|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Oct 31, 2012 5:25:27 GMT -5
Richard, I don’t think the allies could have done a thing to help Poland in 1945, how could they even get to the Polish border without a conflict with Russian Troops, that same problem arose in 1939, the British and French could not help the Poles then, the only thing they could do was declare war, and if we go forward to 1945, the British people and most of the other Allies were sick to death of war, Stalin knew that Churchill opposed the idea of the Russian occupation of Poland, but he could do little else but take it on the chin, he also had to fight a general election (which he lost) back home, but he did warn the western allies of Stalin’s intent, thus the Iron Curtain speech.
There was a program on TV last week about the big three at Teheran, this is a segment;
At Teheran Stalin also proposed the immediate execution of 50,000 German officers once the war was over. Churchill was offended and said so. Roosevelt, playing the role of mediator in elaborately comic fashion said it was too high, 49,000 would be better.
Sounds like Roosevelt was in a jocular mood that night, Stalin was in his normal ‘’let’s murder mood’’ and Churchill was being more grounded, he said that the British people (even though they had just gone through six years of war with Germany) would not stand for this level of barbarity.
Ian.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Oct 31, 2012 6:11:51 GMT -5
I squeak so you can move out of the way, wild. Otherwise, I might step on your hands.
The UN, of course, didn't want Ireland in during the early years given its fascist sympathies demonstrated during and after the war. So, devote yourself to trying to make the US appear genocidal and bring it down to Ireland's ethic level, given over half the states, tons of cities, athletic teams, military units and campaigns all bear, and proudly so, Indian names.
Again: it's not like Hitler and Goebbels played soccer for the Munich Zealots and vacationed in a place called Joshua, Germany. Our toddlers dress as Indians, play football for the high school Mohawks and vacation in Yosemite or on Narrangansett Bay, with an economy based largely on corn/maize, the crop Indians invented in the present form and about which we proudly lecture to the world. Just like the Nazis had Jewish theme restaurants and celebrated German defeats at the hands of the Jews in yearly observance, right?
If we're genocidal we're very bad at it and apparently don't grasp the concept of cultural erasure. Apparently the British are as well, since their famous drive to eliminate Irish writers and artists from fame and fortune has been such a failure.
What is actually known about the Indian past is not due the Indians, but your predicated genocidal murderers who provided the science and, more important, actual interest in their past and future. Also, the tax money for museums and text books and recordings that will preserve dying languages.
We've been guilty of obscene mass murder and land theft - who isn't, including Indians and the Irish? - but from the very beginning there were institutions in place that precluded actual genocide here, starting with - huge irony - elements of the Spanish Catholic Church. We were lucky. Again.
Of course, you need this fiction to claim genocide in Ireland by the British (again: also amusing) and the hope others would provide Eire with that which Eire for so long could not provide for itself and for the same reason as the Indians, Scots, Confederacy could not either: they hated each other more the conqueror.
When have I ever tongue bathed anyone? Example? Not hard to find examples of your own, the latest attempted on Markland. But then, I've never accused us of genocide and then had to back off when countered. There was only one real genocide. All others are mere mass murder for theft. Only the Nazis entertained tracking down and killing Jews and others simply because they existed, even far away.
|
|
|
|
Post by wild on Oct 31, 2012 6:47:34 GMT -5
Hi Ian.
There was a thing called the phoney war,lasted about 7 months.
According to the treaty singed with Poland,Poland was expected to hold for two weeks giving the allies time to concentrate their forces and attack across the German border.In the event the Poles held for 5 weeks all in vain.
In 1943 the Allies were informed of the mass murder of Polish officers.And in 1944 Stalin allowed the Polish home army to be crushed and Warsaw to be leveled to the ground,
So come Yalta what hope Poland.
Yes the West was sick and tired of war.But Poland had endured far more than any of the allies,Armies fought across its lands.Stalin and Hitler had slaughtered it people in their hundreds of thousands.
Poles had fought side by side with the allies.Those men could not return home.
Honour has a price the allies would not pay it.
Regards
|
|
|
|
Post by wild on Oct 31, 2012 7:28:49 GMT -5
If my acknowledgement of Marklands contributation was tongue bathing then you and AZ should get a room.
The use of Indian names for football teams as a defence against ethnic cleansing is a bit flimsey. amusing but flimsey.
As compensation for those slaughtered at wounded knee,corralled in human reservations to see out their lives in useless
humiliating capativity and you joke about this?
Mere mass murder.A new low for the board.Timy Mc Veigh know that DARK CLOUD thinks your murder of 16 children rates no more than a "mere".
Now when you raise your standard of debate above the trivial smarmy I might just might entertain you.Start with the UN LAW and tick the boxs .
|
|
|
|
Post by justvisiting on Oct 31, 2012 8:39:21 GMT -5
Hi Ian. There was a thing called the phoney war,lasted about 7 months. According to the treaty singed with Poland,Poland was expected to hold for two weeks giving the allies time to concentrate their forces and attack across the German border.In the event the Poles held for 5 weeks all in vain. In 1943 the Allies were informed of the mass murder of Polish officers.And in 1944 Stalin allowed the Polish home army to be crushed and Warsaw to be leveled to the ground, So come Yalta what hope Poland. Yes the West was sick and tired of war.But Poland had endured far more than any of the allies,Armies fought across its lands.Stalin and Hitler had slaughtered it people in their hundreds of thousands. Poles had fought side by side with the allies.Those men could not return home. Honour has a price the allies would not pay it. Regards Richard, here is DC's reference to mass murder: "We've been guilty of obscene mass murder and land theft - who isn't, including Indians and the Irish? - but from the very beginning there were institutions in place that precluded actual genocide here, starting with - huge irony - elements of the Spanish Catholic Church. We were lucky. Again." You are the one using the word "mere" not DC. You've conveniently left out his use of the word "obscene". Another red herring supplied by Wild. Billy |
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Oct 31, 2012 8:56:50 GMT -5
Hi Richard, if I put myself in the position of the British and American high command in 1945 and weighed up the options of what would of happened if we had to go to war with Russia, then I would have to contemplate what chances our forces would have had against a battle hardened and well-armed foe like the red army, 1/ have we enough troops, 2/ our Tank strength, 3/ Artillery available and 4/ Airpower.
1/ Troops;
The Russians had an army consisting of 15,000,000 troops.
The Allies could boast around 3,000,000.
2/ Armoured Vehicles (new breed of Tanks)
Russia;
T-34/85 (18.000 produced)
IS-2 (4.000 produced)
IS-3 (200 available)
Britain;
Comet (1.186 produced
Centurion (6 available in 1945)
U.S.A.;
Pershing (1.400 produced with only 300 reaching Europe in 1945)
3/ Artillery
The Soviets also had the advantage of 7:1 in artillery.
4/ Airpower
U.S.A.; Total Aircraft 63.715 in 1945
Russia; Total Aircraft 18.500 in 1945
Britain; 5.381 Aircraft in Europe in 1945
So I would have to think long and hard against taking on Russia in 1945.
Ian.
|
|
|
|
Post by wild on Oct 31, 2012 9:14:44 GMT -5
Billy this is DC reference to mass mirder--------
All others are mere mass murder for theft.
You cant have mere obscene mass murder.
I'm not responsible for DC use of words,He clearly refered to mass murder as "mere".
I expect a withdrawal of yours---------
Regards
|
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Oct 31, 2012 9:59:24 GMT -5
Once again Richard you have fallen off the barstool and taken "mere" out of context in mid fall. You know damned well what he said. You know damned well the meaning of what he said. Yet, you continue to beat this dead horse.
Richard, once and for all the world and all its events do not revolve around the continued bitterness of the Irish over the Battle of the Boyne and Seamus a chaca. You had your chance. You lost. You paid the price for losing. Either shut up about it or win next time. Grow up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Oct 31, 2012 10:26:33 GMT -5
Another Green on Blue attack in Afghanistan, two members of the Royal Gurkha Rifles shot dead by a rogue member of the Afghan Army in Police uniform, that takes the total of 50+ Nato troops killed in this manner in 2012 and 11 British included in that total.
God it makes me sick, if they are not killing our troops with IEDs they are hiding behind a friendly uniforms waiting for our troops to be off guard and shooting them in cold blood, they (Taliban) even shot a Pakistani kid the other week because she wanted to go to School.
Ian.
|
|
|
|
Post by justvisiting on Oct 31, 2012 10:48:52 GMT -5
Billy this is DC reference to mass mirder-------- All others are mere mass murder for theft.You cant have mere obscene mass murder. I'm not responsible for DC use of words,He clearly refered to mass murder as "mere". I expect a withdrawal of yours--------- Regards Wild, here is the entire relevant section of DC's post. Yes, he did use "mere" the second time he referred to mass murder. But, my point still stands that you are ignoring his use of the word "obscene" in his first reference to it. In the second case, "mere" was used as a comparator of "mass murder for theft" in contrast to genocide for racial or ethnic purposes. |
|
|
|
Post by wild on Nov 2, 2012 11:57:34 GMT -5
Billy'
You are the one using the word "mere" not DC
and
Yes, he did use "mere" the second time he referred to mass murder.Enough said.
|
|
|
|
Post by wild on Nov 2, 2012 12:20:13 GMT -5
Hi Ian
Apologies for not getting back to you sooner.I'm away from HQ at the moment;in Poland,Are my preduces showing?
I agree the disparity in ground forces were considerable.But the betrayal was not so much in the failure to confront Stalin but in facilitating and acquiesing in the take over of Poland.
The Allies aware of the mass murders in Poland by Stalin removed recognition from the Polish government in exile and at a stroke made stateless the thousands of Polish servicemen who had fought in the armies of the Allies.Cosmetic but perhaps the meanest cut of all was the refusal to allow the Poles to participate in the victory parade through London.
Regards
PS
I think it was in 1948 that the Allies did actually confront Stalin and he backed down during the Berlin crisis. Berlin yes Warsaw no.That's pragmatism.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Nov 2, 2012 18:03:20 GMT -5
(Posted in wrong thread previous.....)
Wild is fabricating about Poland.
Poland in exile was not united and represented the two sides, neither lovable, that had plagued the country since the 20's and 30's. There were two main groups, predictably communist and reactionary (led by the Church), and there was no real Poland whatever to go to war for after the Big One. To imply there was is a fib.
Granted, neither side acknowledged the other and each said they represented all the Poles, but fighting a war for Poland at that point would, even if won, merely have just allowed another civil war to follow, a continuation of the coup in the 1920's.
Wild wishes that had happened so that Ireland's hypocrisies and incompetence wouldn't look so bad in comparison. Instead he wishes we'd nuked the Soviets to allow that civil war. Irish, you know.
There was neither an agreed upon land mass (even among the Poles, never mind Stalin and the West) nor a functional united government. But that's sufficient for Wild to damn others for not fighting, not nuking, not making a bloody mess even beyond what 1945 presented.
And yes, mass murder is 'mere' compared to actual genocide. But wild wants your tears for the amusing theory of genocide against Ireland. It was murderous neglect and callous disregard, mass murder, and land theft, but if England had wanted to wipe out the Irish or Scots they could have done it in an afternoon as we could have with the Indians. They commanded huge and powerful forces. The British people would never have tolerated that. Wouldn't have tolerated the thought of it out loud.
You wonder, though, if the Irish thugs had the bomb: would they have used it on London? You bet your bippie they would have, especially in that planned alliance under the Vatican with Portugal, Spain, and Italy for after the War. Recall, that's why the UN didn't accept Irish, Spanish, Italian membership for years. Of course, if the conservative thugs won that potentially exciting civil war in Poland, they too might have joined in.
|
|
jag
Full Member
Caption: IRAQI PHOTO'S -- (arrow to gun port) LOOK HERE -- SMILE -- WAIT FOR -- FLASH
Posts: 245
|
Post by jag on Nov 3, 2012 8:52:10 GMT -5
That's all right wild, we all know the truth about How the Irish Won the West and how brilliant radio broadcasters are when it comes to Irish-American history, so much in fact that if Myles Dungan himself were here, were it possible, he'd pitch in here and tell of their exploration and exploitation was vastly different from the myths Hollywood portrayed and instead tell the truth, radio broadcasting style, of the Irish men and women who helped build a new nation.
|
|
|
|
Post by wild on Nov 3, 2012 9:00:13 GMT -5
Hi Jag
From where did you dig up the bold Myles Dungan?
Regards
|
|
