Post a response to this discussion thread
"The only ones who deliberately bombed civilians". This could well be the finest example of cognitive dissonance that I have ever heard. Where could you even conceive of such an idea? I am assuming these bombed civilians you are weeping over are from WWII or Vietnam. Are you seriously going to posit that in WWII the Japanese and Germans did not bomb civilians? The British (and French and Poles and Russians and Dutch and Chinese and Spaniards and Slavs and Scandinavians and Greeks, etc.) may well disagree. As would the Germans who ran from the British bombers. And the Japanese who ran from the Russian ones. In Vietnam we were basically the only ones with planes, but that sure didn't stop your noble heroes in the NVA and Viet Cong from shooting and shelling the shit out of every civilian village they could find. And is it specifically bombing we are discussing, or do hacking, burning and shooting large numbers of enemy civilians also count? Because if so, go back in time, o great military historian, through WWI and the constant wars in Asia and Africa back to the Crusades and then to the beginning of time to find me the armies that did not decimate civilians, before you unload that Evil America bullshit.
I am not going off on this post just because it exemplifies a shining monument to stupidity. What is frightening is that there is a whole self-flagellating, apologist movement who really beleives, and what is more incredulous, wants us to beleive, their History-On-A-Stick. I am sure that the guy who sat down one day to rewrite this particular point of history, probably as a joke, is having a big laugh seeing morons like you spread it around the world. The implications are apalling. I mean, forget the Holocaust, Khmer Rouge, Stalinist purges, Maoist purges, etc. etc. etc., for a second, where these fine, upstanding non-American regimes "took care" of their own civilians, let alone another country's. In what war, except for the Gulf War and the current Balkan episode, has any side who was able to NOT tried to bomb civilians? In fact, if memory serves, it was the groundbreaking idea on the part of Americans not to liquidate civilian obstacles, thus putting our own troops at greatly increased risk, that made these wars much more difficult (and, in the end, less successful) than they would have been if fought the European or Middle Eastern or (God save us) the African way.
What else never happened? Did we now start WWII? Did we fake Pearl Harbor? Or maybe the moon landing? Fawning, masturbatory diatribes that piss on history as they create the most outlandishly self-serving facts are sadly the distinguishing feature of debate in our times.
Post a response to this discussion thread