Still don't believe he's a muslim?

Welcome back Wacko!

Did this week's bad weather reach as far South as the Mount Carmel Center? Originally Posted by bigtex

that's His Royal Exalted Majesty Sir Waco to you, kotex breath.

that's His Royal Exalted Majesty Sir Waco to you, kotex breath. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Did I remember to welcome you back Wacko?

By the way, did this week's bad weather reach as far South as the Mount Carmel Center?

JL is back?

JL is back? Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Yep, he took up residence in the Mount Carmel Center.

He's breakin' bread with the rest of the Wacko's!

Thank you, LL. I don't think anyone here cares about what BigAssSux has to say.

That is quite telling. I'm interested to hear jd since he seems to think opposite. Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

Oh I'm sure he'll be back with some more bullshit "facts" to support his argument sooner or later.
Like I B Wanker, who doesn't realize that Harry S. Truman defending the actions of Harry S. Truman doesn't lend any credibility to his argument whatsoever. Here is a direct quote from who is, perhaps, the biggest retard on the planet

Eisenhower wasn't president in 1945, nor was he completely familiar with the Pacific War, shamman.
Originally Posted by I B Hankering

nor was he completely familiar with the Pacific War. Here he is talking about the 5 star military general active during world war II and put in charge for creating the plans to defeat Germany and Japan. Kudos to you, I B Wanker. Just when I thought you couldn't possibly be more retarded.

Awwww poor me. I wanted to kill 10 million civilians but I decided to kill only 250,000 instead. *sniff* I am so brave.

The army needed to justify itself somehow didn't it? Obviously it succeeded when idiots like you decided to pat themselves on the back for sitting at home eating cheetos and watchin TV.

There were THREE real reasons that America dropped the bomb on Japan.
1. It was a show of our arrogance. It was, plain and simple, REVENGE for pearl harbor. It was completely backed by the military, and the military literally pushed it through by questioning the patriotism of every single politician in the U.S. They were angry that they had been caught sleeping and wanted revenge by dropping an A-bomb on a 100,000 civilians. Logic went right out the window.

2. The U.S was running out of supplies. They realized that the war would be extremely costly if they decided to continue it with Japan. So what's the alternative to spending money? It's to use something you already spent a couple billion dollars on. Sunk cost you see. War time America had no compassion for the Japs, they considered them vermin and much lesser than human beings. So in the end it came down to: save a couple million dollars, or end a couple hundred thousand human lives.

3. And this was, I believe, the most important. Russia. No matter what alliances they had on paper, the U.S and president Truman did not trust Russia. Most could already see the cold war on the horizon. A ground invasion of the Japanese would obviously mean that the Russians were heavily involved. Truman was already scared of the Russian influence growing in Asia, and they all unanimously agreed that having Japan fall under Russian territory would be a huge disadvantage for the U.S. Quick and easy A-bombs were the only way to keep Russia out I suppose. I don't know about you but prevention strategy does not justify the murder of civilians for me.

The U.S could have dropped the bomb near the ports, minimized civilian casualties and brought Japan to their knees. That way we could also have avoided a 100 years of nuclear fallout in one of their most densely populated areas. We could also simply have modified the post-dam proclamation with terms slightly more agreeable to the Japanese. But no, It was an act of revenge and heartlessness. There's a reason the images and reports were banned for 22 years. It was done only so people would forget. Polls that were done right after world war 2 showed that even the majority of Americans did not agree with Hiroshima/Nagasaki. Apparently, now, we know better than the people who actually lived through it. Originally Posted by shanm

In reverse order;
What polls? I'm a World War II buff and a history major. What polls are you talking about? Not that I don't believe you....no, I don't believe you pretty much sums it up.

Its Potsdam and not post dam. If the majority of Americans disagreed with the bombing then why were it all about revenge? Seems to be diametrically opposed thoughts.

The Russians were not our allies and the only piece of paper we had with them said that they would attack Japan within 90 days of the surrender of Germany or August 6. The Soviets (not Russians) did attack Japan and did occupy some northern islands for years. Do you think that the Soviets would have treated the Japanese civilians any better than they treated their own. They would have killed every Japanese person they found.

We were running out of supplies??? Who sold you that fantasy? Our power was growing everyday. We had troops, planes, tanks, and ships to send in from Europe. Do you really know how stupid that comment sounded? If you go read something at the library we had high ranking military officers who had been posted in Japan. To say that they had no compassion for the Japanese civilians is a joke and demented. Remember, I have been talking about civilians the entire time. Don't try to change the goal post now.

There were only a handful of military who even knew about the atomic bomb. So how did this handful become the entire military wanting to bomb the Japanese. You are so full of shit. You must be a regular suscriber to Mother Jones.

Thanks for pointing out the error, JDIdiot. But you probably ought to stay away from that type of discussion because you are just SOOOO BAD at it.

BTW, it's "it's" and not "its." And it's "was" and not "were," you condescending asshole.

Enjoy mopping the floors in the glass house where you work.

LMAO!!!!!

im not sure what Obama is, other than expedient

id say he does seem to have an affinity for islam, quite possibly as a father's legacy held within his being as part of a treasured heritage

it has certainly been his practice to reflexively defend or take the immediate side of those, in any sort of conflict, he considers oppressed by what he considers the privileged in America or by America itself, which he sees as a tool of the those same "privileged"

and he is about doing his best to "fundamentally change America"

Is there any way LLIdiot can prove the accuracy of his allegation that no one cares "about BT's opinion"

Hmmmmmm! Let's see! Yes, there might be!

ECCIE has installed a "like" button on the bottom of each post. Bingo!

Let's go back and do the "like" button test. Shall we?

As of 6:10 pm on February 26, 2015, 5 poster's have openly expressed they "like" BT's post #451 of this thread.

On the other hand; as of the same time, not one single poster. Yes, a big fat "0" has expressed they "like" LLIdiot's post #452.

It appears that LLIdiot's "opinion" received as many tips as a 600 lb, midget pole dancer!

Now, the question becomes, "is there anyone out there who gives a rat's ass (forgive me rat)" about LLIdiot's "opinion?"

"Carry on!" Originally Posted by bigtex

I value LexusLovers opinion. I am not certain that it matters much, but since you were kind enuff to ask. Then my answer is a enthusiastic YES !

As of 10:06 Friday morning the score is now 13:5 in favor of LL.

Oh I'm sure he'll be back with some more bullshit "facts" to support his argument sooner or later.
Like I B Wanker, who doesn't realize that Harry S. Truman defending the actions of Harry S. Truman doesn't lend any credibility to his argument whatsoever. Here is a direct quote from who is, perhaps, the biggest retard on the planet

Here he is talking about the 5 star military general active during world war II and put in charge for creating the plans to defeat Germany and Japan. Kudos to you, I B Wanker. Just when I thought you couldn't possibly be more retarded. Originally Posted by shanm

You neglectfully fail to acknowledge that Ike was a five-star general who was thoroughly involved in and preoccupied with the European theater of operations, shamman, and YOU are the jackass that assigned special and appropriate important to the office of the president. Meanwhile, another five-star general, George Catlett Marshall, Jr., who WAS in a position to know, and who appropriately deferred to his civilian superior's decision, said this:

We talked to a great many on the committee that were involved in it—the engineers and others—and this particular committee that Mr. Roosevelt had set up which Mr. Stimson, Mr. Harrison and Secretary Byrnes were members. And I think in the situation, it was demanded, and was very much for using the bomb....I was familiar with Japanese psychology to quite an extent. I had been in Japan a little bit, much more than the ordinary person and I knew what they were doing on each one of these operations. We had to end the war, we had to save American lives. We had to halt this terrific expenditure of money which was reaching a stupendous total. And there was no easy to economize on it until we stopped the war. The bomb stopped the war. Therefore, it was justifiable.

Five-star general George Marshall, Jr., who WAS in a position to know, also said this, shamman:

The Japanese peace offers to the Russians ... I had been reading all the Prime Minister said to the various ambassadors of Japan and he was unable at that time to direct the Army. The [Japanese] Army was dominant in these matters and they could only apparently be slugged into submission. And we slugged them.

In reverse order;
What polls? I'm a World War II buff and a history major. What polls are you talking about? Not that I don't believe you....no, I don't believe you pretty much sums it up.

Its Potsdam and not post dam. If the majority of Americans disagreed with the bombing then why were it all about revenge? Seems to be diametrically opposed thoughts.

The Russians were not our allies and the only piece of paper we had with them said that they would attack Japan within 90 days of the surrender of Germany or August 6. The Soviets (not Russians) did attack Japan and did occupy some northern islands for years. Do you think that the Soviets would have treated the Japanese civilians any better than they treated their own. They would have killed every Japanese person they found.

We were running out of supplies??? Who sold you that fantasy? Our power was growing everyday. We had troops, planes, tanks, and ships to send in from Europe. Do you really know how stupid that comment sounded? If you go read something at the library we had high ranking military officers who had been posted in Japan. To say that they had no compassion for the Japanese civilians is a joke and demented. Remember, I have been talking about civilians the entire time. Don't try to change the goal post now.

There were only a handful of military who even knew about the atomic bomb. So how did this handful become the entire military wanting to bomb the Japanese. You are so full of shit. You must be a regular suscriber to Mother Jones. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Excellent point about supplies in the European theatre of operations. They could have been redeployed to defeat Japan. I believe the allies dumped billions of rounds of ammo into the sea after the war, correct?

Is there any way LLIdiot can prove the accuracy of his allegation that no one cares "about BT's opinion"

Hmmmmmm! Let's see! Yes, there might be!

ECCIE has installed a "like" button on the bottom of each post. Bingo!

Let's go back and do the "like" button test. Shall we?

As of 6:10 pm on February 26, 2015, 5 poster's have openly expressed they "like" BT's post #451 of this thread.

On the other hand; as of the same time, not one single poster. Yes, a big fat "0" has expressed they "like" LLIdiot's post #452.

It appears that LLIdiot's "opinion" received as many tips as a 600 lb, midget pole dancer!

Now, the question becomes, "is there anyone out there who gives a rat's ass (forgive me rat)" about LLIdiot's "opinion?"

"Carry on!" Originally Posted by bigtex

LOL - open mouth, insert foot!!! You are losing big time, BigTex!! I'm going to give you a charity "like' so you will be less embarassed.

What polls? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Taken from the Gallup poll on public opinion.
Do you think that dropping the atomic bombs saved more Japanese lives than would have been lost if the war had continued, or did dropping the bomb COST more Japanese lives?

2005 Jul 25-28
Saved more Japanese lives 41%
Cost more Japanese lives 47%
No opinion 12
1995 Jul 20-23
Saved more Japanese lives 40%
Cost more Japanese lives 45
No opinion 15

I was referring to your erroneous claim in which you suggested that a ground invasion of the Japanese would have cost more lives:

Here is a question for you. What number is bigger, 250,000 or 10 million? The army calculated that it would cost the Japanese people 10 million civilian casualties for the allies to invade mainland Japan. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

But yes, I'll admit you are correct about public opinion being highly geared towards the thinking that the use of the atomic bombs was justified. But considering that more than half the country believes that the POTUS is a muslim, I wouldn't put too much faith into that. Oh, I forgot that includes you too. (also, 18% of americans still believe that the sun revolves around the earth, that's almost 1 in 5)

Its Potsdam and not post dam Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Oops. Excuse me. My knowledge of history comes from my high school debate team and the 3 classes I took in college. See unlike you, I decided to major in something actually useful. So excuse me if I made a spelling mistake.

Btw, are you actually a JD or is that for comedic effect (you know, to make us laugh when you say something stupid)? Dear Lord, no wonder the law profession has gone to shit. Did they start handing out JD's on every street corner?

We were running out of supplies??? Who sold you that fantasy? Our power was growing everyday. We had troops, planes, tanks, and ships to send in from Europe.
Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Oh are we back to discussing the real issues now? *sigh* its a shame that your online law degree from Devry University did not come with a common sense course. When I said that they were running out of supplies, I did not mean that they were literally running out of bullets. How about you read the entire paragraph instead of nitpicking one sentence out of a hundred like some ignorant twat.
I said that the U.S had already spent too much on the war as it is and they were stretched to the max. The question was whether or not to continue a costly war, or to end it with an atomic bomb that had cost nearly 2 billion (30 billion today) US dollars. Where is your justification for equating human CIVILIAN lives to the amount of dollars spent on a useless war.

There were only a handful of military who even knew about the atomic bomb. So how did this handful become the entire military wanting to bomb the Japanese. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Again you are either confused or just willfully ignorant. I am not talking about your grandpappy private shit-dick forcing the president to drop the bomb. I am talking about the upper echleons of the military. Considering that Major General Leslie Groves was the director of the Manhattan project, and also the entire project was constructed by the U.S army corps of engineers, its safe to assume that the general and those with any real authority knew about the Manhattan project. And you are confusing the secrecy of the project with its conception. The bomb had already been tested a month before Hiroshima in New mexico, and most, if not all, high ranking officials in the military knew about it. Here is a quote for your sidekick I B wanker. This is from general Douglas Macarthur, commander of U.S army forces in the pacific: "My staff was unanimous in believing that Japan was on the point of collapse and surrender." he lamented the use of the bomb after it had been dropped.

The Russians were not our allies and the only piece of paper we had with them said that they would attack Japan within 90 days of the surrender of Germany or August 6. The Soviets (not Russians) did attack Japan and did occupy some northern islands for years. Do you think that the Soviets would have treated the Japanese civilians any better than they treated their own. They would have killed every Japanese person they found. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

The soviets did attack japan, but it was under their own command and not a ground military offensive of the allied powers. I don't know if you have any idea how it works, but if the allied powers had used the Russian alliance to invade japan then all of Japan could have be considered Russian territory. It wouldn't be like the division east-west germany (which the U.S wanted to avoid anyway), because unlike with germany, the U.S had no ground access to Japanese mainland unless through Russia. With the dropping of the atomic bombs, Russia did not venture far enough into Japanese mainland to occupy Japan.

The only real questions were whether or not the U.S was justified in dropping 2 atomic bombs on CIVILIAN cities, AND whether or not that bombing was the cause of Japanese surrender (ignore the fact that it was dropped on civilian cities when it could have easily been dropped on military bases.) So far, you have provided ZERO evidence to support your viewpoint, except for nitpicking sentences and spelling errors that I made while writing something on the shitter. Considering that the U.S strategic bombing survey, the expert authority on the subject, concluded that the atomic bomb DID NOT cause the Japanese surrender, you will excuse me if I don't listen to a rude, ignorant twat parading his fake JD on a hooker forum.