Iraq. Is it better now?? (AKA ISIS/ISIL/IS/name-of-the-week-here) (23 Viewers)

[AFL_ITALIA]

Even though this has absolutely nothing to do with Iraq:

Operation Downfall (what would have happened without the dropping of the atomic bombs - terrible acts that hopefully never happen again) would have resulted in an estimated 456,000 - 1,200,000 casualties, with Japanese loses (assuming a large scale participation by Japanese civilians) estimated at 5 - 10 million.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Hust]

-----------

@X

Is this similar to people arguing with me in the Marchisio debates of old?

- - - Updated - - -

Even though this has absolutely nothing to do with Iraq:

Operation Downfall (what would have happened without the dropping of the atomic bombs - terrible acts that hopefully never happen again) would have resulted in an estimated 456,000 - 1,200,000 casualties, with Japanese loses (assuming a large scale participation by Japanese civilians) estimated at 5 - 10 million.

So that many people would have died had we had not dropped the A-bombs?

- - - Updated - - -

Estimated at around there, yes.

Interesting. The reasons the bombs were drop were two fold. Very much a statement of strength absolutely but probably the most important was saving US casualties should the war go on with a nation that attacked us first.

 

[ReBeL]

Even though this has absolutely nothing to do with Iraq:

Operation Downfall (what would have happened without the dropping of the atomic bombs - terrible acts that hopefully never happen again) would have resulted in an estimated 456,000 - 1,200,000 casualties, with Japanese loses (assuming a large scale participation by Japanese civilians) estimated at 5 - 10 million.

ِAgain these are baseless assumptions and are just miserable justifications for the horrible crime committed there...

 

[AFL_ITALIA]

-----------

@X

Is this similar to people arguing with me in the Marchisio debates of old?

- - - Updated - - -



So that many people would have died had we had not dropped the A-bombs?

- - - Updated - - -



Interesting. The reasons the bombs were drop were two fold. Very much a statement of strength absolutely but probably the most important was saving US casualties should the war go on with a nation that attacked us first.

Sorry, couldn't delete my post in time. Japanese fatalities, yes. American, anywhere from 109,000 - 800,000 depending on the duration and who you ask.

 

[Hust]

ِAgain these are baseless assumptions and are just miserable justifications for the horrible crime committed there...

And your theory on 9/11 and Turks on Pearl Harbor aren't baseless assumptions?

- - - Updated - - -

Sorry, couldn't delete my post in time. Japanese fatalities, yes. American, anywhere from 109,000 - 800,000 depending on the duration and who you ask.

Roger that.

 

[AFL_ITALIA]

ِAgain these are baseless assumptions and are just miserable justifications for the horrible crime committed there...

They aren't exactly baseless, far from it actually. Based on previous battles in the region (Okinawa, Luzon, etc.)

 

[ZoSo]

ِAgain these are baseless assumptions and are just miserable justifications for the horrible crime committed there...

baseless assumptions. history expert . japanese people would just let americans invade them right. hiroshima and nagasaki bombs would be like a picnic party compared to an invasion of japan.

guys don't bother arguing with this isis sympathiser anymore.

- - - Updated - - -

They aren't exactly baseless, far from it actually. Based on previous battles in the region (Okinawa, Luzon, etc.)

It would be worse than the death ratios of those places, considering they were islands and not mainland japan.

 

[AFL_ITALIA]

baseless assumptions. history expert . japanese people would just let americans invade them right.

guys don't bother arguing with this isis sympathiser anymore.

- - - Updated - - -



It would be worse than the death ratios of those places, considering they were islands and not mainland japan.

Oh well of course, but have to create a model from something I would imagine

 

[Bjerknes]

Not you, your $#@!ing freemason founding fathers and the ones following their steps.

Believe it or not, you are on the same side as Homeland Security in that argument. They believe the founding fathers were terrorists and teach that in their training sessions. So if you think our current government respects the founders, you seriously have no clue what you're talking about.

Your government staged/ignored those attacks for profit. They are the epitome of evil, deal with it.

Maybe so, but that doesn't give you a right to defend ISIS.

-Who will take initiative and fight the bad guys when (if) the US leaves (which I think we should leave 100%, for the record)?
-How is that kid labeled a terrorist by pentagon standards?
-Why is it OK for terrorists like ISIS to hide in a crowd and use the excuse that civilians are killed they are somehow martyrs when you know they are only using them as shields? How can they use religion as a reason to hide amongst them knowing that because of that then innocent lives will be killed when forces are trying to target the bad guys?
-You can post a picture of a dead kid (civilian) but won't post pics of innocent life ISIS has taken. Why?

Personally, I don't think it's our job to police the world. Obviously some members here think ISIS is great for the region, so let them deal with the consequences if they happen to take over governments, slaughtering people left and right. Their supporters think they're so loving now but little do they know ISIS will take the entire region back to the stone age, which is where they belong, I might add.

It's also very humorous that they support ISIS since the West and the various Arab governments they hate happened to fund them, which means they are on the same side as the globalists!

 

[Maddy]

this thread

 

[Hust]

Personally, I don't think it's our job to police the world. Obviously some members here think ISIS is great for the region, so let them deal with the consequences if they happen to take over governments, slaughtering people left and right. Their supporters think they're so loving now but little do they know ISIS will take the entire region back to the stone age, which is where they belong, I might add.

It's also very humorous that they support ISIS since the West and the various Arab governments they hate happened to fund them, which means they are on the same side as the globalists!

I remember how much Germans were in love with "hope" when the Nazi's took power. Once their true nature come to fruition only then did the world see the horrors.

Too many hypocrisies here to list. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the Pearl Harbor conspiracy.

- - - Updated - - -

baseless assumptions. history expert . japanese people would just let americans invade them right. hiroshima and nagasaki bombs would be like a picnic party compared to an invasion of japan.

guys don't bother arguing with this isis sympathiser anymore.

- - - Updated - - -



It would be worse than the death ratios of those places, considering they were islands and not mainland japan.

 

[ZoSo]

Oh well of course, but have to create a model from something I would imagine

The Battle of Okinawa ran up 72,000 US casualties in 82 days, of whom 12,510 were killed or missing (this is conservative, because it excludes several thousand US soldiers who died after the battle indirectly, from their wounds.) The entire island of Okinawa is 464 sq mi (1,200 km2). If the US casualty rate during the invasion of Japan had been only 5% as high per unit area as it was at Okinawa, the US would still have lost 297,000 soldiers (killed or missing).

100% = 6 million. they probably didn't even have that many troops let alone more than 100%.

 

[Bjerknes]

Too many hypocrisies here to list. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the Pearl Harbor conspiracy.

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=408

 

[AFL_ITALIA]

100% = 6 million. they probably didn't even have that many troops let alone more than 100%.

What do you mean?

 

[Hust]

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=408

All they need to do was show me something that gave them that inclination.

 

[Bjerknes]

All they need to do was show me something that gave them that inclination.

I have no idea what happened with Pearl Harbor, but I also have no idea what it has to do with ISIS.


In other news, can we impeach this guy already?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-...-country-bombed-2009-nobel-peace-prize-winner

 

[ZoSo]

What do you mean?

The quote said if casualties were only 5% as high as per area measurement as they were in Okinawa, they would lose 300k troops. If it was 100% (i.e. the same casualties say per square kilometre), casualties would have been at 6 million troops (let alone Japanese people). I don't think they even had 6 million troops in ww2, even if some casualties could return. And if the casualty rate was even higher then they would have lost more (which it most likely would have been).

 

[GordoDeCentral]

Okkkkk


back on subject: http://www.arabnews.com/featured/news/633321

 

[Hust]

I have no idea what happened with Pearl Harbor, but I also have no idea what it has to do with ISIS.


In other news, can we impeach this guy already?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-...-country-bombed-2009-nobel-peace-prize-winner

He will never be impeached. Who are we kidding?

- - - Updated - - -

Okkkkk


back on subject: http://www.arabnews.com/featured/news/633321

Can't wait to read when I'm not driving

- - - Updated - - -

Notice how when directed back on topic posting here turns to crickets. When the tough questions are asked you get silence or redirection.

 

[ReBeL]

Notice how when directed back on topic posting here turns to crickets. When the tough questions are asked you get silence or redirection.

You just do not want to admit your questions were silly