Topics Topics Edit Profile Profile Help/Instructions Help Member List Member List Edit Profile Register  
Search Last 1|3|7 Days Search Search Tree View Tree View  

Archive through March 9, 2003

Sepulchritude Forum » The Absinthe Forum » The Monkey Hole » Archive Thru March 2003 » Dude! i so hate the french! » Archive through March 9, 2003 « Previous Next »

Author Message
Lordhobgoblin (Lordhobgoblin)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: Lordhobgoblin

Post Number: 713
Registered: 10-2000


Posted on Sunday, March 9, 2003 - 11:43 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

I see your logic, I think Sharon is a murderous scumbag, Sharon is Jewish therefore I must be anti-semitic. Bollocks! I despise the butcher of Sabra and Shatilla because he is a murderous, facist, scumbag and not because he is a Jew. I dislike you because you are an arsehole and not because you are a Jew.

And to think that all the insulting posts from yourself started with my post contempt for professional wine-tasting. As you are a winetaster I suppose that this also makes me anti-semitic?

You know, sometimes people dislike certain Jewish people because they dislike the individual and not because the individual is Jewish. Stop blaming your religion for why people dislike you. It's a bit like Ali G saying "Is it cos I is black?".
Oxygenee (Oxygenee)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: Oxygenee

Post Number: 105
Registered: 4-2002
Posted on Sunday, March 9, 2003 - 11:18 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

Having read your posts for 3 years Hobgoblin, I've no doubt you're anti-semitic to your core. Of course strongly disagreeing with the policies of the Sharon government isn't anti-semitic - but saying things like "The likes of Sharon of course believe there's no such thing as an innocent Palestinian civilian and believes that they are all (including old men, women and children) vermin and that the only good Palestinian is a dead Palestinian, a view you no doubt hold yourself" sure as hell is.
Jack Collins (_blackjack_)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: _blackjack_

Post Number: 863
Registered: 11-2000


Posted on Sunday, March 9, 2003 - 10:24 am:   Edit PostPrint Post


quote:

Capitulate to their demands for the destruction of the Israeli state?



Meanwhile, in the land of False Dichotomies...

It is perfectly possible for Israel to defend itself and still minimize civilian casualties. They don't have to shell an entire block to get one or two terrorists.

However dedicated Hamas is to destroying Israel, the fact is that they don't have anything approaching Israel's military capabilities. You can kill more people accidentally with a heliocopter gunship than you can on purpose with a suicide bomber, as the lop-sided casualty figures demonstrate.
Lordhobgoblin (Lordhobgoblin)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: Lordhobgoblin

Post Number: 711
Registered: 10-2000


Posted on Sunday, March 9, 2003 - 10:19 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

"This is just despicable, and brings out in the open, the naked anti-semitism..."

I wondered when you'd start calling me anti-semitic. The old cowardly tactic of labelling as anti-semitic anyone condemning anything any Israeli administration does.

So if I oppose what Sharon is doing to the Palestinians I'm anti-semitic am I? If I am opposed to his bombing of innocent Palestinian civilians I'm anti-semitic? If I oppose his bulldozing of Palestinian homes in order to make way for Jewish settlers i'm anti-semitic? I suppose also that the group of Jewish people I met on the march in London who also oppose Sharon's actions and want a fair deal for Palestinians are also anti-semitic?

Being anti-Sharon and anti-Zionist does not make someone anti-semitic.

Sharon wants a enlarged Jewish State for a Jewish people. People of Palestinian origin are not welcome, despite the land being the land of their birth and their parents birth. His treatment of the Palestinians in their own land is ethnic cleansing. He's nothing short of a Facist as are you.

Oxygenee (Oxygenee)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: Oxygenee

Post Number: 104
Registered: 4-2002
Posted on Sunday, March 9, 2003 - 8:30 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

As usual Hobgoblin, your hypocrisy is sickening. You said:

"They had been trying to surrender and had been attempting to do so and the allies purposely chose to close their ears to it. The A-bomb was dropped to show (our ally) the Russians that the USA was not afraid to use any means at its disposal no matter how horrific the consequences. The countless Japanese civilians that died when the bomb was dropped died in order to scare the Russians. "

This is exactly the same as saying that Truman was a cold blooded mass murderer, and is a gross misreading of all available evidence. The same obscenely misguided moral equivalence is reflected in your next post:

"The measure of which action is worse is which action causes the most suffering, regardless of why the suffering is caused."

So this means the Allied forces, confronting one of the most grotesquely evil regimes in the whole of recorded history, fighting perhaps the most clearly morally justified war ever, were as culpable or indeed more culpable than the Nazis, because ultimately more Germans were killed than say British or French civilians.

Your comments on Hamas, are similarly hypocritical. If you agree that they are cold-blooded mass murderers, how exactly should Sharon deal with them? Send in some bobbies on the beat, and issue them with a caution? Capitulate to their demands for the destruction of the Israeli state?

Israel is not facing some some sort of vaguely annoying criminal activity. Its fighting a war for its survival. Its enemy, Hamas, which is sworn to its destruction, and which openly celebrates the deliberate murder of Jewish women and children, chooses to locate its bomb factories and its commanders amongst the densely populated regions of the West Bank and Gaza. The Sharon government, recently reelected with a hugely increased majority, aims to destroy these factories, and locate and kill these commanders. During these operations a tragic number of Palestinian civilians have been killed, as civilians almost always are in wartime. You see this as morally equivalent to targeting a school bus full of pre-schoolers for a suicide bombing. This is what you caracterise as: "Sharon's brutal war which is waged not on Hamas but on innocent Palestinian civilians". Further you say: "The likes of Sharon of course believe there's no such thing as an innocent Palestinian civilian and believes that they are all (including old men, women and children) vermin and that the only good Palestinian is a dead Palestinian, a view you no doubt hold yourself."

This is just despicable, and brings out in the open, the naked anti-semitism bubbling just below the surface in all your posts on the Middle East.

Screw you, you pathetic twisted fuck.

And I mean that, with all sincerity.




Lordhobgoblin (Lordhobgoblin)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: Lordhobgoblin

Post Number: 709
Registered: 10-2000


Posted on Sunday, March 9, 2003 - 7:17 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

Hobgoblin will continue to expound on his Grand Global Theory of Moral
Yeah, yeah Oxygenee, whatever.

"Equivalence, which holds that: Bush is as bad as Saddam Truman was no better than Hitler Bombing Dresden or dropping the A-Bomb on Japan, were both crimes morally equivalent to the Final Solution, Auschwitz and the Holocaust."

I've never said any of the above but Japanese civilians and German civilian had as much right to life as Jewish or any other civilians.

And as for Hamas, I've never supported anything they have done, and you fucking well know this. HAMAS SUICIDE BOMBERS ARE VILE, BRUTAL MURDERERS. I object to Sharon's brutal war which is waged not on Hamas but on innocent Palestinian civilians. The likes of Sharon of course believe there's no such thing as an innocent Palestinian civilian and believes that they are all (including old men, women and children) vermin and that the only good Palestinian is a dead Palestinian, a view you no doubt hold yourself.

You don't like me and that is clear but are you capable of posting on this forum without including personal attacks? I have never initiated a personal attack on you, but only ever respond to your personal attacks. You're a troll and your post here was made simply to attack me personally.

NOW JUST FUCK OFF!
Oxygenee (Oxygenee)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: Oxygenee

Post Number: 103
Registered: 4-2002
Posted on Sunday, March 9, 2003 - 1:57 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

SEVEN GUARANTEED ACCURATE predictions for the coming war:

One:
Contrary to Hobgoblin's assertions, a war in Iraq will be over in 2 weeks tops, with the remnants of the Iraqi army and Saddam's regime collapsing even faster than they did last time.

Two:
Total direct Iraqi civilian casualties will be less than 3500, or ONE TWENTIETH of Hobgoblin's low-end estimate. Such casualties as there are, will be primarily due to Saddam's deliberate policy of siting military facilities in civilian areas. Hobgoblin will choose not to believe these figures, quoting instead the Pan-Scandanavian Vegan Observers League, who will list the casualties at 750000.

Three:
Like them or not, the present governments of the USA, UK, Italy and Spain will all emerge immeasurably strengthened from the conflict. President Bush will win the next election by a landslide. Blair will fire Gordon Brown from the Cabinet, and further consolidate his power. Both the governments of Italy and Spain will survive.

Four:
Any actual documented and filmed evidence of ANY of the following:
1.Cheering crowds of Iraqi’s greeting US troops
2.Searing testimony from recently freed victims of Saddams torturers
3.Iraqi chemical and biological weapons
4.Iraqi nuclear weapon research
will be either ignored by Hobgoblin, or more likely, dismissed as so much propaganda by the evil Yankees.

Five:
During the first days of the war, Al Jazeera will air footage of the first buildings destroyed by US missiles. AT EACH AND EVERY SITE, an Iraqi government official will pull a dusty sign from the ruins reading, in English, EITHER “Baby Formula Production Facility” OR “Youth Camp for Special Needs Children”. Hobgoblin will site this as yet further evidence of American depravity.

Six:
Hobgoblin will continue to expound on his Grand Global Theory of Moral Equivalence, which holds that:
Bush is as bad as Saddam
Truman was no better than Hitler
Bombing Dresden or dropping the A-Bomb on Japan, were both crimes morally equivalent to the Final Solution, Auschwitz and the Holocaust.

Seven:
When the dust has settled, Hobgoblin will tirelessly continue to give all of us on the Forum the benefit of his blinkered, self-righteous, humourless neo-Bennite worldview on US and UK politics, the world scene, and the brutal and unprovoked war still waged by the evil Israeli Jews against those peaceful and Ghandi-like activists from Hamas.






Pervert Euchre (Perruche_verte)
Elitist Bastard
Username: Perruche_verte

Post Number: 417
Registered: 12-2000


Posted on Saturday, March 8, 2003 - 9:48 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

Tacitus had a few good words too (though he put them into the mouth of a Gaul) about leaving a desert behind us, and calling it peace.


"Drink accomplished what God did not." --Marguerite Duras
Lordhobgoblin (Lordhobgoblin)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: Lordhobgoblin

Post Number: 708
Registered: 10-2000


Posted on Saturday, March 8, 2003 - 1:10 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

"Bush is going to get a "regime change", allright. Three of them, actually. U.S, Great Britain, and Spain."

Let's not forget the Italians. Three million protestors on the streets of Rome, 50% more than in either the UK or Spain. I guess Silvio Berlisconi is busy getting his resume updated and typed as we speak.
Lordhobgoblin (Lordhobgoblin)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: Lordhobgoblin

Post Number: 707
Registered: 10-2000


Posted on Saturday, March 8, 2003 - 1:05 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

"It refutes virtually EVERYTHING you said."

It doesn't refute the communications made by the Japanese.

It doesn't refute Stimson's remarks to Truman about Japanese cities unfortunately being too bombed out to use the A-bomb effectively.

Nor does it refute what Stimson himself wrote in his memoirs.

It refutes none of this.

Quidam (Artemis)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: Artemis

Post Number: 640
Registered: 10-2000


Posted on Friday, March 7, 2003 - 9:33 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

I swore to admin recently I was going to stay out of politics etc. but went back on my word.

So now I'm going to conclude my posts on this issue, which I confess were part trolling, part heartfelt conviction, with this by Tacitus:

"The task of history is to hold out for reprobation every evil word and deed, and to hold out for praise every noble word and deed."

Quite a task, as long as some people think evil is in the eye of the beholder. It all depends on what the meaning of "is" is and all ... what distresses me is that a lot of people here seem to consider these issues in the sort of moral vacuum certified by slick Willie with that astounding phrase. If anyone here really thinks the Germans could have been justified in an atomic attack on the U.S. because well, they wanted to end the war, too, as I read in a post below, I recommend you follow the fuhrer's lead and bite the pill right now, because you aren't fit to make any life decision for yourself or anyone else.
Quelle vie ont eue nos grands-parents
Entre l'absinthe et les grands-messes... ?

Quidam (Artemis)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: Artemis

Post Number: 639
Registered: 10-2000


Posted on Friday, March 7, 2003 - 9:31 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

"In fact the National archive in Washington show that the US was aware of similar Japanese overtures for peace as far back as 1943."

Yes, they overtured thousands of American servicemen right into their graves for another two years. That's the sort of claim that's just so obviously fucking stupid, based upon common sense alone, that NOBODY should be expected to refute it with any further sources.

"Now Gasspectro I challenge you to provide evidence to dispute anything I have said."

Allow me to step in. Read that paper. It refutes virtually EVERYTHING you said.
Quelle vie ont eue nos grands-parents
Entre l'absinthe et les grands-messes... ?

Quidam (Artemis)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: Artemis

Post Number: 638
Registered: 10-2000


Posted on Friday, March 7, 2003 - 9:25 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

Yes, the Japanese were so anxious to surrender, that after the first bomb, they waited three days and allowed another to be dropped on them!! Even after that, in a cabinet session August 9-10, 1945, they remained deadlocked on the issue and the emperor was forced to cast the deciding vote (for peace).

It appears I had accepted the one million casualty figure (predicted for the invasion of Japan) just because I've seen it so many times, but spurred to look a little deeper by this debate, I see that an estimate from General George C. Marshall, Chief of Staff of the Army, was as low as 40,000. That's still too many, and the idea that the American bulldog which had been set to chewing in the Pacific should be tied to a post while the Japanese made up their minds is too stupid to be credited.

See http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/report/1986/WLT.htm

This is a fascinating document. Apart from comparing President Truman to a boy on a sled which had already been pushed down hill, being hollered at "are you sure you want to take that ride?" it gives the lie to the bullshit about the bomb being used to impress the Russians (although IN COMBINATION with the true reason it was used, that's a valid reason as far as I'm concerned; too bad they didn't impress the bastards by dropping one down Stalin's chimney - what misery that could have prevented!).

The above paper also points out, as I claimed earlier, but without attribution, because common sense told me it had to be so, that the meatgrinder at Okinawa weighed heavier in the minds of just about everyone than any possibility that SOME Japanese were in favor of surrender.

Anyway, I highly recommend that paper - a step by step how and why the U.S. came to use the bomb, written by a military man, and by no means entirely critical of one side or the other - pretty well balanced, I think.
Quelle vie ont eue nos grands-parents
Entre l'absinthe et les grands-messes... ?

Jack Collins (_blackjack_)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: _blackjack_

Post Number: 856
Registered: 11-2000


Posted on Friday, March 7, 2003 - 3:01 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

Here is the text of the Togo-Sato telegrams in question:

http://www.nuclearfiles.org/docs/togo-sato-index.html

This site also has voluminous primary sources regarding the decision to drop the bomb. Read away.

http://www.nuclearfiles.org/docs/bombing-hiroshima.html
Dr. O (Dr_ordinaire)
Elitist Bastard
Username: Dr_ordinaire

Post Number: 451
Registered: 7-2001
Posted on Friday, March 7, 2003 - 2:05 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

A cartoon from a Spanish paper: Prime Minister Aznar and his wife are watching the multitudinary demonstrations against the war. The wife turns to him and asks: "Honey, who's Bush trying to get rid of? Saddam or YOU?

Bush is going to get a "regime change", allright. Three of them, actually.

U.S, Great Britain, and Spain.
gary kiger (Teneng)
Mousquetaire
Username: Teneng

Post Number: 30
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Friday, March 7, 2003 - 12:46 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

how about some actually sources for this info. where exactly did you come across this. if true, it would be interesting reading.
Lordhobgoblin (Lordhobgoblin)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: Lordhobgoblin

Post Number: 705
Registered: 10-2000


Posted on Friday, March 7, 2003 - 10:45 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

Gasspectro,

As early as 5th May 1945 a cable was intercepted and decoded by the U.S. which read

"Since the situation is clearly recognized to be hopeless, large sections of the Japanese armed forces would not regard with disfavor an American request for capitulation even if the terms were hard"

The US Government did nothing to pursue this.

In the same month Henry Stimson dismissed out of hand 3 seperate recommendations from within the Roosevelt administration to start peace negotiations with the Japanese.

On 6th June Stimpson told Truman that he was "fearful" that before the A-bombs were ready to be delivered, the Air Force would have Japan so "bombed out" that the new weapon "would not have a fair background to show its strength"

How inconvenient that would be!

In his memoirs Stimson admitted that "no effort was made, and none was seriously considered, to achieve surrender merely in order not to have to use the bomb".

The A-bomb was not used as a reluctant, last-resort.

In July, before Potsdam, the Japanese government sent several radio messages to its ambassador in Moscow (Naotake Sato) asking him to request Soviet help in negotiating a surrender. One of these messages said.

"His Majesty is extremely anxious to terminate the war as soon as possible"

When Potsdam was taking place Japan instructed Sato to keep meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Molotov to show the Russians

"the sincerity of our desire to end the war and have them understand that we are trying to end hostilities"

Having broken the Japanese codes earlier the US did not even have to wait for the Russians to pass this on to them. In fact the National archive in Washington show that the US was aware of similar Japanese overtures for peace as far back as 1943.

The A-bomb was not dropped in order to save lives or force the Japanese to surrender. Dropping the A-bomb was the first act of the Cold War and Japanese cities and civilians were a convenient resource to show the Russians just how militarily powerful the USA was.

Now Gasspectro I challenge you to provide evidence to dispute anything I have said.
Gasspectro (Gasspectro)
Mousquetaire
Username: Gasspectro

Post Number: 33
Registered: 1-2003
Posted on Friday, March 7, 2003 - 10:14 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

Hob,
In a word, bullshit. Cite your evidence that the Japanese were attempting to surrender.
Lordhobgoblin (Lordhobgoblin)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: Lordhobgoblin

Post Number: 703
Registered: 10-2000


Posted on Friday, March 7, 2003 - 9:57 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

"Hrm, which is worse ... homicidal gullibility or bloodthirsty revenge?"

Neither. The measure of which action is worse is which action causes the most suffering, regardless of why the suffering is caused. Suffering is difficult to quantify accurately however both events discussed caused immense amounts of suffering. Both actions were heinous crimes and those involved will pay the price for their actions.
Lordhobgoblin (Lordhobgoblin)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: Lordhobgoblin

Post Number: 702
Registered: 10-2000


Posted on Friday, March 7, 2003 - 9:48 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

The A-bomb was not simply dropped to force the Japanese to surrender. They had been trying to surrender and had been attempting to do so and the allies purposely chose to close their ears to it. The A-bomb was dropped to show (our ally) the Russians that the USA was not afraid to use any means at its disposal no matter how horrific the consequences. The countless Japanese civilians that died when the bomb was dropped died in order to scare the Russians. It was about the inevitable Communist/Western power struggle that would dominate the world after WW2, not about forcing the Japanese to surrender.
Dr. O (Dr_ordinaire)
Elitist Bastard
Username: Dr_ordinaire

Post Number: 450
Registered: 7-2001
Posted on Friday, March 7, 2003 - 2:52 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

Kalli, I didn't realize that you have been personally touched by the Holocaust. It was not my intention to hurt you.

We'll talk about something else.
Kallisti (Admin)
Madame Guillotine
Username: Admin

Post Number: 877
Registered: 1-1998


Posted on Thursday, March 6, 2003 - 6:26 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

Yeah, that was fucked up. Like I said ... one fourth of my family gone .... *POOF!* I'll never know them.

Hrm, which is worse ... homicidal gullibility or bloodthirsty revenge? But you're also comparing the soldier with a nation's leader. To be fair, you've gotta either compare Truman (or other allied leaders) with Hitler, or compare that soldier to an American Fighter pilot following orders as he lets fly over Dresden.

I don't pretend to know which is worse... and I find it rather frustrating that there are so many people who think they do know.
“A lady who has a secure seat is never prettier than when in the saddle, and she who cannot make her conquest there, may despair of the power of her charms elsewhere.” - THE MANNERS THAT WIN, 1880

http://www.feeverte.net
Dr. O (Dr_ordinaire)
Elitist Bastard
Username: Dr_ordinaire

Post Number: 449
Registered: 7-2001
Posted on Thursday, March 6, 2003 - 5:00 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

"Comparing the Holocost with Hiroshima/Nagasaki is apples and orange"

Well, yes, but not in the way you mean.

Chesterton's Father Brown was such a good detective because he would go into a criminal's mind.

Let's try that.

Be, for a moment, a Nazi in charge of a concentration camp. You've been brought up in an anti-semitic family. You know your "Protocols of the Sages of Sion" by heart. You KNOW that these people you are putting to death are the Spawn of the Devil, the Seed of Satan, you are actually saving the Fatherland with every Jewish baby you kill.

Now be Truman, or the guy who ordered Dresden's fire-bombing. You know that the people you are killing are not the Spawn of the Devil, the Seed of Satan, you are NOT saving the Fatherland with every German or Japanese baby you kill.

And, yet, you kill those babies.

Now, who is the worse criminal?
Carl Guderian (Bjacques)
le Duc
Username: Bjacques

Post Number: 209
Registered: 4-2001
Posted on Thursday, March 6, 2003 - 4:37 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

Hey, anyone who hates the French, can I have your absinthe? Swiss and Spanish too... >;-)
Lordhobgoblin (Lordhobgoblin)
Absinthe Mafia
Username: Lordhobgoblin

Post Number: 701
Registered: 10-2000


Posted on Thursday, March 6, 2003 - 3:53 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

As for someone saying that the civilian casualties from this war will be minimum. BOLLOCKS. The lowest estimates for civilian casualties is 70,000 (US and UK government figures) and the highest estimate is 300,000. The true figure will no doubt be somewhere in between. I deliberately chose a figure closer to the lower end for fear of being branded a scare-monger.

This is not simply 'Gulf War part 2'. This is not a simple case of evicting an invading army from a neighbouring country. This is a full scale invasion and occupation of a large and well armed nation. This war will make the Gulf war look like a vicar's tea party.

Administration Administration Log Out Log Out   Previous Page Previous Page Next Page Next Page