World War II problem

Where have we been?
User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5102
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: Morgan de Veldt
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

World War II problem

Post by Upton_O_Goode » Sat Feb 23, 2019 10:21 pm

What were their motives?

You probably know that the British attacked the French fleet at Mers-el-Kébir In July of 1940. As most of France was under German control at the time, Churchill's unseemly haste to get the French fleet sunk is plausibly interpreted as the only viable (though frankly Machiavellian) option any British PM would have had. He couldn't, despite assurances from Darlan that the French would scuttle the fleet if necessary, risk the fleet falling under German control. But the French found it hard to forgive; in his memoirs, De Gaulle was bitter about this, mainly because the British (more or less) won the battle. (A considerable part of the French fleet escaped.) De Gaulle said that in such a situation, the side that fires the first shot is almost certain to win.

So, what was Admiral Darlan up to in May 1941, when he wrote to Hitler not only to offer the use of French facilities and bases, but to propose the "first steps toward a happier future for our two lands" and to work toward "European cooperation"? Was he (and his government) simply bitter and spiteful about that earlier conflict? At the time Britain had been standing practically alone against the Nazis, as Hitler had not yet attacked the USSR, and America was being tiresomely neutral (though not really). Did the French figure Germany was close to winning the war, so they wanted to look out for themselves?

And then what do we make of the fact that the French DID scuttle the fleet at Toulon in October 1942, and thereby thwarted a major German offensive? Did they always plan to do this rather than let the Germans have the fleet? Or did they now realize that Germany was overextended, the USSR and the USA having come in on the side of the British, and so decided once again to cozy up to the probable winners?

I suppose any answers to these questions will be hard to nail down. I haven't yet looked for any concentrated study of the politics involved. No doubt there is some, probably cited in the Wikipedia article that I linked to. Just wondered if others on this board had any ideas I might learn from.
“It is certainly sad and regrettable that so many innocent people died…Stalin was absolutely adamant on making doubly sure: spare no one…I don’t deny that I supported that view. I was simply not able to study every individual case…It was hard to draw a precise line where to stop.”

Vyacheslav Mikhailovich Skryabin (“Molotov”)

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19020
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: World War II problem

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Feb 23, 2019 11:16 pm

What Machiavellian about sinking WAR Ships that aren't "definitely" on your own side?

I'd ask: "Why aren't the French turning their ships over to us?"

You know: standard WAR stuff.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: World War II problem

Post by landrew » Sun Feb 24, 2019 1:42 am

I think we tend to forget that there was a significant contingent in France who had decided after the occupation that siding with Germany was the best option. We tend to be a bit revisionist in thinking that most French people remained resolutely anti-German throughout the war, which is colored by our glorification of the French resistance and the throngs of adoring crowds that attended the American liberation of France. Much of the French resistance was more pro-communist than pro-Allies, and were prone to fighting amongst themselves as fighting the Nazis.

No citations will be provided. This is entirely my own analysis based on my own studies.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23696
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: World War II problem

Post by Gawdzilla Sama » Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:42 am

"This is what comes from twenty years of socialism."
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"
WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5102
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: Morgan de Veldt
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: World War II problem

Post by Upton_O_Goode » Sun Feb 24, 2019 4:13 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Sat Feb 23, 2019 11:16 pm
What Machiavellian about sinking WAR Ships that aren't "definitely" on your own side?
Uh, perhaps killing a thousand sailors from a neutral country that you still have diplomatic relations with? Ya think?
“It is certainly sad and regrettable that so many innocent people died…Stalin was absolutely adamant on making doubly sure: spare no one…I don’t deny that I supported that view. I was simply not able to study every individual case…It was hard to draw a precise line where to stop.”

Vyacheslav Mikhailovich Skryabin (“Molotov”)

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23696
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: World War II problem

Post by Gawdzilla Sama » Sun Feb 24, 2019 6:14 pm

Wartime. "I told what I'd do if you didn't do what I told you to do."
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"
WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: World War II problem

Post by landrew » Sun Feb 24, 2019 6:59 pm

Upton_O_Goode wrote:
Sun Feb 24, 2019 4:13 pm
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Sat Feb 23, 2019 11:16 pm
What Machiavellian about sinking WAR Ships that aren't "definitely" on your own side?
Uh, perhaps killing a thousand sailors from a neutral country that you still have diplomatic relations with? Ya think?
Churchill was never afraid of making tough and controversial decisions. He went from hero to zero and back again many times in his long career. He was a known commodity when he was appointed wartime Prime Minister in 1940, few thought then or since that he was a poor choice for the job. He was quickly dumped again after the war, he came back for a second term and was dumped again.

It's easy to second-guess wartime decisions in peacetime. It's a different situation where the stakes are extreme, and great risks need to be taken and great sacrifices need to be made.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23696
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: World War II problem

Post by Gawdzilla Sama » Sun Feb 24, 2019 9:12 pm

"When things get tough they send for the sons-a-bitches." Attributed to Ernest J. King when he was appoint Chief of Naval Operations in 1941. He said he would have said that if he had thought of it.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"
WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Goody67
Regular Poster
Posts: 514
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: World War II problem

Post by Goody67 » Sun Feb 24, 2019 9:38 pm

landrew wrote:
Sun Feb 24, 2019 6:59 pm
Churchill was never afraid of making tough and controversial decisions.
Really? :lol:

Maybe you can explain why he never went through what he wrote in a secret telegram about the Bombing of Dresden. Instead, he succumbed under pressure from chiefs of staff and rewrote his telegram.
He went from hero to zero and back again many times in his long career.
Explain...

If anything, he went from controversy to controversy during his career. Whether or not he was regarded as a "hero" would have depended on whom you asked.

Which biographies about Churchill have you read?

Because of the British being on the side of the victors, many of Churchill's controversial statements, ideas and decisions are not taught in schools. Then again, few schools even teach about what the Soviets did for the exact same reason.

I don't consider the simple fact that he was Prime Minister during the war to label him as a "hero". He certainly helped to defeat Nazi tyranny, but some of his ideas were not exactly what a person described as a "hero" would have even thought.
He was a known commodity when he was appointed wartime Prime Minister in 1940, few thought then or since that he was a poor choice for the job. He was quickly dumped again after the war, he came back for a second term and was dumped again.
Exactly. Churchill was even unpopular among the Conservatives and many people did not want him to replace Chamberlain. Churchill could never have won a majority in the House of Commons and when the House of Lords became aware of his appointment, there was not a single thing mentioned.

A "hero" would not have been treated like that.

Anyone who would have been Prime Minister during the war and was helping the British defeat the Axis, especially the Germans, would have been regarded by many as someone to respect and worship - that is a no-brainer. Nothing exclusive to Churchill.

Heck, look at how Hitler was viewed by the Germans when France was defeated. The crowds siding with the victorious side is nothing new.
It's easy to second-guess wartime decisions in peacetime. It's a different situation where the stakes are extreme, and great risks need to be taken and great sacrifices need to be made.
Which decisions?
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: World War II problem

Post by landrew » Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:02 pm

Goody67 wrote:
Sun Feb 24, 2019 9:38 pm
landrew wrote:
Sun Feb 24, 2019 6:59 pm
Churchill was never afraid of making tough and controversial decisions.
Really? :lol:

Explain...

Which biographies about Churchill have you read?

Which decisions?
It's called an "opinion" not a claim.
:lol:
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19020
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: World War II problem

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:07 pm

Dictionary Skills:

Machiavellian: cunning, scheming, and unscrupulous, especially in politics.

unscrupulous: having or showing no moral principles; not honest or fair.

So, lets add up the pros and cons: Seems to me every term of the definition is NOT MET. It turns on the context more than anything else? WAR not politics? Any ship/asset not your own or closely or believed to be allied to your cause: IS THE ENEMY to be killed/destroyed at every opportunity. This is NOT cunning...etc...just the direct application of a very simple rule: kill or be killed.

Now you throw into the equation "Uh, perhaps killing a thousand sailors from a neutral country that you still have diplomatic relations with? Ya think?" //// Killing: yes aka WAR. Neutral country: by definition not your side or closedly allied. Diplomatic relations come and go as the battlefield dictates. I would agree there is some Big Mac going on if you enter into peace/neutrality negotiations and agreements "for the purpose" of setting up a betrayal, but that is not the case here. "Ya Think?"===>Oh yes. As first clearly stated and now as detailed.

WAR: removes a lot of nuance, real or pretended.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19020
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: World War II problem

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:10 pm

landrew wrote:
Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:02 pm
Goody67 wrote:
Sun Feb 24, 2019 9:38 pm
landrew wrote:
Sun Feb 24, 2019 6:59 pm
Churchill was never afraid of making tough and controversial decisions.
Really? :lol:

Explain...

Which biographies about Churchill have you read?

Which decisions?
It's called an "opinion" not a claim.
:lol:
Dictionary Skills:

Opinion: what you think to be true.

Claim: what you say to be true.

Easy to miss the difference and which applies. Opinion: always. Claim: only when you open your yap.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Matthew Ellard
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 30516
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am
Custom Title: Big Beautiful Bouncy Skeptic

Re: World War II problem

Post by Matthew Ellard » Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:21 am

Mers-el-Kébir has always been a popular topic for "David" one of our ex-regular holocaust deniers. The best plan is to check the facts as the holocaust deniers changed them. :D

Anti-Holocaust Denial / Churchill Propaganda / Mers-el-Kébir
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=13429&p=206604&hil ... an#p206604

Australia had battles with French Vichy troops in French Lebanon in 1941. The commanding officer lost his leg in the battle and later, became governor general of Australia. It was a bit weird to me as a kid because he lost his leg in a battle against the French, who were our allies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Damour

User avatar
Goody67
Regular Poster
Posts: 514
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: World War II problem

Post by Goody67 » Mon Feb 25, 2019 8:20 am

landrew wrote:
Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:02 pm
It's called an "opinion" not a claim.
:lol:
Since when can an opinion not be a claim? :?
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19020
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: World War II problem

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Feb 25, 2019 11:40 am

Goody67 wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 8:20 am
landrew wrote:
Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:02 pm
It's called an "opinion" not a claim.
:lol:
Since when can an opinion not be a claim? :?
When its not spoken. See above.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Goody67
Regular Poster
Posts: 514
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: World War II problem

Post by Goody67 » Mon Feb 25, 2019 2:49 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 11:40 am
When its not spoken. See above.
It depends whether a claim functions as a verb or a noun. In both cases, a claim can have different meanings.
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19020
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: World War II problem

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Feb 25, 2019 2:58 pm

Everything has different meanings. Silly to define/use two different words without using their differences in meaning. Better to be more precise, than repetitive or redundant. If you are going to define opinion as being the same as a claim....why have two words?

CONTEXT should orient the speaker as to which word/concept to use. Opinion certainly has the two meanings, while claim only the one. Lets advocate for better use of the former?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Goody67
Regular Poster
Posts: 514
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: World War II problem

Post by Goody67 » Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:49 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 2:58 pm
Everything has different meanings. Silly to define/use two different words without using their differences in meaning. Better to be more precise, than repetitive or redundant. If you are going to define opinion as being the same as a claim....why have two words?

CONTEXT should orient the speaker as to which word/concept to use. Opinion certainly has the two meanings, while claim only the one. Lets advocate for better use of the former?
In every single post I have read that you have posted, the same theme occurs - you always have an answer for everything and deliberately try and be provocative. Of course in the due process you make yourself look like an idiot.

I posted, “Since when can an opinion not be a claim?” Not that every opinion is a claim.

Now getting back to the topic...
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: World War II problem

Post by landrew » Mon Feb 25, 2019 6:04 pm

Goody67 wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:49 pm
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 2:58 pm
Everything has different meanings. Silly to define/use two different words without using their differences in meaning. Better to be more precise, than repetitive or redundant. If you are going to define opinion as being the same as a claim....why have two words?

CONTEXT should orient the speaker as to which word/concept to use. Opinion certainly has the two meanings, while claim only the one. Lets advocate for better use of the former?
In every single post I have read that you have posted, the same theme occurs - you always have an answer for everything and deliberately try and be provocative. Of course in the due process you make yourself look like an idiot.

I posted, “Since when can an opinion not be a claim?” Not that every opinion is a claim.

Now getting back to the topic...
It's just simple trolling. No need to elaborate on it much. This forum has had several of them embedded over the years, who are set on spoiling discussions as much as possible, for some sort of juvenile gratification.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23696
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: World War II problem

Post by Gawdzilla Sama » Mon Feb 25, 2019 6:23 pm

I'm glad you admit you're trolling.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"
WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: World War II problem

Post by landrew » Mon Feb 25, 2019 6:30 pm

Gawdzilla Sama wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 6:23 pm
I'm glad you admit you're trolling.
Yes, juvenile behavior like that.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23696
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: World War II problem

Post by Gawdzilla Sama » Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:09 pm

landrew wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 6:30 pm
Gawdzilla Sama wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 6:23 pm
I'm glad you admit you're trolling.
Yes, juvenile behavior like that.
Then trying stopping your juvenile behaviour, like that.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"
WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19020
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: World War II problem

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:52 pm

Goody67 wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 2:49 pm
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 11:40 am
When its not spoken. See above.
It depends whether a claim functions as a verb or a noun. In both cases, a claim can have different meanings.
My first reaction: excellent point. thinking more, not as strong a point as initially thought as both opine and claim have the same verb and noun functions the only difference then being the spelling of the two forms while the root is just the same. Opine/opinion vs claim/claim.

I think the distinction has value and should be honored. When a completely BS statement is made and the speaker is called on it the "excuse" that it is just my opinion should not protect from the ridicule that follows. Do you ever find yourself "thinking" one thing but when called upon to give your opinion you modify it for various reasons? Its because there is a difference between what you privately think and what you say in public.

...............I could go on, but if you don't like words and what they say about your own thinking process..........then........pearls before swine. Why even go on to the fact that claim does not have two different meanings other than the verb vs noun function. What other meaning is there for claim that is not a homonym? Claim is real close as the root is quite similar, still: not two different meanings of the "same" word.

Tricky and subtle words can be.........just like the thinking they represent. Or not.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: World War II problem

Post by landrew » Mon Feb 25, 2019 10:37 pm

Gawdzilla Sama wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:09 pm
landrew wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 6:30 pm
Gawdzilla Sama wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 6:23 pm
I'm glad you admit you're trolling.
Yes, juvenile behavior like that.
Then trying stopping your juvenile behaviour, like that.
I can't stop it, but I try to set a good example for those who carry on that way.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19020
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: World War II problem

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Feb 25, 2019 10:52 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:10 pm
Dictionary Skills:

Opinion: what you think to be true.

Claim: what you say to be true.

Easy to miss the difference and which applies. Opinion: always. Claim: only when you open your yap.
I think I overly focused on what I wish were true, but dictionary skills force me to admit I'm wrong: the very benefit of using the dictionary. I'll try again:

Opinion: a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

Claim: state or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof

This shows the more important difference "that is accurate." Opinion is personal: meaning practicably speaking: irrelevant to everyone but yourself. Claim is aimed at being true for everyone. One stands in opposition to the other. When anyone says, its my opinion........blah, blah, blah: in essence, they can be ignored because it is a statement not subject to analysis or disapproval. Claim is just the opposite.

So glad to correct myself. Dictionary Skills allow for that. ..................Just imagine?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: World War II problem

Post by landrew » Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:24 am

If we were all morons who couldn't form a cogent argument or develop analysis of what we have learned, then this would be nothing but a massive exchange of citations. Boring as hell. But that's what some nincompoops think it's all about; they enter a debate just to demand citations from everyone. I enjoy good opinions and witticisms. Sharing thoughts and wisdom is what a forum should be all about. Not a playground for immature emotions.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19020
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: World War II problem

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:42 am

landrew wrote:
Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:24 am
If we were all morons who couldn't form a cogent argument or develop analysis of what we have learned.............
Yes, yes........thats what I think when I see anyone say thats my opinion, not a claim.

thank you.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: World War II problem

Post by landrew » Fri Mar 01, 2019 7:35 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:42 am
landrew wrote:
Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:24 am
If we were all morons who couldn't form a cogent argument or develop analysis of what we have learned.............
Yes, yes........thats what I think when I see anyone say thats my opinion, not a claim.

thank you.
That's one of the best tools in your bullying toolkit.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 34854
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: prostrate spurge
Location: Transcona

Re: World War II problem

Post by Gord » Fri Mar 01, 2019 10:37 pm

landrew wrote:
Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:24 am
I enjoy good opinions and witticisms.
Who are you and what have you done with landrew!!!
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE
Is Trump in jail yet?

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: World War II problem

Post by landrew » Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:08 pm

Gord wrote:
Fri Mar 01, 2019 10:37 pm
landrew wrote:
Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:24 am
I enjoy good opinions and witticisms.
Who are you and what have you done with landrew!!!
Once upon a time I had an agenda. I thought I had the correct definition of a True Skeptic®.
I saw many "professional skeptics" as making a name for themselves by having a closed mind to many subjects, being blind to evidence and declaring dismissive verdicts without ever having investigated the things they were dismissing. And so I argued for years for having a more open mind and giving unpopular ideas a fair hearing, until nearly everyone was convinced that I was a defender and believer in woo-woo subjects, so I finally just left to rethink and reflect. It's a mistake to tell people how they should think.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19020
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: World War II problem

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:58 am

landrew wrote:
Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:08 pm
It's a mistake to tell people how they should think.
No it isn't. Just the opposite.......................if you know how to think yourself. Thats a process question. The conclusions reached: are subject to individual values. One demonstration: don't rest on logical fallacies. You can read up on/study logical fallacies and learn how you should think: avoid well know pit falls to begin with.

Your welcome. ((Don't fall for that trap!))
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10797
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: World War II problem

Post by Poodle » Sat Mar 02, 2019 9:22 am

But back to the original post ...
The French fleet was attacked by the British because it was sitting there waiting for the Germans to take it over and use it against the British.
Now, what's difficult about that?
It's tantamount to asking why the Japanese attacked the US fleet at Pearl Harbour.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23696
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: World War II problem

Post by Gawdzilla Sama » Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:25 pm

"Harbor". It's a proper name and spelling isn't optional.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"
WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: World War II problem

Post by landrew » Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:39 pm

Gawdzilla Sama wrote:
Sat Mar 02, 2019 12:25 pm
"Harbor". It's a proper name and spelling isn't optional.
No wonder so many hate Americans for their exceptionalism.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23696
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: World War II problem

Post by Gawdzilla Sama » Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:54 pm

Dumbass.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"
WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: World War II problem

Post by landrew » Sat Mar 02, 2019 5:29 pm

Gawdzilla Sama wrote:
Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:54 pm
Dumbass.
:D
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5102
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: Morgan de Veldt
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: World War II problem

Post by Upton_O_Goode » Wed Mar 06, 2019 7:18 pm

Poodle wrote:
Sat Mar 02, 2019 9:22 am
But back to the original post ...
The French fleet was attacked by the British because it was sitting there waiting for the Germans to take it over and use it against the British.
Now, what's difficult about that?
It's tantamount to asking why the Japanese attacked the US fleet at Pearl Harbour.
Yeah, as I remarked, the British Empire was standing alone against the Nazi threat. The Soviet Union had signed a non-aggression pact (and a let's-partition-Poland pact) with the Nazis; France had crumpled; the US was making strenuous efforts to keep out of war with Germany (and an American election was about to get underway). I ask any fair-minded person: Put yourself in Churchill's place and make the call. Do you trust the word of one French admiral with what might tip the balance of power in the continuing war?

I hasten to add that, unlike most Americans, I'm no fan of Churchill. He got a lot of Canadians massacred at Dieppe, and he raided the Australian navy to defend the British homeland. It was only because Japan lost the battle of the Coral Sea that Australia didn't have a much worse war than it actually did. Again, what he did may have seemed justifiable in both of these cases, but these were not his finest hours. But sinking (or trying to sink) the French fleet does not arouse any outrage in me, as it did in De Gaulle. (Although, truthfully, De Gaulle mostly hated the British because they didn't sign on to his belief that he could lead the French overseas empire to victory over Germany. Realistic as always, they preferred to deal with the Vichy government while using the refugee French military in Britain as an auxiliary force.)
“It is certainly sad and regrettable that so many innocent people died…Stalin was absolutely adamant on making doubly sure: spare no one…I don’t deny that I supported that view. I was simply not able to study every individual case…It was hard to draw a precise line where to stop.”

Vyacheslav Mikhailovich Skryabin (“Molotov”)

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19020
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: World War II problem

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Mar 06, 2019 9:46 pm

justifiable = mandatory? aka: decisive goal directed leadership in WAR time. Very few have it.

Since nothing "bad" happened as a result of those troop/asset deployments..........whats the beef? Blame Wellington????? :lol:
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
True Skeptic
Posts: 10941
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: World War II problem

Post by landrew » Thu Mar 07, 2019 6:47 pm

Upton_O_Goode wrote:
Wed Mar 06, 2019 7:18 pm

I hasten to add that, unlike most Americans, I'm no fan of Churchill. He got a lot of Canadians massacred at Dieppe, and he raided the Australian navy to defend the British homeland. It was only because Japan lost the battle of the Coral Sea that Australia didn't have a much worse war than it actually did. Again, what he did may have seemed justifiable in both of these cases, but these were not his finest hours. But sinking (or trying to sink) the French fleet does not arouse any outrage in me, as it did in De Gaulle. (Although, truthfully, De Gaulle mostly hated the British because they didn't sign on to his belief that he could lead the French overseas empire to victory over Germany. Realistic as always, they preferred to deal with the Vichy government while using the refugee French military in Britain as an auxiliary force.)
They were all guilty of sacrificing other nations under their command; Montgomery, Eisenhower and Churchill. Canadians, Australians and other Allies were sent in as cannon-fodder, but they showed their mettle regardless.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Balsamo
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2079
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: World War II problem

Post by Balsamo » Sun Mar 17, 2019 5:23 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:21 am
Mers-el-Kébir has always been a popular topic for "David" one of our ex-regular holocaust deniers. The best plan is to check the facts as the holocaust deniers changed them. :D

Anti-Holocaust Denial / Churchill Propaganda / Mers-el-Kébir
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=13429&p=206604&hil ... an#p206604

Australia had battles with French Vichy troops in French Lebanon in 1941. The commanding officer lost his leg in the battle and later, became governor general of Australia. It was a bit weird to me as a kid because he lost his leg in a battle against the French, who were our allies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Damour
Wasn't a member of this forum yet. But you also did some factual mistakes in your argumentation against David. ;)