I B Lying enjoys cloaking himself in ignorance whether it's past, present, or future and I find it truly fascinating and enjoyable to watch (especially in the backdrop of Trumpie losing the election to Hilary). I said it took both but with the MAIN difference being the strategic bombing campaign against the Axis powers. An Air Campaign will win you a war before a Ground campaign especially if you're concerned about limiting soldier deaths. All the history books are on my side it yes the Allied forces working in tandem had troops on the ground but those troops would have lost if no Air campaign. Again Air beats ground every time if you're singularly focused which you in your wonderful ignorance clearly are. Think about it you dipshit; what ended WWII; yep you guessed right a fucking bomb in Hiroshima which incidentally ignited a cold war. No amount of manpower can defeat a bomb / strategic air campaign. I swear you folks have got to be the dumbest I've ever come across and what's disturbing is your proud of it or totally clueless but your kind it's what we expect/People much smarter than you argued the same POV before WWII, Sissy Chap, and they were proved wrong by the course of events during WWII.
Carry on Einstein - lol Originally Posted by Sistine Chapel
Regarding the bombing of Berlin, February, 1944: "This disaster, which hits Nazis and anti-Nazis alike, is welding the people together. After every raid special rations are issued–cigarettes, coffee, meat. As Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor said, 'Give them bread and they will back you up.' If the British think they're going to undermine our morale they are barking up the wrong tree" (p. 92, Diary of a Nightmare: Berlin, 1942-1945by Ursula Von Kardorff).Ultimately, men and materiel had to invade the shores of Normandy and drive on Berlin to win that war. Air power alone did not win that war, Sissy Chap, just as air power alone will never win a war, Sissy Chap.
Air power employing conventional munitions did not win WWII, Korea, Iraq, and certainly did not win in Vietnam, Sissy Chap, and you have yet to produce an actual example that supports your ignorant POV, Sissy Chap, because you cannot produce such an example, Sissy Chap. Your fall back position of relying on unconventional nuclear weapons to achieve mere political goals has been duly noted, Sissy Chap, and that, you ignorant mutha fucker, is not a position shared by the greater part of either political party.