Crap Throwing Monkey

No, please, don't ban the Nazi. He's funny.

Then learn English. What it says and what you say it says are two entirely different things.

Try reading a history of the air war WWII...as it defies your preconceived notion of the Dresden bombing, I'm sure you'll be entirely disinterested to find the bombing of Dresden fiths the definition of a legitimate military operation. I'm speechless. You don't know anything about it. You're misinformed. Badly. Horribly. I recall we had this problem last time: you make unsubstantiated comments you claim are factual, people disagree, you require people to back up their position, but you don't require the same standard of support for yourself. What's more...when people do back up their claims, you simply resort to "You're wrong, because you disagree with me." Jesus Christ, if you took just thirty seconds to try to back up your own nonsense, you'd find the post-war Strategic Bombing Survey is actually available online, and explains virtually everything I've been telling you. But I suppose the USSBS isn't reliable either... You defined speciation, you !@#$ing idiot! The divergence of a species into separate subspecies due to isolation over a course of time. "Ah, but I didn't use the word, so it doesn't count!" You are absolutely unreal.

You didn't read the entire article, did you?

Uh...no. I can't really blame you for parrotting the myth, since it's so established (and, by the way, it was started by Goebbels. You're repeating Nazi propaganda, what a shocker). But the decisions leading up to Dresden are well-documented, including the industry in the city. It's importance as a transport hub is well-documented. The raid itself is well-documented. The aftermath is well-documented. None of which actually support the popular myth you're parrotting. Which, again, I can't blame you for, since you haven't the brains to do much else. As usual, you're long on mistakes but short on actual facts. Read a friggin' book, for crying out loud. I can quote you a day-by-day account of the targets the US and British Air Forces hit from 1943-1945 in the ETO. I wouldn't...because you'd simply say I was wrong, because my referencing actual combat reports from the VIII, IX, XII, and XV Army Air Forces is in your mind somehow far less reliable than the intellectual drool you spout. You don't actually know what "speciation" means, do you? Because you did say it; you practically defined it. I probably shouldn't be surprised at this point that you don't even understand your own posts...but somehow, you've managed to surprise me.

Yes, her post was gloriously ignorant. But you're the last one who should be complaining about it; she was no more gloriously ignorant than you usually are.

1) Wikipedia isn't a reliable source. 2) Are you brain-damaged? That's not even what the article says!!! It says that the Ukraine was ruled by Russia from 1648 to 1993; from 1918-1920, Ukranian separatists declared a series of republics, battled the Bolsheviks unsuccessfully, and were invaded by Poland. Did you actually read what you linked? Except that wasn't your original point. Your original point was "Soviets bad, Germans not quite as bad." Except that far more Poles died under the Germans than Soviets. And most of the dead Poles were either executed (gassed - a huge number of them were Jewish) or died as slave laborers. Or are you adding Holocaust denial to your Nazi platform now? No, but it's a natural progression from your speciation hypothesis. (Is hypothesis even the right word? Fantasy's probably more accurate.) "My" logic? Ask a prosecuting attorney. Hell, you're living proof that the ability to see something and the ability to remember it are two completely different things; your eyewitness accounts of your own posts are notoriously unreliable. You are so startlingly ignorant on the subject of Dresden and aerial bombing in general that arguing with you is a waste of time. You misunderstand (unsurprisingly) the technology, purpose, doctrine, and political considerations of the Allied air campaign in WWII. You'd have been better off referring to the Hamburg or Tokyo firebombing as genocidal...except you'd still be wrong. But at least you'd have a case. Dresden was a clear-cut viable military target, bombed in a clear-cut legitimate military operation with clear-cut tactical and operational goals relating to the front lines. That 50k people died in the bombing does not make it genocidal; that was not the intent. Quoting the example of Allied air operations around D-Day, too, is stupid (for anyone else, I'd merely say it's disingenious. For you, it's a sadly typical act of idiocy and ignorance). It is, again, a complete mischaracterization of the air campaign, both the prelude to D-Day, operations during D-Day and the immediately following period, and longer-term post-Normandy operations. You have managed to get preciesly NO facts right about it. Not a single one. Most people, even completely ignorant on the subject, would probably manage to stumble over one correct fact by random accident. You can't even manage that. No, you specifically said that 100k years of racial isolation led to speciation. I linked to it earlier. It was in the same thread where you referenced the "liberal agenda of marital genocide", two posts later. You can look it up.

You must have missed the part where it said "know your place".

You're pregnant.

Okay, here's a trivia question: who caught his first pass in Buffalo? Not "Who caught his first pass on the field?" or "Who caught his first pass in practice?" Who caught the first football he physically threw in Buffalo NY?

Your "proof" of it keeps changing. Now you seem to be saying he was "deeply pro-Soviet" because of Versailles. But then, he did permit the unfettered remilitarization of Germany, which led to Eastern European aggression by the Soviets, so maybe he was. Don't take my word for it, look it up. You'll find that when you look historical facts up, they turn out to be different than when you make them up. Specifically, you wrote that many Balkan remnants of the Austro-Hungarian empire were not allowed, as Germany wasn't. Soviet neighbors, however, were Finland - which was permitted a military, and successfully fought Soviet aggression, Poland - which was permitted a military, and successfully fought Soviet aggression, and Romania - which was permitted a military (hell, they were one of the victors in WWI). None of the countries you mentioned are actually Soviet neighbors. Don't forget to mention the forced deportation of Poles to the gulags, too, and the various other pogroms. That leaves only...oh...maybe five million other Poles unaccounted for. I suppose they just moved to Cheektowaga; the Germans couldn't have killed them, they were nowhere NEAR as cruel to the Poles as the Soviets. Well, after 100k years of racial isolation and speciation, I suppose you can make the perfectly valid assumption that not all victims were equal. Not that I believe that...but hey, it's your racial theories... Olay, so you don't know sh-- about Dresden either. Big surprise. I'm curious as to why you'd think eyewitness reports are so completely reliable, when ever single remotely intelligent person on the planet is aware that's not the case. But I expect nothing less from you; your horizons tend to get pretty limited when they're confined by the lining of your own rectum. Would you like me to list all the major war industries in Dresden? All the legitimate military targets? Or would you like to look them up yourself? Or, most likely, would you just like to pretend there were none, so that your own little idiot world-view remains undisturbed? No, you said that because of racial isolation over 100k years, Homo Sapiens has undergone speciation. Of course, Homo Sapiens has not experienced "racial isolation" over the past 100k years, and has not undergone any process of speciation. But other than that, your statement was completely correct.

It is possible (common, even) to bring a suit in a court of choice, at a time which greatly increases the odds of getting it on a specific judge's docket.

Uh, no, actually it's not. It's factually correct. It just doesn't correspond to the nonsense you make up. ...case in point. Once again, we're back to "FDR was a Stalinist stooge." Or "Stalin was FDR's stooge." One of the two, at least. I'd wish you'd just pick one; it's so hard to follow your nonsense when you keep changing the story. Not conicidentally, the lack of Western (not "Allied") interest in containing Soviet expansionism is concomitant with the lack of Soviet expansionism in the '20s. The Soviets did not "invade" the Ukraine...the Ukraine was Soviet. And I've already debunked the "Soviet neighbors not having credible militaries"...by illustrating that they in fact DID. Poland, again...who actually DID invade the Ukraine. You've fallen into the classic trap of thinking your opinions are reality. They're not. They're opinions...and misinformed ones at that. So let me get this straight...the Poles, with French assistance, successfully defended themselves from Soviet aggression, causing the Soviets to not be aggressive, and this is an example of Western Europe not combatting Soviet aggression???? Once again, you fail to understand historical fact. What Eastern and Central European countries weren't prosperous? Bulgaria and Albania. Maybe Romania. That's about it. Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Austria, Poland...all had relatively strong healthy economies (relative to everyone else in the world...this is the depression era we're talking about, after all). All also had mutual defense pacts in place with Britain and/or France through the '20s and early '30s to contain Soviet aggression. Of course, that's a fact, and something you can't be bothered with. Never said they could. However...they didn't have to, until German remilitarization shielded the Soviet Union from any response from Western powers. You see, there's this thing called geography: Between France and Poland is this country called Germany. If Germany is incapable of interdecting French aid to Poland, the French can help Poland (as in 1920). If Germany IS capable of doing so, the French can't (as in 1939). Disarming Germany allowed the Western powers to contain the Bolsheviks. Rearming Germany - and the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact - is what broke Western containment. It's all very simple if you could be bothered to pull your head out of your ass. Highly relevant. You're claiming that the Western powers were supposed to guarantee Polish soverignty against Soviet aggression because of German threats. Again, you're tripping over that whole "reality" thing again. Show me what was supposed to motivate the West to issue yet another guarantee to Poland against Soviet aggression. And don't tell me "Because the Soviets eventually invaded"...we live in a world where cause precedes effect, not the other way around. Ah. Historians whitewashed Soviet atrocities in Poland and blamed the Nazis because they're bolshevik sympathizers. Last time I heard this, coincidentally, was from the Nazis. You're callous tone you've chosen with respect to the Holocaust is noted. And unsurprising, considering your racial philosophies. Don't forget the Morgenthau plan. Musn't forget that genocidal plot against the Germans either. Do you even know what happened at Dresden? Even money says you dust of that moldy old myth about USAAF Mustangs strafing innocent civilians on the roads leading out of Dresden... No more than you do, really. You're the one that said 100k years of racial isolation caused speciation in Homo Sapiens. I don't need to understand it to quote it.

WTF is he ever rambling about? God only knows...

You're kidding, right? Let's dissect this statement by statement. Everyone made enormous sacrifices. Arguably, the French sacrifices were worse. The French government wasn't overthrown. The overthrow of the Russian Tsar had more to do with the Russian governmental system being very antiquated- a form of serfdom western Europe had abandon 200+ years previously - and the Tsar being an ass hole. Details, man, details. How many troops, where, for what reason? And what role did weariness of the blood-letting of the First World War have to do with it? You see, it's all well-and-good to say "The Allied powers wanted to aid the Bolsheviks, so they didn't commit to propping up the Russian Monarchy"...except that the monarchy was dead months before the Allied powers ever committed to anything. How can you have a pro-monarchy intervention for a non-existent monarchy? Ah, but I forget...historical fact has little to do with the nonsense you post. Are you the only one that doesn't see how the treaties of Brest-Litovsk, Versailles, and St. Germain, in dissolving the dual Austro-Hungarian monarchy and granting independence to Lithuaina, Latvia, Estonia, Poland, Finland, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia, actually did contain Bolshevik (not Soviet - again, your knowledge of historical facts sucks) military expansion westward. That containment lasted until the rearming of Germany shielded the USSR from any meaningful Western response to westward expansion. The Soviet Union didn't absorb the Baltics, Eastern Poland, or Bessarabia until Germany rearmed. While Germany was disarmed...the Soviet Union did nothing. Ergo, your whole argument is fallacious based on that pesky little "historical fact" thingy you keep ignoring. Because the driving force behind NATO - US involvement - was absent minus US ratification of the League of Nations, you moron. The rest of Europe was too war-weary. Really, you can't just selectively ignore facts. Instead, the Treaty of Versailles kept "Soviet mass murder" out of Eastern Europe, as I already outlined above. For example, I'm sure if the Poles had a strong military, they would have contained Bolshevik expansion. Oh, wait...they did. It's called the Russo-Polish war. Ended with the Treaty of Riga in 1920. Or if the Czechs had a strong military...of course, they did too, until they were handed over to a remilitarized Germany. Or if the Romanians had a strong military...of course, they were an Allied power, so why would they be disarmed? They won. And the Soviets didn't take any of their land until after Germany remilitarized and precluded Western interference. Or if the Finns had a strong military...but of course, they successfully fought the Bolsheviks to gain their own independence, and weren't invaded by the Soviets until - you guessed it - Germany remilitarized. (Funny how that "remilitarized Germany" thing keeps popping up in connection with Soviet expansion, i'n't it?) Really, the salient event that allowed Soviet expansion westward wasn't the demilitarization of Germany by Versailles, it was the remilitarization of Germany after Versailles was trashed. Those little "historical fact" thingies can be awfully irritating when you're consistently getting them wrong? I can't argue that...simply because it's based on such a ridiculous foundation of bull sh-- a priori assumptions that there's no point. "If Britain, France, and the US had ignored the Western Front and instead fought against the Bolsheviks with Germany, more Russian Republics would have been free to join an alliance that didn't exist against a threat that wasn't realized until 20 years later...triggered by a proximate cause (German remilitarization) that itself would never have been realized if the Western Powers had fought the Bolsheviks on the German side!!! Makes perfect sense...if you ignore historical fact and logic, as you're prone to do. Poland is a very good example. The Russo-Polish war was won by Poland with Western aid. Well, guess what? No one knew the Molotov-Ribbertrop Pact include provisions for the partition of Poland until after the Soviets walked across the border. That's why that provision of the Non-Aggression pact is referred to as "secret". That's beside the fact that numerous pre-established assistance pacts were still in force guaranteeing Polish independence from Soviet aggression as well as German. But, again, when you selectively pick and choose your historical facts... Pitiful. The Nazis were much more efficient. They achieved a rate close to one in five. Too bad the West "disarmed" them and so "allowed" the Soviet aggression, else so many more Poles would have lived. The Ukraine was Russain territory since the 1600's until 1993. One of those little historical facts you keep ignoring. This is why I keep harping on things like Ilya Ehrenberg's role in Soviet propaganda. Little facts like that are often important; you consistently get them wrong, when you don't outright ignore them, which leads to !@#$ed up theories about the Democratic party's complicity in German genocide as perpetrated by Stalin, or nonsense about racial purity based on blacks being a separate and distinct species.

You didn't interpret my statement as hyperbole because of something Ronald Reagan said 20 years ago? Even though I said immediately after I typed it that I was obviously being over the top? Because...why? Reagan is somehow a better source for my quotes than I am? THIS is why people think you're such a retard.

Funny how you're the only one that picked that up. Probably because everyone else is aware enough to understand hyperbole. Clearly, you don't understand the use of sarcasm in a reducto ad absurdum counter-argument, either. Come to think of it, there's not a whole lot you actually do understand, do you?

If you're brain's so !@#$ing exceptional, how come you can't spell "course".

How cute. I have another stalker.

Ain't he a hoot? Gotta love the "Because they invaded, it was a long-range goal..." logic, too. Clearly, it was a long-range goal to occupy the Parthenon, since Germany invaded Greece as well...

What's your point?

Of the first three picks, two (Flowers and Moore) are no longer playing as far as I can tell, and the third (Tillman) looks like he's just about done. Though Morris has shown himself to be a servicable backup in Miami, the most productive player out of that draft is arguably the last one picked. My God...we're the !@#$ing Bengals.

Or crank the A/C. Snakes are cold-blooded.

And now he's saying he "accidentally" drugged here, had sex with her, beat her, and strangled her.

About a month ago. Ovarian cancer.