h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

You said Russia won the war originally. You're the only one who has insulted any of the countries that participated in WWII.

dave

Two uncles, one grandfather KIA fighting for two of those *insignificant* countries. A father who died early because of it. I don't think that makes me oversensitive, just aware. I unsubscribed for a number of reasons, your insensitive, ignorant response to my humour being the biggest one. *You* are the one who tracked me down to my own site and picked a fight. I backed up the kernel of truth in the ironic statement I made and you chose to take it on as untrue. You continue to try to prove my statistics wrong, all I have are those and a sizeable chunk of historical documents to back myself up with. You have belief, which I think is better used in a religious thread.

It's *your* view of the war that is unsupportable. I merely looked at the best way to value effort- loss of life and suffering. *Everybody knows the US was the most valuable contributer* is not a fact, merely a statement. I in fact believe it to be a lie.

Wow, you're related to WWII victims & soldiers?!?! THat's amazing. I take everything back. Please accept my deepest and humblest apologies. Clearly you were right all along. As a RELATIVE of someone who fought in WWII, you deserve the utmost respect. I shouldn't have thought to argue with you, it was completely out of line.

Actually it's your view of the war that is unsupportable. Russia won the war, you said it. Unsupportable. Fact.

dave

Let's look at the original posts, shall we;

*It's me, Fluffy Pink Rabbit. I'm not a ghost any more!:

I don't carrot all about culture.*

This is called a pun, a particularly good one given the rabbit reference.





*cl zoomer - mining for facts in the desert.

Lettuce leaf it alone, then.*

This is a pun in a similar vein, tying into the previous post

*btw, I thought Russia won WWII? *

This is an ironic statement, as indicated by the tongueout smiley and in direct reference to the commonly held belief in the US that it was the largest contributer to the war effort during WWII. It was a jibe at Oetzi who also simplifies life by thinking history was written in Hollywood.



*dave aka Captain Obvious

of course YOU did, zoomer, of course you did. And didn't you also beleive that the Jew's were massacred in upstate NY, and their remains secretly moved to Germany by the US govt?

dave*

At first I thought this was humour even though it uses the Holocaust, but with subsequent posts I realised you failed to see what was meant by my post and actually did believe that the US was the primary force of the Allies victory.

I disagreed and that disagreement plus all the sheep who were on that thread at that time caused me to unsubscribe. I suppose you took that personally and decided to chase me down on my personal space and attack me.

btw, sarcasm isn't really you, you don't do it very well. I took your statement personally and told you why. If you don't like my reasons, say so, don't try to make them part of the discussion.

classic zoomer. Don't like having the tables turned? So I guess a second obsequious post isn't what you're looking for?

If the jokes were funny, maybe. But they're not particularly good. So stop patting yourself on the back about how great your sense of humor is (it isn't).

Russia won the war. Unsupportable claim. Not fact. Not a statisitic. NO math, none required. That's what started the ball rolling.

dave

It was IRONY! Isn't that obvious? No, apparently not. Here's an idea, why don't you go ask anyone that was on that thread whether or not they thought it was an ironic statement or not. Don't bother with Oetzi, he'll waffle more than IHOP. Is this what this is all about? That you seriously believe that statement was an honest, daring statement of how I see the world? Why the toungueout smiley? Why put it next to a pun? Why even make the statement that is so blatantly singular? Is there no subltly in your world? No nuance? Is your world so black and white that you don't see this? I have been supporting the kernel of truth in the statement, as I said. That kernel is simply that Russia suffered and fought more than any other Allied country. You chose to go back to the original ironic statement to make your point, even after I have said that the Allies as a whole won subsequently. I would have expected to see you jump up and down when I said that, showing how you had *won* the argument. You have gone from the unsupportable to the theoretical and now to the absurd.

OK, I suppose you win. Yes, I admit that Russia did not win the war. In fact I never thought that, imagine that. I guess I must have been high, and now I realise that you are the most talented debater and historian of our time.

There's truth in humor, or perceived truth. Anyway, if you really thought it was all a joke, why did you get so hopping mad about it when the tables turned?

dave

Didn't see anything funny about you accusing me of being a conspiracy nut since it didn't follow any logic. Or of bringing the Holocaust into it. Simple as that. That and the revisionism, party line politik, other things that so many people on that thread were blind to.

I have read this thread with great interest, partly because of Dave's absurd assertion about the holocaust, which I took as an attempt at irony, that then quickly showed to be an actual appraisal of Zoomers mindset. But mostly because I had thought it would be interesting to see the outcome.

Since then it has saddened me to see someone whose learning has been so stunted by the educational system he has been taught in refuse to even consider arguments that differ from the limited and revised facts he has been fed whilst growing up.

Dave you are a tenacious debater and clearly fairly bright, however your backround knowledge is severly lacking.

Blicky.

where do I begin?

Let's start with this. Do you dispute the fact that there are more to battles than numbers? That the importance of battle is not dictated by the number of casualties/amount resources expended?

dave

*History is written by the winners.*

Anon

*You can paint a turd red, but it's still a turd.*

Jason Bray

Once again, you've missed the point. If the winners of World War II were the coalition called the Allies then the histories should all be the same, shouldn't they? Well they aren't. Ask a Brit who won the war in Europe and they will say that for whatever reasons in many ways, they did or that the Allies did or that the ending was started before the US entered. Ask a Canadian and they will say the Allies or they will say the Commonwealth or they will say Russia perhaps. The Russians will say they bled the Nazi's dry until the victory was assured or as I said that statistically they did or they will give credit to everyone. The US? They will with very few exceptions say they won.

Read something that wasn't written in your fair country before deciding that everything you know is the truth.

that had nothing to do with my post. But please, keep repeating yourself. Maybe if you say it for the 1000th time I'll start to beleive you.

dave

OK, let's take this nice and slow for you.

You say that some battles were more important than others apart from statistical losses.

Which battles, how and why are they more important, and who agrees with you?

Well I feel for anyone who doesnt live by the sea and only gets to know it from the accounts of others who are biased aboutits nature.

Politically, geographically and culturally the US is a country that is very isolated. It is no surprise that its education system and the sources it uses reflects this.

I can appreciate that many americans can appear annoying because of this but I also feel genuinely sorry for a people who have systematically had the wool pulled over their eyes.

Battles of Cannae, battle of thermopylae.

Cannae was the most major defeat that Rome ever suffered (50k dead). Kept Hannibal in Italy for an extra long time, as Rome was unwilling to risk a direct confrontation.

Thermopylae (5K dead, 300 spartans, the rest persians). Kept the Persian army of some 100K from overrunning the Greek city states, and wiping out Greek culture that existed and would developped subsequently.

The 2 authors I've cited agree as to the importance of these 2 battles. The authors point out that these positions are generally accepted by most historians.

dave

I suppose I will have to be even more plain.

I acknowledge that there are historically battle that have been won with little loss of manpower that have achieved great things. Now you tell me what battles in WW II won the war.

"I'm not a historian, and I haven't studied WWII yet."

Says it all really.

Awwww, I think we scared him away.....

We? I did nothing. All you, m'dear. Just showing solidarity.