Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 21, 2014, 09:53:50 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3
1  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: hello I am calling out wormyguy for a detailed response to this on: October 13, 2014, 11:04:14 am
Wormguy,

I have heard this argument for years that there was some way that the Americans could have forestalled Russian advances into Eastern Europe. Yet, when this case is made rarely do they explain where the troops and more importantly the landing craft were supposed to come from. You also want the Americans to have propped up the Chiang's regime, so again you need to have a large number of landing craft left in Southeast Asia (in 1943-44), for the capture of Burma. Something Cairo and Octagon struggled with. For instance, King's decision, at Octagon, to allow the removal of the landing craft from SEAC for use in the Mediterranean never gave the British the landing craft needed for any third front in the Med yet, precluded the necessary landing craft for a full amphibious assault on south Burma. So, even if you don't launch Anvil, something even Alexander wanted, you still need to figure out where the extra troops and landing craft would come from for an actual  breakthrough the lubjilana (sp) gap. The British troops are maxed out, French troops are few in numbers, and have issues with the Italian troops who also do not have large numbers and are still not fully considered allies. Greece is in flame and troops cannot be removed from there and Turkey would not enter the war without the Allies giving them supplies they could never afford to supply them with, i.e. they were not going to enter the war.

If you are going to forestall Russian encroachment you need to have a full invasion of Normandy (an Italian breakthrough itself would only change the iron curtain from vertical to horizontal) as well as at least 20-25 divisions, since 12-15 were unable to force Kesserling to surrender by the fall of 1944, the time the Allies had to breakthrough to forestall Russian advancement.  Plus, it is on you to figure out the landing craft necessary, since you are claiming to know how to accomplish something Churchill really wanted yet never was able to make the numbers work. Because, as you know Churchill and Alexander believed a simultaneous land and amphibious assault on Istirean peninsula, was the only possible way for the "third front" to be opened successfully.

Also, since you are well aware that the Chinese military forces are not able to help in any way to defeat the Japanese by the time of Yalta how to you defeat the Japanese without the Russians. The Far Eastern agreements were the price of Red Army participation. Who fills the Russian void if they are not participating.  There is no one. Furthermore, regardless of whether you agree or not with the numbers or the sentiments, Roosevelt's administration believed that the assault on Japan would cost millions of American lives, having experienced Japanese fanaticism during the island hopping campaign. So, either make the trade or sacrifice American lives needlessly (imho).

Ultimately it is easy in hindsight to say this should have happened or that should have happened, but the Americans were working within an Alliance they needed to maintain to win the war and usher in a lasting peace. They had limited resources which had to be allocated with precision, each time these allocation happened other plans had to be scrapped. There were just not enough men or supplies for every possibly successful, in hindsight, invasion some revisionist can clearly see should have been launched and therefore change the outcome of the war. Decisions in the European theater effected the decisions in the Pacific. These facts are far often overlooked by revisionists on the right and the left who want to defame the President.

Just my two cents, would love to hear a rebuttal, Wormguy. I study diplomacy not military history so I could easily have missed something, but diplomatically I have never found a non-orthodox historical interpretation that has held any water.
2  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Yet another police shooting of a black man in St. Louis area on: October 09, 2014, 02:47:34 pm
So I have thinking about this all day. From my understanding (which could be completely wrong) the burden of proof for stand your ground is merely ones belief that their life is being threatened. What would happen if a young black man killed a cop approaching him and claimed self-defense under stand ground laws citing these recent shootings as proof that he had a justifiable reason to fear he life was endanger. It could be that this is too cute by half, but it seems like it could work as an argument (for a Cochranesque Chewbacca defense) if the burden of proof is merely the perception that ones life is under threat to kill under stand your ground. Or this could be completely stupid dunno.
3  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Patent Office cancels Redskins trademark registration, says it's disparaging on: June 19, 2014, 04:43:16 pm
I only know that from watching them my whole life. If it was some other team I probably wouldn't have known either. So no worries.
4  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Patent Office cancels Redskins trademark registration, says it's disparaging on: June 18, 2014, 05:08:57 pm
The mascot for the Indians was Chief Wahoo. It is or has been phased out. The present mascot is Slider an amorphous dinosaur like creature and has been my whole life. The logo was still Chief Wahoo when I was young however the latest Indians logo is just a script C on blue. From a basic search only Ebay has Chief Wahoo hats. It will be interesting to see if that move is enough, though to give the Indians credit they started this process at least thirty years ago in regards to the mascot and 5-10 on the logo.
5  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Why is the GOP so fixated with Socialism? on: February 14, 2014, 12:38:00 am
Republicans have been using fearmongering about foreign policy to attack the domestic policies of the democrats since, at the latest, the 1950 election. Nixon got his start as red baiter like McCarthy. If you want to understand how this came about Athan Theorias' (sp) Yalta Myths is an interesting read about how the Repbulicans used myths and misinformation to scare voters away from New and Fair deal legislation throughout the 1950s. He's a liberal hack in some ways but the research related in the book is irrefutable. The main figure behind the move to use foreign policy as guise to attack Democratic domestic policies started with Robert Taft Jr. If you desire to look into the origins of this Robert Dirilek's A Loyal Opposition details the inner workings of the repbulican party during WWII as they tried to regain political power. The author is quite sympathetic to the republican party, yet the title starts to take on a sense of irony by the time you get to the Mackinac Conference in the spring of 1944. My favorite acedonote from the book is the story of Lord Halifax Republican reception dinner when he was named ambassador to the US. One republican congressmen told him point blank that he and many others in this room thought FDR was far more dangerous to America than Mussolini and Hitler. It so alarmed Halifax he reported the conversation to either Welles or Hull (can't remember which).

But honestly you could go back to the 1880s to find Republican officials using red scares and comparing democrats to socialists and "radicals reds." Carter Harrison's (mayor of Chicago) public statement about the Haymarket riot reads like a diatribe by hannity during the campaign. Its available through the Haymarket Historical Foudnation's website, if interested.
6  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: ‘47 Percent Negro’: Anti-Obama Protest Turns Racist In Phoenix on: August 09, 2013, 02:35:44 pm
Your party use to claim it was un-american to believe in involving ourselves in other countries affairs even if it affected our own interests. That isolationism lead us to be unprepared when WWII hit. Now your party flips 180 degrees, no small coincidence either, and says anyone who questions large military spending, magnitudes greater than the spending you vilified FDR for requesting, is un-american. Maybe and this is just a theory stop being so radical and moderate from the two extremes. But, conservatives by their very nature are reactionaries so maybe that is asking to much.
7  Election Archive / 2012 Elections / Re: Sandy and Christie Screwed Romney; May Be Time to Write-Off America on: November 08, 2012, 01:20:55 pm
First thing I thought about when reading the op

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0
8  Election Archive / 2012 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: BREAKING: Donnelly opens double-digit lead in final Howey Indiana poll on: November 03, 2012, 01:43:15 am
After lugar lost the primary Donnely's people decided that they would run a campaign aimed at disaffected Lugar voters. They believed that demcorats would be with them regardless so they have run as republican lite. It would not suprise me if Donnely voted with the dems 90+ percent of the time knowing he is a one and done senator.
9  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Hi new poster!-Questions about Republican supported voter laws and turnout? on: July 11, 2012, 11:44:04 am
I would be glad to go along with these laws if they didnt clearly target certain people and groups. For instance almost all of the states make exception for military ids that dont have expiration dates or have expired before the day of voting yet they do not extend the same thing to college id's which in many cases are government issued id's since they are state run institutions. Some states dont even except them. Which group supports the reps and which doesnt.

Secondly why cant we just have universal registration why does one need to go through all of these hoops to vote. The only logical reason to create barriers to voting is not to stop voting fraud but to disenfranchise. If you cant win the vote suppress the vote, weird how this push came after 08 not 04 or 00 when the election were actually contentious (not claiming voter fraud just saying.)  Words mean nothing to me action shows your true motives. You combine voter id with universal registration and ill be right their helping you pass it. Until then your motives are under suspect in my view.
10  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Obama's Catholic hospital decision on: February 07, 2012, 10:27:23 pm
To me this is a simple problem to fix. If the catholic church does not want to pay for things like this or compromise their mission and the integrity of their institution STOP ACCEPTING FEDERAL FUNDS. You dont get something for nothing. When two groups who hold different ethics and morals enter into an agreement one side is going to have to compromise their identity do you really think it will be the government. Therefore, just like people have been saying since Madison railed against Patrick Henry's supplemental pay for teacher tax it is the to the detriment of both the government and the religious groups or institutions when funds are given/accepted. Faith based initiatives ,charitable choice, and all of the other various tax payer money grabs by the religious institutions are all unconstitutional but even more they are philosophically wrong for the government and the religious institutions. Some of the strongest opponents of the F.B.I. were mega church ministers fearing a loss of their religious identity. Also anyone who supports the Hyde Adm. and F.B.I./ charitable choice and does not see how that is hypocritical makes me laugh.
11  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Dems propose the''Rebuild America Jobs Act'' and .7% tax on millionaires. on: October 21, 2011, 04:32:23 pm
The millionaires are the ones getting a free ride on the back of society.

The dumb choice we made that put us into such debt was the ridiculous tax-cutting for the wealthy that has been going on since Reagan.

check you facts - the top 1% pay an ever increasing share of the tax burden over the last 50 years

Yeah when you keep getting more and more of the nations wealth you have to pay more taxes. Its pretty disingenuous to say their tax burden has risen with out including that their percentage of the nations wealth has also increased during that time period.
12  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Tea Party Nation says "Don't hire people" on: October 21, 2011, 01:55:55 pm
Any business that does this should be first boycotted and then have the occupy people protest in front of their business making it impossible for them to run properly. If they want to claim borderline treasonous (purposefully trying to undermine the economic prosperity of the country)ideas like this are good then anything legal actions that keeps their businesses hurting and hopefully causes it to fold is perfectly fine with me. If ya play with fire .....

Could you imagine if a democratic group put this kind of asinine BS out right before the 2004 election. Every single republican would demanding their heads for treason and to be honest I wouldn't attempt to defend them well outside being anti-death penalty.
13  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Wisconsin Senate Recall-a-palooza (results in OP) on: August 10, 2011, 04:03:20 pm
It seems to me that someone like kapkanke (sp) losing because hes in a democratic districts misses a larger point. He was clearly able to win this seat even in a year like 08 so he had some broad appeal.  If he has now lost it shows that his desicions lost that broad appeal. In a state that is aleast marginally democratic one would think you have to hold seats like this if your republicans and you want a long standing majority. Yes, i am sure they can gerrymander the hell out of things a maybe make enough safe seats but that a risky long term startegy escpicially in a politically literate state like wisconsin. Uber political gerrymandering voter laws politically targeted and voter id laws all scream we are doing this for our gain not for the betterment of the state, people may be apathetic but they are not stupid. Sooner or later if you play with fire your gonna get burnt.

Also, what really saddens me about this whole thing both here and in other states is the complete lack of knowledge about what labor unions have done for people throughout the years. I am glad i never had to work when i 8 or that when i was hurt on the job i didnt just get fired cause i couldnt work anymore and had recourse against my employer for the negligence that caused the accident.  The problem i see is that over time people forgot the struggles that granted them rights and benifits that they have become so accustom to having they now take them for granted. Just my opinion everyone has one.
14  Election Archive / 2012 Elections / Re: Which of these candidates ... on: May 30, 2011, 05:18:06 am
Invasion wasn't necessary. By the time the nuclear bombs were used, Japan was completely incapable of fighting back and was starved for natural resources. A couple of blockades would have been of trivial cost and would have forced Japan to surrender anyway. The Japanese government wasn't especially fanatical, it just didn't want to accept the American offer of unconditional surrender. If Japan had no resources coming in from its empire, it would surrender very quickly.

In what world is this statement true. The Japanese were prepped for a long scale invasion that would have been similar to the invasions of the outer islands and other pacific islands. In that it would have been a fight for every inch of soil, with massive death tolls, see the tom hanks HBO series for an illustration. Only after the bombing did the hierarchy of the Japanese military see the futility of furthering the war. No one, not a single credible historian I have ever read argue anything close to what your describe.  Hell, i know many pacifist historians who vehemently argue against all military action who readily agree with Truman discsion to bomb japan knowing full well the lives it saved.  If you honestly believe this either you have never studied the history of the Japanese war apparatus during WII or your so desperate to make a point that you fabricate the truth to fit the agenda you purport. I, not knowing you, will choose to believe the former instead of the latter.
15  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: What issues do you dislike the people who 'side' with you on? on: May 30, 2011, 03:18:33 am
Its funny alot of people have talked about the anti-zionist whom they disagree with, im the other way i tend to despise the pro Israel people, which i am. Mostly the fundies who support Israel, i just dint find their support to be genuine. In that i mean they support Israel not for the fact that the Jewish people have a right to have their own homeland,which is my opinion that is to long to discuss and would side track this discussion.  However, their end is to further their own biblical prophecies which dictate those that they supposedly support are doomed upon the realization of said prophecies.

The other group that i am part of but disagree with, though not necessarily political but becoming more so, are the ex- insert lifestyle choice. For instance i was skinny then i got a little fat during undergrad and i am now back in shape. Also, i quit smoking cigs. These groups along with other who fit this description are so sanctimonious. Now that they dint have this bad habits anybody who does should be admonished and condemned.  Though not a part of the groups i am a part of born agains of any stripe are also like this. It just pisses me off that people who until recently act the same way as those they are condoning think its okay to admonish those who still act like they previously did. I just cant wrap my mind around that thought process.
16  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Beyond George Washington and Abe Lincoln... on: May 30, 2011, 02:41:28 am
If you would consider sporcle a good source in this instance than Reagan would be the most recognizable and pierce would be least.
17  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Is obsessing over what the founding fathers wanted stupid? on: March 25, 2010, 01:21:02 am
Without getting into the obsession over the word obsession did the founding fathers not write the constitution as a "living" document to be modified as the times deem?  Hence the ability to amend the constitution and to pass the laws the reflect the times we live in. Its been awhile since i took gov/civ in high school but i recall being taught this. Now in our con law classes we discuss this idea, however i do recall this concept being tantamount in our discussion in that class as well. 

So if we are going to "obsess" about the intentions of the founding fathers why is this part of their intentions so rarely discussed.  My only conclusion is that its not the intentions of the founding fathers that people desire to follow but their own interpretations of the Constitution.  So, lets be frank we need to look at the reasons and intentions of the people who desire to use this concept. While also looking at why they need to use this idea as their fall back positions.  For if their ideas were so widely accepted they would not need to look to anything else but their own arguments. In my opinion they want cover for their beliefs and what is better cover than saying the founding fathers disagree.  Basically stating if you dont agree with me and the founding fathers you are some how less American and therefore your opinions matter less. 
18  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: A specific ? for TEA partiers and right wingers on: February 11, 2010, 09:47:00 pm
Well, they havent gone into effect yet, except the pesky cigarette tax under SCHIP.  They start in 2011.  Here's Obama's 2009 budget, prepared by Jake Tapper of ABC News:

President Obama's budget proposes $989 billion in new taxes over the course of the next 10 years, starting fiscal year 2011, most of which are tax increases on individuals.

1) On people making more than $250,000.

$338 billion - Bush tax cuts expire
$179 billlion - eliminate itemized deduction
$118 billion - capital gains tax hike

Total: $636 billion/10 years

2) Businesses:

$17 billion - Reinstate Superfund taxes
$24 billion - tax carried-interest as income
$5 billion - codify "economic substance doctrine"
$61 billion - repeal LIFO
$210 billion - international enforcement, reform deferral, other tax reform
$4 billion - information reporting for rental payments
$5.3 billion - excise tax on Gulf of Mexico oil and gas
$3.4 billion - repeal expensing of tangible drilling costs
$62 million - repeal deduction for tertiary injectants
$49 million - repeal passive loss exception for working interests in oil and natural gas properties
$13 billion - repeal manufacturing tax deduction for oil and natural gas companies
$1 billion - increase to 7 years geological and geophysical amortization period for independent producers
$882 million - eliminate advanced earned income tax credit

Total: $353 billion/10 years


so none of the taxes of the vast majority of the tea partiers are gonna be raised thanks for making his point.
19  Election Archive / 2010 House Election Polls / Re: IN-09/SUSA-FDL: Hill trails Sodrel on: January 21, 2010, 09:24:11 pm
18-34 is  almost a 2-1 advantage for sodrel yeah thats gonna happen in a district thats dominated by bloomington. i would put good money that sodrel has never won that age group and probably lost by that margin the last two go arounds.  Its the older non bloomington/monroe county residents who make this a marginal republican district not the younger voters if sodrel needs the youth vote to give him a lead hes not winning let alone as JLT said he probably wont make it through the primary.
20  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: IN-09: Fifth time's the charm for Mike Sodrel? on: January 08, 2010, 10:57:43 pm
The two major problems i see sodrel having are enthusiasm and bayh.

I just dont see him winning the primary i dont know much about his opponent but anyone has to be more popular amongst republicans in the area than sodrel.  Republicans i know(my district when im not at school) vote for him but only because he is the republican.  They dont really like him or find him an appealing candidate.  Though this is anecdotal it seems pretty prevalent amongst the people who i have talked to the last few cycles.  The lack of enthusiasm for him should sink his campaign either in the primary or the general.  Plus, how many times do you expect a constituency to give you a chance.

Also, bayh should win this district handidly so if he does manage to get past the primary he will have to deal with a popular senator of the opposing party running atop the ballot.
21  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Did You Ever Know Someone Born in the 1800s? If So, Who and When Were They Born? on: December 28, 2009, 01:30:54 am
yes actually my sister in laws great grandmother was born in 1899, she was at my brothers wedding. She pasted away last summer but seemed like a very nice lady in the one conversation we had at the reception
22  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Is Racism a Factor in Conservative Opposition to Pres. Obama? on: December 28, 2009, 12:49:33 am
I actually think quite a bit of the heated conservative criticism of Obama has its roots in his race and background in general. It's an appeal to fear of "the other" that the GOP has perfected. The problem with most of the disgusting and crazy things Republicans said about Bill Clinton was that they were often true. His politics weren't that liberal, but they could attack him on his character. Obama's personal life seems pretty tame, but his policies are just as center-right as Clinton's.

Republicans have a problem with change; they don't like that this country isn't the country that they grew up in, and Obama's race is a symbol of social change. I think most of the anger stems from economic changes and in many cases truly negative social changes. For some unfortunate reason though a large segment of the population lashes out at these real and negative changes by attacking positive changes, such as black or gay rights. These people's anger isn't unfounded, it's just been directed in a way that the establishment pushes because they can use it to divide and win votes. They can't have people directing their anger in constructive ways because that threatens their power.

I don't think it matters though, as Obama has benefited from the perception that his race is a factor in criticism of him.


That was very well stated i have always thought that its more fear of what obama symbolizes more so than his race that is driving this vitrolic hatred for him you see from the foaming at the mouth right wing.
23  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Stewart owns Fox News Yet Again on: December 11, 2009, 09:37:20 pm
This is why i hate when people say that msnbc is just as bad as fox.  people like olbermann are hacks but this stuff is just so asine it makes one wonder how foxnews actually has viewers.  Then again america always has to prove pt barnum right.
24  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Are You a DownWithTheLeft conservative? on: December 09, 2009, 12:09:07 am
this post reminds me of the guy at the podium after billy madisons' speech at the end of the movie.  We are all dumber for having read your opinions.   you either put forth opinions that are so sugar coated you could have asked do you like chocolate. IE the us should be put first. What American would disagree with that? Its not a question but an exercise in futility.  Then you gone on to ask questions that are so loaded that you might as well be asking when the last time we beat our woman.  ultimately i guess what was your point is anyone as extreme in more way than one as you.  As far as your questions go i disagree with most of the non sane purportions and agree with the do you like chocolate ones.
25  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Should this cop get the death penalty? on: December 05, 2009, 12:28:49 am
i disagree entirely in the issuance of the death penalty in this and/or many other cases however cops should be held to a higher standard and therefore when found guilty should be subjected to punishments more severely than those who commit the same offenses.  In our society we grant certain privileges to people who obtain certain ranks and stations whether they deserve so is up to debate.  yet, if we grant these people certain privileges there punishments upon violatation of these rules norms and morays should be punishable in a more severe manner.  IE if you declare you are entitled to greater protection and privileges under the law when you violate said law your punishments should be equally reciprocal.
Pages: [1] 2 3


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines