Thumpalumpacus wrote:Gawdzilla wrote:We need a tap-dancing smiley.

Thumpalumpacus wrote:Gawdzilla wrote:We need a tap-dancing smiley.
That's your standard of argument, is it? "you're wrong" ?Thumpalumpacus wrote: You're wrong. You're wrong about Churchill's objection to appeasement being hindsight, you're wrong about British impotence in the 30s, and you're wrong in the fact that not only Americans, but Britons as well criticize appeasement as a failed policy, an opinion borne out by fifty million deaths.
No, you ASKED FOR A LINK where he cut arms spending when in office. If you don't want an answer, don't bother asking.Thumpalumpacus wrote: Wait, now you're criticizing Churchill because he did not foresee the rise of Hitler twenty-five years before the fact?
I've already laid out his contemporaneous speeches. Your inability to read is not my problem.mistermack wrote:That's your standard of argument, is it? "you're wrong" ?Thumpalumpacus wrote: You're wrong. You're wrong about Churchill's objection to appeasement being hindsight, you're wrong about British impotence in the 30s, and you're wrong in the fact that not only Americans, but Britons as well criticize appeasement as a failed policy, an opinion borne out by fifty million deaths.
Well, it's pathetic, but it is an improvement I suppose.
The less you say, the less stupid it sounds.
Well, I didn't expect I should have to specify that the link be relevant to the conversation. 1908!No, you ASKED FOR A LINK where he cut arms spending when in office. If you don't want an answer, don't bother asking.
I'll let you know when I value your advice and opinion. I don't anticipate that happening any time soon.I think you SHOULD stick to posting smilies.
It's the safest option for you.
It seems to be the only way you can post something, without saying something silly.
I was somehow under the impression that the deaths happened only after appeasement was abandoned.Thumpalumpacus wrote:You're wrong. You're wrong about Churchill's objection to appeasement being hindsight, you're wrong about British impotence in the 30s, and you're wrong in the fact that not only Americans, but Britons as well criticize appeasement as a failed policy, an opinion borne out by fifty million deaths.
That was my point. My apologies if I wasn't clear about it.Warren Dew wrote:I was somehow under the impression that the deaths happened only after appeasement was abandoned.Thumpalumpacus wrote:You're wrong. You're wrong about Churchill's objection to appeasement being hindsight, you're wrong about British impotence in the 30s, and you're wrong in the fact that not only Americans, but Britons as well criticize appeasement as a failed policy, an opinion borne out by fifty million deaths.
Thumpalumpacus wrote:That was my point. My apologies if I wasn't clear about it.Warren Dew wrote:I was somehow under the impression that the deaths happened only after appeasement was abandoned.Thumpalumpacus wrote:You're wrong. You're wrong about Churchill's objection to appeasement being hindsight, you're wrong about British impotence in the 30s, and you're wrong in the fact that not only Americans, but Britons as well criticize appeasement as a failed policy, an opinion borne out by fifty million deaths.
Quite right. Nearly any fool should see that.MrJonno wrote:Chamberlain policy was appeasement and massive rearnament, it was the only valid strategy at the time (appart from actually forming an alliance with Nazi Germany which is what the russians did)
Plus a lot of anti-fascist anti-communist views.MrJonno wrote:You could also add there was significant pro-fascist anti-communist views on both sides of the Atlantic
... says the guy who thinks Churchill should have foreseen Adolf Hitler in 1908 and taken action accordingly.mistermack wrote:You're not clear about much at all, are you?
Yeah, I don't think anyone was arguing otherwise. The point was that doing nothing was not really productive.MrJonno wrote:You could also add there was significant pro-fascist anti-communist views on both sides of the Atlantic
Not an awful lot, people were either anti fascist pro communist or pro fascist anti communism. They simply werent that many people who were neutral through many were indifferent.Gawdzilla wrote:Plus a lot of anti-fascist anti-communist views.MrJonno wrote:You could also add there was significant pro-fascist anti-communist views on both sides of the Atlantic
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest