BBO Discussion Forums: zero - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

zero

#41 User is offline   jtfanclub 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,937
  • Joined: 2004-June-05

Posted 2008-May-27, 11:34

luke warm, on May 24 2008, 09:33 PM, said:

had the japanese, after pearl harbor, sailed east toward california what would have stopped them? was there a back-up non-mothball fleet waiting to defend the mainland?

All of the Pacific aircraft carriers (Saratoga, Enterprise, and Lexington) were not at Pearl Harbor at the time of the attack. The battleships that were sunk were too old and slow to keep up with the carriers, and would have had a great deal of trouble finding anything to fight without them.

Is it possible that the U.S. High Command knew about the attack but did nothing to stop it except clear out the carrier forces? Sure. Is it possible that the U.S. knew that bin Laden was going to try to hijack a number of passenger jets and crash them into critical targets, and did nothing to stop them? Sure, why not?

Is it possible that the Japanese never actually went to Pearl Harbor, and instead the U.S. government blew up their own battleships and killed 4200 people while at the same time somehow keeping this all secret, AND forcing the Japanese to take credit? Um, no.

But if you think that's silly, you should hear what some people think about 9/11.
0

#42 User is offline   Al_U_Card 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,080
  • Joined: 2005-May-16
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2008-May-27, 12:45

Opportunism is a word that politicians are well-acquainted with.

Secrecy is a term that generally only serves the interests of the few.
The Grand Design, reflected in the face of Chaos...it's a fluke!
0

#43 User is offline   luke warm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,951
  • Joined: 2003-September-07
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Bridge, poker, politics

Posted 2008-May-27, 16:48

ok, now i'll combine the two posts

Quote

mike said:

Al I always get lost in your logic, is our first duty to humanity or to the selfish gene? At times you seem to argue for humanity  at other times for the selfish gene.

al said:

1) Of the humans that make up mankind.

Quote

mike said:

As for honor coming from  protecting life, well humanity often does not protect life...just by existing we seem to kill all kinds of life. So you say you do not believe in honor?

al said:

2) Nope.  Honor is illusory.  Integrity is a aspect of our existence.

Quote

Quote

In any event is your first duty to humanity or your loved ones or something even greater or have you never faced that choice?

Quote

3) Life, the process by which we experience and improve our conscious level of evolution. (The physical part (ie genetics) is beyond my scope for this discussion.)

and i think mike's last bit was

mike said:

If you and your family's duty is to protect humanity when it is attacked then ty for your families service in defending darfur, iraq, tibet, afghanistan or wherever your family is doing its duty, protecting humans when they are attacked, ty. In any event however your logic defines your duty and your honor [sic - integrity] if you are fullfilling it God Bless you. ty.

that part you can address if you want
"Paul Krugman is a stupid person's idea of what a smart person sounds like." Newt Gingrich (paraphrased)
0

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

2 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users