We ended WW2 with suicide attacks against us, coming from the Japs

And this war was started against us with suicide attacks?

I think they're vastly different.

Ironic would be a suicide attacker getting killed in a suicide attack.  

I don't think that's actual irony.  

Quoted: I think they're vastly different.

I was referring to the fact that, we ended the one on this note, and we have begun where we left off.

Quoted: the japanese suicide attacks were at least honorable soldiers attacking military targets. i don't recall any on civillians.

No, they did not attack civilians with suicide attacks. In the beginning of the war, they did kill plenty of civilians with conventional means.

Yeah, but there were a couple wars in between, so where's our real starting point?


My unexplained point would be the ideology behind the suicide attacks.  Japan's were motivated by a last ditch attempt to stave off the occupation of  their homeland. It wasn't used in the beginning of the conflict when they were a power hungry nation looking to expand their material wealth and resource base by expanding their grip over the Pacific and Asian region. When they got their asses kicked back to their shores, suddenly their Bushido code rears it's ugly head. Suddenly there was a line out the door to get to heaven via slamming a plane into the side of a US warship. At least the Japanese had a code that restricted them to fellow combatants in the war.

Muslims that elect the suicide route are just feckless pussies blowing up innocent women, kids and defenseless civilians.

sherm8404 Yeah, but there were a couple wars in between, so where's our real starting point?

This is a world war like WW2, would you not agree? The wars in between, were not quite the scope of this one.

Quoted: the japanese suicide attacks were at least honorable soldiers attacking military targets. i don't recall any on civillians.

didn't they strafe people on 12/741?  

also, some of the kamikazi pilots were locked into their planes and had escorts to make sure they followed through with their missions.  not all of them were doing it of their own free will.  

Quoted: Quoted: the japanese suicide attacks were at least honorable soldiers attacking military targets. i don't recall any on civillians. didn't they strafe people on 12/741?   also, some of the kamikazi pilots were locked into their planes and had escorts to make sure they followed through with their missions.  not all of them were doing it of their own free will.

Yes, they were similar to the animals we are fighting now, no?

Well............

IF the Terrs had Tomahawk missles they would not have had to suicide themselves  

Thankfully they dont.

Quoted: Well............ IF the Terrs had Tomahawk missles they would not have had to suicide themselves   Thankfully they dont.

Oh, but they do, they just use the human idiot, err, I mean, the human brain for the guidance system.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: the japanese suicide attacks were at least honorable soldiers attacking military targets. i don't recall any on civillians. didn't they strafe people on 12/741?   also, some of the kamikazi pilots were locked into their planes and had escorts to make sure they followed through with their missions.  not all of them were doing it of their own free will.   Yes, they were similar to the animals we are fighting now, no?

is that a question or a statement?  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: the japanese suicide attacks were at least honorable soldiers attacking military targets. i don't recall any on civillians. didn't they strafe people on 12/741?   also, some of the kamikazi pilots were locked into their planes and had escorts to make sure they followed through with their missions.  not all of them were doing it of their own free will.   Yes, they were similar to the animals we are fighting now, no? is that a question or a statement?

Rhetorical question.

Quoted: Well............ IF the Terrs had Tomahawk missles they would not have had to suicide themselves   Thankfully they dont.

Some muslim animal with a box cutter, cost, The price of a plane ticket.

Tomahawk missle, cost, million dollars.

Quoted: I think they're vastly different.

I wouldn't be so sure.  "Desperate times call for desperate measures" comes to mind.  The Arab Muslims have nothing.  Not a god, not a race of people worth shit and not a damned piece of real estate that anyone wants.  Oh wait....the Japs had all of that, I'm sorry, you're right.

Without nations behind them the "clients" of this war are left with desperate means as the only or most(arguably) effective ones.  We are fortunate that we've developed tactics and weapons that avoid responses like "carpet bombing" which would seem wildly disproportionate and offensive to most nations and peoples.

Edit: This was for Ballsacks post, I was just slow.

Quoted: sherm8404 Yeah, but there were a couple wars in between, so where's our real starting point? This is a world war like WW2, would you not agree? The wars in between, were not quite the scope of this one.

I would say in Korea, we ended up fighting China, a numerically huge army and formidable adversary, and who we failed to defeat and the ramifications still loudly echo today.

In Vietnam, they had the full support of the Soviet Union, again, a huge backer. Neither were global wars, but they had HUGE consequences.


Is the current war of "global" proportions? Yes. Do we have a sworn enemy bent on our destruction? Yes.

Is there a country with an dictatorial antagonist we could bomb the shit out of to end the threat? IS the a head we could cut off to sap the morale and will of the soldiers to fight? No, never, they will fight harder. Both our antagonist in WWII were power/territory hungry powers that were kicked to shit and their threat ended. Their German's version of genocide was limited to what they perceived as an iferior race, an internal threat. The Japanese versions of genocide was similar, just in China, but was more aof a pillaging for pillaging's sake. Not because theywere doctrinally bent on killing all that didn't believe as they did. Those wars required us to strike out for a foreign nation, crush it's armies, and win.

This war has no central hub we can scour from the face of the earth. This one never will. I'm at a loss as to why we accept "assistance" and congratulate "cooperation" from nations like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia when they still fully support the terrorists activities.


Smoke them from the face of the earth. Then we can be safe.

Quoted: Well............ IF the Terrs had Tomahawk missles they would not have had to suicide themselves   Thankfully they dont.

Of course deliberately choosing women, children and other civilians as targets defies comprehension but why they choose to sacrifice themselves in the effort is something I have never understood.  Hiding a few handgrenades or satchel charges seems no harder than strapping yourself down with a charge.  Why don't they choose to simply throw their charge into a crowd and at least attempt to escape.  

Maybe the fact they choose to blow themselves into hamburger adds to the horror?  Whatever I can't imagine of a more despicable act than that of the current crop of Islamic terrorists.

I can't wait till the arrive in hell and find that THEY are the virgins for the Hitlers and other infamous sons of Satan.

Do you even know what irony means?

Quoted: Do you even know what irony means?

NO!


The use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of the literal meaning.

WW2 ended
Radical Islam war Began


Get it?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: the japanese suicide attacks were at least honorable soldiers attacking military targets. i don't recall any on civillians. didn't they strafe people on 12/741?   also, some of the kamikazi pilots were locked into their planes and had escorts to make sure they followed through with their missions.  not all of them were doing it of their own free will.   Yes, they were similar to the animals we are fighting now, no?

Could say the same about our own tactics in WWII. We're just as guilty of intentionally targetting civilians.

However, the "people" we're fighting now, I agree, animals.

Quoted: Quoted: Do you even know what irony means? NO! The use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of the literal meaning. WW2 ended Radical Islam war Began Get it?

Uh, your example isn't irony.


An example of irony is that your thread title states it's about irony, when it really isn't.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: the japanese suicide attacks were at least honorable soldiers attacking military targets. i don't recall any on civillians. didn't they strafe people on 12/741?   also, some of the kamikazi pilots were locked into their planes and had escorts to make sure they followed through with their missions.  not all of them were doing it of their own free will.   Yes, they were similar to the animals we are fighting now, no? Could say the same about our own tactics in WWII. We're just as guilty of intentionally targetting civilians. However, the "people" we're fighting now, I agree, animals.

There were instances, such as Dresden, Tokyo, and others, but, not to the exclusion of military targets.

Quoted: There were instances, such as Dresden, Tokyo, and others, but, not to the exclusion of military targets.

That is true, you're right. There were legitimate targets in those locations. Just used a rather... messy means to get it done. I'm not criticizing our tactics. That was was a nasty one, and it was animalistic, certainly in the Pacific.

Quoted: Uh, your example isn't irony. An example of irony is that your thread title states it's about irony, when it really isn't.

How about this, in the last global war we fought, out last enemy used suicide attacks, out of desperation to win, and in this new global war, our enemy has started the war with suicide attacks, out of desperation to win.

Quoted: Quoted: Uh, your example isn't irony. An example of irony is that your thread title states it's about irony, when it really isn't. How about this, in the last global war we fought, out last enemy used suicide attacks, out of desperation to win, and in this new global war, our enemy has started the war with suicide attacks, out of desperation to win.

No that isn't irony at all - a coincidence maybe.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Uh, your example isn't irony. An example of irony is that your thread title states it's about irony, when it really isn't. How about this, in the last global war we fought, out last enemy used suicide attacks, out of desperation to win, and in this new global war, our enemy has started the war with suicide attacks, out of desperation to win. No that isn't irony at all - a coincidence maybe.

I'm sorry I'm just a spelling and grammar freak.

About your topic though - that is certainly an interesting point worth noting.

Quoted: I'm sorry I'm just a spelling and grammar freak. About your topic though - that is certainly an interesting point worth noting.

You could have just typed, "I do not see the irony in it". No?

Quoted: Quoted: I'm sorry I'm just a spelling and grammar freak. About your topic though - that is certainly an interesting point worth noting. You could have just typed, "I do not see the irony in it". No?

I got carried away.

Anyway, back to topic.