Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
There never was a chance. By December 1944 the WAllies had outrun their supply lines. Patton stripped follow-on units of fuel and other supplies to keep his armored spearheads going as long as they did. The Germans shortened the war by months at least by expending men, vehicles, weapons and supplies in the Bulge. Those losses allowed the Red Army to surge forwards to the Elbe.We lost almost half the number of total losses in Korea and Vietnam in a battle late in WW2 that should not have happened but the media convinced America that it was a victory. Perhaps it was a victory but it took them 20,000 lives and 50,000 casualties when they should have rolled over what was left on the German defenses when they had the chance.
Reminds Oct 7thThe victors write the history books and maybe that's fair enough. The media told Americans that General McAuliffe was a hero for a note to Germans when he lost his entire command at Bastogne. American G.I.'s were sure that the Germans were done and they would be home for Christmas in 1944. On Dec. 16 Ike was attending a series of Christmas parties and probably enjoying several glasses of liberated French wine while everyone on the front lines who was sober could hear ominous diesel exhaust from German tanks. Ike should have been relieved of duty after his failure of leadership led to the almost successful German offensive known as the Battle of the Bulge or the Ardennes Offensive. .
It was a surprise because it was so monumentally stupid. The threat of the attack was effectively stopped when Pieper's formation was cut off and mauled just a few days in (Dec 19). Turns out German wonder weapons were crap. It resulted in a massive WALLIED victory.
By December 1944 the WAllies had outrun their supply lines.
A good point. Ike probably assumed that the Germans would be taking a winter vacation just like his Troops. Intelligence should have told him different but Intelligence was taking a winter break also.Whether that could have done by wnter is something else. Market Garden's failure informed the Allies the Nazis had plenty left in the tank.
Intelligence should have told him different
We know FDR set up events at Pearl Harbor and knew beforehand the Japanese were coming. He moved out the carriers and his favorite battleship leaving primarily older ships in harbor to be sacrificed. He refused to warn commanders and then scapegoated them after the attack.And how, exactly? Are you aware of highly placed Allied spies inside of the German decision loop that nobody else is aware of?
This is what you seem to fail to grasp. There can be no "intelligence failure" if there is absolutely no intelligence to act upon. This is not an "intelligence failure" any more than Pearl Harbor was.
We know FDR set up events at Pearl Harbor and knew beforehand the Japanese were coming. He moved out the carriers and his favorite battleship leaving primarily older ships in harbor to be sacrificed. He refused to warn commanders and then scapegoated them after the attack.
I didn’t read after you ignorant statement FDR didn’t know. Fuck yeah he knew. The evidence is overwhelming.Oh dear sweet lord, how much you get so incredibly wrong in so few sentences.
FDR had no idea. Nor did anybody else.
As for the next, that is complete and utter hogwash and easy enough to prove. Do you know which aircraft carriers were based at Pearl Harbor in December 1941? Well, let me tell you because that is really simple to answer. There were three of them, the USS Saratoga, the USS Lexington, and the USS Enterprise.
Now for the USS Saratoga, that ship had actually just finished a six month modernization refit at the Bremerton Shipyard in Washington. It was just off the coast of San Diego where they were about to bring on her fighter squadrons when the attack happened. So what, are you claiming that it was moved to safety some seven or more months in advance?
How about the USS Lexington? Well, she was actually about 500 miles to the north as she was ferrying 18 Vindicator dive bombers to Midway. If your intent is to keep a carrier safe, you do not send it out with a light escort into the actual path the Japanese would take to attack from. If the Lexington had left on 6 December instead of 5 December, there is an excellent chance it would have been detected, and attacked and easily sunk by the Japanese.
And the USS Enterprise? She was actually on her way back to Pearl Harbor when the attack happened. And it had a much lighter than normal fighter complement as she also had been on a ferry mission, returning after taking a squadron of F4F Wildcats to Wake Island. That ship was to the South of the Japanese, but once again if discovered it would have been sunk because she only had half her normal complement of aircraft. They did indeed send up aircraft as soon as they heard word of the attack, but they were too far away to detect the Japanese fleet, and even if they had found it did not have the assets to do anything about it.
So your claim they were moved out is a lie. All of our Pacific carriers were almost constantly in movement ferrying aircraft to more advanced bases. When Saratoga loaded her complement she was supposed to sail for the Philippines with a shipment of fighters for those islands. Once again, doing the exact opposite of what you are implying because they were all being repeatedly sent to sea with a light escort and half the aircraft they normally had.
As far as "older ships", that is complete nonsense. Yes, a lot were around 20 years old, but Battleships are made to last for 3-5 decades. And we had damned near nothing newer because of the London and Washington Naval Treaties. The Navy had already scrapped all of their "Old Battleships" decades ago after WWI with the London Naval Treaty. Hell, some of our newest would have been the South Dakota Class. We had six of those being built in 1922 when they were outlawed by the Washington Naval Treaty. And all six of them were scrapped in 1922.
The first of the new Battleships were just entering service in 1941, that is the North Carolina Class. Of those two ships, the USS North Carolina was on her shake-down cruise in the Caribbean when the attack happened. The USS Washington was doing the same thing off the coast of New England.
But your claim the ships sunk were "older" is meaningless, as the US along with all other nations stopped building Battleships shortly after WWI. Hell, most should know that because that is what really allowed the US to jump into aircraft carriers so quickly. They had multiple ships already being built which were proscribed by new treaties, but were allowed to finish them as "Experimental" aircraft carriers.
The USS Lexington CV-2 and USS Saratoga CV-3 were both being built as Battlecruisers. But when the Washington Naval Conference prohibited all Battlecruiser construction world wide, they were instead converted to aircraft carriers. Hell, if you know anything about Naval History, you would know that almost all of the first carriers were converted mid-construction from ships that had been proscribed during the Interwar years by the London and Washington Naval Treaties.
I didn’t read after you ignorant statement FDR didn’t know. Fuck yeah he knew.
You don’t know shit if you think FDR was unaware of the forthcoming attack on Pearl.Oh yes, of course.
That was way the only two operational aircraft carriers were at sea, with light escorts, actually in the potential path of the Japanese fleet approaching Pearl Harbor. If what you claim is even remotely true, then why were they hundreds of miles at sea to the North and West of Hawaii on that day, and not say off the coast of California where they would have been safe? And with much less than a full complement of aircraft?
Because I guess obviously the place to put them to keep them safe is along the routes the Japanese would have taken.
Knowing actual history is not "ignorant".
Here is an excellent book for you. It will blow up everything you know about WWII.Oh yes, of course.
That was way the only two operational aircraft carriers were at sea, with light escorts, actually in the potential path of the Japanese fleet approaching Pearl Harbor. If what you claim is even remotely true, then why were they hundreds of miles at sea to the North and West of Hawaii on that day, and not say off the coast of California where they would have been safe? And with much less than a full complement of aircraft?
Because I guess obviously the place to put them to keep them safe is along the routes the Japanese would have taken.
Knowing actual history is not "ignorant".
Here is an excellent book for you. It will blow up everything you know about WWII.
So you readily admit you know nothing about Ron Unz, other than the lies the establishment told you. As I thought. You only believe the establishment and they’re nothing but liars.Wait a minute, you think I should read a self-published book by an anti-semite? And who actually believes there is such a thing as a "gay germ"? And who actually believes that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a real book outlining the world takeover of Jews?
Oh my dear sweet lord, you are actually believing a book by that nutcase? That pretty much tells me all I need to know about you and your ideas. Ron Unz is a far-right racist nutcase that is a holocaust denier and absolutely nobody takes seriously. That is, unless you are an anti-Semitic holocaust denier.
The Unz Review
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Mediawww.unz.com
Most of his very own website is almost nothing but calls for Jews and Israel to be destroyed, denying the Holocaust, and assorted other garbage. And you call anything written by him as "excellent"?
No thank you.
So you readily admit you know nothing about Ron Unz,
Last week the bloody Israel/Gaza conflict of the last couple of months suddenly claimed an important American political victim as Liz Magill was forced to resign as president of the University of Pennsylvania under the pressure of Jewish billionaire donors and pro-Israel elected officials, convicted of an inadequate response to the threats faced by Jewish students at her Ivy League university. Her supportive Board chairman was also swept out in a sudden ideological purge that may be completely unprecedented in the history of elite American higher education and might have very serious implications for academic freedom.
Since the Holocaust only became a major public topic after wartime memories had grown dim, the story has always seemed to suffer from the problems traditionally associated with “recovered memory syndrome.” Truths and falsehoods were often mixed together in strange ways, and the door was opened wide to an astonishing number of outright frauds and liars.
or example, in the late 1970s I remember many of my high school classmates devouring The Painted Bird by Jerzy Kosinski, perhaps the first widely popular Holocaust memoir. But then a few years later, the media revealed that Kosinski’s national best-seller was simply fraudulent, and the plagiarizing author eventually committed suicide. Indeed, there have been so many fake Holocaust memoirs over the years that they nearly constitute a literary genre of their own.
This particular example came to my mind last week when I published a long article on the surprising and controversial history of Zionism, the ideological movement that led to the creation of the State of Israel, highlighting some of the thoroughly-documented but little known elements of the story. Co-founder Max Nordau was much better known as a founding father of European racialism and the Nazi-Zionist economic partnership of the 1930s had been absolutely crucial in Israel’s creation. None of these historical facts are subject to much serious dispute, but for various reasons they have remained almost totally ignored by our mainstream media and history textbooks, so that today very few Americans are aware of them.
In my discussion, I mentioned the famous Balfour Declaration issued by the British government in 1917, a landmark Zionist political triumph that somewhat ambiguously promised the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. That agreement facilitated both the heavy Jewish immigration and the political momentum that eventually created Israel more than three decades later. My few words were not at all controversial.
Our very lightly-moderated website naturally attracts a host of highly-opinionated individuals who embrace a wide range of controversial views generally excluded from more mainstream venues. So that casual reference eventually touched off a heated debate in the comments on a notorious “conspiracy theory” very widespread among anti-Zionists.
Has nothing to do with Unz’s book. He has stated many times his website is a free speech site. He allows for all opinions.I looked at his freaking web page! Hell, I posted a ling right to it!
Holy hell, here it is again. This is hos own webzine!
The Unz Review
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Mediawww.unz.com
And here, these are articles he himself wrote!
Gaza and the Dangers of Jewish Paranoia
Although the subject is generally avoided in our politically-correct age, for many generations it has been known that different groups suffer from different social maladies, probably due to a complex mixture of innate traits and cultural factors. The Irish have long been plagued by drunkenness...www.unz.com
Then there is this, a long and rambling post where he defends multiple Holocaust Deniers, and gives a lot of time to their writings and books. But then, we get to what he calls "Holocaust Frauds and Confusions.
And oh, let's keep going on this, shall we?
The Balfour Declaration and 116,000 American Lives
Did the Zionists Buy Palestine with the American Army During the Great War?www.unz.com
So your claiming I "know nothing about Ron Unz, other than the lies the establishment told you" is completely wrong. Because as you should have realized when I freaking linked to his webzine that I actually had read some of his works. Hell, I even read the crap that you said was so critical of in another of his articles. You did not link to it, but I am not afraid to do so.
And that really is an almost nonsensical stream of coprolite. Ranging from brutal Poland bullying a defenseless Germany and forcing Hitler to attack them, to England and France preparing to attack Germany's ally Russia, so of course Germany had to react by declaring war against them. And of course more Holocaust denial.
Oh no, I read more of his rambling and nonsensical posts than I care to have read. And found them fairly typical of the sort. But come on now, you should have realized I was aware of who he was and his writings from the very fact I referenced his own webzine. And in fact, I welcome all others in this thread to go and read his writings. Because if they have functioning brain cells that are not rotted away from decades of conspiracy theory nonsense they will see he is as loopy as a bowl of fruit flavored breakfast cereal with a toucan on the box.
But your claim is an absolute lie, I know who he is and have read his work. Care to try again?
