migui8618

quote:

---

this

---

The frick you think the Cold War was a reaction to? Do you guys live in Mayberry?

quote:

---

Absolutely. Take the US out of the equation, Germany would have certainly won the war.

---

Don't forget, until it became more profitable to destroy them, we funded Germany too.

I can just wear sun screen dawg.

quote:

---

ok but that's a different argument. you also arent accounting for the risk to life of the thousands of servicemen flying that mission vs the handful of guys in the Enola Gay. how much were they worth? when you get into the mathematics of war, it gets pretty sticky.

---

Agreed.

quote:

---

i guess one man's "perpetual state of war" is another man's "unusually peaceful in context of recent centuries". sure there were wars, but on a tiny scale in comparison. the reason the Vietnam War and the Korean War didnt expand into major wars was due to the ever looming threat of nuclear exchange between superpowers. that's literally the entire reason we fought in such a limited measure in both wars.

i'm not saying it was pretty, and i'm not saying that the existence of nuclear weapons is a good thing. but knocking Japan out of the war with a couple planes and a couple bombs was an easy choice when put against losing hundreds of thousands if not a million Marines and soldiers in a mainland Japan invasion. and if you are saying that we would have won the war without invading Japan OR dropping nukes, then that is simply revisionist history.

---

But you are missing the entire point of calling it peaceful. We were spending on WW1 & WW2 because it was a massive destructive war. Here's the kicker, they never stopped spending like that, without the massive destructive war. We still spend like we are at war, have been since the end of WW2, and will continue to do so. That's not peace, and nukes did nothing to stop the spending. If anything, they kicked it into ultra high gear. It's the ultimate boogeyman. Keeps everyone super duper scared, while all the superpowers that have them agree to to never use them, and just keep like it's war time for profit for them and their deep state buddies. This ain't peace.

History is written by the victors. WE say the nukes stopped the war dead in it's tracks. Because WE stood to make massive amounts of money from owning this technological terror and perpetuating it's role as the ultimate check mate (when we didn't have anymore, and couldn't for the foreseeable future until production was scaled up). It's written fact that Japan worried that invasions on both fronts would cause more damage and loss of life. Not the bomb saving the loss of life as the ultimate sacrificial lamb. That fricking lie has kept the world poor while the elites continue to harvest.

quote:

---

wrong about what? i never said that the Tokyo raids werent more devastating. they absolutely were. i'm saying that it's not an apples to apples comparison. one plane did to a city what it took thousands of planes to do to another city

---

Both were done in a day or two, and total project wise...Tokyo raids were 100% cheaper. It was a tremendous waste of money on something that should never have been unleashed. Wasn't necessary.

quote:

---

well i would say that the fact that there hasnt been a world war since 1945 is evidence of that. mutually assured destruction was certainly inelegant, but it more or less kept the world at peace through the entire second half of the 20th century when compared to the absolute catastrophic devastation dealt out in the first half.

---

Sir...the world has been in a perpetual state of war since the end of WW2. World wars are obsolete, because you can't keep reaping the taxpayer whirlwind when you push it too far. The nukes haven't solved anything, but have made people exceptionally rich creating a trinket that is the ultimate boogeyman.

quote:

---

you're still talking about hundreds of sorties vs one single mission you moron. it's apples and volkswagons.

---

Dude, you know you're wrong here, just admit it.

quote:

---

i say it stopped a hundred wars. maybe a thousand. prove me wrong.

what is certain is that a large number of Americans would have absolutely died during an invasion of mainland Japan.

---

Alright padnuh, show me the decades of peace the world has experienced due to scary nukes being rattled like keys. It doesn't exist. It's just another tool to make people rich. And people got rich testing them for decades, destroying land and killing people across the globe. They are more useful to the people that matter as a scare tactic. No one makes money if nuclear war sparks off, idiot. It's the dumbest ponzi scheme in history.

The threat of invasion was the catalyst in ending the war. Nukes made no difference, at fricking all. The people in power knew Truman was an idiot, because he used them in the first place. Saying nukes ended the war is the ultimate propaganda that's fed families for decades off taxpayers backs trying to arm the world in a pissing contest that ultimately did jack shite.

quote:

---

Add all that up, and even with the victory at Stalingrad in early 1943, by the end of that year the Red Army, and indeed the Soviet Union itself, would not have lasted past the end of the year if not for Lend Lease.

---

Well worth it. Keeping the Reich away from the oil in Baku was incredibly important.

quote:

---

If Trump hadn’t gone to Iran there would’ve been a 9/11 style attack attributed to Iran

---

CIA reading the message board

quote:

---

heres my latest content. yoked

---

I can smell the peptides coming off of you