That was nice but im personally in the camp where people who think the holocaust has received to much attention. But a nice poem.

thanks for your opinion.it actually means a lot to me.im glad you liked it and i hope the other members will to.

At 4/26/06 12:52 PM, rayzerblayze wrote: thanks for your opinion.it actually means a lot to me.im glad you liked it and i hope the other members will to.

Yes it was good, a shame millions of people have to die beacuse of one prat.

i guess it was fate and it couldnt be changed.but so many lives destroyed so many famalies torn apart.it just makes me want to fill with anger

damn it! i forgot to press "Paste"!!

Thanks to all the recommendations, im sorry i got a bit impatient. i could make up excuses, but this is war! and you act on gut feeling! hoo-rah!

At 4/23/06 06:52 AM, GeneralMBison wrote: So, the officers want MrDeadly to become Cpl? Well, as Commander of the crew, I, GeneralMBison, now has given my word to make MrDeadly a Cpl. The ranks will be fix in the forums. Also about the "General A something something" RedGlare, that is a good idea. I'll be back in a few.

yay! oh, and in terms of activeness, you guys are rarely on the front page, and since "war" is 3 letters, you cant search it. kinda sucks.

At 4/27/06 10:09 AM, MrDeadly wrote:
yay! oh, and in terms of activeness, you guys are rarely on the front page, and since "war" is 3 letters, you cant search it. kinda sucks.

All the more reason for activity then hey?

And the main problem i have with the Holocaust is not only do we forget the worser ecesses of genocide but Jews use it as a weapon. Take the Jewish council of Britain. Then theres the other victims of the holocaust that are forgotten. Shamefull

At 4/27/06 10:09 AM, MrDeadly wrote:
yay! oh, and in terms of activeness, you guys are rarely on the front page, and since "war" is 3 letters, you cant search it. kinda sucks.

Another reason is we do not spam, all the replys have meaning to them.

yes activety is good so why don't we post some promotions now glad you guys still here and if you guys are'nt so active it could be bam gone so get back and active

i have a question.how many ships were lost at the bombing of pearl harbour.

At 4/30/06 07:51 AM, rayzerblayze wrote: i have a question.how many ships were lost at the bombing of pearl harbour.

Their was 12 damaged or destroyed American warships, 188 aircraft and 2,403 American servicemen died.

wow.thats a lot.and how many japanise bombers and fighters were destroyed.i think it was a really low number

At 4/30/06 08:01 AM, rayzerblayze wrote: wow.thats a lot.and how many japanise bombers and fighters were destroyed.i think it was a really low number

29 Japanese aircraft were shot down

At 4/30/06 08:04 AM, WastedWizard wrote:

At 4/30/06 08:01 AM, rayzerblayze wrote: wow.thats a lot.and how many japanise bombers and fighters were destroyed.i think it was a really low number

29 Japanese aircraft were shot down

Pearl Habour the result of 20 years of careful planning. Just goes to show you what you can achieve if you put your mind to it.

only 29.were they kamikaze pilots as well.

At 4/30/06 08:12 AM, rayzerblayze wrote: only 29.were they kamikaze pilots as well.

No the Pacific fleet did not expect it so had no defences so it was like target practise.

At 4/30/06 08:12 AM, rayzerblayze wrote: only 29.were they kamikaze pilots as well.

No the Kamakazi tactic was a defensive strategy when they were loosing. A last dicth effort to win the war and fulfil the Emperor's decree to fight to the death.

war isnt worth it though.even if you win the battle you still lose.you either have casualties or whatever happened to your enemies affects you.

At 4/30/06 08:17 AM, rayzerblayze wrote: war isnt worth it though.even if you win the battle you still lose.you either have casualties or whatever happened to your enemies affects you.

such a broad statement is never justified. What about wars of independance?

At 4/30/06 08:17 AM, rayzerblayze wrote: war isnt worth it though.even if you win the battle you still lose.you either have casualties or whatever happened to your enemies affects you.

It all depends, we went to war to save Poland, we did that so we won but the casualties were out of this world and it is sad that it happened but it is like and those who died can be proud they kept are fredom and will always be in history.

At 4/30/06 08:19 AM, WastedWizard wrote:

At 4/30/06 08:17 AM, rayzerblayze wrote: war isnt worth it though.even if you win the battle you still lose.you either have casualties or whatever happened to your enemies affects you.

It all depends, we went to war to save Poland, we did that so we won but the casualties were out of this world and it is sad that it happened but it is like and those who died can be proud they kept are fredom and will always be in history.

Shame we didn't do it for the Czechs we pretty much sold them out. Chamberlain was a weak leader. And British casulties add up to around 250,000 not a lot in a war that claimed 50million.

good point.well that is for freedom.but what about the war in iraq the now.why have they still got troops there if they know there isnt any weapons of mass destruction.

also most wars are usually started by a crazy leader who wants to rule.for example kaiser wilhelm,adolf hitler,george bush

At 4/30/06 08:22 AM, RedGlare wrote:
Shame we didn't do it for the Czechs we pretty much sold them out. Chamberlain was a weak leader. And British casulties add up to around 250,000 not a lot in a war that claimed 50million.

I was talking about everyone involved in the war I was just focusing on my country.

At 4/30/06 08:22 AM, rayzerblayze wrote: good point.well that is for freedom.but what about the war in iraq the now.why have they still got troops there if they know there isnt any weapons of mass destruction.

also most wars are usually started by a crazy leader who wants to rule.for example kaiser wilhelm,adolf hitler,george bush

We fucked them up so we have to sort the mess out, thanks to Bush and a prime minister who does what Bush says and not what the British people want. Hopefully they will be out soon.

about 8000 troops got pulld out and were sent directly to afghanistan or something like that

At 4/30/06 08:29 AM, WastedWizard wrote:

At 4/30/06 08:22 AM, RedGlare wrote:
Shame we didn't do it for the Czechs we pretty much sold them out. Chamberlain was a weak leader. And British casulties add up to around 250,000 not a lot in a war that claimed 50million.

I was talking about everyone involved in the war I was just focusing on my country.

I personaly think the British army was almost as useless as the French. I mean Germany Japan and the Soviet Union were known to fight to the death. Look at Singapore thousands captured with barely a shot fired.

at least britain was one of the first to help at the beginning of the war.and france still had a resistance during the war when france was occupied with nazi troops

At 4/30/06 08:41 AM, RedGlare wrote:
I personaly think the British army was almost as useless as the French. I mean Germany Japan and the Soviet Union were known to fight to the death. Look at Singapore thousands captured with barely a shot fired.

We could make a big argument about this but I don't want to.

At 4/30/06 08:46 AM, rayzerblayze wrote: at least britain was one of the first to help at the beginning of the war.and france still had a resistance during the war when france was occupied with nazi troops

Yes but France was more collabarator then resistor. And Britain sat back and let the Germans invade Czechislovakia. Worse they practicly authorised it through incompetence.

i guess britain didnt want another war but it happened eventually

At 4/30/06 08:50 AM, RedGlare wrote:
Yes but France was more collabarator then resistor. And Britain sat back and let the Germans invade Czechislovakia. Worse they practicly authorised it through incompetence.

Ohh.. so the British sat back but the Americans came right away *cough* *cough*

At 4/30/06 08:53 AM, WastedWizard wrote:

At 4/30/06 08:50 AM, RedGlare wrote:
Yes but France was more collabarator then resistor. And Britain sat back and let the Germans invade Czechislovakia. Worse they practicly authorised it through incompetence.

Ohh.. so the British sat back but the Americans came right away *cough* *cough*

Are you implying that im American? And yes they did sit back and let Germany invade Czechislovakia.