Revisionist View and WWII

Discussion in 'Education' started by Annie, May 14, 2005.

  1. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    I hate revisionist history.

    http://victorhanson.com/articles/hanson051305.html

    There's more...


     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. padisha emperor
    Offline

    padisha emperor Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2004
    Messages:
    1,564
    Thanks Received:
    53
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Aix-en-Provence, France
    Ratings:
    +53
    When people say "we do more than the others", I find it quite stupid.
    alone, the anglo-US would be probably not able to win. Alone, USSR would be probably not able to win.
    because the german army was divised, on the two fronts, then the job of the two allied armies was easier than if the german units would have been united on one single front.

    (dont forget the French in Africa, Italy, France :) (of course, their contribution is not the same than the UK-US-USSR's ones, that's sure, these nations did an awesome job, for it the world will be always respectfull ;)
     
  3. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    PE, thanks. Not coming through with revisionists though. US bombed Hiroshima-bad.

    US interred Japanese-bad.

    UK/US bombed Dresden-bad.

    That's from textbooks in America. Other than stopping Hitler's holocaust, there was nothing ok about our involvement in WWII.
     
  4. padisha emperor
    Offline

    padisha emperor Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2004
    Messages:
    1,564
    Thanks Received:
    53
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Aix-en-Provence, France
    Ratings:
    +53
    Dresden, Hamburg : it's a bad thing, bombardments on a city, wihtout real strategic interest, it's sad, bad...and it didn't change the moral of the german population.


    For Hiroshima : sure, a nuke bomb is not a joyce, but this idea was not adopted with the smile, it was the last solution, and it avoids to the USA the lose of several hundreds of thousands, probably several millions of marines. (the conquest of Japan would have been certainly an awful massacre).
    The USA nuked Japan, it's awful and terrific, but the first interest of a nation during a war, is to win with the minimum of human loses.
     
  5. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Nope, no apologia here for Hiroshima. Nor for Dresden. War is hell and to be avoided at all REASONABLE costs:

    http://windsofchange.net/archives/004822.php


     
  6. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511
    We did do more. Accomplishment is not a function of the number of casualties.
     
  7. NATO AIR
    Offline

    NATO AIR Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,275
    Thanks Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    USS Abraham Lincoln
    Ratings:
    +282
    WW2 was total war at that time. The fate of the world hung in the balance. Messy, terrible things happened. They were worth it though in the long run, unless these revisionist bastards want to be speaking German and owning black slaves.
     
  8. William Joyce
    Offline

    William Joyce Chemotherapy for PC

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    9,693
    Thanks Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Caucasiastan
    Ratings:
    +1,349
    WWII was an unnecessary war for America pushed for mainly by Anglo elites and Jews. Before our involvement, there was a huge America First movement by true nationalistic patriots like Henry Ford and Charles Lindbergh who dared to say the truth --- that we should not be involved. Hitler was not a threat to the U.S., not in the slightest. He was a threat to Jews. Why so many thousands of white Christian men have had to die for them is beyond me. But it continues to this day --- just look at Iraq. But our reward for being their soliders is that they mock us on TV and in the movies as Christian buffoons.
     
  9. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    You need to rethink your math. Hitler declared war on the US the Dec 8, 1941. We did not initiate the state of war with Germany.

    Speculation of course, but had he not declared war on us, we could very-well have conducted only a single-front war in the Pacific, and/or had a much more limited involvement in Europe.

    And we did not fight WWII for the Jews. The Holocaust was kept secret from the American people for attitudes such as yours. We fought first and foremost in our own defense.
     

Share This Page