unbillievable Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Is Facebook allowed to call out idiots? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted March 21, 2016 Author Share Posted March 21, 2016 It's actually the K-159. It sank off the Russian coast in 2003. The photo is from beore that sinking. Read about it here: http://barentsobserver.com/en/security/2013/08/ten-years-no-plan-lift-sunken-nuclear-sub-28-08 Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Very wide right Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 (edited) http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/usa-mysterious-nazi-submarine-from-wwii-discovered-in-great-lakes/ Weird...I hadn't seen this story yet and I didn't see it covered in local news. Tom, throw me a bone here and please identify the sub class. It doesn't resemble a typical Nazi uboat. The conning tower looks Russian? Asking a guy who thinks he saw a missile fired at the pentagon on 9-11?I think you could find a more reliable source. Edited March 21, 2016 by Very wide right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted March 21, 2016 Author Share Posted March 21, 2016 Asking a guy who thinks he saw a missile fired at the pentagon on 9-11?I think you could find a more reliable source. Sigh... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Sigh... Exactly.....................that mistaken claim is getting old. On the other hand................ The Nazi Moon Base is REAL ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Asking a guy who thinks he saw a missile fired at the pentagon on 9-11?I think you could find a more reliable source. He did? You're on a gator-sized roll today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Exactly.....................that mistaken claim is getting old. On the other hand................ The Nazi Moon Base is REAL ! He knows he's wrong. He's just trolling. Ignore him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 (edited) Exactly.....................that mistaken claim is getting old. On the other hand................ The Nazi Moon Base is REAL ! As someone who's been down the rabbit hole in the name of research for my latest work, the Nazi moon base isn't/wasn't that large. Think shipping containers, in terms of dimensions, above the surface (forming the swastika) and the rest of the small facility is underground. Edited March 21, 2016 by Deranged Rhino Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 As someone who's been down the rabbit hole in the name of research for my latest work, the Nazi moon base isn't/wasn't that large. Think shipping containers, in terms of dimensions, above the surface (forming the swastika) and the rest of the small facility is underground. Gott in himmel ! . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 As someone who's been down the rabbit hole in the name of research for my latest work, the Nazi moon base isn't/wasn't that large. Think shipping containers, in terms of dimensions, above the surface (forming the swastika) and the rest of the small facility is underground. bull ****. If you know anything about Nazi architecture, you know they went for gigantic, mammoth classical architecture. Not "shipping containers." Hitler and Speernever would have aallowed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 bull ****. If you know anything about Nazi architecture, you know they went for gigantic, mammoth classical architecture. Not "shipping containers." Hitler and Speernever would have aallowed it. That's no shipping container!! That's a Nazi shipping container. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Is Facebook allowed to call out idiots? The guy who runs facebook is an idiot. A rich one though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 bull ****. If you know anything about Nazi architecture, you know they went for gigantic, mammoth classical architecture. Not "shipping containers." Hitler and Speernever would have aallowed it. According to my notes (I wanted to make sure I got this right, there's gold in some of the specifics of this mythology -- which, for the record, I do not endorse and am merely relaying for entertainment value), the group responsible for the alleged base outranked Hitler and were quite separate from the Nazi party itself which could explain the disparity between Nazi architecture on terra firma compared to Nazi architecture on the moon. ...Or, it could have something to do with the zoning laws on the moon. Not joking, this would be a likely answer to your "skepticism". Apparently the moon (which has its own bizarre esoteric origins according to these sources) is a diplomatic neutral zone for many different, often warring, alien species who are quite particular about where you can or cannot build on the moon. The Nazis lost many men trying to build their own base, but it wasn't until they partnered with a particularly nasty race of ETs who let them use one of their own, much older bases on the moon that the Nazis got a foothold. This all was relayed to me with a straight face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 (edited) Total bull ****. It's a November-class submarine. And the Nazis never had a "UX" designation, or a "U-1200" model. And a U-boat never would have made it up the St. Lawrence. And USS Sable was never damaged. And a bunch of other ****... You're the first one to ask me about this...but the third to share this story with me. The other two insist it's true because they read it on Facebook, and are mad that I called them gullible idiots for blindly accepting something that can be disproven with a simple google image search. I hear you... But sub nets were installed (if I recall correctly) @ The Soo. ...protecting the ore coming out of The Mesabi. Also, barrage balloons too (that is hell of a flight, from say Norway). There had to be a reason the sub nets went up in the locks? Just over-cautious? 800 miles inland (via water). Now... Not sure what they did @ The Welland? Edited March 21, 2016 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 (edited) 20 years before the major improvement to The Seaway... How would they have gotten into @ least Lake Erie or Lake Huron. Not sure what the set up on The St. Lawrence was during the War... Vastly dependant on the whim of the water? Smaller locks. Could they have done something in remote northern Ontario/Superior and came in intra-basin... But that area was teeming with work building the two major hydro-power diversions from the arctic TO and into Lake Superior (Long Lac & Ogoki). How the hell would they have snuck in... Under a freighter, shadowing them? Or It was it sabotage prevention? How many Nazi sympathizers back then? ??? Edited March 21, 2016 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 I hear you... But sub nets were installed (if I recall correctly) @ The Soo. ...protecting the ore coming out of The Mesabi. Also, barrage balloons too (that is hell of a flight, from say Norway). There had to be a reason the sub nets went up in the locks? Just over-cautious? 800 miles inland (via water). Now... Not sure what they did @ The Welland? Over-cautions. Fact is, there was no way a U-boat was getting into the Great Lakes. However you sail into the lakes, you're going against the flow of water. Surfaced, a U-Boat wasn't getting up the St. Lawrence without being seen. Submerged, it wasn't getting up the St. Lawrence at all. A U-Boat couldn't handle more than a 2 knot current submerged, which I'm assuming is slower than the St. Lawrence's flow. And that's besides the fact that the typical U-Boat (Type VIIc) barely carried enough fuel to get to the Atlantic coast, never mind another 1000 miles upriver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg F Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Fact is, there was no way a U-boat was getting into the Great Lakes. Well there was ... and one did ... Just not the way most would imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Kind of related. Can you imagine how freaked out people must have been to hear about this. http://ww2days.com/japanese-sub-shells-u-s-west-coast.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Kind of related. Can you imagine how freaked out people must have been to hear about this. http://ww2days.com/japanese-sub-shells-u-s-west-coast.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts