One Day The Americans Decided To BBQ A City For No Reason

the ar · Post by **the ar** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 12:57 am

Tone Deft wrote:
the ar wrote:
Tone Deft wrote: we didn't have the bomb when Pearl Harbor went down.

The first bomb was detonated on the morning of 6 August 1945.
Pearl Harbor was December 7, 1941.

omfg some of you guys...
You are SOOO shrewd.
Your acumen is blowing me away.
I applaud you for the use of "your" in place of "you're." run home and tell your mom how special you are!!

still, a pretty dumb thing to post.

If YOU'RE trying to be smart, you could at least get it right, couldn't you?
It's YOUR acumen.
It might be a pretty dumb thing to post, but still not as colossaly dumb as YOUR 'I'm trying to be a smartass but got it wrong' post, isn't it?
I'm guessing you don't even know what acumen means.
SHREWD.

Tone Deft · Post by **Tone Deft** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:02 am

the ar wrote:
Tone Deft wrote:
the ar wrote: You are SOOO shrewd.
Your acumen is blowing me away.
I applaud you for the use of "your" in place of "you're." run home and tell your mom how special you are!!

still, a pretty dumb thing to post.
If YOU'RE trying to be smart, you could at least get it right, couldn't you?
It's YOUR acumen.
It might be a pretty dumb thing to post, but still not as colossaly dumb as YOUR 'I'm trying to be a smartass but got it wrong' post, isn't it?
I'm guessing you don't even know what acumen means.
SHREWD.

the fail continues...

I would expect that someone who would post such an ignorant claim would also mistake "your" for "you're."

yes I know what acumen means, you're lacking it.

but you did mean to post that remark? ouch. kill yourself.

the ar · Post by **the ar** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:05 am

It's YOU who's failing, my dear Tone Deft.
You didn't get the irony in my first post, and you didn't get the tease in this last one.
I'm too shrewd for the shrewds.
Shrewd's, shrewdos.
And as far as killing myself goes, I'm still not ready.
But thanks for the suggestion.

Tone Deft · Post by **Tone Deft** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:11 am

yeah, retreat behind the veil of a poorly delivered joke.

interwebs are complex things, I'll watch myself next time.

the ar · Post by **the ar** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:15 am

Yeah, retreat behind pretending I poorly delivered a joke while telling me I retreat after poorly delivering a joke, if that makes you feel like YOU'RE shrewdy acumen has triumphed.
I frankly don't give a shit, and if I did I would make you pay for it.
Interweb, hmpf.

adventurepants_ · Post by **adventurepants_** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:21 am

the ar · Post by **the ar** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:25 am

It is, yes.
And thank you for the awesome award.

landrvr1 · Post by **landrvr1** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:28 am

the ar wrote:Yeah, retreat behind pretending I poorly delivered a joke while telling me I retreat after poorly delivering a joke,...

what?!

...

the ar · Post by **the ar** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:37 am

landrvr1 wrote:
the ar wrote:Yeah, retreat behind pretending I poorly delivered a joke while telling me I retreat after poorly delivering a joke,...

what?!

...

I'd explain it to you, but since I enjoy takin' the piss out of you and YOU'RE narrow minded gitness, I won't.
Move along, sir.

landrvr1 · Post by **landrvr1** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:41 am

the ar wrote:
landrvr1 wrote:
the ar wrote:Yeah, retreat behind pretending I poorly delivered a joke while telling me I retreat after poorly delivering a joke,...

what?!

...
I'd explain it to you, but since I enjoy takin' the piss out of you and YOU'RE narrow minded gitness, I won't.
Move along, sir.

Gitness. I DO like that. Yes, your Gitness. No, your Gitness.

Or is it You'RE Gitness?

...

the ar · Post by **the ar** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:44 am

You decide, but I'm pretty sure it was just another one of my poorly delivered jokes.
I guess.
YOUR the smart guy, you should know.

Machinesworking · Post by **Machinesworking** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:54 am

Wow, all this thread has done is convince me it's even more important to prevent this 18 year old kid I know from joining the army here. landrabies and b0unce sharing party photos......

My opinion is that the first bomb made sense, the second was done because the military wanted two "examples" of the power the A-bomb had. The second drop wasn't necessary IMO. They (the military) had a chance to test the bomb on two cities and they took it. I don't think it's possible to really justify it. Though I'm sure people will.....

adventurepants_ · Post by **adventurepants_** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 2:06 am

Machinesworking wrote:Wow, all this thread has done is convince me it's even more important to prevent this 18 year old kid I know from joining the army here. landrabies and b0unce sharing party photos......

My opinion is that the first bomb made sense, the second was done because the military wanted two "examples" of the power the A-bomb had. The second drop wasn't necessary IMO. They (the military) had a chance to test the bomb on two cities and they took it. I don't think it's possible to really justify it. Though I'm sure people will.....

this is a classic topic in most US history courses. The mainstream idea is that the US made demands they knew that the Japanese would never accept ie giving up the Emperor to be tried for war crimes. This then gave them the excuse to test the A bomb which was a show of power to the Russians hungrily expanding across Europe. Its accepted that the bombs saved about 1 million GI lives that would have been sacrificed taking every square inch of the Japanese homeland by conventional methods.

The great debate is wether the Japanese would have surrendered if given terms they werent philosophically opposed to , like giving up the Emperor. Then there would not have been any need for a million more US deaths, or the horrors of the A bomb. We will never know.

Machinesworking · Post by **Machinesworking** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 2:48 am

adventurepants_ wrote:
Machinesworking wrote:Wow, all this thread has done is convince me it's even more important to prevent this 18 year old kid I know from joining the army here. landrabies and b0unce sharing party photos......

My opinion is that the first bomb made sense, the second was done because the military wanted two "examples" of the power the A-bomb had. The second drop wasn't necessary IMO. They (the military) had a chance to test the bomb on two cities and they took it. I don't think it's possible to really justify it. Though I'm sure people will.....
this is a classic topic in most US history courses. The mainstream idea is that the US made demands they knew that the Japanese would never accept ie giving up the Emperor to be tried for war crimes. This then gave them the excuse to test the A bomb which was a show of power to the Russians hungrily expanding across Europe. Its accepted that the bombs saved about 1 million GI lives that would have been sacrificed taking every square inch of the Japanese homeland by conventional methods.

The great debate is wether the Japanese would have surrendered if given terms they werent philosophically opposed to , like giving up the Emperor. Then there would not have been any need for a million more US deaths, or the horrors of the A bomb. We will never know.

Again, it's not that they dropped the A-bomb but that they dropped two! I really don't think there was any need to drop two. To me it reeked of opportunity more than necessity.
1 A-bomb = ending the war sooner, scaring the russians etc.
2 A-bombs = testing new toys on civilian populations, because we can. Three days between them too.

Like I said I'm sure plenty of people will disagree, but I see it like that.

silverlulu · Post by **silverlulu** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 3:09 am

yeah ar YOUR not the first person to come under attack from tonedeft the grammar king, he fucked up when he came at me as well. irony is a bitch.

or has he would put it "irony is an bitch"