Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

THE NORMANDY QUAGMIRE
The Daley Times-Post ^ | 06/02/04 | Edward L. Daley

Posted on 06/02/2004 10:29:02 AM PDT by Edward_Daley

By I. N. Tanswer - June 9, 1944

Tuesday's invasion of the European continent by primarily American and British forces may go down in history as the biggest military blunder of all time. The presumptuousness of the invasion's name alone, "Operation Overlord", should have been our first clue as to the state of mind of the people who concocted this foolhardy and now obviously disastrous scheme. As the number of casualties continues to rise, with estimates approaching 50,000 dead and 240,000 wounded, many patriotic Americans are forced to ask if Mr. Roosevelt's preemptive war against the people of Germany has been worth the cost of so many innocent young lives.

(Excerpt) Read more at users.adelphia.net ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Political Humor/Cartoons
KEYWORDS: edwardldaley; normandy; quagmire
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-132 next last
To: brothers4thID

Some folks don't like to be bothered by FACTS! They crave and love the myths that make them feel special because they feel that they have some sort of "hidden knowledge"; sitting there in their easy chair watching satillite tv, and clicking around on the internet; that others actually working in the government reading real intelligence information...and the general public don't have!

Here is the truth about these stupid, childish rumors:

Saudi Arabian citizens, yes, some from the Royal family, who were related to Usama Bin Laden, were given permission to fly out of the country--for their protection. In the climate of that day, senseless assaults on these people could have taken place. They left after being checked out and with the full knowledge of authorities.

Should we hang them, because their relative is evil? Shall we hold you in account for your relative's crimes? The Saudis had long ago renounced their relationship with Usama--and cut him off from his fortune. Usama had actually declared war on them as well...he hates them!

And in FACT, the Saudi flights did NOT happen until the reopening of our national airspace on 9-13.

To somehow make this sound like President Bush actually was allowing Usama Bin Laden, and his immediate family to escape, because he was some kind of family friend, is preposterous!

It is a rumor perpetuated by Bush haters, such as Michael Moore.



81 posted on 06/02/2004 12:32:23 PM PDT by tuckrdout (Grant Teri Schindler (Schiavo) her wish: A DIVORCE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Williams
"...We obviously needed to defeat Germany as well."

With all due respect, 'we' didn't need to defeat Germany - England & Russia did. And if FDR wasn't illegally giving arms & aid to GB from the get-go (in violation of the Neutrality Act) our ships wouldn't have been attacked by the U-Boats and Raiders.

Which also brings up WHY Japan attacked us in the first place; FDR's asia policy was openly hostile to Japan as FDR pretty much declared Economic War them a long time before 1941. 'He' was choking them off from vital necessities for survival (like oil & rubber) and it guaranteed that they'd respond - and not with a nasty letter.

Anyway, after Dec 7th Germany was forced compelled to declare war on us do to their pact with Japan.

NOTE: I'm not justifying anything that Germany or Japan did (I still HATE detest the Japs). My point is that FDR was determined to get us into the war one way or another. And like a typical DemoncRAT -- the Law, Congress or 'the peoples will' be damned, he wanted us in and he got us in.

82 posted on 06/02/2004 12:32:24 PM PDT by Condor51 (May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't. -- Gen G. Patton Jr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
Extrapolating from random data?! The USA's sale of WMDs to Saddam and then pursuing his removal based on his possesion of these, and other WMDs, is hardly 'random data'. Talk about extrapolating! Pot, meet kettle...

It was not only his possession of WMD that led to the war. It was his proven willingness to use them against enemies and his own citizens. It was his complete unwillingness to accede to even the most basic of controls. And I will assert again that you stated two widely known facts to support your argument that the war against Saddam was somehow not connected tot he war with Osama Bin Laden. You used to unrelated facts and filled in the blanks. And then you resorted to name calling instead of actually arguing the merits of your case.

You cannot subtract points for my pointing out the obvious without thereby negating your generalization riddled argument.
83 posted on 06/02/2004 12:33:03 PM PDT by brothers4thID (Saying Dr. Rice hadn't heard of Al Queda is like saying Dr. Ruth hadn't heard about sex)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Edward_Daley

No. Thank YOU!


84 posted on 06/02/2004 12:35:08 PM PDT by tuckrdout (Grant Teri Schindler (Schiavo) her wish: A DIVORCE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: tuckrdout

I know, but I have a feeling we are both banging our heads against a brick wall of willful ignorance. Thanks for trying to help, though.


85 posted on 06/02/2004 12:36:06 PM PDT by brothers4thID (Saying Dr. Rice hadn't heard of Al Queda is like saying Dr. Ruth hadn't heard about sex)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: stylin_geek

" honestly don't give a fig about Osama's family"

Me neither. Doesn't change the fact that they received special treatment by our gov't the very day that their brother slaughtered 3000 of us.



"However, in regards to the selling of WMD Saddam, so, we should have continued in this mistake? We should have left Saddam in place to continue butchering the Iraqi people? The 300,000+ dead don't matter and don't count? You're arguing for status quo ante, based on past mistakes?"


Well, at least you acknowledge history, unlike a few others in this thread. I don't and didn't argue the removal of Saddam. Please find where I did. I also, like your feelings toward the Bin Ladens, don't give a rat's ass about the poor Iraqi people either. Nor did anyone here until Bush told them to in the summer/fall of 2003. Where was your righteous indignation in 1993? 1998? 2000? Where was the outrage as 500,000 Iraqi kids were dying due to UN sanctions during the 90s? Why didn't any American give a rat's ass about the Iraqi people until late last year, when it became obvious that Saddam's WMDs were long gone/destroyed/moved to Syria/whatever? Why should I start caring about ungrateful Iraqis who, a year after liberation by American blood, still don't seem to be too concerned about taking charge of their own country? And where's your righteous indignation about Fidel Castro's butchering and torturing of mostly-Christian Cubans, which has been going on 90 miles from America for almost 40 years? "


"Give me a break, yeah, you think President Bush is to be hung because his family has oil ties, and invading Iraq is wrong because of those oil ties."


Firstly, the proper tense is "hanged", when referring to capital punishment. Secondly, I almost clicked "Report Abuse", since I never did nor intend to request personal harm to come to our President. Your statement here is patently false and bordeline libelous. "


"I think you need to reexamine your values and priorities."


I think you need to take a "Reading Comprehension" course, as the majority of your post attributes words to me that were never typed on this forum board.


86 posted on 06/02/2004 12:37:15 PM PDT by Blzbba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
None of what I mentioned (Bin Laden family getting flown out of USA on 9/11 and the USA selling WMDs to Saddam in 1983) are false.

International politics sometimes makes strange bedfellows. A good example is our ally in World War II, the Soviet Union. Shortly after World War II ended, we witnessed the beginnings of the Cold War with the Soviet Union.

87 posted on 06/02/2004 12:43:58 PM PDT by usadave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Sloth

:o)


88 posted on 06/02/2004 12:44:31 PM PDT by Edward_Daley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba

Thank you!


89 posted on 06/02/2004 12:45:05 PM PDT by Edward_Daley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Edward_Daley
Not far off the mark:

Mugshot of traitor/Nazi propagandist Mildred Gillars (aka Axis Sally):

"Damn all Jews who made this war possible. I love America, but I do not love Roosevelt and all his kike boyfriends."

"It's a disgrace to the American public that they don't wake to the fact of what Franklin D. Roosevelt is doing to the Gentiles of your country and my country."


90 posted on 06/02/2004 12:45:54 PM PDT by weegee (NO BLOOD FOR RATINGS. CNN ignored torture & murder in Saddam's Iraq to keep their Baghdad Bureau.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
Doesn't change the fact that they received special treatment by our gov't the very day that their brother slaughtered 3000 of us.

Other than being members of the same extended family, do you know of any terrorist connections between Osama and the rest of his extended family?

91 posted on 06/02/2004 12:55:42 PM PDT by usadave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: weegee

What a swine that witch was.


92 posted on 06/02/2004 12:58:14 PM PDT by Edward_Daley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: brothers4thID

"your argument that the war against Saddam was somehow not connected tot he war with Osama Bin Laden. "


According to our President, it wasn't, as neither he, Cheney, nor Rummy have ever been able to link Saddam with Bin Laden. Don't bother sending me a bunch of liberal-media links to the contrary - if there was anything irrefutable about Saddam/Osama connections, the Bush Admin would rightfully trumpet them loudly.


"And then you resorted to name calling instead of actually arguing the merits of your case."

Whoa. I apologize for name-calling. This damn forum board sometimes brings out the child in me. I ask that you forgive and we continue to keep this above the table.


"You cannot subtract points for my pointing out the obvious without thereby negating your generalization riddled argument."

I'll add points just for that sentence. But there should be a "-" between generalization-riddled! :)


93 posted on 06/02/2004 1:10:03 PM PDT by Blzbba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
I'll add points just for that sentence.

Works great when you are the score keeper in your own arguement.

We are still waiting for you to own up to two very specific and wrong statements made by you.

1) Did the Osama family members fly out on 9/11 or on 9/20 as stated in another post?

2) Who, by name, in the group of Osama's family that was flown out of the country was actually Osama's "brother"? (Note: Uncles, brothers-in-law, cousins, and fourth cousins twice removed do not qualify.)

94 posted on 06/02/2004 1:28:54 PM PDT by been_lurking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Edward_Daley
She was convicted/jailed for treason when she came back to the US after WWII. Lord Haw Haw was hanged in England when he was convicted of treason.

Some say that he would have lived if he had been permitted to come back to the US.

The will must be there to punish enemies of the state.

95 posted on 06/02/2004 1:48:19 PM PDT by weegee (NO BLOOD FOR RATINGS. CNN ignored torture & murder in Saddam's Iraq to keep their Baghdad Bureau.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: catpuppy
I think you may be the first to truly understand the satire of Edward_Daley's post. The value lies not in the accuracy of the facts in the SATIRICAL article, but the choice of spin and innuendo about Roosevelt's actions. If the press in 1941 had treated Roosevelt like the press in 2004 treats Bush, this post could well have been found on the editorial page of the NYT! It is not an attack on Roosevelt, but satire aimed at today's press: facts are forced to take a back seat to the desired spin.

And the post is pretty darned funny (although a bit depressing because it so accurately reflects the opinions of the maim stream press).
96 posted on 06/02/2004 2:05:50 PM PDT by Law is not justice but process
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: been_lurking

"Works great when you are the score keeper in your own arguement."

A. It's a joke.

B. Why are you involving yourself in a discussion that doesn't involve you?


"We are still waiting for you to own up to two very specific and wrong statements made by you."


"We"? Ooo. I'm scared.


"1) Did the Osama family members fly out on 9/11 or on 9/20 as stated in another post?"

I've since read 9/13. Doesn't matter - they shouldn't have been flown out at all. If Clintax had done something like this, you'd be screaming for his impeachment.


"2) Who, by name, in the group of Osama's family that was flown out of the country was actually Osama's "brother"? (Note: Uncles, brothers-in-law, cousins, and fourth cousins twice removed do not qualify.)"


Strawman and a misquote, as I said that Osama was the brother of some of them, and not the other way around. If you're gonna butt into a discussion that doesn't involve you, at least quote me correctly please.


97 posted on 06/02/2004 2:06:13 PM PDT by Blzbba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: familyofman

Funny thing. Yamamoto and Hitler are spelled differently, too.


98 posted on 06/02/2004 2:07:16 PM PDT by watchin (Democratic Party - the political wing of the IRS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Condor51
With all due respect we DID need to defeat Germany. Any nation that believed in human rights needed to defeat Nazi Germany. Auschwitz is the one-word justification for our need to defeat Germany.

Ironically, we needed to defeat the USSR as well. The entire moral argument for war on Germany also applied to the USSR. Someone I know once expressed it as "we allied ourselves with the second worst dictator of the 20th Century [Stalin] to defeat the third worst [Hitler] and inadvertently paved the way for the worst [Mao]."
99 posted on 06/02/2004 2:18:02 PM PDT by Law is not justice but process
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: weegee

I have to wonder why Hanoi Jane wasn't tried for treason... or why John Kerry hasn't stood trial for his admitted war crimes.


100 posted on 06/02/2004 2:20:41 PM PDT by Edward_Daley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-132 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson