Path: ccsf.homeunix.org!ccsf.homeunix.org!news1.wakwak.com!nf1.xephion.ne.jp!onion.ish.org!news.heimat.gr.jp!taurus!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!nntp.gol.com!203.216.70.8.MISMATCH!not-for-mail From: Brett Robson Newsgroups: soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.scottish,soc.culture.china,fj.life.in-japan Subject: Re: Why do chinks hate japs and not brits? Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 16:38:12 +0900 Organization: FusionGOL - Global Online Japan Lines: 105 Message-ID: References: <5eb15984.0411200235.6b8e011b@posting.google.com> <419f9a70.10682090@news> <41a11116.16561714@news> <41A33EF9.9030506@hotmail.com> <41a4e552.16329760@news> NNTP-Posting-Host: 203-216-000-091.engineering.gol.ad.jp Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: nnrp.gol.com 1101368294 17780 203.216.0.91 (25 Nov 2004 07:38:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@gol.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:38:14 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041007 Debian/1.7.3-5 X-Accept-Language: en In-Reply-To: Xref: ccsf.homeunix.org fj.life.in-japan:22445 Ernest Schaal wrote: > in article co3l04$ds5$1@nnrp.gol.com, Brett Robson at deep_m_m@hotmail.com > wrote on 11/25/04 12:53 PM: > > >> >>Ernest Schaal wrote: >> >> >>>Actually, the nature of war could have been foretold if they had looked at >>>the right previous wars. Both the US Civil War and the Russo-Japanese War >>>could have given them a sense of what would happen in trench warfare against >>>prepared positions. >> >>It was. > > > It was what? It was foretold. Generals were well aware of the power of machine gun and artillery. Get this, some of them even imagined the use of motor vehicles and aircraft! > > It had everything to do with tactics. Only a fool hits prepared positions > over and over when they don't have a numerical advantage. This shows your complete ignorance both of what actually happened and what the objectives were. > The European generals attacked, and attacked, and > attacked, because the mantra of the times was "the only good defense is a > strong offense." More fantasy of yours. > Yes, they wanted victory and they were prepared to pay for it. But no, that > doesn't make them great generals. They are not "generals". They are "both sides", governments, politcians, nations. > >>So you have some magic tactic that would prevent deaths in trench >>warfare? > > > For starters, play defensive more and offensive less. Wow you are fucking genius. That is exactly how PARIS was defended. But then there was this little problem that France was full of Huns. And of course that is exactly what Germany did at the end of the war - and lost. Now little give you a little gem. You stay in one spot you die in that spot. A defensive position attracts artillery like flies to a corpse. The British did lots of nasty things like tunneling underneath and blowing up German positions with huge mines, not to mention those big nasty guns. Your opening tactic is useless, got anymore? Nearly one million men on each side are facing each other. What are you going to do Field Marshall Schaal? Issue them with soft toys and tell them to play nice? > There is an old saying that says only a fool repeats the same mistake over > and over again and expects a different result. Here is a new saying, you don't know what you are talking about. The European generals were > fools in that they continued a losing tactic with no real chance of success, > partly because of their egotistical pride and partly because of their > dogmatic belief in the attack. > > > The role of the American troops in the war is an interesting one ... Seems that is all you know. Try reading a history book that doesn't start with US soliders arriving in France, much like that other one of yours, WWII. > One result of the way the British and French treated their Ally is that > after the war America drifted into isolationism that delayed their entrance > into the Second World War. > I nearly choked on that one. Maybe you should read about US interference in the Versailles Treaty and the problems the US caused for France in the 1930s. Occupation of the Rhine is a good starting point. The Nye Commision makes good reading too.