Italian Cruise Ship Disaster

@ossobuco,

I know, you still have a problem with the penultimate spoiled brat.

Of course we need to know who the ultimate spoiled brat may be before we judge the next in line.

I like you and never cast the first stone. If you want to throw stones though, I'm a deadeye.

It's up to you dear.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

okay, okay, I will reread.

Very annoying.

1 Reply

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Tibbits was doing what all Americans do to try to cover their perfidy, their extreme moral cowardice, their evil crimes - they grasp onto the flimsiest of notions and defend them by stamping their feet and yelling.

Nope. What Tibbits was doing was "telling the truth".

Hiroshima was a huge military center filled with tens of thousands of soldiers. It was also the military headquarters in charge of repelling any invasion in the southern half of Japan.

JTT wrote:

Do you actually think that the top brass would take this dumb grunt into their confidence? You are way dumber than you normally appear.

My IQ is about a billion times higher than yours, since you asked.

And the fact that Hiroshima was a huge military target was never a classified secret. (And Tibbits was privy to many classified secrets in fact.)

JTT wrote:

I just love your sources, Oralboy. They are soooooo peachy keen.

Why thank you. It is a shame you have to be so obnoxious with your namecalling.

0 Replies

@ossobuco,

Yes you are.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

okay, okay, I will reread, re penultimate.
I like the word penultimate. My mother used it, about spanish, proudly, and she told me about it, which is why I fling the word around, a word she taught me, all this time later, I think we both liked it.

So, no, I don't think I have a problem with that word.

Failure to be the ultimate, I have to think about that.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

really? tell me about it. And don't call me dear, sonny.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

I found your contributions to this thread quite annoying.

Does that sufficently tell you about it?

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

No - it seemed like you enjoyed them.

1 Reply

Ok, I'll stop.
What a joke, others have been bloviating for pages.

I am still interested re the ship and will be back when there is anything of interest.

0 Replies

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

okay, okay, I will reread, re penultimate.
I like the word penultimate. My mother used it, about spanish, proudly, and she told me about it, which is why I fling the word around, a word she taught me, all this time later, I think we both liked it.

So, no, I don't think I have a problem with that word.

Failure to be the ultimate, I have to think about that.

If u like it so much,
u can get your jollies from ante-penultimate, meaning 3rd from the last.

David

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

Who cares whether or not you have a problem with penultimate, you've misused it and still don't know what it means.

There is the ultimate and there is the one before the ultimate, the penultimate.

If 10 is the ultimate, 9 is the penultimate.

It's a word that should be rarely used except that people don't understand it's meaning. They think it means the very most ultimate, which it doesn't.

The same people probably are guilty of a daily misuse of "literally."

Literally doesn't mean "really"

No one literally eats up the highway or crushes their opponent.

Similarly there is a new and common misuse of "begs the question." That phrase doesn't mean: That a good question which really invites an answer.

Explaining what "begs the question" actually means is not easy and it's legitimate usage is rare. Thus it is very likely that the corrupted but intuitive meaning will prevail.

It would be a shame, however, to corrupt the definition of literal simply because lazy ignorami can't be bothered to think before they spout.

2 Replies

@ossobuco,

That I may enjoy responding to a comment, doesn't mean I enjoyed reading said comment.

I appreciate the opportunity to respond, in a snarky way, to your comments, but there are very many additional A2Kers who can and will provide me with the same opportunity.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Begging the question addresses the concept of circular reasoning.

David

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Honey, you're kidding. I studied many years of latin.

In contrast to you, I like word play. I remember one of our first contretemps, you making fun of something I said, when I was word playing.

And now you are instructing me while playing.

Get yourself a broom.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

Oh, I get it, you didn't like being called the penultimate spoiled brat... not that I didn't know what I was saying.
Tool.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

Oh, I get it, you didn't like being called the penultimate spoiled brat...
not that I didn't know what I was saying.
Tool.

By what reasoning (or by what word playing)
did u choose to call someone the next to the last spoiled brat ??

If HE is the next to the last one, then:
WHO is the "last spoiled brat" ?

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Quote:
And it is also a fact that even after Hiroshima and Nagasaki were destroyed, the Japanese still insisted that Emperor Hirohito be allowed to remain emperor as a condition of surrender. Only when that assurance was given did the Japanese agree to surrender. This was precisely the clarification of surrender terms that many of Truman's own top advisors had urged on him in the months prior to Hiroshima. This, too, is a widely known fact.[4]

Wow! So many outright lies in one small paragraph. Where to begin.

First, what Japan asked was that Hirohito retain all his prerogatives as Japan's sovereign ruler. Those prerogatives included unlimited dictatorial power as Japan's living deity.

Second, the US did not give them that assurance. What the US did was tell Japan that Hirohito was going to be made subordinate to MacArthur, and then we made ready to nuke Tokyo if they didn't accept.

Third, the clarification that some of Truman's advisors had suggested, was that we guarantee that Hirohito's dynasty be allowed to remain as a constitutional monarch. Note that this clarification, if it had been adopted, would have allowed us to depose Hirohito in favor of his son. It would also have contradicted Japan's request that the Emperor retain unlimited dictatorial power. In any case, it was one suggestion out of many, and it was never adopted.

It occurs to me that there was an additional important point that I neglected to make.

The erroneous contention that Japan's surrender condition was granted, and the erroneous contention that it was identical to the earlier recommendation by Grew, are intended to lead people to the erroneous conclusion that Japan would have surrendered earlier if only we had granted that condition earlier.

However, Japan was not willing to surrender with "just that condition" until August 10, which came after both A-bombs had been dropped.

Before that time they wanted FAR more than that one condition. They wanted to end the war in a draw, much like the Korean War later ended.

Even if we had offered that condition, and even if we had offered it earlier, it still would have taken until August 10 before Japan offered to surrender.

0 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

The Japanese paid for their war crimes, the Germans for theirs, others are routinely brought to justice for theirs -

How did they pay? Sure, they were occupied but the US helped to rebuild them. How many Japanese war criminals were punished? Few. Even less Nazis for we had to employ them against the Russians.

I think in your mind the US government has been more evil than the Japanese or German were in the 1940's. But I don't see it.

0 Replies

@ossobuco,

Quote:

Perhaps it's late for you too.

I was referring to myself.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Just saw that, you're right, I remember the anti penult (my mother, again and yet).

0 Replies

Italian Cruise Ship Disaster

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know