logo Sign In

Post #261217

Author
Obi Jeewhyen
Parent topic
A Date Which Will Live...in Infamy
Link to post in topic
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/261217/action/topic#261217
Date created
12-Dec-2006, 3:20 PM
Stinky, you have a lot of nerve accusing me of not reading your post when it's clear you comprehended nothing of mine ... and checking back, I posted using the English language. Try reading it and attempt to understand before accusing me of what I did not do.

First of all, the word "allies" does not refer to American soldiers. Check Websters. But let me ask again ... in a more See Dick Run sort of way: 1) Were German citizens somehow less willing to fight invading troops than Japanese citizens? 2) Are nuclear weapons less of an option where radioactive fallout might hit the French and British (our allies) as well as the Germans and Italians (not to mention purportedly neutral Swiss, et al.). I'm perfectly aware from the dates in your post (thanks for the info, btw), that nuclear weapons were simply not available for the invasion of Europe. Mine was a hypothetical question designed to find out your opinion on when nuclear weapons are feasible in lieu of invasion.


I took note of your airplane analogy and I find it without merit. Your claim that more Japanese civilians would have died in an invasion than perished in two nuclear bomb attacks and the radioactive fallout result is unfounded. On what do you base such an estimate? Perhaps it might be useful to consider how many German and Italian civilians died in the European invasion as a baseline for comparison.

In any event, it is precisely your conclusions about nuclear weapons casualties vs. conventional weapons casualties that I called into question. I did not ignore it ... I just commented on it in a way you failed to comprehend. I hope I made myself clearer now.



However, since you have resorted to namecalling on your first response to me ... I am going to assume you cannot hold an internet conversation involving controversy. When you learn proper message board behavior, give me ring, ok? (I don't care how lax the moderation on this particular board may be, personal attacks and namecalling are message board verbotens).


* * * * * * *


Oh, and Rob: Yes, homophobia is very, very gay. Your overt homophobia is a weird way to do it, but it serves just fine to let everyone know you're homosexual. Straight guys don't give a fvck about gay. Only 'mo's are phobic. So, send me that photo and we'll see if we can't get something going. Picturing you as Sebatian Shaw isn't doing anything for me.






.