Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(National Review)   National Review asks the question no one is dumb enough to ask: "Was World War II worth it?"   (article.nationalreview.com ) divider line
    More: Stupid  
•       •       •

10575 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Sep 2009 at 7:14 AM (6 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



351 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2009-09-04 10:03:22 AM  

Secret Master of All Flatulence: nicksteel: but they lost more planes over Germany than they did over England or the eastern front.

The Brits, the Americans, and the Soviets all flew over Germany. You can't count all planes shot down over Germany as being British kills.


I never claimed that silly notion. First of all, by the time the Soviets started flying over Germany, the war was almost over and the Germans were short on fuel and pilots. Any contribution that the Soviets made to destroying aircraft in Germany was done to planes sitting on the ground.

It is a commonly accepted fact that the back of the Luftwaffe had been broken prior to the D-Day landings. The bombing campaign had destroyed a great number of planes, mostly in the air. The bombing campaign is also responsible for the lack of fuel. During that bombing campaign, the British flew at night and the number of German planes knocked down was far less than the daylight raids were piling up.

That bombing campaign was such a threat that the Germans pulled most of their aircraft off the eastern front by mid 1943.

So, it appears that the air force most responsible for the destruction of the luftwaffe was the US Air Forces.

Here is a good site to illustrate my point.
Link (new window)
 
2009-09-04 10:03:39 AM  
I get to trot out one of my favorite Discworld quotes again:

"War, Nobby. Huh! What is it good for?" he said.
"Dunno, Sarge. Freeing slaves, maybe?"
"Absol - well, okay."
"Defending yourself against a totalitarian aggressor?"
"All right, I'll grant you that, but - "
"Saving civilization from a horde of - "
"It doesn't do any good in the long run is what I'm saying, Nobby, if you'd listen for five seconds together," said Fred Colon sharply.
"Yeah, but in the long run, what does, Sarge?"
 
2009-09-04 10:04:04 AM  
Secret Master of All Flatulence:
I'd like to see the US make the French love us again. We have the firepower to accomplish this.

Honestly, we'd rather start with a nice dinner and a romantic stroll under a starry sky.
 
2009-09-04 10:05:34 AM  

Tatsuma: Dammit, now I'm craving a sabich.


Is that like a sandwich on Shabbat? Mmmmm, challah and brisket.
 
2009-09-04 10:06:11 AM  

Thakh: Without WW2, the video game industry would only have 1/3rd of the titles it has today!


And what would the History Channel show all day?
 
2009-09-04 10:06:22 AM  

TheJoeY: I just... I don't get it anymore.

"OBAMA IS HITLER... [weeks later] Actually Hitler wasn't all that bad"


is that what you got from that article?? A subdued defense of Obama???

Seek professional help.
 
2009-09-04 10:06:37 AM  

biffstallion: This would also be worth stopping, then again if you are a bleeding heart liberal panty waist, probably not.


Unless WE do it, right?
 
2009-09-04 10:07:30 AM  

Little.Alex: Cuba is still executing and starving it's people TODAY. It amazes me how Liberals defend mass murder, so long as it's done by a fashionable socialist. The New York media treated Stalin exactly the same way. And Mussolini was a hero to American lefties in the 1930s.


I'm not defending it, I'm just saying it doesn't measure up. I never said Castro was anything but a nasty dictator. I just said that, by putting him alongside Stalin and Mao, you reveal yourself as a typical Conservitive idiot - you have a twisted obsession with Cuba.

It would be like if I put Pinochet alongside Hitler.
 
2009-09-04 10:08:38 AM  

Little.Alex:
Cuba is still executing and starving it's people TODAY. It amazes me how Liberals defend mass murder, so long as it's done by a fashionable socialist. The New York media treated Stalin exactly the same way. And Mussolini was a hero to American lefties in the 1930s.


I believe Texas holds the world record for executions at the moment.
 
2009-09-04 10:08:54 AM  

jonnypeh: Little.Alex: You'd have a hard time making that argument in Angola, retard.

Heh indeed, while it didn't kill exactly millions, it led to a conflict lasting from 1966 to 1989, also soviets sent a lot of equipment there for their cuban allies to use, ranking probably third right after arabic countries and afghanistan. At least 400 000 cuban soldiers were rotated through Angola in that time period.


May I say; it's always a pleasure to chat with other people who read.

Doesn't it amaze you that people like Robert Redford/Fonda/Democrat Congressmen go down south and suck Castro's dick? It's amazing. Or Sean Penn being a human shield for Sadam? Why does the left love tyrants? I think it's about impatience for democracy, and a contempt for average people.
 
2009-09-04 10:11:23 AM  

Little.Alex: Pxtl: Little.Alex: You'd have a hard time making that argument in Angola, retard.

Yes, because the invasion of Angola is exactly the same as the deaths of millions upon millions under Stalin and Mao.

Totally the same.

But a half million dead in a smaller population is ok? Why? Because they're black, or because it invalidates your argument?

Cuba is still executing and starving it's people TODAY. It amazes me how Liberals defend mass murder, so long as it's done by a fashionable socialist. The New York media treated Stalin exactly the same way. And Mussolini was a hero to American lefties in the 1930s.


I nominate this the single stupidest thing ever said on Fark, trolling or not.
 
2009-09-04 10:12:37 AM  

TraeHova: When the answer to the 'rhetorical' question is: "Perhaps," I think it pretty much kills any goodwill the writer may have banked in earlier paragraphs.


Thread Over. I cannot believe the author wasted valuable seconds and electrons on this claptrap. If all you think is "Perhaps," maybe being a fellow at the Hoover Institution is not all its cracked up to be. Furthermore, one would hope that Hoover Fellows know how to CITE or IDENTIFY historians they disagree with by name rather than say "Its fashionable to say," or "has been downplayed." That's Faux News style weaseling. If you have a scholarly disagreement with someone, have the ballz to mention them by name or STFU.
 
2009-09-04 10:14:17 AM  
cryptozoophiliac:

I nominate this the single stupidest thing ever said on Fark, trolling or not.

Did you expect profundity from a birfer?
 
2009-09-04 10:14:30 AM  

Little.Alex:
Doesn't it amaze you that people like Robert Redford/Fonda/Democrat Congressmen go down south and suck Castro's dick? It's amazing. Or Sean Penn being a human shield for Sadam? Why does the left love tyrants? I think it's about impatience for democracy, and a contempt for average people.


No, it's just contrariness. If the US right wingers didn't have an insane obsession with hating Cuba that they don't have for every other tin-pot dictator in the world, knee-jerk groups of liberals wouldn't flock to his defense.

Also, remember that Liberals don't see things as black-and-white. A dictator may be bad, but the war to oust him can be worse for the people he oppresses, even if it may seem cathartic. How many hellholes were created by colonialists with high ideals of "liberating" the people? Isn't that what the aforementioned Angola crisis was about? Nobody *wanted* those African shiatholes, but Communist theory says that those people must be "rescued". And then a whole farktonne of blood appears on the ground.
 
2009-09-04 10:15:15 AM  

Persnickety: FTFA: "By 1944, the Allies had the best and most numerous tanks, artillery and planes; the largest armies; the best wartime leadership in Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin; and the most adept generals."


I'm not sure TFA should include Stalin in there as a great wartime leader since he started out allied with the enemy. While the Soviet Union was undoubtably the key critical player in Europe, they worsened their situation by helping build Hitler's war machine into the monster it was.

And as to great generals, the Soviets suffered 24,000,000 casualities fighting the Germans almost exclusively while the Germans suffered 6,500,000 to 8,500,000 fighting everyone. Attrition does not a great general make.


They (USSR) still "won" the war on the battlefields. But war is about politics/economics not body counts and battlefields.

The USSR was still suffering the after effects for decades after wards of losing 24 million people. They lost 10 million military casualties alone, That hits 16-45 age bracket pretty hard. Throw in Stalin's purges and the USSR was set up for failure down the road.

Who really won the war, The US. But not in the way people think on aka on the battle field. The US "won" the war because it was the only major power not blasted to shiat during the war and it didn't lose 9% or more of its population. More importantly it only suffered 450K military casualties
 
2009-09-04 10:15:37 AM  
The Lincoln Brigade, a group of American "leftists" who fought against Generalissimo Francisco Franco (who's still dead btw):

www.freedomsphoenix.com
 
2009-09-04 10:15:38 AM  

biffstallion: This would also be worth stopping, then again if you are a bleeding heart liberal panty waist, probably not.


Meh. Apartheid did all those things too, and the liberal pantywaists got too tired of trying to get Reagan to even dare criticize South Africa for it.
 
2009-09-04 10:16:56 AM  

Thunderpipes: Obama is quickly turning this country into a spitting image of Nazi Germany without the armed forces buildup, no, wasn't really worth it. Only time until Obama and company start firing up the ovens.

Ramming bills through against American's wishes, appointing communists, 9/11 truthers as his personal advisers, Pelosi, Rangle, outright liars and criminals and you libtards scream and cheer his praises.


Thank you for properly voicing what I am thinking most of the time.

This bunch makes me nervous with their Cult of Personality implied mandate. They don't have MY mandate.

Going to buy another couple boxes of shotgun shells during this tax-free weekend. Y'all me commence to flaming again.

NRA. NRA. NRA.
 
2009-09-04 10:17:15 AM  

Pxtl: Little.Alex: Cuba is still executing and starving it's people TODAY. It amazes me how Liberals defend mass murder, so long as it's done by a fashionable socialist. The New York media treated Stalin exactly the same way. And Mussolini was a hero to American lefties in the 1930s.

I'm not defending it, I'm just saying it doesn't measure up. I never said Castro was anything but a nasty dictator. I just said that, by putting him alongside Stalin and Mao, you reveal yourself as a typical Conservitive idiot - you have a twisted obsession with Cuba.

It would be like if I put Pinochet alongside Hitler.


I give ya that Hitler racked up a bigger body count; but you can't slight Castro for not trying! And he tortures as well as anyone. If C had those methodical Germans to work with, he might have been a Contender.

I think Mao actually holds the record. Have you read this? Very good.


http://www.amazon.com/Hungry-Ghosts-Maos-Secret-Famine/dp/0805056688/r​ef=sr_1_1 ? ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1252073634&sr=1-1 (new window)
 
2009-09-04 10:17:23 AM  
cryptozoophiliac:

still dead

Where's the death certificate?
 
2009-09-04 10:17:43 AM  

ukgrad89: If China ever gets a free shot at Japan, for what happened there back in WWII, the Japanese might as well kiss their mf-ing arses goodbye. China despises Japan, and there is an unpaid debt China will collect from Japan that only bombs, bullets and blood can satisfy. The irony is that China actually has good ties with USA that go back to our WWII involvement there. I'm not saying we are warm and fuzzy, but we didn't rape and murder 35 million Chinese either, and we actually fought well in defense of China, and even today the Chinese government acknowledges that. We don't hear much about this part of WWII in the USA, but in China, its shown on TV fairly often. To be sure, as long as we can, we won't let China get that free shot, but if it ever is available, I wouldn't want to be anywhere near Japan.


Here's a historical irony that will bake your brain just a little. You know who the Chinese generally regard as the "hero of Nanking" for his tireless work in trying to safeguard civilians there, credited with saving perhap a quarter million people?

A German businessman named John Rabe who used his membership in the Nazi party to pressure Japanese authorities to let him set up a "safety Zone in Naking that saved hundreds of thousands of lives.
 
2009-09-04 10:17:59 AM  
I found that article kind of surreal. For the most part coherent and informative, then a one paragraph sumary of the the most glaringly obvious outcomes of one of the most pivotal events in history.

was it worth it? Kinda.
WTF?
 
2009-09-04 10:18:01 AM  
Was it worth defending ourselves once attacked by Japan? Yes
Was it worth continuing to fight and dropping the atomic bomb once Japan no longer posed a threat to us? No.
 
2009-09-04 10:19:00 AM  
WW2 was not worth it. The aliens never arrived and I am stuck with all this ginger.

/nothing is obscure enough for this site
 
2009-09-04 10:19:14 AM  
No, we need WWIII to fix that stupid mess.

/heh
 
2009-09-04 10:21:28 AM  
oneworldnews.files.wordpress.com

Trade with the enemy much, Republicans?
 
2009-09-04 10:21:28 AM  

Capitalist1: Factors to consider:

2. Everyone who fought against Hitler adopted all of his ideas *aside* from turning Jews into household knicknacks. No. Might as well have stayed home.


Wow.
 
2009-09-04 10:21:59 AM  
False analogy? Okay, but we still didn't enter WW II to stop genocide.
 
2009-09-04 10:22:17 AM  

Little.Alex: http://www.amazon.com/Hungry-Ghosts-Maos-Secret-Famine/dp/0805056688/​r​ef=sr_1_1 ? ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1252073634&sr=1-1


I still get utterly flabbergasted that, after the epic, catastrophic, massively moronic failure of the Great Leap Forward... there were enough party faithful supporting him for his Cultural Revolution.
 
2009-09-04 10:23:55 AM  

Little.Alex:
Doesn't it amaze you that people like Robert Redford/Fonda/Democrat Congressmen go down south and suck Castro's dick? It's amazing. Or Sean Penn being a human shield for Sadam? Why does the left love tyrants? I think it's about impatience for democracy, and a contempt for average people.


Uh, the right has supported more than its share of lunatics (Regan and Saddam were buddy, buddy). As a rule: Brutal dictators that hate capitalists = Left love. Brutal dictators who help capitalists get richer = Right love.
 
2009-09-04 10:23:57 AM  

Pxtl: Little.Alex:
Doesn't it amaze you that people like Robert Redford/Fonda/Democrat Congressmen go down south and suck Castro's dick? It's amazing. Or Sean Penn being a human shield for Sadam? Why does the left love tyrants? I think it's about impatience for democracy, and a contempt for average people.

No, it's just contrariness. If the US right wingers didn't have an insane obsession with hating Cuba that they don't have for every other tin-pot dictator in the world, knee-jerk groups of liberals wouldn't flock to his defense.

Also, remember that Liberals don't see things as black-and-white. A dictator may be bad, but the war to oust him can be worse for the people he oppresses, even if it may seem cathartic. How many hellholes were created by colonialists with high ideals of "liberating" the people? Isn't that what the aforementioned Angola crisis was about? Nobody *wanted* those African shiatholes, but Communist theory says that those people must be "rescued". And then a whole farktonne of blood appears on the ground.


Yeah. the whole Cuba thing has outlived it's usefulness. I'm surprised clinton didn't raise the embargo. Cuba is irrelevant now. They were the foothold in our hemisphere for Soviet expansion, and useful surrogates for Africa. Now they're just hungry victims who can't afford electricity or soap. It's pathetic.

But give them credit where it's due. In their day, they raised some hell. If that attempted 1968 Communist revolution in Mexico had worked: it might be a different World.
 
2009-09-04 10:24:36 AM  
That's article is like a stupid layer cake with asshole frosting.
 
2009-09-04 10:24:40 AM  

MooseBayou: Thunderpipes: Obama is quickly turning this country into a spitting image of Nazi Germany without the armed forces buildup, no, wasn't really worth it. Only time until Obama and company start firing up the ovens.

Ramming bills through against American's wishes, appointing communists, 9/11 truthers as his personal advisers, Pelosi, Rangle, outright liars and criminals and you libtards scream and cheer his praises.

Thank you for properly voicing what I am thinking most of the time.

This bunch makes me nervous with their Cult of Personality implied mandate. They don't have MY mandate.

Going to buy another couple boxes of shotgun shells during this tax-free weekend. Y'all me commence to flaming again.

NRA. NRA. NRA.


Look, Obama is the most brilliant politician I have seen in my life, I give him full credit there. A master of getting people to vote for him. But the craziness that is going on is unbelievable. Look how much stink was raised about the Patriot Act under Bush. Nothing even remotely damaging came out of it. Seriously, imagine if Bush appointed a Grand Wizard of the KKK to one of his top aids?

That is basically what Van Jones represents. I bet Farkers probably have not even looked this guy up. It is truly scary the people getting into top positions. They all are interelated as well through Acorn and other organizations. If Bush did 1/10th of what Obama is doing most people here would be enraged. But since it is Obama they don't care. It is sad.

A 9/11 Truther, self avowed communist, thinks white people poison black people, as the nation's Green Job "Czar"? You guys approve of this?
 
2009-09-04 10:26:43 AM  

nicksteel: TheJoeY: I just... I don't get it anymore.

"OBAMA IS HITLER... [weeks later] Actually Hitler wasn't all that bad"

is that what you got from that article?? A subdued defense of Obama???

Seek professional help.


This is the Fark politics tab. Here, you are not supposed to read the articles. You're just supposed to read the headline, notice the source of the article, and have a knee jerk reaction. Thinking will not be tolerated! If everyone actually read the articles and posted rational, well-thought out replies, how could we have stupid, pointless flamewars??
 
2009-09-04 10:27:11 AM  

EZ Writer: Wow, Subby... That is some world-class douchebaggery...

FTA: The Holocaust was finally stopped before every Jew in Europe was killed as Hitler had planned. Germany, Italy, and Japan were transformed from monstrous regimes into liberal states whose democracies have done much for humanity in the ensuing years. And Western civilization survived its own heretical cannibals - to foster in the ensuing decades the greatest growth in freedom and prosperity in the history of the planet.

Yes, NRO asked the question... but they also answered it. Better question though is, who greenlit this WHARRGARBL headline?


The same retarded mods who seem to have been responsible for a general decline in the quality here?
 
2009-09-04 10:27:42 AM  
Here's a different perspective from Senator Robert Taft, "Mr. Republican"

The truth is that no nation can be constantly prepared to undertake a full-scale war at any moment and still hope to maintain any of the other purposes in which people are interested and for which nations are founded.

In the first place, it requires a complete surrender of liberty and the turning over to the central government of power to control in detail the lives of the people and all of their activities.

While in time of war people are willing to surrender those liberties in order to protect the ultimate liberty of the entire country, they do so on the theory that it is a limited surrender and one which they hope will soon be over, perhaps within a few months, certainly within a few years. But an indefinite surrender of liberty such as would be required by an all-out war program in time of peace might mean the final and complete destruction of those liberties which it is the very purpose of the preparation to protect.

www4.images.coolspotters.com
 
2009-09-04 10:29:22 AM  

chipspastic: RedArny: Nazi Germany without the armed forces buildup

1) hurrr
2) If Germany hadn't built up its army & invaded Poland, WWII would never have started.


WWII was going to happen, one power or another was going to use building up the military as a jobs program which would trigger tensions all over the place. The Great Depression was world wide, some sort of conflict would have happened that would spark a WWII.

Remember in the 1930s fascism had yet to be discredited and was on the move in many countries. You had the Spanish Civil war and Japan's invasion of China. You can make some argument that the initial skirmish of WWII started in 1936 with the Spanish Civil War not 1939 Germany's invasion of Poland.

Germany's rearming and invasion of Poland wasn't the only reason for WWII. Given the nature of the times a world war was on the horizon regardless.
 
2009-09-04 10:31:40 AM  
At first I was ready to say surely subby did not read or understand the article, but skipping to the end:

Did any good come from such a monstrous bloodletting?

Perhaps. [emphasis mine] The Holocaust was finally stopped before every Jew in Europe was killed as Hitler had planned.


What the farking farking fark? "Perhaps"? Perhaps stopping genocide was worth it. Stopping the f'n Holocaust is a 'meh'? I don't have words to describe my bewilderment. I really don't get it. Is this some coded way of saying he'd rather have had Hitler win, Holocaust and all, than have Obama as president. Really, WTF?
 
2009-09-04 10:32:51 AM  

hitlersbrain: Little.Alex:
Doesn't it amaze you that people like Robert Redford/Fonda/Democrat Congressmen go down south and suck Castro's dick? It's amazing. Or Sean Penn being a human shield for Sadam? Why does the left love tyrants? I think it's about impatience for democracy, and a contempt for average people.

Uh, the right has supported more than its share of lunatics (Regan and Saddam were buddy, buddy). As a rule: Brutal dictators that hate capitalists = Left love. Brutal dictators who help capitalists get richer = Right love.


Well, I'm not sure I'd blame Reagan for Sadam. The State Dept for decades pushed the strategy that stability was the Holy Grail of slowing down communist expansion. But we certainly had some disgusting friends thru that strategy. The Shah of Iran was no better.

I loved Reagan's quote about the Iran/Iraq war: "The only thing wrong with the I/I war, is that it ended." Two anti-American countries, beating the crap out of each other, and we sold weapons to both sides. Foreign policy doesn't' get any better than that!
 
2009-09-04 10:33:08 AM  

Thunderpipes: Obama is quickly turning this country into a spitting image of Nazi Germany without the armed forces buildup, no, wasn't really worth it. Only time until Obama and company start firing up the ovens.

Ramming bills through against American's wishes, appointing communists, 9/11 truthers as his personal advisers, Pelosi, Rangle, outright liars and criminals and you libtards scream and cheer his praises.


i630.photobucket.com
 
2009-09-04 10:33:16 AM  

Thunderpipes: MooseBayou: Thunderpipes: Obama is quickly turning this country into a spitting image of Nazi Germany without the armed forces buildup, no, wasn't really worth it. Only time until Obama and company start firing up the ovens.

Ramming bills through against American's wishes, appointing communists, 9/11 truthers as his personal advisers, Pelosi, Rangle, outright liars and criminals and you libtards scream and cheer his praises.

Thank you for properly voicing what I am thinking most of the time.

This bunch makes me nervous with their Cult of Personality implied mandate. They don't have MY mandate.

Going to buy another couple boxes of shotgun shells during this tax-free weekend. Y'all me commence to flaming again.

NRA. NRA. NRA.

Look, Obama is the most brilliant politician I have seen in my life, I give him full credit there. A master of getting people to vote for him. But the craziness that is going on is unbelievable. Look how much stink was raised about the Patriot Act under Bush. Nothing even remotely damaging came out of it. Seriously, imagine if Bush appointed a Grand Wizard of the KKK to one of his top aids?

That is basically what Van Jones represents. I bet Farkers probably have not even looked this guy up. It is truly scary the people getting into top positions. They all are interelated as well through Acorn and other organizations. If Bush did 1/10th of what Obama is doing most people here would be enraged. But since it is Obama they don't care. It is sad.

A 9/11 Truther, self avowed communist, thinks white people poison black people, as the nation's Green Job "Czar"? You guys approve of this?


As long as they believe in evolution & science and are not anxious for Armageddon I'm a lot happier than I was a year ago. (Bunch o superstitious white trash in power, I'm surprised we're still alive.)
 
2009-09-04 10:34:02 AM  

ez-reader: At first I was ready to say surely subby did not read or understand the article, but skipping to the end:

Did any good come from such a monstrous bloodletting?

Perhaps. [emphasis mine] The Holocaust was finally stopped before every Jew in Europe was killed as Hitler had planned.

What the farking farking fark? "Perhaps"? Perhaps stopping genocide was worth it. Stopping the f'n Holocaust is a 'meh'? I don't have words to describe my bewilderment. I really don't get it. Is this some coded way of saying he'd rather have had Hitler win, Holocaust and all, than have Obama as president. Really, WTF?


Did you forget you were reading NRO?
 
2009-09-04 10:34:36 AM  

Thunderpipes: Look, Obama is the most brilliant politician I have seen in my life, I give him full credit there. A master of getting people to vote for him.


Obama is a law nerd who happens to be black and was in the right place at the right time, scooped up by the Democratic Party for its own ends. Have you ever heard him speak without a teleprompter or without a script? Pitiful.

This is an example of a brilliant politician.
 
2009-09-04 10:38:47 AM  

Little.Alex:
Well, I'm not sure I'd blame Reagan for Sadam. The State Dept for decades pushed the strategy that stability was the Holy Grail of slowing down communist expansion. But we certainly had some disgusting friends thru that strategy. The Shah of Iran was no better.

I loved Reagan's quote about the Iran/Iraq war: "The only thing wrong with the I/I war, is that it ended." Two anti-American countries, beating the crap out of each other, and we sold weapons to both sides. Foreign policy doesn't' get any better than that!


Hurray for death and destruction! I don't recall that Iraq was anti-american until we started farking them over by selling weapons to the enemey. Helping over throw Iran's democratically elected government to put the Shah in power is a valid reason enough to hate the US. Maybe we should stop doing stuff like that and fewer people will want to kill us.

But who would we get our rocks off by torturing then?
 
2009-09-04 10:39:08 AM  
submitter: "Was World War II worth it?"

Considering I'm not reading this in German, I'm going to say, "YES!"
 
2009-09-04 10:39:57 AM  

Thunderpipes:
A 9/11 Truther, self avowed communist, thinks white people poison black people, as the nation's Green Job "Czar"? You guys approve of this?


You guys spent eight years demonizing your political enemies, marginalizing them, and passing unconstitutional acts that violate the privacy of every American. Bush and his cronies - some of whom were grossly unqualified for the jobs to which they were appointed - started two separate wars and spread the military so thin that now neither conflict is 'winnable' and the US government is in negotiations with the Taliban - the farking Taliban; Bin Laden's ideological fark-buddies who gave him privacy and succor to ferment his plans. The Taliban had more to do with 9/11 than Hussein ever did.

But then you're surprised - shocked, I tells ya - that the voters wanted "change" and elected a charismatic, articulate politician to the POTUS; and that now they don't take anything coming from your side seriously.

Instead of merely pointing out his flaws as a leader, however, you're still doing as you've always done: tarring people who disagree with your political ideology as "bad," then wondering why they have no interest in listening to your complaints.

If you care so much about the GOP (or perhaps Ron Paul), then speak out against those idiot teabaggers and the religious zealots before they destroy your party entirely.

You're being eaten from the inside out.
 
2009-09-04 10:40:17 AM  

Thunderpipes: Van Jones


I assume you're referring to his work with STORM. While I'm not happy with it, membership to a feminist/communist activism group tells me a man is a stupid and crazy idealist - kind of like a Christian creationist fundamentalist. Somebody I don't want in the government, to be sure, but comparing it to a white supremacist group is a bit of a stretch.
 
2009-09-04 10:40:30 AM  
I'd like to see the US make the French love us again.

We gave them Canada. What else do they want?

I don't care for France. It's all cigarettes and body hair. Canada is a mystic wonderland of beer and regret.
 
2009-09-04 10:42:07 AM  
A little off topic, but when people say Hitler was ok at first, do they mean before or after this? Link (new window) Seems to me he was always batshiat.
 
2009-09-04 10:42:19 AM  

Pxtl: Little.Alex: http://www.amazon.com/Hungry-Ghosts-Maos-Secret-Famine/dp/0805056688/r​ef=sr_1_1 ? ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1252073634&sr=1-1

I still get utterly flabbergasted that, after the epic, catastrophic, massively moronic failure of the Great Leap Forward... there were enough party faithful supporting him for his Cultural Revolution.


I once read this theory: The Cultural Revolution (which was a blood bath) was thought by Mao to be necessary to maintain control, after killing about 120 million of his own people thru gross incompetence in the GLF. It was a preemptive civil war.
 
Displayed 50 of 351 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report