Forums-->Off-game forum-->
<<|<|24|25|26|27|28|29|30|31|32|33|34
| Author | May 21, 2011-End Of The World? |
|---|
| the world will endvin hours to day when the sun from energy is gone there hahaha | Ah I see the whelps have been yapping while I was away. Miss me?
Poor little diversity drones, their dreams are shattered and their little world is about to fall apart :P
Best part is that they don't even know it.
Anyone see the utter cowardice in the "head covering" trial Down Under? Bwahahaha...they shook in their boots while being intimidated in the courthouse by a group of thugs...who wasted no time at all showing who was boss when they promptly started a row outside the court, shouting " Allah Akbar" and pushing police and reporters around like the owned the place. Believe me, you don't want such weaklings as those in charge having any say in world issues...and they don't.
Ta ta for now comrades. lol | What's the matter Old Man Modi?
Afraid that a little scrap of clothing is going to cause the collapse of civilisation? Oh Noes!
Pity you didn't follow that story just a little longer before posting about it Unc.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14025386
The knee-jerk banning of concealing head-gear like Burkas (and motorcycle helmets for that matter, something an "ex-bikie" should appreciate) is just the sort of solution that a wimp might propose, being too scared to be able to think of a more reasonable solution while quivering in the corner.
The proposed solution is far more wide-ranging and reasonable.
Don't want to reveal your identity so you can try get away with stuff? Fine, you can take a little trip to the slammer until you decide to cooperate.
Don't worry little Modi. The Aussies will show you how to keep those nasty "end-of-the-world" head coverings from being a problem.
Have Fun
Grunge | Thought some people might appreciate this link. Just to reinforce my continuing point that extremists of all kind are just wrong and scary.
http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/79e78ef3c143466a891de3f8f69e9bb1/NC--Polygamist-Sect-Miss ing-Members/ | for kiwi:
Wow... so you're one of those who think that the French actually almost beat the Germans? When the Germans basically ran them over as easily as the rest of Europe? And all the Americans did was just help in the final attack? I'm not saying the French, English, and the underground forces didn't do anything, but they hardly did the majority of the work.
If anything it's the Americans and Russians who did all the work and the main vital points everyone else did was buy time and gather intelligence.
for Asarile:
You're right; nothing would truly end till we lose the sun. Unless we figure out how to colonize other planets. | @ pantheon,
i am just saying that must americans are so full of themselves thinking that they won the war on their own.
[Player banned by moderator Kiz until 2011-07-25 09:41:10 // Posting with multi, relapse.] | http://fleetstreetblues.blogspot.com/2011/07/sun-blames-al-qaeda-for-norway.html
It seems that the Sun are like some people in this thread. A bit fast and loose with the facts if it doesn't match their world view.
It's interesting that when they thought it was a Muslim, it was a terrorist attack against the West by a Muslim. When they found out it wasn't a Muslim....
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/sun_says/244723/The-Sun-Says.html
He was just a rogue loner. They refer to McVeigh, but don't call him a christian terrorist either.
Remember, any Christian nutter who kills a Doctor, blows up a building, or any act of violence is a rogue loony who doesn't represent Christianity as Christianity is pesceful (ignore that the president of the US called it a crusade, that was just poetic license).
Any Muslim that does a violent act shows how it is a religion of hate. Remember to accept the indoctrination. Can't let a little bit of fact ruin you rosy world view of black and white cartoon good and evil. | for Pantheon:
the british and the Soviet Union did most of the hard work in WW2. america barely did anything in the end and took all the credit. yeah really big and brave dropping nuclear bombs on little countries. | for Gangstarr:
So you think that the British and the Soviet Union did all the work and beat the Germans and the Japanese? Or did you think the Axis Powers was just the Germans while Japan, Italy, and the other nations were just little countries that in the end the US just dropped a bomb or two on them?
I know the US isn't currently popular and have some bad stereotypes against them, but people should learn history.
Maybe the next guy to post in here would talk about how WWII was Muslims vs Germans and somehow this leads to the end of the world. | for Pantheon:
American help was not needed to win the war, and the atomic bombs that USA dropped on Japan were not to help win the war, but to show its power to the world, especially the USSR. | for Gangstarr:
It was pretty obvious that Germans and Italians would soon defeat the British and after that combine their western front forces with their eastern front and run USSR over. And even if the USSR got another lucky weather break, came up with several brilliant battle tactics, and somehow pushed the frontlines outside of USSR, there's still the Japanese from the other side.
If the US never entered the war, Japanese would soon have consolidated their forces in eastern Asia and attacked Siberia. Or do you think Japan was just a little countries and the Soviets wouldn't lose to them? | You need the history lesson Pantheon. It was not obvious the Germans would defeat England. Germany thought England might be their ally. Germany had more in common with England than France. Historically England hated France. If England fought Germany, it meant that Russia who was no natural ally to England would be strengthened, and neither country wanted that. England decided a Europe united under Germany was a bigger problem than Russia and chose sides due to that.
Germany was always going to leave England alone for as long as possible. Also, England's navy was formidable. Germany had an incedible army and air force, but it's navy would have struggled to support the transports needed to bring enough troops to take England.
Russia was a country with a huge population, incredibly rich natural resources who had Germany on the run after the winter of '43. Much earlier than the D-Day landing of 1944. Read the "Russian Victory" paragraph here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/hitler_russia_invasion_01.shtml
Some quotes to pay attention to "More destructive by far than the D-Day landings, Stalin's Operation Bagration in Belorussia eliminated three times more German army divisions than the Allies did in Normandy."
"In the whole of history there has never been a war like it. In its scale of destruction, the war on the Eastern Front was unique; from Leningrad to the Crimea, from Kiev to Stalingrad, the Soviet Union was devastated - at least 25 million Soviet citizens died."
Japan was incredibly stretched. Here's a useful page to read regarding the strength of Japan with comments by one of it's most famour commanders.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isoroku_Yamamoto%27s_sleeping_giant_quote
Japan had nowhere near the material resources or the naval ability to maintain an attack on Russia. They were struggling to maintain their hold on the Dutch East Indies (Now Indonesia) and China. As the link shows, Yamamoto was certain they couldn't defeat the US. Russia's land and air force capability was better than the USA (in the context of an attack on Russian soil), as they didn't have the huge supply lines the USA had.
Maintain the illusion all you want that the US were the deciding factor in winning the war against Germany , but the stats are hard to argue with. German deaths, Eastern vs Western front here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_casualties_in_World_War_II
Eastern front about 800% more than the Western. Russia defeated Germany with a little help. Without American involvement, Germany may have held on for another year.
Japan, if it was smart enough to stop at China and the Dutch East Indies may have been the big winner of the war if America didn't get involved. If it attacked Russia, and due to the nature of the country at the time, it probably would, it would have lost all of it's Asian holdings.
America helped end it early and help reduce allied casualties. They probably increased the overall casualty count due to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. | | exactly | This end of world is lie...try think that why 1012 never end of world?
then 2012????
if not happen,some guys say will it will happens at 3012?
this is wierd. | for Barbarian-Fishy:
Actually you need to read history more in-depth. Germans were already attacking the British well before US involvement. British colonies were being taken over by the Axis and air raids devastated the cities. Germans did leave England for as long as possible. That's why Germans had scheduled the invasion of England after the scheduled plans to take over the rest of Europe, but they never did because of setbacks and US involvement.
Russia never truly had the upper hand. Sure Russia eliminated many German army divisions, but it was done at huge costs. Russians were saved by the winter and extended German supply lines. Also the Germans were fighting on too many fronts: western europe and northern africa.
Russians fought on only 1 front and used home ground, civilian lives, and material resources. Japan was stretched but without US involvement they would have consolidated their forces and attacked Russia. Your use of Yamamoto's comments is wrong.
1. Japan would have needed to transport their forces across the Pacific to invade the US.
2. The US was being paranoid, had set up underwater and coastal defenses, and rounded up all the japanese-americans.
3. The Russo-Japanese war had shown that Japan could fight the Russians.
4. With consolidated holdings especially China, Japan could have launched an extensive land invasion into Siberia.
5. Russian supply lines may have been shorter than the US, but the Russians were stretched thin and occupied with German forces. The Russians depended on supplies from the East to support the Western front. The western areas were not usable since the Germans were fighting the Russians there.
Without US involvement the Axis would have taken over Europe, Africa, and Asia before crushing Russia. The Russians weren't in any position to fight the Axis all over the world on multiple fronts.
America helped end it early and help reduce allied casualties. They probably increased the overall casualty count due to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Americans reduced overall casualty count due to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Japanese were prepared to fight for every inch of soil. Americans bluffed the Japanese by introducing WOMD and gave the Japanese no choice other than die or surrender. The only other way for Americans to reduce overall casualties was to never enter the war and let the Axis win.
for Jack-Sparrow:
The world ends every year. There are "end of the world" theories for every single year. Maybe this is why people celebrate the New Year because the world is able to see another year. | Germany was dragged in to Africa and the Middle East by the imcompetent Italians. They really didn't want to fight there, but they couldn't give the British a win. Germany bombed civilian targets in the Blitz to try to convince the English to surrender, and a victory anywhere would break the "Invincible Germans" image they were trying to portray.
It doesn't matter what justification you try to use. The winter. It came at huge cost. Germany was split on multiple fronts. The winter existed. Russia was willing to pay the cost. Germany had multiple fronts (but as shown the Eastern front had 8x the casualties for the Germans). Russia did have the upper hand. They got to Berlin before the allies did.
You haven't tried to counter the numbers I've provided. Russia killed 8 times as many Germans as the Allies did. How can you claim US involvement was critical when they did less than 10% of the killing?
Without the US, Russia still would have crushed Germany because Germany assaulted Russia in Winter and Russia were willing to sacrifice millions of men. You may consider it a BS way to win, but Germany failed to deal with the Russian Winter, and Japan, if it came to that, wouldn't have done any better.
If it makes you feel better, rewrite history so that you don't have to accept that USA was late to both world wars, jumped on the side that was already winning, but then claimed they did all the hard work. The rest of the world knows the truth.
The Hiroshima, Nagasaki argument is old as well. USA could easily have bombed one of the small islands, showing the destructive power of the bomb without killing the amount it did. It chose not to. | Fine.. if you want to talk about the numbers, it's obvious that fighting on home ground results in more casualties. Germans and Russians were obviously fighting a war of attrition. The French gave up to save lives. The British wasn't easily reachable. Same with North Africa. Obviously German casualties would be higher on the eastern front where they were pushing hard to reach Moscow before winter. On the western front Germans had tactical and resource advantages. Germans spent lives on the eastern front while they spent resources for the western front.
I'm not saying that the Russians did nothing and the US won the war without any help. I'm just countering what everyone seems to say that the US played no role and just walked in at the end. I'm saying that without the US the war would have been completely different.
Without the US the Germans wouldn't have been so stretched and split on multiple fronts. The Russians were paying a heavy price to hold the line on home ground: military, civilian, and resources. Luck was on the side of Russians. Without the US the situation would be completely reversed on the Russians. Single front for the Germans and Japanese. Multi-front for the Russians. Not saying that the Russians would give up easily, but instead of winning, they would have lost.
Next you'll say that because of the relatively lower US casualties in both WW, that US involvement was very low. Read my first paragraph again. War involvement and support in one isn't just about the casualties.
USA could easily have bombed one of the small islands, showing the destructive power of the bomb without killing the amount it did. It chose not to.
You said it yourself. It's all about the casualties. The US could have just bombed an unoccupied mountain or maybe even just sent pictures of the test bomb. Anyway even with the 2 bombs it didn't even guarantee Japan's surrender. Japan's military leaders rebelled over the decision to surrender. And to this day historians are still struggling with whether it was the Soviet declaration of war or was it the nuclear bombs that finally convinced Japan to surrender. History could have easily been different and Japan may not have surrendered even with the extra nuclear bombs that were finished in the months afterwards.
WWIII would be the end of the world as we know it. | The French didn't give up. Their Maginot line failed horribly and before they knew it, Germans were in Paris.
You are saying that if the US did not get involved, the Axis would have won. I say taking out a group that caused less than 10% of the casualties isn't that big a deal. The assault on Russia involved most of the Germans military. They had a small part of their military holding France, combined with the turncoat cowardly Vichy French. The troops in Africa were also not that significant in number.
Russia, due to the Russian winter, had devastated Germany in 1943. Everything else was a side show to that bloodbath. This all happened way before D-Day, the point where USA involvement had any significance. So yes, in regards to defeating Germany, American military was not critical.
If Japan was not attacking America, they could not assault Russia successfully. To take Russia involves supplies and resources Japan did not have, even if they didn't attack the USA.
If you were claiming that they were needed to stop Russia controlling all of Europe, instead of stopping at Germany, then I'd agree with you. If you were claiming they were needed to stop Japan holding on to Indonesia and South East Asia, I'd also agree, but Germany.... That was all about Russia. | | the real end is on 2012 december !!!! | Maybe, Maybe not...
Because from where im standing [sitting actually] the world has been through a ton of stuff.
Some much MUCH worse, if Earth can take it, WE CAN! |
<<|<|24|25|26|27|28|29|30|31|32|33|34Back to topics list
|
