Russian army as good as the US army????? - Page 5 - GoFuckYourself.com

rogueteens · 05-17-2013, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

Churchill saw the wisdom in standing his ground. Hilter was a one trick pony - he would promise he wouldn't attack, would stage "incidents" and then claim he was protecting "Germans and German interests" and then would attack.

Sure, Churchill could have signed a peace treaty... And then watched as Germany build up in invasion force in France while Hilter start complaining loudly about how "Germans were being treated" in the UK.

He did the right thing.
.

Of cause, history shows that but at the time, Britain was alone and had it's back against the wall and invasion was a real threat.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

Not at all. Americans believed in brute force, not hiding in the darkness of night and maybe hitting the target. They wanted to destroy their targets, not play guessing games.

Really? At the cost of their own pilots and proving pretty damn ineffective at hitting targets?
BTW, I spoke to an old WW2 soldier once after some British troops were killed in Iraq by American planes. He told me that even in WW2 "You always wanted to know which way the yanks were pointing their guns".

https://gfy.com/showpost.php?p=19629449&postcount=197

helterskelter808 · 05-17-2013, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

Churchill saw the wisdom in standing his ground. Hilter was a one trick pony - he would promise he wouldn't attack, would stage "incidents" and then claim he was protecting "Germans and German interests" and then would attack.

Sure, Churchill could have signed a peace treaty... And then watched as Germany build up in invasion force in France while Hilter start complaining loudly about how "Germans were being treated" in the UK.

Hitler didn't even occupy the whole of France, a country which had surrendered, and he would have been trapped in a quagmire, literally, in Russia for a decade while having to maintain control of the rest of Europe he'd occupied.

It's a matter of historical fact how much he admired the British Empire almost as much as he loathed the Russians. By the time he'd suppressed/liquidated them, if ever, Britain may have already developed its atom bomb, whereupon we'd have a situation with dictatorship across Europe, with a few free countries, one of which was nuclear armed.

Pretty much how things turned out anyway, just with different actors.

RKLover · 05-17-2013, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

Yep, but not for free. It was done in exchange of gold. That's just a business

The Gold was promised. It was never delivered. However, the Tanks and airplanes were delivered.

helterskelter808 · 05-17-2013, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RKLover

Still, there is no doubt in my mind that Russia suffered more horribly than any other nation during the course of WWII.

Poland might have something to say about that.

RKLover · 05-17-2013, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogueteens

A couple of minor points, Churchill had plenty of chances to negotiate a truce and even during "The Darkest Hour" refused.

Yes America did provide (sell) loads of hardware but their troops were badly trained and their leaders refused point blank to learn the lessons learnt the hard way by the British in the war with Germany. an example being that the USAF insisted on restarting day raids, ignoring the RAF advice to fly by night resulting in huge losses.

Not entirely accurate. The American leadership refused to blindly bomb civilians in the middle of the night. Maybe they would have felt differently had the endured the nightly German bombings of London.

As for badly trained? Simply put. Screw you. And your Dog. My Dad flew 34 missions, my best friends Dad is an ace. Stick that back up your ass where it belongs.

Rochard · 05-17-2013, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogueteens

Of cause, history shows that but at the time, Britain was alone and had it's back against the wall and invasion was a real threat.

Yeah... He liked them all right up until he stabbed them in the back and invaded them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogueteens

Really? At the cost of their own pilots and proving pretty damn ineffective at hitting targets?
BTW, I spoke to an old WW2 soldier once after some British troops were killed in Iraq by American planes. He told me that even in WW2 "You always wanted to know which way the yanks were pointing their guns".

LOL. So we gave weapons to a former British colony.... Shame on us.

EddyTheDog · 05-17-2013, 04:29 PM

Has anyone posted this yet - I am not going through the whole thread....

Rochard · 05-17-2013, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by helterskelter808

Hitler didn't even occupy the whole of France, a country which had surrendered, and he would have been trapped in a quagmire, literally, in Russia for a decade while having to maintain control of the rest of Europe he'd occupied.

Yeah, Hilter set up a rump state - Vichy France. But even Vichy France was divided into half, half of which was directly controlled by the Nazis and the other half had a French government that was nothing more than puppets.

Quote:

Originally Posted by helterskelter808

H
It's a matter of historical fact how much he admired the British Empire almost as much as he loathed the Russians. By the time he'd suppressed/liquidated them, if ever, Britain may have already developed its atom bomb, whereupon we'd have a situation with dictatorship across Europe, with a few free countries, one of which was nuclear armed.

He claims he admired the British, but he desperately wanted to bring them to heel. He just physically couldn't. The British controlled the channel and the skies; Germany tried to build an invasion fleet by the Brits just attacked them from the air and destroyed them before the Germans could get enough boats ready for Sea Lion.

Rochard · 05-17-2013, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by helterskelter808

Poland might have something to say about that.

Russia lost four to five times more than Russia did. No one had more killed or wounded than Russia did.

_Richard_ · 05-17-2013, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

Russia lost four to five times more than Russia did. No one had more killed or wounded than Russia did.

no one killed or wounded more russians than the russians did either

what of it

rogueteens · 05-17-2013, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RKLover

Not entirely accurate. The American leadership refused to blindly bomb civilians in the middle of the night. Maybe they would have felt differently had the endured the nightly German bombings of London.

As for badly trained? Simply put. Screw you. And your Dog. My Dad flew 34 missions, my best friends Dad is an ace. Stick that back up your ass where it belongs.

But they rather quickly went to night-time raids didn't they, also the bombing runs weren't like they are today with pinpoint accuracy, even daytime raids could leave bombs dropped miles off were they were intended.

The sheer numbers of troops needing training and the fact that they hadn't been in battle was why I said that.
Americans troops have long been known for accidentally shooting the wrong people, Stick that back up your ass too.

rogueteens · 05-17-2013, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

Yeah... He liked them all right up until he stabbed them in the back and invaded them.

LOL. So we gave weapons to a former British colony.... Shame on us.

none of that makes any sense whatsoever.

dyna mo · 05-17-2013, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RKLover

My Dad flew 34 missions, my best friends Dad is an ace. Stick that back up your ass where it belongs.

there is 1 ww2 american flying ace left living right now

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...f_World_War_II

he's 93.

it appears there is only 1 remaining living british flying ace left with us as well.

there are very few of these guys left at all.

_Richard_ · 05-17-2013, 05:25 PM

either does bombing a boat full of jewish and russian POWs 3 days after ww2 ends.. but i bet that doesn't get included in 'the version' either

dyna mo · 05-17-2013, 05:33 PM

not sure where you are coming up with that story, richard, according to you history is written by the victors eh.

RKLover · 05-17-2013, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogueteens

...Americans troops have long been known for accidentally shooting the wrong people, Stick that back up your ass too.

You're obviously a dilgent researcher who bases his opinions on sheer fantasy rather than fact

Quote:

The Polish submarine ORP Jastrząb was mistakenly sunk by the British destroyer HMS St Albans and minesweeper HMS Seagull. She was attacked with depth charges and made to surface, there she was strafed with the loss of five crew and six injured, including the commander, despite yellow recognition smoke candles.
27 June- a group of RAF Vickers Wellingtons bombed the units of 4th County of London Yeomanry, British 7th Armoured Division and the British 3rd Hussars during a two-hour raid near Mersa Matruh, Egypt, killing over 359 troops and wounding 560.
On 23 October 1942, during the 2nd Battle of El Alamein, at 2140 hours under the cover of a barrage of 1000 guns, British infantry of the 51st (Highland) Infantry Division advanced towards the enemy lines. However, they advanced too fast into the area of fire from British artillery, causing over 60 casualties.[19]
During the 2nd Battle of El Alamein, RAF fighters bombed British troops during a four-hour raid, causing 56 casualties. The British 10th Royal Hussars were among the victims; they did not know the proper signals to call off their planes.[19]

1944
28 April. Exercise Tiger, a nine-day rehearsal for the D-Day landings on Utah Beach, was marred when troops landed at Slapton Sands during a live firing exercise. American soldiers crossed into an area which was being shelled with live ammunition by the British heavy cruiser HMS Hawkins. One source put the number of deaths at 308 American soldiers. A total of 946 American servicemen died during the exercise. The death toll was four times greater than in the action at Utah Beach itself.

5?6 June, several RAF Avro Lancasters attempting to bomb the German artillery battery at Merville-Franceville-Plage attacked instead friendly positions, killing 186 soldiers of the British Reconnaissance Corps and devastating the town. They also mistakenly bombed Drop Zone 'V ' of the 6th Airborne Division, killing 78 and injuring 65.[39]
6 June 1944, RAF fighters bombed and strafed the HQ entourage of 3rd Parachute Brigade (British 6th Airborne Division) near Pegasus Bridge after mistaking them for a German column. At least 15 men were killed and many others were wounded.[40]
8 June 1944, a group of RAF Hawker Typhoons attacked the 175th Infantry Regiment, 29th Infantry Division (United States) on the Isigny Highway, France, causing 24 casualties.[41]
On 27 July 1944, the former HMS Sunfish was sunk by a British RAF Coastal Command aircraft in the Norwegian Sea. All crew, including the British liaison staff, were lost. Later investigation revealed that the RAF crew were at fault.[43]
7 August 1944, a RAF Hawker Typhoon strafed a squad from 'F' Company/US 120th Infantry Regiment, near Hill 314, France, killing two men.[44] Around noon on the same day, RAF Hawker Typhoon of the 2TAF was called in to assist the US 823rd Tank Destroyer Battalion in stopping an attack by the 2nd SS Panzer Division between Sourdeval and Mortain but instead fired its rockets at two US 3-inch guns near L'Abbaye Blanche, killing one man and wounding several others even after the yellow smoke (which was to identify friendlies) was put out. Two hours later, an RAF Typhoon shot up the Service Company of the 120th Infantry Regiment, US 30th Division, causing several casualties, including Major James Bynum who was killed near Mortain. The officer who replaced him was strafed by another Typhoon a few minutes later and seriously wounded. Around the same time, a Hawker Typhoon attacked the Cannon Company of 120th Infantry Regiment, US 30th Division, near Mortain, killing 15 men.[44] An hour later, RAF Typhoons strafed 'B' Company/US 120th Infantry Regiment on Hill 285, killing a driver.
8 August 1944, near Mortain, France, RAF Hawker Typhoons attacked two Sherman tanks of 'C' Company, US 743rd Tank Battalion with rockets, killing 5 tank crewmen and wounding 10 soldiers. Later that day, two Shermans from 'A' Company, US 743rd Tank Battalion were destroyed and set ablaze by RAF Typhoons near Mortain. One tank crewman was killed and 12 others wounded.[46]
9 August 1944, a RAF Hawker Typhoon strafed units of the British Columbia Regiment and the Algonquin Regiment, 4th Canadian Armoured Division, near Quesnay Wood during Operation Totalize, causing several casualties. Later that day, the same units were mistakenly fired upon by tanks and artillery of the 1st Polish Armoured Division, resulting in more casualties.
12 August 1944, RAF Hawker Typhoons fired rockets at Shermans of 'A' Company, US 743rd Tank Battalion, near Mortain, France, causing damage to one tank and badly injuring 2 tank crewmen.[47]
13 August 1944, 12 British soldiers of ?B? Company, 4th Wiltshires, 43rd Wessex Division, were killed and 25 others wounded when they were hit by rockets and machine gun attacks by RAF Typhoons near La Villette, Calvados, France.[48]
14 August 1944, RAF heavy bombers hit Allied troops in error during Operation Tractable causing about 490 casualties including 112 dead. The bombings also destroyed 265 Allied vehicles, 30 field guns and two tanks. British anti-aircraft guns opened fire on the RAF bombers and some may have been hit.
17 August 1944, RAF fighters attacked the soldiers of the British 7th Armoured Division, resulting in 20 casualties, including the intelligence officer of 8th Hussars who was badly injured. The colonel riding along was badly shaken when their jeep crashed off the road.[49]
14?18 August 1944, the South Alberta Regiment of the 4th Canadian Armoured Division came under fire six times by RAF Spitfires, resulting in over 57 casualties. Many vehicles were also set on fire and the yellow smoke used for signalling friendlies was ignored by Spitfire pilots. An officer of the South Alberta demanded that he wanted his Crusader AA tanks to shoot at the Spitfires attacking his Headquarters.[50]
On 27 August 1944, a minesweeping flotilla of Royal Navy ships came under fire. At about noon of the 27th, HMS Britomart, Salamander, Hussar and Jason came under rocket and cannon attacks by Hawker Typhoons of No. 263 Squadron RAF and No. 266 Squadron RAF. HMS Britomart and HMS Hussar took direct hits and were sunk. HMS Salamander had her stern blown off and sustained heavy damage. HMS Jason was raked by machine gun fire, killing and wounding several of her crew. Two of the accompanying trawlers were also hit. The total loss of life was 117 sailors killed and 153 wounded. The attack had continued despite the attempts by the ships to signal that they were friendly and radio requests by the commander of the aircraft for clarification of his target. In the aftermath the surviving sailors were told to keep quiet about the attack. The subsequent court of enquiry identified the fault as lying with the Navy, who had requested the attack on what they thought were enemy vessels entering or leaving Le Havre, and three RN officers were put before a court martial. The commander of the Jason and his crew were decorated for their part in rescuing their comrades. At the time reporting of the incident was suppressed with information not fully released until 1994.[51][52][53]
12 September 1944, a group of RAF Hawker Typhoons destroyed two Sherman tanks of the Governor General's Foot Guards, 4th Canadian Armoured Division in the vicinity of Maldegem, Belgium, killing 3 men and injuring 4. One Canadian soldier from the 4th Canadian Armored Division wounded recalled this incident saying "....while so deployed the tanks were suddenly attacked, in mistake, by several Typhoon aircraft. Lt. Middleton-Hope's tank was badly hit, killing the gunner Guardsman Hughes, and the tank was set on fire. Almost immediately Sgt. Jenning's tank was similarly knocked out by Typhoon rockets. Meanwhile the Typhoons continued to press home their attack with machine guns and rockets, and, while trying to extricate the gunner, Lt. Middleton-Hope was blown off the tank. In this tragic encounter Guardsmen Baker, Barter, and Cheal were seriously wounded."[54]
Canadian artillery units were rushed in to support the retreating American forces as a counterattack against the advancing German Army during the early stages of the Ardennes Offensive. When American troops were making a retreat north of the Ardennes, the Canadians mistook them for a German column. The Canadian artillery guns opened fire on them, resulting in 76 American deaths and many as 138 wounded.[55]

1945
On 23 January 1945, a group of Royal Air Force fighters strafed the assault gun platoon (105mm Sherman tanks) of US 743rd Tank Battalion, near Sart-Lez-St.Vith, Belgium, killing 6 men and wounded 15.[57]
The March (1945) ? On 19 April 1945, at a village called Gresse, a flight of RAF Typhoons strafed a columns of Allied POWs during the death march after mistaking them as retreating German troops, killing 30 and fatally injured 30 more.
Cap Arcona incident ? This incident has been referred to as "the worst friendly-fire incident in history"[58] On 3 May 1945, the three ships Cap Arcona, Thielbek, and the SS Deutschland in Lübeck Harbour were sunk in four separate, but synchronized attacks with bombs, rockets, and cannons by the Royal Air Force, resulting in the death of over 7,000 Jewish concentration camp survivors and Russian prisoners of war, along with POWs from several other allies.[58][59] The British pilots were unaware that these ships carried POWs and concentration camp survivors,[60] although British documents were released in the 1970s that state the Swedish government had informed the RAF command of the risk prior to the attack.[61][62]

helterskelter808 · 05-17-2013, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

Russia lost four to five times more than Russia did. No one had more killed or wounded than Russia did.

Obviously. They have a far bigger population and were fighting their former ally for 4 years.

Aside from the country being carved up by two of the most evil, barbaric ideologies in history, about 20% of the Polish population was wiped out and Warsaw was the most destroyed city in WWII; the Nazis intended for it to be literally wiped off the map and almost succeeded.

Everything that happened to the Russians, they had coming. They were no better than the Nazis; in fact in some ways were far worse.

Rochard · 05-17-2013, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by helterskelter808

Obviously. They have a far bigger population and were fighting their former ally for 4 years.

Aside from the country being carved up by two of the most evil, barbaric ideologies in history, about 20% of the Polish population was wiped out and Warsaw was the most destroyed city in WWII; the Nazis intended for it to be literally wiped off the map and almost succeeded.

Everything that happened to the Russians, they had coming. They were no better than the Nazis; in fact in some ways were far worse.

My Grandmother's entire family died in Poland... She was the only one who got out.

helterskelter808 · 05-17-2013, 08:07 PM

I'm sorry to hear that. Poland suffered diabolical treatment during the war, and Poles were an important part of the fight against Germany, as exiles and in being first people cracking the German Enigma machine, long before the war began.

JFK · 05-18-2013, 05:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matyko

Hungary is not on the list, I think we might be stronger than Tuvalu but not sure

Talpra Magyar

Rochard · 05-18-2013, 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogueteens

none of that makes any sense whatsoever.

Hilter was everyone's best friend right up until the point he invaded them. He did the same exact thing every time - he would sign a treaty or agree to protect borders, stage incidents or events and then explain he had to protect "German interests" and then invaded. You can say he liked the British, and even admired him, but his goal was to defeat them.

My other comment was about Iran. You said the US had given planes to Iran. Well, yes, yes we did. You are saying the US armed a future enemy, while I am saying the US armed a country that was one step short of being a British colony. Funny thing, if you take a look back at world history over the past three hundred years, you see one common problem - Small countries in Europe tried to run the world.

nico-t · 05-18-2013, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antonio

i like men

.

rogueteens · 05-18-2013, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RKLover

You're obviously a dilgent researcher who bases his opinions on sheer fantasy rather than fact

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010...ndly-fire-iraq

it is such a problem that there is even an (incomplete) wiki page about it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ritish_victims The topic has become prevalent in British culture due to some recent incidents, and is often satirically portrayed in the media.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...ndly-fire.html

Fantasy?

rogueteens · 05-18-2013, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

Hilter was everyone's best friend right up until the point he invaded them. He did the same exact thing every time - he would sign a treaty or agree to protect borders, stage incidents or events and then explain he had to protect "German interests" and then invaded. You can say he liked the British, and even admired him, but his goal was to defeat them.

My other comment was about Iran. You said the US had given planes to Iran. Well, yes, yes we did. You are saying the US armed a future enemy, while I am saying the US armed a country that was one step short of being a British colony. Funny thing, if you take a look back at world history over the past three hundred years, you see one common problem - Small countries in Europe tried to run the world.

I didn't say any of that I don't think, have you confused me with someone else?

dyna mo · 05-18-2013, 08:44 AM

if hitler thought so highlyy of the brits, why did he think they would be so complacent to his aggression?

helterskelter808 · 05-18-2013, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogueteens

I didn't say any of that I don't think, have you confused me with someone else?

For some reason he assumed you were talking about Brits killed by Iranians using American weapons, rather than being killed by Americans.

The US military is so large the percentage of subnormals within it is significant (and let's face it, militaries everywhere are not exactly famous for attracting the most socially well-adjusted types) and it's impossible to keep control of what everyone is doing.

The 'fuck yeah' mentality is very real, and encouraged, there are flat out psychotics, and there are people who think these conflicts are real life video games with no serious consequences. The policy of allowing the kind of utter dumbass who joins the army access to serious weaponry is one thing, to them let them play with iPods and/or other distracting toys during active duty is absolute fucking lunacy.

If another country was doing to our forces what that Wikileak says we're doing to you, and probably other countries, you can bet there'd be voices raised about it.

Sadly for you, your country's role in the world, like Canada's, is to shut the fuck up and do whatever we tell you to do. That's why we love you more than, say, France, a country that was critical to our Independence, because France has the balls to stand up for itself and say no to us.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

if hitler thought so highlyy of the brits, why did he think they would be so complacent to his aggression?

Well nobody ever claimed he wasn't batshit nuts.

dyna mo · 05-18-2013, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by helterskelter808

Well nobody ever claimed he wasn't batshit nuts.

that's my point. we can all discuss wtf all about hitler but the dude talked out of his ass and did the opposite. we'll never know

just like the us bombing campaing of germany. current historians tend to point the finger at this guy

gen hap arnold, the guy in charge in the early days who clung to daylight runs, in spite of the data showing him it wasn't working. his argument was that his pilots were not aggressive enough.

Rochard · 05-18-2013, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogueteens

none of that makes any sense whatsoever.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogueteens

I didn't say any of that I don't think, have you confused me with someone else?

I don't believe I have you confused with anyone else. You said my reply didn't make any sense and I it explained to you.

rogueteens · 05-18-2013, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by helterskelter808

Sadly for you, your country's role in the world, like Canada's, is to shut the fuck up and do whatever we tell you to do. That's why we love you more than, say, France, a country that was critical to our Independence, because France has the balls to stand up for itself and say no to us.

Unfortunately, that's true, not since Thatcher have we had a Prime Minister willing to stand up to the US president - I'm sure that Blair got a hard on from being the US's bitch.

rogueteens · 05-18-2013, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

I don't believe I have you confused with anyone else. You said my reply didn't make any sense and I it explained to you.

https://gfy.com/showpost.php?p=19629608&postcount=206

your replies make no sense to what I posted though.

Point one, I was saying that Churchill never thought about surrendering or calling for a truce even though things were practically hopeless at that point.

Point two, I was saying that US troops make a habit of shooting allies, not that they sell weapons.

Rochard · 05-18-2013, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogueteens

Point two, I was saying that US troops make a habit of shooting allies, not that they sell weapons.

Oddly enough I haven't heard or read too much about friendly fire issues when it comes to WWII. And I've read a lot about WWII.

just a punk · 05-22-2013, 02:05 AM

RKLover · 05-25-2013, 12:24 PM

Historically,NO MATTER WHO is doing the shooting, friendly fire has typically accounted for 35% of all casualties in ANY armed conflict. The U.S. Army is well aware of this, and had a goal, when I served, of reducing that to 25%

First recorded incident of friendly fire I saw on Wikipedia was about British Archers making pincussions of their own infantry sometime around 1460.

It would be difficult to imagine that the Chinese, Egyptians, Greeks, Persians and Romans miraculously avoided doing the same thing over thousands of years of those ancient empires history of armed conflict. I would wager friendly fire has been occuring since man first learned to throw a rock.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogueteens

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010...ndly-fire-iraq

it is such a problem that there is even an (incomplete) wiki page about it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ritish_victims The topic has become prevalent in British culture due to some recent incidents, and is often satirically portrayed in the media.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...ndly-fire.html

Fantasy?

Rochard · 05-25-2013, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RKLover

Historically,NO MATTER WHO is doing the shooting, friendly fire has typically accounted for 35% of all casualties in ANY armed conflict. The U.S. Army is well aware of this, and had a goal, when I served, of reducing that to 25%

First recorded incident of friendly fire I saw on Wikipedia was about British Archers making pincussions of their own infantry sometime around 1460.

It would be difficult to imagine that the Chinese, Egyptians, Greeks, Persians and Romans miraculously avoided doing the same thing over thousands of years of those ancient empires history of armed conflict. I would wager friendly fire has been occuring since man first learned to throw a rock.

Of course it's common... If someone hands you a gun and says "Someone is going to try to shoot you in the next 24 hours", you will obviously shoot first and ask questions later.

05-22-2013, 02:05 AM	#232
just a punk So fuckin' bored Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 32,384	__________________ Obey the Cowgod

05-17-2013, 04:29 PM	#207
EddyTheDog Just Doing My Own Thing Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: London, Spain, New Zealand, GFY - Not Croydon... Posts: 25,064	Has anyone posted this yet - I am not going through the whole thread....

05-17-2013, 05:25 PM	#214
_Richard_ Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Earth Posts: 30,989	either does bombing a boat full of jewish and russian POWs 3 days after ww2 ends.. but i bet that doesn't get included in 'the version' either

05-17-2013, 05:33 PM	#215
dyna mo The People's Post Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: invisible 7-11 Posts: 64,840	not sure where you are coming up with that story, richard, according to you history is written by the victors eh.

05-17-2013, 08:07 PM	#219
helterskelter808 So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 3,405	I'm sorry to hear that. Poland suffered diabolical treatment during the war, and Poles were an important part of the fight against Germany, as exiles and in being first people cracking the German Enigma machine, long before the war began.

05-18-2013, 08:44 AM	#225
dyna mo The People's Post Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: invisible 7-11 Posts: 64,840	if hitler thought so highlyy of the brits, why did he think they would be so complacent to his aggression?