Posted on 01/04/2015 9:01:57 AM PST by shoedog
No, we would not have won WW2 with today’s media and liberals. And no, I don’t think we could win such a war nowadays, with today’s faggoty, pajama-boy society and culture.
We were “John Wayne’s America” back then. Today, we are “My Little Pony’s America.” We as a country had a spine back then. Now, we have a country that glorifies the anus.
Thank you for clearing that up...
I know the NYT is toilet paper, but I didn’t think they were THAT far gone back then.
No. Liberals believe reasoning with people in a soft and calm voice, and no personal attacks, will always have a positive affect.
“Dear Mr. Hitler,
Please allow me to introduce to you an idea I have for handling those pesky Jews you so often talk about. First, I would like to say that I am proud of your work in helping the German people understand and celebrate their rich and deserving history, and I would like the opportunity to discuss with you an action plan that could be inclusive of all viewpoints. Perhaps we could have a discussion and see where the gaps are in our expectations between the Jews and the Nazi. I am sure we can come to an understanding that meets in the middle and prevents what may be seen as undesired hostilities.
Thank You and Sincerely,
A Liberal”
Of course, Hitler would laugh his ass off at the stupid liberal/Dr. Spock idiot. Instead, we took the only course of action we could: “F*** You, Pal! We’re coming to getcha! Yer a dead man!” Today’s milquetoast liberal would sh*t their pants at such a prospect as a real war.
No.
No there aren't, that is why we have to take females, fat kids, and 42 year old grandmothers, one of the surprising facts from the 9/11 attacks was how little the rush to enlist was, and how short lived, in some categories they quit joining when combat started, and pretty quickly the military started having to search for people, even lowering standards.
The liberal media — even the liberal Jews — would have agreed with Hitler on the subject of Jews.
Sad but true. We’ve gone from the alpha male of the greatest generation to the metrosexual male of the politically correct generation of today.
Slapping a GI by a General Officer is not, nor has it ever been reasonable. This is not the Red Army or the Japanese Army.
This is true. Losing 4,000 or so troops in Iraq essentially broke our country’s will to fight that war. Mostly due to one of our political parties and their allies in the liberal media.
Just think. We would easily lose that many on a single day before lunch time, invading an Island in the Pacific.
There would have been media trucks and equipment waiting on and around the beaches of Normandy days before our arrival on D-Day, after announcing that the invasion of Pas De Calais and all of “Operation Fortitude” was a decoy.
“You mean the Army, the Air force didn’t exist until after WWII.
Aviation was a part of the Army, just like Armor, or it’s naval elements.”
USAF did not exist as a separate armed service dept until September 1947.
The US Army Air Corps was established in 1926 to bring some order and permanence to the air arm of what was then the War Dept. This brought a degree of autonomy - personnel could no longer be assigned outside aviation.
The US Army Air Forces were established in 1942 and took over all former USAAC facilities, equipment, and people. Nominally, this put the air arm on a more equal footing with the other two War Dept branches: the Army Ground Forces, and the Services of Supply.
USAAF did operate with a large degree of de facto autonomy. It was always staffed by volunteers, so the problems that came with draftees were largely absent. It was often referred to as “the Air Force” in routine activities.
The US Navy developed its air arm along completely different lines. Aviation was always conceived of as an element of support for the Fleet (still is today). Aviation had no independent mission and still does not. USN has been reducing all aviation capabilities that are not carrier based.
Unified standards for performance, interoperability, interchangeability, etc were never mandated, though a few tentative steps were taken along technical lines, by both War and Navy Depts in the late 1930s, on their own initiative. Interoperability is still a problem, despite numerous attempts to make it mandatory.
Actually, liberals ran WWII. So it was there war and not a political football with which to score points in the domestic political battles. And they did a pretty good job. I like unconditional surrender.
That group fought foreign opponents like liberals fight domestic opponents. Scorched earth. Total destruction.
Note the similarity between their scorched earth tactics in WWII and the IRS/FEC/OSHA scandal in their domestic war against conservative Americans.
“Slapping a GI by a General Officer is not, nor has it ever been reasonable. This is not the Red Army or the Japanese Army.”
I guess we disagree. It is not as though he bayoneted the soldier. That sort of pansy attitude is part of what undermines the military.
We have NOT won a war since the Department of "War" was changed to the Department of "Defense."
That name change brought with it a change in focus. . . and psychological intent. The DemonCrats knew what effect that change would engender. They essentially emasculated our stance and every one of our military effort after WWII, beginning with the Korean "Police Action" neé War. Not one war has now ever since the change been allowed to be won, because it has to be couched in terms of "defense."
The media and the American Left, wasn’t supportive of U.S. involvement in WW II, right up until the summer of 1941.
As German armies sped into the USSR at top speed, the American Left turned on a dime from anti-involvement and anti-war to being strongly anti-fascist and pro-involvement.
As soon as WWII was won and Uncle Joe was again safe, the American Left moved right back to being anti-involvement and anti-war.
This has been a guiding principle of our armed forces since the revolution. An officer that has to use physical force to lead his men, deserves to have his rank insignia ripped off his collars and drummed out of the service. That type of conduct was acceptable in the Soviet Armed services or the Japanese army and Navy, not in our services. Physical abuse is a poor substitute for leadership.
yes we still would have would have won ; because we would have had the common sense to round them all up and put them in camps . Which is what should also happen today
I don't think so since the Army was 93% draftees, I believe you mean that the Army pilots were volunteers, not everyone in the Army air forces.
Hmmm...Patton obviously disagreed with you. So do I, and I spent 25 years in the USAF.
Patton wasn’t leading his men by physical force. If you believe he was, then you don’t know much about the military or men.
Same with showing anger or cussing. A good ass chewing and righteous anger can do wonders, but it is now frowned on.
You also might want to learn more about just what sort of physical pressure was used in the Soviet or Japanese armies before comparing what Patton did to their practices.
Terror bombing, like torture, not only was immoral but it didn’t work. Dresden certainly had nothing to do with victory, and was mere vindictiveness. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were only useful if you cared about unconditional surrender, which we shouldn’t have. But even if we did all we needed to do was sit on Japan, which was helpless. Neither invasion nor mass slaughter were required.
What did victory get us, whether or not murdering civilians was necessary? Our Gallant Ally Russia in charge of nearly as much as the big, bad Nazis and Japs conquered, and 50 or so years of Cold War and a never-ending commitment to being World Police. All the evils that come with empire.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.