View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
legrande
Joined: 23 Nov 2010
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Junior

Joined: 18 Nov 2005 Location: the eye
|
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 7:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
I can't be bothered to click on the link.
What is this thread about?
Write it in the title, so people can choose wether to be bothered or not.  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Space Bar
Joined: 20 Oct 2010
|
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 8:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Junior wrote: |
I can't be bothered to click on the link.
What is this thread about?
Write it in the title, so people can choose wether to be bothered or not.  |
But you must admit it is at least 10x better than "Interesting article." |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
legrande
Joined: 23 Nov 2010
|
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hey, if you can't be bothered, don't bother with it, brother, it wasn't meant to be |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
CentralCali
Joined: 17 May 2007
|
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 8:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Junior: The link is to the WONJCT about the attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
young_clinton
Joined: 09 Sep 2009
|
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 9:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
The US should not have been lending and leasing munitions to Britian to keep it afloat? I don't believe in the conspiracy, but Roosevelt should not have wanted to join the war against Germany? Without American industry what would have happened to Poland? and a lot of other countries. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
legrande
Joined: 23 Nov 2010
|
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 2:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
@young clinton
The point of the documentary and the presentation of the documents wasn't that the US shouldn't have helped out, it was to demonstrate how the US stages provocations on a grand scale in order to (1)paint other countries as evil (2)galvanize public opinion against those countries (3) and then justify attacking them. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
legrande
Joined: 23 Nov 2010
|
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
@young clinton
Also, if after viewing the above, you don't believe that it happened, you are either (1) unable to process basic information (2) delusional or (3) in acute denial, as the evidence is set out clear as a bell.
The BBC has a much larger rep than yours on the line, and wouldn't go ahead with a project with such far-reaching implications if the evidence wasn't there. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
kotakji
Joined: 23 Oct 2006
|
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
legrande wrote: |
@young clinton
Also, if after viewing the above, you don't believe that it happened, you are either (1) unable to process basic information (2) delusional or (3) in acute denial, as the evidence is set out clear as a bell.
The BBC has a much larger rep than yours on the line, and wouldn't go ahead with a project with such far-reaching implications if the evidence wasn't there. |
Quite a false dichotomy you've set up there. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Steelrails

Joined: 12 Mar 2009 Location: Earth, Solar System
|
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This thing ignores one key fact- The expenditures on the war for the European and Pacific theaters were equal through 1943 (Weigley, The American Way of War), it wasn't until middle of 1944 that there was a force imbalance in favor of Europe.
Besides Japan was also engaged in a two-front war so someone miscalculated on that fact. The war in the CBI theater was a MASSIVE drain on Japanese troops, planes, and pilots. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Nowhere Man

Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 5:51 pm Post subject: ... |
|
|
One thing that FDR didn't stage was a Japanese fleet approaching and attacking Hawaii.
Sitting on your hands and waiting for an attack makes sense in both 1941 and 2001 in terms of what presidents wanted to happen (and is a far easier explanation than the pap about thermite and whatnot).
But, for the sake of argument, what was going to happen instead? The fleet was going to leave port, bump into a Japanese attack fleet, and...?
The and...? here is laid at those who describe this as something that wouldn't have happened anyway. And, if it was going to happen anyway, how sure are you that FDR programmed it?
Bottom line: Japan sent a fleet to attack the US. It's kind of hard to stage such an attack, and it's preposterous to think that the US would allow such an attack and remain neutral.
That's some serious dumbassery on the Axis powers part. Why in the fruit-daloops did Germany commence a SECOND two-front war? They had continental Europe. The Japanese had a preposterously huge Pacific empire.
Clearly, the Germans weren't in the business of provoking the US.
Let's imagine the massive "Doh!" uttered when the Japanese changed the game plan.
As such, the whole FDR conspiracy hinges upon a Japanese fleet coming to attack the US. In view of this, I'm not sure at all that an attack wouldn't have happened anyway. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Captain Corea

Joined: 28 Feb 2005 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The title of this thread needs to be changed. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
legrande
Joined: 23 Nov 2010
|
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Obviously, Japan wouldn't have engaged with the US if they didn't have to. US top brass are on official record as wanting to engage Japan as a way in to the war.
Okay, maybe things need to be made even more explicit-
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27c/494.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAeWqBQr1GA
And no, I don't think any of you are more accurate and/or well-informed than an MIT professor.
Neither do I think any of your claims would hope up in a televised documentary, if your ideas were to even make it beyond the discussion stage.
Yes, I do think some people are in denial. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
young_clinton
Joined: 09 Sep 2009
|
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
legrande wrote: |
@young clinton
Also, if after viewing the above, you don't believe that it happened, you are either (1) unable to process basic information (2) delusional or (3) in acute denial, as the evidence is set out clear as a bell.
The BBC has a much larger rep than yours on the line, and wouldn't go ahead with a project with such far-reaching implications if the evidence wasn't there. |
That's what people on the fringe always say when they find thier beliefs being questioned or disbelieved. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
legrande
Joined: 23 Nov 2010
|
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 10:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
@youngclinton
Let's make this simple for you:
The facts contradict your position. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|