US 'should have bombed Auschwitz'

**November Rain** · 12-01-2008, 10:14 AM

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

Another Bush-whacking story. I would think he meant bomb it to take out the cold-blooded killers of these people.
I tire of US bashers. You try leading a company let alone a fekin country. Then you'll know what it's like.

Jet, when you run any sort of business and are being interviewed for an article or could be quoted in the press one of the first things you learn (to use one of my Mum's expressions) is not to "open your mouth and let your belly rumble".

I'm sure you have had contact with the media while doing your work in Japan etc or London. And I'm sure you knew not to make stupid comments that would be detrimental to yourself or your company, if reported.

If the President of the US hasn't learnt that lesson, then there's a little bit of a problem, IMO.

BTW, I didn't start this thread to bash the US or Americans. I happen to think Bush is an idiot, I'll admit to that, but that's a view based on him personally, not Americans. But if this story involved a high up Brit or member of any other Western nation, I'd have started the thread exactly the same. I wondered if others read the remark the same as I did.

**sabang** · 12-01-2008, 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

Another Bush-whacking story. I would think he meant bomb it to take out the cold-blooded killers of these people.
I tire of US bashers. You try leading a company let alone a fekin country. Then you'll know what it's like.

Totally illogical. So we can't criticise Chavez, Whackjob et al because 'it's hard to run a country'?

The opposite is the case- Politicians are accountable to their electorate and citizenry. Like CEO's they are judged on their results.

**Jet Gorgon** · 12-01-2008, 10:27 AM

^ Criticise who you like, Sabang. In this case, it's snippy asides to further negative opinion of a person who led a nation for eight years. My case is that people are attacking him, just for the sake of attacking. The know-it-all news and TV armchair vultures.

^^ Beg to differ, NR. The press lurks, takes any comment and uses it to its advantage. Most are out of context -- simple examples are the review blurbs in paperback books "fantastic!!!, riveting!!!, heart-stopping!!!" when in fact the reviewer said "it's the antonym of fantastic", etc.
It is so easy to criticise a leader. Bush is an idiot? Your opinion. Sure, I do not agree with some of his policies. But, he was smart enough to be elected for two terms (and not even get impeached) as the president of the strongest nation in the world. Not bad for an "idiot".

**Norton** · 12-01-2008, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by November Rain

I happen to think Bush is an idiot, I'll admit to that, but that's a view based on him personally, not Americans.

The strategic importance of Auschwitz, ones feelings about Jews and Bush's IQ aside, his comment is another example of his general approach to problem solving which seems to be bomb first and think later!

**Ivor Biggun** · 12-01-2008, 10:39 AM

Why blame Bush as an individual ? He's only the front man for a lot of people pulling the strings in the background ? He's just a stooge.

**Texpat** · 12-01-2008, 11:06 AM

It wasn't a stupid comment. It was an opinion on a historical wartime decision NOT to bomb concentration camps. He was reviewing historical documents and artifacts at the time.

"We should have bombed it," Bush said, according to Shalev.

Bush didn't say it to the media.
Perhaps he didn't say it at all.

A lot of people criticized the Allies for not bombing the death camps. (perhaps ancestors of the genius TD posters who sit around salivating for another pot shot at Bush or America)

Imagine how many lives would have been saved if the camps were bombed out of commission in 1945 instead of Dresden? Or before the huge effort that went into Operation Overlord before the slog across Europe ... (As stated, I don't believe this logic, but many do.)

So now he's in the middle of a tour of a holocaust museum ... I suppose he had been weighing the WWII military options in his mind and made a aside remark to his Secretary of State.

I happen to think Bush is a dolt too. But my entire existence doesn't revolve around lathering up over an opportunity to say something clever or witty about the idiot. At least curb your enthusiasm for a comment that warrants such excitement.

This one doesn't.

Your over-eagerness to discredit him makes you appear equally foolish.

**Wallalai** · 12-01-2008, 01:02 PM

Me think the White House and the Pentagon should be bombed to avoid thousands of killings and lies we can see everyday.

**Marmite the Dog** · 12-01-2008, 01:25 PM

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

My case is that people are attacking him, just for the sake of attacking.

I thought people continue to attack him because he's an idiot and continues to shine in this department. The world is fed up of the most influential organisation (USA Inc) being led by a complete moron who has caused misery, danger and death to millions.

It's a shame he's only attacked by words and not hand grenades.

**November Rain** · 12-01-2008, 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by Texpat

I happen to think Bush is a dolt too. But my entire existence doesn't revolve around lathering up over an opportunity to say something clever or witty about the idiot. At least curb your enthusiasm for a comment that warrants such excitement. This one doesn't. Your over-eagerness to discredit him makes you appear equally foolish.

Is this directed at me?

First, my entire existence does not revolve around lathering up over an opportunity to say something clever or witty about the idiot. I never comment on the US or Middle East subforums, because (despite my personal opinions about Bush) I don't know enough about them to comment. This has got to be one of the first times (if not, the first) I've ever made any comment about the man on here.

I posted the thread because I thought it a strange comment to make, considering bombing the camp (rather than supply lines to it) would have resulted in killing the inmates. As stated, had anyone else said it, I would have found it just as strange. I just wondered (as I've stated) whether anyone else saw it the same way.

That was all. Jeeze.

**Butterfly** · 12-01-2008, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

But, he was smart enough to be elected for two terms (and not even get impeached) as the president of the strongest nation in the world. Not bad for an "idiot".

Jesus, you can't be that naive or foolish ? he was "smart" enough to be elected ? get real, he got "elected" through fraud, and the only smart people are the ones with their hand in his arse who got him "elected" and take the fall for all his stupid moves.

Originally Posted by Norton

The strategic importance of Auschwitz, ones feelings about Jews and Bush's IQ aside, his comment is another example of his general approach to problem solving which seems to be bomb first and think later!

Right on, I think that the point for bashing him, his thinking process is very revealing in that comment alone,

**HermantheGerman** · 12-01-2008, 02:26 PM

Stroller brought it to the point.

Bush should first ask himself why his country did not let the MS St.Louis (a boat with 906 jews on board) seek asylum in the U.S 1939.
SS St. Louis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'am also tired of this jewish hype. Every idiot that goes to Israel has to go to these Holocaust sites. Enough is enough !

Of course, the allies should have bombed the supply lines of the camps. But should we have not also done something against the killings in Cambodia, Ruanda, Sudan, Jugoslavia?
I guess history is not one of George's favorit subjects.

**Butterfly** · 12-01-2008, 02:31 PM

Bombing death camps would have made sense at the very beginning of the deportation, not at the end.

**AntRobertson** · 12-01-2008, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by HermantheGerman

I'am also tired of this jewish hype

Yeah. It was only, what, 6 milion or so killed. Bit of a trifling genocide if you ask me. Don't know why they're still arsing on about it. Wimps.

Every idiot that goes to Israel has to go to these Holocaust sites. Enough is enough !

Eh? What has Israel got to do with the Holocaust sites in Europe (aside from the obvious)?

**Texpat** · 12-01-2008, 02:48 PM

Originally Posted by November Rain

Is this directed at me?

No, not necessarily -- unless it applies.

**HermantheGerman** · 12-01-2008, 04:47 PM

Originally Posted by HermantheGerman

I'am also tired of this jewish hype

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Yeah. It was only, what, 6 milion or so killed. Bit of a trifling genocide if you ask me. Don't know why they're still arsing on about it. Wimps.

You are so right..peanuts ! Let George open another one...and let it be the duty for every foreign politician that visits the U.S. to visit this memorial site.

Thus, according to Ward Churchill, a professor of ethnic studies at the University of Colorado, the reduction of the North American Indian population from an estimated 12 million in 1500 to barely 237,000 in 1900 represents a "vast genocide . . . , the most sustained on record.By the end of the 19th century, writes David E. Stannard, a historian at the University of Hawaii, native Americans had undergone the "worst human holocaust the world had ever witnessed, roaring across two continents non-stop for four centuries and consuming the lives of countless tens of millions of people."
Were American Indians the Victims of Genocide?

Every idiot that goes to Israel has to go to these Holocaust sites. Enough is enough !

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Eh? What has Israel got to do with the Holocaust sites in Europe (aside from the obvious)?

Eh ? Want me to write an essay about it?

**AntRobertson** · 12-01-2008, 04:51 PM

Originally Posted by HermantheGerman

Eh ? Want me to write an essay about it?

No, not particularly. Explaining that seemingly rather odd comment should be sufficent thanks.

**stroller** · 12-01-2008, 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by HermantheGerman

Of course, the allies should have bombed the supply lines of the camps.

This is the first thing which springs to mind, yes, how could one have let this continue? On further reflection, what would have happened to the Jews instead?

- difficult to say, would the Nazis just have executed people instead of incarcerating them, would having to find a different 'solution' slowed the murder-rate down (remember the death camps weren't public knowledge in Germany and the Nazis tried to disguise what they were doing)? We'll never know...

However, the anti-semitic motives for not intervening have been underplayed in discussions, IMO, I agree with you.

**barbaro** · 12-01-2008, 05:30 PM

Originally Posted by stroller

A typical thoughtless Bush remark.
The boy hasn't got a brain.

These remarks are extremely stupid.

As well as his whole charade in Israel, holding up an "Israel" t-shirt, wearing a Yamalka [sic], praying in Bethlehem, and making a fake remark about Isreali staying out of Arab lands, just to give a token nod to the Arabs.

Also, remember that GWB admits he doesn't read books. Except for the Zionist book by Israeli, Natan Sharansky.

It was a matter of weighting the possible outcomes against each other: with camps and supply lines destroyed, the Nazis might have just mass-murdered rather than incarcerated Jews and others, as they did in Poland - this was the main consideration against a bombing campaign.

He doesn't have much knowledge about the present, and certainly doesn't have much knowledge about recent history.

What a clown.

**stroller** · 12-01-2008, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Originally Posted by HermantheGerman

I'am also tired of this jewish hype

Yeah. It was only, what, 6 milion or so killed. Bit of a trifling genocide if you ask me. Don't know why they're still arsing on about it. Wimps.

The point is, there's very little "arsing" about other monumental homicides, Japan in China, Stalin persecutions et al.
It seems like this particular one is being overplayed for the wrong motives.

Every idiot that goes to Israel has to go to these Holocaust sites. Enough is enough !

Eh? What has Israel got to do with the Holocaust sites in Europe (aside from the obvious)?

Did he refer to all sites, or those in Israel, hmm, what do you think?

**AntRobertson** · 12-01-2008, 06:07 PM

Originally Posted by stroller

Did he refer to all sites, or those in Israel, hmm, what do you think?

What Holocaust sites are there in Israel stroller?

**barbaro** · 12-01-2008, 06:26 PM

Originally Posted by HermantheGerman

I'am also tired of this jewish hype. Every idiot that goes to Israel has to go to these Holocaust sites. Enough is enough !

What the Nazis did the to Jews ware horrible. Of course.

But we should remember that WWII, 60 million people died, most of them, civilians.

And yes, the Holocaust has been used to further the interests of Zionism inside Israel as well as in the United States.

Of course, the allies should have bombed the supply lines of the camps. But should we have not also done something against the killings in Cambodia, Ruanda, Sudan, Jugoslavia?
I guess history is not one of George's favorit subjects.

Yeah, there have been genocides and ethnic cleansing throughout history. Unfortunately, it will likely happen against. Just look at humans' track record throughout history.

**stroller** · 12-01-2008, 07:01 PM

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

What Holocaust sites are there in Israel stroller?

Ok, "Holocaust sites" was the wrong term to use.
Memorial, museum, places of remembrance - will this do for you?

**AntRobertson** · 12-01-2008, 07:41 PM

Originally Posted by stroller

Ok, "Holocaust sites" was the wrong term to use.
Memorial, museum, places of remembrance - will this do for you?

Righto, fair enough.

But tell me this, how many people who go to Israel go to such memorials, museums, and places of remembrance much less go specifically for them?

Because I know plenty of people who've been to Israel for many different and varied reasons but that was never one of them.

Ergo, Herman's post:

Every idiot that goes to Israel has to go to these Holocaust sites. Enough is enough !

strikes me as rather odd and incongrous. Wouldn't you agree?

**Texpat** · 12-01-2008, 08:22 PM

Originally Posted by stroller

A typical thoughtless Bush remark.
The boy hasn't got a brain. This was a controversial issue during the war and has continued to be so.

Originally Posted by HermantheGerman

Of course, the allies should have bombed the supply lines of the camps.

Originally Posted by stroller

This is the first thing which springs to mind, yes

I've spun around so many times on this one my head hurts.

Let's see if I follow this.
Stroller calls Bush an idiot because Dubya said the Allies should have bombed.
Herman agrees with Bush.
Stroller agrees with Herman.

So either Bush, Stroller and Herman are all correct.
Or they're all idiots.

I'm going to just keep walking and give a Princess wave.

**stroller** · 12-01-2008, 10:04 PM

Should a president of the US and world-leader voice the first thing that springs to mind?

(hint:this is a rhetorical question)

I don't, unless I am very pissed in either sense of the word.

Thread: US 'should have bombed Auschwitz'

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions