T Nation

Modern Democrats Invade 1942


#1

From the strategy page:

Midway Island Demolished. Yorktown, destroyer sunk.
Many US planes lost
June 7, 1942
The United States Navy suffered another blow in its attempt to stem the Japanese juggernaut ravaging the Pacific Ocean. Midway Island, perhaps the most vital U.S. outpost, was pummeled by Japanese Naval aviators. The defending U.S. forces, consisting primarily of antique Buffalo fighters, were competely wiped out while the Japanese attackers suffered few, if any, losses.

In a nearby naval confrontation, the Japanese successfully attacked the Yorktown which was later sunk by a Japanese submarine. A destroyer lashed to the Yorktown was also sunk.

American forces claim to have sunk four Japanese carriers and the cruiser Mogami but those claims were vehemently denied by the Emporer's spokeman.

The American carriers lost an entire squadron of torpedo planes when they failed to link up with fighter escorts. The dive bombers had fighter escort even though they weren't engaged by enemy fighters. The War Dept. refused to answer when asked why the fighters were assigned to the wrong attack groups. The Hornet lost a large number of planes when they couldn't locate the enemy task force. Despite this cavalcade of errors, Admirals Fletcher and Spruance have not been removed.

Code Broken
The failure at Midway is even more disheartening because the U.S. Navy knew the Japanese were coming. Secret documents provided to the NY Times showed that "Magic" intercepts showed the Japanese planned to attack Midway, which they called "AF".

Obsolete Equipment
Some critics blamed the failure at Midway on the use of obsolete aircraft. The inappropriately named Devastator torpedo planes proved no match for the Japanese fighters. Even the Avengers, its schedule replacements, were riddled with bullets and rendered unflyable. Secretary of War Stimson dodged the question saying simply: "You go to war with the Navy you have, not the Navy you want or would like to have". Critics immediately called for his resignation.

Democrats smell!!!

JeffR


#2

Ahahahahaha! What a loser.

Look, anyone who is in charge is going to get questioned. I suppose it is a matter of history as to who was left to do the questioning at that time.

I can't believe how retarded your thinking is...


#3

Funny post.

There is a difference between holding the ones in charge accountable and shamelessly undercutting morale and strategy for political gain.


#4

What is the point of this? Abraham Lincoln was questioned more than anyone else maybe in the history of the country during the Civil War. So was Johnson during Vietnam, as well as the Continental Congree during the Revolution. It is the nature of democracy to question its leaders at any time we see fit. That's what makes us a democracy.


#5

What in god's name is your point?


#6

i think the point hes trying to make is he doesnt like democrats, from this post and last nights post...who fucking cares, right?


#7

Jeff, what are you trying to illustrate with this post? Please tie this post together with your point. Otherwise, it just looks like the rantings of a lunatic.


#8

The damned MSM! It's all the fault of the MSM... we would have won Pearl Harbor otherwise dammit!


#9

Nice one Jeff. They are so wrapped up in their ABB banners - they can't see that this is exactly how the current war is being reported.

It's hilarious that each one of the left-wing idiots feign confusion at what was written.


#10

Nice one Jeff! You basically pointed out that the MSM has always been messed up. You also brought out the difference between an enemy that actually attacked us and an enemy that we went to their country to attack. "You go to war with the Navy you have not the Navy you want" has a whole different context when you are attacked by surprise (Pearl Harbor) as opposed to doing the attacking (Iraq).

I will conceed that this does illustrate that there is some similarity in reporting WW2 and the current war from this article. I saw that from the begining. I just wanted you to say more than "Democrats smell". The dems of that era had nothing to do with reporting that article. However, they were in charge then and last I checked, we actually WON World War 2.


#11

[i]"If you're going to go in and try to topple Saddam Hussein, you have to go to Baghdad. Once you've got Baghdad, it's not clear what you do with it. It's not clear what kind of government you would put in place of the one that's currently there now.

Is it going to be a Shia regime, a Sunni regime or a Kurdish regime? Or one that tilts toward the Baathists, or one that tilts toward the Islamic fundamentalists?

How much credibility is that government going to have if it's set up by the United States military when it's there? How long does the United States military have to stay to protect the people that sign on for that government, and what happens to it once we leave?"[/i]
- Dick Cheney, 1991


#12

ABB! ABB!! ABB!!!


#13

FightinIrish26 wrote:

"What is the point of this? Abraham Lincoln was questioned more than anyone else maybe in the history of the country during the Civil War. So was Johnson during Vietnam, as well as the Continental Congree during the Revolution. It is the nature of democracy to question its leaders at any time we see fit. That's what makes us a democracy."

irish, I agree one-hundred percent.

Further, the abuse that Lincoln took makes the democratic crap look very tame.

HOWEVER, mass media being what it is in 2005, makes it very important to the war effort to be careful to report the full story.

Many of us in the Right are dismayed when the al qaeda's number two sends out a memo stating that the "American media will undercut the war effort."

THEY ARE COUNTING ON THE MEDIA TO DESTROY MORALE!!!

We get pissed when stories similar to the one I posted are the ONLY COVERAGE AVAILABLE.

If my democratic pals want to play Monday Morning quarterback with the TACTICS involved in Iraq, let's do it.

However, when horseshit like "bush lied, it's all about halliburton, oil is the only reason, the "insurgents" are winning" is repeated ad nausem by a bunch of hypocrites, count on us to slam you. In the middle of the war, the LEAST we can do is not give comfort to the enemy.

JeffR


#14

"harris447 wrote:
What in god's name is your point?"

Biased reporting affects morale.

It gives comfort to the enemy.

I blame the msm in no uncertain terms.

JeffR


#15

"mmg_4 wrote:
i think the point hes trying to make is he doesnt like democrats, from this post and last nights post...who fucking cares, right?"

Wrong. I LOVE you!!!

Your intolerance and prejudices ensure more Republican dominance.

Thanks!!!

JeffR


#16

Actually, the LEAST we can do is tell the truth. Y'know...unlike the president.


#17

ALDurr wrote:
"Nice one Jeff! You basically pointed out that the MSM has always been messed up."

Thanks.

"You also brought out the difference between an enemy that actually attacked us and an enemy that we went to their country to attack."

Wrong.

Remember hussein trying to kill GHWB? (1993)

Remember him firing on our planes in the no fly zone? Circa 1992-2003.

"I will conceed that this does illustrate that there is some similarity in reporting WW2 and the current war from this article. I saw that from the begining. I just wanted you to say more than "Democrats smell"."

Ok. I've fleshed it out a little.

"The dems of that era had nothing to do with reporting that article. However, they were in charge then and last I checked, we actually WON World War 2."

Let me let you in on a little secret (I believe the article was written recently to illustrate a point).

In 2005, how you cover an event can be critical to the morale of our country and our enemies.

Watch the next event. It is VERY easy to discern the agenda of the msm.

JeffR


#18

harris447 wrote:
"Actually, the LEAST we can do is tell the truth. Y'know...unlike the president."

Ok, harris. Either your powers of retention are on par with my truck's tires or (gasp) you aren't reading the posts!!!

If everyone (except henry "I look like a rutting swine" waxman) believed the same things, how could Bush be lying?

(before you make any commentary about "doctored intelligence" please read the many posts by your pals BEFORE W. CAME TO OFFICE.)

If you cannot give a satisfactory answer to this, please drop the "lying crap."

THANKS!!!

JeffR


#19

I'd like to propose something to all the liberals/libertarians/thinkers out there:

The MLM. Yes, our very own alternative to the "MSM", which is apprently what Rush and O'Reilly and Fox News are not. Even though they have huge ratings and best-sellers and are owned by some of the biggest corporations in the world, they are nowhere near the mainstream!

From now on, Faux News, et al., should be the Mostly Lies Media.

The MLM. Anyone with me?


#20

oooooohhh,republican DOMINANCE, nice jeffr. Let me ask u something, how has being a republican helped you be DOMINANT in your own life? Do you walk around with a big banner saying: "im a republican, and i DOMINATE!!!" And how was i being prejudice, i mean, you really dont like democrats, right?