing, I've seen programs showing all the innocent Japanese children with their faces melting off from the radiation, and it was an absolutely horrendous thing to see. BUT we HAD to win that war. I can't even imagine being in command and having to make a decision like that.

And btw my Father is a Navy veteran as well