Posted on 08/29/2002 9:52:00 AM PDT by Prysson
Exactomundo. When you're the King of the Hill, and have been so for such a long time, the only thing that can give pleasure to the frightened and impotent masses is your downfall. If we ever were brought to our knees (a virtual impossibility, imo), the rest of the world would quickly rue the day they ever wished for such a thing, because our destruction would be their own.
My assertion stands... now in spades.
Not to stereotype you on this more than I already have, but this is plain Chomskyite bunk. If you're going down that road, then any honest person has to arrive at the conclusion that it was the Soviet's fault. It is illogical to blame anyone other than the party that started the situation in the first place.
In any case, Bush is the one who tried to placate the Taliban by giving them $50 million in U.S. money for their supposed anti-drug stance. We all know he was just trying to grease the wheels to get an oil pipeline built.
No, we don't. Cite some proof for this Chomskyite crap.
When he couldn't get it, he used September 11th as an excuse. In fact, I am of the opinion that his administration allowed it to happen for precisely that reason.
This speaks volumes about your frame of reference, and not in a good way. You need to brush up on your WWII history.
Given what you've previously stated, you should be the last to lecture anyone about their history. History is based on facts, not opinions, and you have so far based your 'history' on opinions.
Not only are you grossly ignorant of Britain's role in the war,
Oh, well, while we are seriously denigrating the value of the contributions the Americans made, I guess everyone else is fair game, right? The British contribution to the war was considerable, yet much less than the American contribution in terms of fighting men and materiel. If you lower the value of the American contribution, you would then be lowering the value of the British contribution by default, would you not?
you seem to be unaware that there were THREE theatres in WWII
No, I am not
(European, Pacific, and North African). America was involved in all three, but they rarely focused all of their efforts into all three.
Note how silly this statement is. This would require 300% effort. Then you run into the problem of where were the Soviets (aka, the 'heroes of WWII') in the latter 2 theatres?
Had the shoe been on the other foot and the Americans had been subjected to nightly bombings, I doubt they'd have stood it as long as the British.
You are completely naive.
Americans have no right to preach to the British about World War II. They have no idea how the British military and the British public suffered.
In the context that America has done nothing for the British, I don't care. They got us into WWI, and they, along with France, put the screws to Germany after that war and created the environment that led to Hitler. You blame the US for the Taliban but not the European victors of WWI for the Nazis?
Lastly, as for Germany being beaten in the air...I suppose that's why the U.S. had to train fresh air crews every couple of weeks because the turnover was nearly total after only a couple of months of bombing runs. My grandfather was a bomber pilot in WWII, based in England. If he were alive today, he'd tell you exactly how wrong you are.
Sorry, but the facts remain that by DDay, the Allies had the best of it in the air.
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.