Nuklear bomb

[Splitter]

Originally Posted by WTE_Galway

There is a lot of revisionists and apologists around concerning the motives of the allied bombing campaign. It makes it more comfortable when we look back at WWII if we can pretend it was a tactical military bombing campaign that just happened to go on for 5 years.

The allied leaders at the time had no illusions as to what its purpose was, first and foremost destroy the moral of the German people. They felt it was justified at the time, but changed their mind later in the war. This is Winston on the topic:

Very true, Galway. And I am sure you would agree that the Axis powers did the same. I think Germany actually went after civilians first in the BoB to demoralize the Brits.

Splitter

[Hunden]

Originally Posted by Madfish

If you're a criminal of the same level as the attacker you crush his/her skull. If you're a sane person you just get them arrested.
If you kill the attacker his family might crush your skull which then provokes your family to crush one of theirs etcetera. I think this is a silly act as best and sometimes people need to control their actions if they don't want to lower themselves.

Ever heard of Kant's categorical imperative? Interesting read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative

What you're proposing leads to the extinction of mankind and probably the annihilation of earth.

You must not be from the south side of town. Dont worry about it and go have some ice cream. Hugs and kisses, I think your new name should be cuddlefish. Just kidding dont get all upset.

[Ernst]

Not cool. There is no sportsmanship in dropping a nuclear bomb.

[WTE_Galway]

Originally Posted by Splitter

Very true, Galway. And I am sure you would agree that the Axis powers did the same. I think Germany actually went after civilians first in the BoB to demoralize the Brits.

Splitter

Not so much in BoB as Hitler was convinced England would not want another 5 years of war so soon after WWI and would make peace.

Definitely the Germans in the SCW, Poland, Belgium Holland and France before the BoB had shown no qualms about bombing and strafing civilians though mainly for short or medium term tactical advantage.

Ironically the German's never really planned for strategic 'terror' bombing and had no real aircraft suitable for it early in the war. Nazi terror campaigns seemed to feature a lot more hangings and concentration camps than bombings.

Whilst this failure to plan is often cited as a reason for failure of the "blitz" history has shown time and again that "shock and awe" style campaigns, whilst giving the side attacking a warm fuzzy glow, tend to stiffen rather then weaken resistance. Even with 4 engined bombers and longer range fighters it seems unlikely the "blitz" would have forced Britain to capitulate.


Note Churchill however was a proponent of long range bombing of Germany right from the start of hostilities.

[Friendly_flyer]

Originally Posted by Dozer_EAF19

The word 'cult' is referred to, or the religion? Is this the religion that the underbelly of the Internet goes on anonymous mass protests about?

Considering that the only known "manual" in "brainwashing" (Brain-Washing: A Synthesis of the Russian Textbook of Psychopolitics) was written by L.R. Hubbard (who tried to pass it off as a summary of something written by Beria, the the then head of KGB), I'd say the word refers to Hubbard's little group.

About the book and some interesting thoughs on "brainwashing":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain-Washing_(book)

[Friendly_flyer]

I just thought I had to respond to this:

Originally Posted by Splitter

On "carrot and stick": The US gives more in foreign aid than any other country. As a matter of fact, losing a war to the US ensures a large amount of aid for many years to come lol.

Curiously, the top recipient of aid from the US is a nation with BNP per capita well ahead of other nations who are rich enough to give foreign aid themselves. They receive almost a quarter of all US aid, and (again curiously) most of it is in the form of weapons.

The US give about 13 billion dollars a year in aid, 1/3 of which goes Israel and Egypt (who mostly use it on weapons). My own country give a measly 1,8 billion (all 5 million of us...). So sorry mate, your notion that the US dispense carrots is not entirely correct, neither is the notion that Israel is somehow abandoned by the US. Should Israel go on and bomb in Iran, you can rest assure that the planes ad bombs are your tax-money at work.

[Splitter]

Originally Posted by Friendly_flyer

I just thought I had to respond to this:

Curiously, the top recipient of aid from the US is a nation with BNP per capita well ahead of other nations who are rich enough to give foreign aid themselves. They receive almost a quarter of all US aid, and (again curiously) most of it is in the form of weapons.

The US give about 13 billion dollars a year in aid, 1/3 of which goes Israel and Egypt (who mostly use it on weapons). My own country give a measly 1,8 billion (all 5 million of us...). So sorry mate, your notion that the US dispense carrots is not entirely correct, neither is the notion that Israel is somehow abandoned by the US. Should Israel go on and bomb in Iran, you can rest assure that the planes ad bombs are your tax-money at work.

That would be about the best use my tax dollars have been put to in years lol. There is no curiosity on why so much aid goes there. It makes sense that we would back Israel so much financially because if they were not strong militarily they would have been over run in one of the past attacks.

One of the aggressors, not all that long ago in the grand scheme of things, was Egypt. I guess we are still paying for that peace.

Also, Israel DOES do much of our dirty work. They took out Iraq's nuclear plant in 1980 I believe. They sat and took SCUD missile attacks in the early 90's and did not retaliate at our request.

When the time comes to take out Iran's nuclear power attempt, it will not be US planes. It should be, but it won't because we do not have the backbone for it. We will publicly give a lukewarm condemnation, but behind the scenes we will be happy that it was done.

(Just for the record, I am not Jewish. I know people are wondering because I support Israel, but that is not why).

BTW, it appear that the next thing the Iranians want from Russia is anti-aircraft missiles.

Galway, it is my understanding that the Germans shifted their bombing focus in the BoB from military to civilian targets in the hope that doing so would weaken the will of the Brits. When that didn't work, for the reasons you spelled out and the backbone of the British people, they then set about developing the V2 and V1. These were to be "terror" weapons.

Splitter

[swiss]

Splitter, do you also know WHY is Israel is so afraid of Iranian nuke?


Hint: They don't expect one thrown at all.

[Hunden]

Originally Posted by Ernst

Not cool. There is no sportsmanship in dropping a nuclear bomb.

Are you kidding me, I would hate to have you in a fox hole next me crying this is not fair or stop i need a time out. War has nothing to do with sports. LMAO

[Splitter]

Originally Posted by swiss

Splitter, do you also know WHY is Israel is so afraid of Iranian nuke?


Hint: They don't expect one thrown at all.

I would suspect that a terrorist type attack is more likely than a missile attack. Get one into the country secretly and set it off.

Or, also likely, a dirty bomb of some sort. Such destructive power would be very dangerous if it fell into the wrong hands, like Hamas. Since the Iranian regime supports anyone who opposes Israel, it is quite possible that they would try to employ such weapons through a third party.

If there is another theory I would like to hear it .

EDIT: I guess the hope would be that any effective attack would set the Middle East aflame and lead other countries to join in wiping out Israel. That probably would not happen, rhetoric aside.

Splitter