Children As Decoys

[Canadian Blue]

Once again...I provided you a superb link. That you're too lazy to figure out the details is YOUR problem....Buddy. But here are a few more...

No no, I just have other things to do besides going through mounds of information to prove your own case for you. It's just that you're too lazy to do it thats all.

Why didn't you provide the link's you just provided, wouldn't that have made life easier on everyone.

Meh atleast you provided them. Thank you for giving in.

As for being a "war winner", the Combined Bomber Offensive was. That includes the Americans and their daylight bombing as well as the RAF with night-area bombing. Between them and the Russian steamroller, it was tits up for Germany. Sheeesh...I'm a lot of things...right wing isn't one of them. Harper sucks...so does GW Bush. I'm a political agnostic. I believe in good government when I see it. I haven't seen it yet...Buddy. But...you never know...perhaps when I close my eyes and vote next time around, I'll be voting for the same folks you vote for.

I vote for the I hate America Party of Canada.

There were Civil Defence Units made up of women and teens, but they were mainly manning searchlights and sirens...also very important...but not so much the flak units as they are very complex weapons...I'd say 'as I'm sure you know', but apparently not. In order to hit an aircraft moving 200mph at 25,000ft...in the dark at times...takes skill and training. As mentioned earlier...this wasn't Iraqis shooting into the air like it's New Years in San Diego. I have no doubt there are exceptions as there are with everything...perhaps there are even cases of swimsuit models manning the guns. Who knows? Maybe you...

Once again the Canadian Forces doesn't train with Flak 88's. We aren't taught on the 88's if you didn't know.

Buddy, man you cry alot, I never claimed that swimsuits modeled the guns. I simply pointed out that I'm sure during the war people would volunteer to man the guns and be trained to use them. I highly doubt the training program was more than a few months, unless you want to give me a link showing it. I didn't even say they shooting in the air like in New Orleans.

[scribblet]

They should get their embassy people out of there now, I suppose somebody is stoking the flames, looks good on Iranian TV

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6515995.stm

Protests at UK's Tehran embassy

Iranian students protesting in Tehran

Protesters chanted "death to Britain" and called for an apology

Iranian students have thrown firecrackers and rocks into the British embassy compound during a protest in the capital Tehran.

About 200 people demonstrated against what they say was the illegal entry into Iranian waters of 15 UK Royal Navy personnel captured nine days ago.

[DogOnPorch]

Why didn't you provide the link's you just provided, wouldn't that have made life easier on everyone.

Meh...could have just taken me at my word, too. I think you just like putting the ball in the other guy's court. Not always a bad thing...but it's not my style. So I resist...

I vote for the I hate America Party of Canada.

I think I voted the "Let's Party" last time...

Once again the Canadian Forces doesn't train with Flak 88's. We aren't taught on the 88's if you didn't know.

Buddy, man you cry alot, I never claimed that swimsuits modeled the guns. I simply pointed out that I'm sure during the war people would volunteer to man the guns and be trained to use them. I highly doubt the training program was more than a few months, unless you want to give me a link showing it. I didn't even say they shooting in the air like in New Orleans.

You see...I just take you at your word. I wouldn't pester you links that back-up your claims...not the way I operate. I'd just prove you wrong if possible. As for crying a lot...I think that one of those logical falacies much like my "Death to America" comment. Used as a sabre cut more than anything else....like I'm a baby for not playing the game your way.

Good for you. Take a seat in the same boat...(pats seat)

"Now let's stop this nonsense and be chums...(hand out)"

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

I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency.

---Vice President Dick Cheney: 2005

[Canadian Blue]

You see...I just take you at your word. I wouldn't pester you links that back-up your claims...not the way I operate. I'd just prove you wrong if possible. As for crying a lot...I think that one of those logical falacies much like my "Death to America" comment. Used as a sabre cut more than anything else....like I'm a baby for not playing the game your way.

Good for you. Take a seat in the same boat...(pats seat)

My games the good one, you should join the other team. I personally am not aware of todays military using Flak 88's.

[ScottSA]

You see...I just take you at your word. I wouldn't pester you links that back-up your claims...not the way I operate. I'd just prove you wrong if possible. As for crying a lot...I think that one of those logical falacies much like my "Death to America" comment. Used as a sabre cut more than anything else....like I'm a baby for not playing the game your way.

Good for you. Take a seat in the same boat...(pats seat)

My games the good one, you should join the other team. I personally am not aware of todays military using Flak 88's.

He never said they do. You misread him. Anyone who has ever read anything about strategic bombing knows exactly what an 88mm gun is and how it was used and who used it and why. Did you know it was also used as a tank killer?

You see CB, you have been trounced and proven wrong repeatedly, and this is your tactic...instead of just admitting that you're wrong, you instead seize on some little side argument and flog it. Only this time you siezed on a side argument that's ALSO wrong, since you're imputing something that Dog never even said.

[Canadian Blue]

He never said they do. You misread him. Anyone who has ever read anything about strategic bombing knows exactly what an 88mm gun is and how it was used and who used it and why. Did you know it was also used as a tank killer?

Since I was about 7, and I know what the 88 is, it was very effective weapon.

You see CB, you have been trounced and proven wrong repeatedly, and this is your tactic...instead of just admitting that you're wrong, you instead seize on some little side argument and flog it. Only this time you siezed on a side argument that's ALSO wrong, since you're imputing something that Dog never even said.

It's not my fault that he brought the America hating into this thread, and how the bomber campaign was a "war winner", I corrected him.

As for being wrong, buddy, you claimed that Muslims in Western Europe were going to become the majority within what, a decade. That was proven to be false.

As well I never once said that I thought swimsuit models manned 88's. So he should admit he was also wrong.

[DogOnPorch]

Canadian Blue: As well I never once said that I thought swimsuit models manned 88's. So he should admit he was also wrong.

Is in response to:

DogOnPorch: I have no doubt there are exceptions as there are with everything...perhaps there are even cases of swimsuit models manning the guns. Who knows? Maybe you...

Which in no way implys you said swimsuit models manned 88mm guns...just that you might be aware of exceptions. Are you?

Admit I'm wrong? What are you? Iran??

It's not my fault that he brought the America hating into this thread, and how the bomber campaign was a "war winner", I corrected him.

Correct me nothing...The Combined Bomber Offensive was a 'war winner'...you just don't happen to see things that way...as is your right...to be wrong. This would be the Combined US/Commonwealth effort. Not just the RAF. As well I don't discount the Russians who did the overwhelming amount of fighting on the ground. Frankly, I believe it took both to do the job...both adding up to the 'real war winner'. But I've already stated that.

Since I was about 7, and I know what the 88 is, it was very effective weapon.

Then this should mean something to you:

Goering had to deploy 8,876 very useful 88 mm flak guns to fight off the bombers (Rommel's Afrika Korps only had 35 of these guns, which were quite effective against tanks). To man these guns (as well as 25,000 pieces of 20 mm and 30 mm cannon) Germany required 900,000 soldiers (Rommel's army for the defense of Normandy only had 500,000 men). Similarly, many pilots and aircraft that could have been used to attack Russia or the United Kingdom were tied down defending the Reich.

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

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

---Rip Van Winkle

[Rue]

You Myata are everything I absolutely loath in humans when they discuss such things.

You try rationalize terrorism as a morally acceptable action. For that you disgust me. sorry but you do. You have lost the most basic value of life-that life is precious and we don't exploit the innocent and snuff their lives out because we think its a legitimate way to express ourselves...

Ah, what an excellent example of ... trying to find a gentlier, milder equivalent to s-word... whatever. I gather, you aren't expecting a response to that?

No and thank God for that. When I am at the point when I read people referring to the use of children as decoys as simply a semantic issue as to use of war tactics I am passed repulsed. I wish I could take the guts of the Palestinian child I saw blow up and deliver it to you in aa bag to make my point but then I thank God you are so removed from such a thing you can't fathom it and make such comments.

Leave it to die like anyone else who tries to suggest children can be used in war as a legitimate decoy weapon and its simply semantics to discuss this use of humans.

[myata]

... I could take the guts of the Palestinian child I saw blow up and deliver it to you in aa bag to make my point but then I thank God you are so removed from such a thing you can't fathom it and make such comments.

Welcome back.

Will you do the same with the guts of a Palestinian child killed by Israeli bomb? Or Iraqi child killed by US shell? Or Vietnamese child burned by napalm?

You're welcome, Rue. I'm sure you won't need help with finding the addresses.

[Canadian Blue]

Correct me nothing...The Combined Bomber Offensive was a 'war winner'...you just don't happen to see things that way...as is your right...to be wrong. This would be the Combined US/Commonwealth effort. Not just the RAF. As well I don't discount the Russians who did the overwhelming amount of fighting on the ground. Frankly, I believe it took both to do the job...both adding up to the 'real war winner'. But I've already stated that.

Read the link.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwt...ombing_01.shtml

Which in no way implys you said swimsuit models manned 88mm guns...just that you might be aware of exceptions. Are you?

Admit I'm wrong? What are you? Iran??

I know that you're right, well extreme right atleast.

Goering had to deploy 8,876 very useful 88 mm flak guns to fight off the bombers (Rommel's Afrika Korps only had 35 of these guns, which were quite effective against tanks). To man these guns (as well as 25,000 pieces of 20 mm and 30 mm cannon) Germany required 900,000 soldiers (Rommel's army for the defense of Normandy only had 500,000 men). Similarly, many pilots and aircraft that could have been used to attack Russia or the United Kingdom were tied down defending the Reich.

This doesn't say specifically were they came from, only that they required 900,000 soldiers.

[DogOnPorch]

Read the link.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwt...ombing_01.shtml

That's more dealing with just the RAF's part of the job. It's also a BBC overview written by Detlef Siebert...a film maker rather than a historian. He did do a pretty good Auschwitz thing on PBS, though. Worth a look if you're unfamiliar with the Holocaust. I feel you have a layman's knowledge, at best, when it comes to WW2...or we wouldn't be having this debate...if I can call it that.

I know that you're right, well extreme right atleast.

Of course I'm right. I had no impression I was anything but right on this issue. As for me BEING right-wing...think again. As mentioned...I'm a political agnostic. I'll believe in good government when I see it. For me to be right-wing, I would have to vote for that a**hole, Gordon Campbell (the Premier of BC) or that Eastern Canada serving, Harper. I'd self-destruct, first.

I will not insult you by stereotyping you in kind...that's more a "your sort of thing", I see.

This doesn't say specifically were they came from, only that they required 900,000 soldiers.

That's nice. I guess it's time for you to delve into my previous link re: Luftwaffe Flak unit movements.

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

How do you want to change things for the better? By hugging Nazis? By trying to argue with them? It doesn't work that way.

---Henry Rollins

[ScottSA]

This doesn't say specifically were they came from, only that they required 900,000 soldiers.

But you admit 900,000 soldiers had to come from somewhere, right? Obviously they couldn't be somewhere else, like on the Italian front, or North Africa, or the eastern front? Since Germany was actually retreating in all those places for a goodly amount of the war, they could probably have been used there, waddayathink? Honestly, you wade into these arguments completely unarmed with any knowledge, and get stoutly beaten and become so punchdrunk that by the end of them you're actually punching your own argument in the head.

[DogOnPorch]

But you admit 900,000 soldiers had to come from somewhere, right?

Or the opposite, even. If we weren't bombing the Reich, those 900,000 Luftwaffe troops/fighters/flak end up where? Juno Beach...Kursk...Anzio?

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

The Russian Front in photos.

[Canadian Blue]

But you admit 900,000 soldiers had to come from somewhere, right?

I'd assume the lionshare came from Germany, I'm not going to read every single individual units movements.

Obviously they couldn't be somewhere else, like on the Italian front, or North Africa, or the eastern front? Since Germany was actually retreating in all those places for a goodly amount of the war, they could probably have been used there, waddayathink?

I'd assume they would train people in Germany to main any extra guns. I'd assume if you have a requirment for some more troops, you would want to increase the ranks at home.

Honestly, you wade into these arguments completely unarmed with any knowledge, and get stoutly beaten and become so punchdrunk that by the end of them you're actually punching your own argument in the head.

Pot calling the kettle black.

Or the opposite, even. If we weren't bombing the Reich, those 900,000 Luftwaffe troops/fighters/flak end up where? Juno Beach...Kursk...Anzio?

Most historians still contend that even with the bombing campaign of 1942-1943, and the bombing of civilians in 1945, had little effect on the outcome of the war. From 1942-1943 production actually increased. The reason the bomber offensive was effective was because they stepped away from "breaking civilian morale" to hitting military targets. That was successful, however the bombing campaign in 1945 didn't really have much of an effect since the enemy was already defeated.

[DogOnPorch]

Germany had a huge amount of slack in its production capacity. They were still making huge amounts of 'peace-time' goods. Germany reached peek war production in early 1944

(Totaler Krieg) in February, 1943.

I'd assume the lionshare came from Germany, I'm not going to read every single individual units movements.

You know what they say about assumptions.

I'd assume they would train people in Germany to main any extra guns. I'd assume if you have a requirment for some more troops, you would want to increase the ranks at home.

Class of 1929...Volksstrum... Back a few posts. Germany's defeats in Russia and North Africa left it with hardly anyone left to call-up. By late 1944 they were into the 16-17 year olds. The Volksstrum was made up of old men and teens 15 and under. The only source for these trained men were places like Russia where millions of Germans were serving.

Most historians still contend that even with...

For a man with so little time to go over the movements of Flak units, you seem to have a lot of time to judge the opinions and results of the majority of historians. Just an observation.

The reason the bomber offensive was effective was because they stepped away from "breaking civilian morale" to hitting military targets. That was successful, however the bombing campaign in 1945 didn't really have much of an effect since the enemy was already defeated.

The Americans never went for "breaking civilian moral". They had a wee device known as the Norden bombsight which allowed them to drop bombs into a bucket from 28,000+ ft in daylight. The Brits had Oboe which allowed them to arrive over an interior German city w/ 1000 planes at night and blast the crap out of what was below. It didn't break moral...doubt there's an instance in all history where it did...but its physical effects on the cities themselves were hard to ignore. As a sign in the rubble of Berlin said: 'You can break our cities...but not our hearts.' Never-the-less...much Flak and nightfighters were put up to defend against the RAF. Not to mention nobody slept well for years.

As for Germany being defeated. The Russians lost about a half a million men in the final campaign to take Berlin. Germany was defeated after that when Hitler finally shot himself.

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

Nation, Rise Up, and Let the Storm Break Loose

---Joseph Goebbels

[Canadian Blue]

You know what they say about assumptions.

I'm not sure, you seem to make many yourself.

For a man with so little time to go over the movements of Flak units, you seem to have a lot of time to judge the opinions and results of the majority of historians. Just an observation.

No thats just what I read on the BBC. It was fairly straightforward, and I provided a link.

The Americans never went for "breaking civilian moral".

Yes, the RAF did, however it wasn't the "war winner" as you suggest, and it was only effective when the Americans used different tactics. However it's nice to see that you changed your answer on that.

As for Germany being defeated. The Russians lost about a half a million men in the final campaign to take Berlin. Germany was defeated after that when Hitler finally shot himself.

Which shows how useless the bombing campaign was in 1945.

[DogOnPorch]

DOP: The Americans never went for "breaking civilian moral".

CB: Yes, the RAF did, however it wasn't the "war winner" as you suggest, and it was only effective when the Americans used different tactics. However it's nice to see that you changed your answer on that.

I never changed my answer. The Combined Bomber Offensive was the US 8th Airforce and RAF's Bomber Command. Two different groups. One by day...the other by night. You're just tossing wrenches into the spokes at this point.

CB: Which shows how useless the bombing campaign was in 1945.

As was explained to me with PMs...you just go on and on and on and on. Tired yet? Care to switch wars? We can argue about how Verdun wasn't a meat-grinder.

:D

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

Mrs. Lovejoy: Do you think they should be talking about s-e-x in front of the c-h-i-l-d-r-e-n?

Krusty: Sex Cauldron! I thought they closed that place down years ago!

[Canadian Blue]

I never changed my answer. The Combined Bomber Offensive was the US 8th Airforce and RAF's Bomber Command. Two different groups. One by day...the other by night. Your just tossing wrenches into the spokes at this point.

No, you said that the bomber offensive was the "war winner" then said it was the combined ground and air offensive.

As was explained to me with PMs...you just go on and on and on and on. Tired yet? Care to switch wars? We can argue about how Verdun wasn't a meat-grinder.

Its nice to see that you an ScottSA engage in mutual masturbation...

[DogOnPorch]

Its nice to see that you an ScottSA engage in mutual masturbation...

Classy.

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

I have about 100 pairs of pajamas. I like to see people dressed comfortably.

---Hugh Hefner

[M.Dancer]

Its nice to see that you an ScottSA engage in mutual masturbation...

Classy.

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

I have about 100 pairs of pajamas. I like to see people dressed comfortably.

---Hugh Hefner

Not to worry, I'm sure Figleaf will report it.

[DogOnPorch]

Not to worry, I'm sure Figleaf will report it.

Right after admiting you're right...LOL.

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

Always look on the bright side of life.

---Eric Idle

[ScottSA]

I hope CB is learning to breathe under water, since he's been in over his head throughout this conversation, as usual.

[Canadian Blue]

I hope CB is learning to breathe under water, since he's been in over his head throughout this conversation, as usual.

Wow, have you ever considered writing for Jay Leno?

Really, I'm still surprised I have a fan club.

Classy.

No, it was warranted. Either way I'm surprised you and ScottSA are exchanging PM's, its really cute!

[DogOnPorch]

Canadian Blue: Its nice to see that you an ScottSA engage in mutual masturbation...

Classy.

No, it was warranted. Either way I'm surprised you and ScottSA are exchanging PM's, its really cute!

I see...Classy, again.

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

I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said.

--- William F. Buckley, Jr.

[Canadian Blue]

Oh DOP...

I must have really hit a nerve.