Bush: We should have bombed Auschwitz

[kengs333]

WW1 and WW2 might not have been won without America. They certainly wouldn't have been won when they did - without them.

WWI probably would have dragged on for another year or two, but Germany was isolated and problem on the homefront was near crisis. WWII would have been won--by the Russians.

[Rue]

With Keng's calling Bush an idiot then denying it, trying to back peddle on suggesting the Aushwitz bombing debate discriminated against non Jews and now suggesting the Americans have a questionable war record is precisely the kind of exercise of exploiting history to justify being intolerant and disresepectfil that the memory of those who died i n the holocaust or at war as a soldier should never be used for and I thank White Doors for capturing that in his response.

Rest assured you Americans have nothing to defend or apologize for and the memory of your soldiers like the memory of our soldiers is and will always be RESPECTED and hopefully be remembered and used to make us on both sides of the border better people.

But come on you Yanks have watered down beer and nothing can change that or the fact that our beer is superior. But it evens out since we have Celine Dion.

[bush_cheney2004]

Yeah, that's great, five months before the war ended... Actually, the Canadian's participation in the spearhead attack during the last two months of the war did contribute significantly to the war's ending in 1918, not 1919. I never said it was a "single handed" effort; but the Canadian contribution is undeniable, and quite disproportionate to the size of the force that was fielded.

Nobody has denied the Canadian contributions, or even the contributions from Newfoundland (which you never mentioned). It's just difficult to reconile nearly twice as many dead Americans with your claims of stupidity and cowardice, particulary if using the same methods as the "elite" Canadians. Americans have much more recent experience with those claiming to be "elite", and now occupy their country.

[Black Dog]

Nobody has denied the Canadian contributions, or even the contributions from Newfoundland (which you never mentioned).

Nflds's contributions (that is to say: casualties) are officially incorporated into the Canadian numbers.

[Wilber]

Nflds's contributions (that is to say: casualties) are officially incorporated into the Canadian numbers.

Yet in the Peace Tower they have a separate remembrance book.

[bush_cheney2004]

Nflds's contributions (that is to say: casualties) are officially incorporated into the Canadian numbers.

Really? How does one go about doing that..."officially" incorporating the "numbers"? Were the Newfoundland Highlanders or Regiment posthumously awarded Canadian citizenship? What about Labrador? They had their own remembrance for Somme before being "incorporated".

[jbg]

As if we didn't need more proof that GWB is an idiot.

I think an idiot is proven here but it's not Bush.

[jbg]

No one dislikes Bush more than I do, but his comment in no way idiotic. It's also far from being a "non-issue."

*******

I don't think anyone could go to Auschwitz and not be affected. Sounds to me as if Bush was expressing regret that more wasn't done to save some of the lives that were lost there, and who wouldn't go there and feel that way?

Great post.

I have my own dark views here, that Churchill (as much as I admire him), Roosvelt and King (who I despise) were worried about the West's inability to cope with 1,500,000 surviving Jews that clearly couldn't remain in Europe. Bringing them to the US, Canada, Australia and/or the Middle East were all imperfect options from a political point of view. As usual, the politicians did not account for the fact that these would have been productive immigrants.

Thus, the unspoken choice was to let the Jews die rather than cope with them as refugees.

[kengs333]

I think an idiot is proven here but it's not Bush.

Would you care to be more specific in your personal attack? I'm inclined to think that your being self-depricating again.

[kengs333]

With Keng's calling Bush an idiot then denying it

I've never "then denying it"...

[kengs333]

Nobody has denied the Canadian contributions, or even the contributions from Newfoundland (which you never mentioned). It's just difficult to reconile nearly twice as many dead Americans with your claims of stupidity and cowardice, particulary if using the same methods as the "elite" Canadians. Americans have much more recent experience with those claiming to be "elite", and now occupy their country.

Did I say "stupidity and cowardice"? I stated that the Americans entered the war late in the game and that they would not employ lessons learned by the other combatants, thus taking unnecessary casualties in some peoples' opinions. If you want to mock the fact that Canadian troops were considered "elite," then go right ahead; the fact that their contemporaries on both sides of the trenches thought so is really all that's important.

When you look at Canada's contribution; Canada's population at the time was abou 8 million, and in total about 600,000 men entered the CEF alone; approximately 250,000 of these served on the front lines. So in proportion how does that compare to the American contribution? And we have to keep in mind that the Canadian contribution was voluntary up until the beginning of 1918. Moreover, how many men went to serve in the Imperial Forces, the Royal Flying Corps, etc? Canada was in the war from the beginning, the United States was not; that's simply the way it was.

Less than half of American casualties were due to combat. Let's not forget the influenza outbreak that was first recognized at an army camp in the United States.

[White Doors]

WWI probably would have dragged on for another year or two, but Germany was isolated and problem on the homefront was near crisis. WWII would have been won--by the Russians.

wrong. Japan could have directly helped the Germans by attackign Russia from the East making Russia the one with a war on two fronts instead of Germany. It would have fundamentally changed the war, to the Axis immense benefit.

[White Doors]

Did I say "stupidity and cowardice"? I stated that the Americans entered the war late in the game and that they would not employ lessons learned by the other combatants, thus taking unnecessary casualties in some peoples' opinions. If you want to mock the fact that Canadian troops were considered "elite," then go right ahead; the fact that their contemporaries on both sides of the trenches thought so is really all that's important.

When you look at Canada's contribution; Canada's population at the time was abou 8 million, and in total about 600,000 men entered the CEF alone; approximately 250,000 of these served on the front lines. So in proportion how does that compare to the American contribution? And we have to keep in mind that the Canadian contribution was voluntary up until the beginning of 1918. Moreover, how many men went to serve in the Imperial Forces, the Royal Flying Corps, etc? Canada was in the war from the beginning, the United States was not; that's simply the way it was.

Less than half of American casualties were due to combat. Let's not forget the influenza outbreak that was first recognized at an army camp in the United States.

Why do you insist on denigrating America's great contributions to freedom?

What is it that drives you to do this?

[bush_cheney2004]

Did I say "stupidity and cowardice"? I stated that the Americans entered the war late in the game and that they would not employ lessons learned by the other combatants, thus taking unnecessary casualties in some peoples' opinions. If you want to mock the fact that Canadian troops were considered "elite," then go right ahead; the fact that their contemporaries on both sides of the trenches thought so is really all that's important.

So when Canadians or Newfoundlanders (e.g. at Somme) die that way it is considered "lessons learned"? Yet the Americans are stupid cowards...bull pucky.

When you look at Canada's contribution; Canada's population at the time was abou 8 million, and in total about 600,000 men entered the CEF alone; approximately 250,000 of these served on the front lines. So in proportion how does that compare to the American contribution? And we have to keep in mind that the Canadian contribution was voluntary up until the beginning of 1918. Moreover, how many men went to serve in the Imperial Forces, the Royal Flying Corps, etc? Canada was in the war from the beginning, the United States was not; that's simply the way it was.

Proportions mean nothing to the dead, and I count more dead Americans than Canadians. It was not America's war for Empire and domination; they didn't do it for any goddamn throne.....America could just as easily have entered on the Axis side, but her commerce was made worse more by Germany than Britain.

Less than half of American casualties were due to combat. Let's not forget the influenza outbreak that was first recognized at an army camp in the United States.

And of course, all of Canada's troops died in glorious combat against the Hun.

[jbg]

Would you care to be more specific in your personal attack? I'm inclined to think that your being self-depricating again.

I didn't attack or denigrate anyone.

[Rue]

Keng you started off calling George Bush an idiot. You even confirmed this by responding to another poster by saying it is a fact George Bush is an idiot. (which by the way shows how you do not understand the difference between your subjective opinions and what facts are once again)

Now you respond to me and have the audacity to say you never tried to deny saying George Bush was an idiot?

Here are your words Keng:

"Where did I "call someone an idiot" on this thread?"

Keng its bad enough you have the audacity to tell a poster you are an expert on World War Two history then make references to alleged web-sites and never provide them. Now you play these games?

You got caught trying to suggest discussing the bombing issue was discriminatory against non Jews who died in Aushwitz and your attempt to try deny that by suggesting you were only in fact referring to AmericanGal's post was transparent.

So is this attempt to deny calling George Bush an idiot by now trying to suggest you were only denying calling other posters an idiot.

Its also transparent Keng because you are the same person who claims he is an expert on World War Two.

To date Keng you have told posters you are superior to them and no more then them and are an expert on;

1-the New Testament

2-who a Christian is

3-who a sinner is

4-human sexuality, homo-sexuality, pedophilia

5-Jewish religion and culture

6-aboriginal culture and traditions

7-anthropoly including ethnography, martriarchal societites

8-women and inter-gender relationships

9-World War Two history.

Interesting you have yet to state what Christian sect you are a member of our what academic credentials you have that leads you to call yourself an expert and superior to others in knowledge about any of these areas.

Interesting you have once again after claiming to be an expert on a subject, in this case World War Two, not provided one reference for your opinions.

This is why Keng I challenge you and repeat again, your comments about the role of the US in WW2 is based on your subjective unsubstantiated opinions and serve only to do one thing-insult their contributions.

For that and all the above Keng you should be challenged.

I repeat once again to the Amercs on this forum, he speaks only for himself.

[Higgly]

Let them? They foorced them march on the roads.

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=...duleId=10005143

Say thank you M.Dancer for improving my slack and idle mind

So on the one hand you say they would have congested the roads and on the other you say they were forced to walk on the roads.

Good grief.

[kengs333]

I didn't attack or denigrate anyone.

The who is "the idiot proven here"?

[M.Dancer]

So on the one hand you say they would have congested the roads and on the other you say they were forced to walk on the roads.

Good grief.

Yeah I thought that might be too complicted for you. You think they made them march as their first option or that was their fall back option? If that is too taxing, sleep on it.

[kengs333]

wrong. Japan could have directly helped the Germans by attackign Russia from the East making Russia the one with a war on two fronts instead of Germany. It would have fundamentally changed the war, to the Axis immense benefit.

I don't think that Japan would have gotten involved as they still would probably have gone to war with the United States, which now would be able to focus all of its resources in the Pacific.

[Wilber]

I don't think that Japan would have gotten involved as they still would probably have gone to war with the United States, which now would be able to focus all of its resources in the Pacific.

A pointless discussion. Germany declared war on the US, not the other way around.

[kengs333]

So when Canadians or Newfoundlanders (e.g. at Somme) die that way it is considered "lessons learned"? Yet the Americans are stupid cowards...bull pucky.

The Somme was fought in June 1916, most of the American units first saw combat TWO years later; that's two years to learn from mistakes like that made at the Somme, and to incorporate other knowledge about battlefield tactics. That just common sense.

Proportions mean nothing to the dead, and I count more dead Americans than Canadians. It was not America's war for Empire and domination; they didn't do it for any goddamn throne.....America could just as easily have entered on the Axis side, but her commerce was made worse more by Germany than Britain.

Of course they don't mean anything because if they did--which they should--you wouldn't have an argument. From a country of 8 million, were have 600,000+ men in uniform, of whom 66,000 died. Given that Canada's population was 1/10 that of the United States, that's the equivalent of 6.6 million men in uniform, with 660,000 dying.

And of course, all of Canada's troops died in glorious combat against the Hun.

Well, Canadian soldiers were in action by March 1915 (earlier if you count the PPCLI) and fought in a number of battles prior to the arrival of the flu. So, yes, a much greater proportion of the casualties were sustained in combat rather than to disease.

[kengs333]

A pointless discussion. Germany declared war on the US, not the other way around.

So what? All the united states had to do was alot some of its naval resources to combatting the U-Boats. They didn't have to get involved the way they did.

[DogOnPorch]

The Somme was fought in June 1916

Actually it started July 1st, 1916. Verdun in February of 1916.

-----------------------------

The idea that a war can be won by standing on the defensive and waiting for the enemy to attack is a dangerous fallacy, which owes its inception to the desire to evade the price of victory.

---General Douglas Haig

[DogOnPorch]

So what? All the united states had to do was alot some of its naval resources to combatting the U-Boats. They didn't have to get involved the way they did.

They were kinda doing that already with the Lend Lease Act. The US loaned the Brits many of their old 4 stacker destroyers for ASW duty.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our losses at sea…have reached an intolerable level. The enemy air force played a decisive role in inflicting these high losses.

---