mysteryman wrote:I agree,but we didnt start that war.
Of course not. We were attacked.
They started it.
mysteryman wrote:Therefore,we are not guilty for doing what it took to win.
Your logic is pluperfect.
mysteryman wrote:Tell me,would you have rather we had invaded?
Of course,if we had there would have been millions of casualties,both military ans civilian.
Prove that statement.
Wait a minute; which war are you talking about?
mysteryman wrote:Would that have been better,in your mind?
I watched the Discovery docu-drama about Hiroshima last night, which was followed by a similar biograph of Hirohito and his war-mongering lackey, Tojo. Did you know, mys, that one of the rationales the Japanese had for attacking Pearl Harbor was to
discourage to the point of prevention America's involvement in World War II ?
"Fight 'em over there so we don't have to fight 'em over here", essentially. (Let's hear the translation into Japanese of that phrase.) THAT worked out pretty well for them, don't you think?
Apparently this is the kind of critical error in judgment that keeps repeating itself throughout history. Bush, of course, doesn't read books or newspapers, so how could we expect him to know anything about history?
(Well, the dumbass
could watch the Discovery channel occasionally ...)
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace