Frosty
Logical and sensible but turns women gay
Can anyone confirm that Israel is now in breach of the peace treaty with Egypt? I have heard that in passing by a couple of journalists and was curious that they mentioned it in passing.
Which one? Genuine question.
The bombing of Dresden in February 1945 is widely viewed as a revenge bombing which served no strategic purpose nor any military interest, especially at a time where it was clear that Germany was all but defeated. It's one of the Allies darkest moments in WWII.
That's the IDF way. They just erase a whole block to get one guy who's probably there. There's many reports from Israeli soldiers that will tell you how disproportionate their use of artillery and airstrikes is. They don't go in the tunnels and instead they exact revenge on the civilian population.
- 5% (and counting) of the Gaza population are casualties.
- There's at least 79,000 housing units completely destroyed and 370,000 damaged, which effectively means that half of the population is homeless. Keep in mind that the housing build rate in Gaza was 992 units a year prior to 10/7. Even at a five-fold higher rate, it would take until 2040 to rebuild what was lost.
- Almost 90% of the schools have been either severely damaged or destroyed. 260 teachers have been killed by the IDF.
- Every single university in Gaza (12) has been destroyed. 95 professors and 5,400 students have been killed by the IDF.
- 31 hospitals out of 36 have been either destroyed or damaged. 345 doctors and nurses have been killed by the IDF.
- 195 heritage sites, 227 mosques and 3 churches have also been damaged or destroyed, including the Central Archives of Gaza, which catalogued 150 years of history.
- 190 administrative buildings have been destroyed.
- 16 cemetaries have been either damged or destroyed by the IDF.
- The damages caused by the IDF amount arount $30 to 40 billions and we're talking about a 141 square miles territory.
The amount and scale of damage in Gaza has not been seen since WWII and effectively sent it back to the stone age, for those willing to stay. If this is not a deliberate intent to destroy the Palestinians as a people, then I don't know what to tell you (obviously not directed at you). And I'm not even taking into account what's happening in the West Bank.
To any present and future arsehole coming with a "But, but Israel is just defending itself and tries to minimize civilian casualties": Shame on you. You can go feck yourself to hell and back, you revolting piece of fecal matter.
You're right. I'll edit my post.You're absolutely right and it's indefensible but take it down a notch. That kind of discourse doesn't help at all.
Good man. The post is excellent minus that last paragraph. You don't need that.You're right. I'll edit my post.
Extremely concerning. Their ideal goal is certainly ethnic cleansing and now they have control of both sides of the border.Can anyone confirm that Israel is now in breach of the peace treaty with Egypt? I have heard that in passing by a couple of journalists and was curious that they mentioned it in passing.
I interpret Brexit as the UK overestimating their influence or the influence they should have more than being particularly virtuous.
320m
Which one? Genuine question.
The bombing of Dresden in February 1945 is widely viewed as a revenge bombing that served no strategic purpose nor any military interest, especially at a time where it was clear that Germany was all but defeated. It's one of the Allies darkest moments in WWII.
That's the IDF way. They just erase a whole block to get one guy who's probably there. There's many reports from Israeli soldiers that will tell you how disproportionate their use of artillery and airstrikes is. They don't go in the tunnels and instead they exact revenge on the civilian population.
- 5% (and counting) of the Gaza population are casualties.
- There's at least 79,000 housing units completely destroyed and 370,000 damaged, which effectively means that half of the population is homeless. Keep in mind that the housing build rate in Gaza was 992 units a year prior to 10/7. Even at a five-fold higher rate, it would take until 2040 to rebuild what was lost.
- Almost 90% of the schools have been either severely damaged or destroyed. 260 teachers have been killed by the IDF.
- Every single university in Gaza (12) has been destroyed. 95 professors and 5,400 students have been killed by the IDF.
- 31 hospitals out of 36 have been either destroyed or damaged. 345 doctors and nurses have been killed by the IDF.
- 195 heritage sites, 227 mosques and 3 churches have either been damaged or destroyed, including the Central Archives of Gaza, which catalogued 150 years of history.
- 190 administrative buildings have been destroyed.
- 16 cemetaries have been either damaged or destroyed by the IDF.
- The damages caused by the IDF amount to $30 to 40 billions and we're talking about a 141 square miles territory.
The amount and scale of damage in Gaza has not been seen since WWII and effectively sent it back to the stone age, for those willing to stay. If this is not a deliberate intent to destroy the Palestinians as a people, then I don't know what to tell you (obviously not directed at you). And I'm not even taking into account what's happening in the West Bank.
In short, to any present and future poster coming with a "But, but Israel is just defending itself and tries to minimize civilian casualties": Shame on you.
Deeply evil.
It doesn't and it never has. That whole alleged stance was merely an excuse for Israel to justify its ongoing onslaught, pinning the burden of the blame on Hamas. Its the same reason they've been ramping up settler violence in the West Bank despite Hamas being a non-factor there. This 'war' was never about the hostages nor Hamas.
I can accept that reasoning.The war is about Netanyahu buying time until he feels he's recovered in the polls and can win an election again.
Do you know of a website where these soviet documents can be read in english?Re: Dresden
Historians and commentators who consider Dresden revenge bombing ought to take a trip to the Soviet Archives and US/UK archives to read the documents and sources pertaining to the decision making before and during the bombing of Dresden.
A few points to consider anyhow:
1) By 1945 the Germans knew they were losing, (despite internal propaganda to the contrary) and their strategy revolved around the concept of 'Verteidigungsbereich', a series of military chokepoints on strategic locations along the Eastern front that were to be held at all costs. All expenses were not to be spared in making sure that the Germans held on to these positions because if they fell then that entire section of the front would fall. Heinz Guderian was responsible for designation of these defensive chokepoints along the Southern sector of the Eastern Front, and he personally chose Dresden. Dresden was vital strategically because it was a) relatively untouched by Western bombing as it was in the far south eastern corner of Germany and therefore had the vast majority of its infrastructure, both civilian and military, in tact. b) It sat on the border between the east and western banks of the Elbe. The closest crossing of the Elbe was +-150 miles from Dresden. If Dresden could be held, the Elbe provided a natural barrier against Soviet forces in the Southern sector of the Eastern Front.
2) As a follow up to the first point, The soviets by early 1945 were launching the Vistula-Oder offensive, which was some of the most brutal segments of the Eastern front. If you look at maps of the offensive, after a month of fighting, there were huge gains in the North/Center, but the Soviets were suffering huge casualties in the South. Why? Because German logistics infrastructure was practically intact. The railway intersection in Dresden could transport two entire German divisions a day to the front and back, allowing for much easier troop rotation, delivery of munitions and supplies as well as reinforcements to plug any gaps in the line. On a side note, it was averaged that 2150 Jews were being ferried to Auschwitz via Dresden per day, but that information only became available post war. Between January 15th and February the 9th, the Soviets request three separate occasions for the Western Allies to bomb Dresden. These requests were initially denied, because running Strategic bombing missions to that corner of Germany was deemed too much of a risk, as it would severely stretch the range of even the most capable escort-fighters at the time (P-51 Mustangs). However, as it looked like the Soviets were loosing momentum on the Southern Front by mid-February, the western allies decided it was the best thing to do. There was a genuine fear that the Soviet offensive had stalled in that region, so the decision was made to flatten it.
3) Two separate recommendations had been made for bombing attacks on Dresden before 1945, one being in December 1944, where Allied intelligence reported that there were 127 Military factories, housing 62,000 German Workers in the war effort. In these factories, production entailed ball bearings, tungsten rods, military telephones, shell munitions and aircraft spare parts. It was estimated around 19% of all German ball bearing production was handled in Dresden by December 1944.
4) As a direct result of the bombing, Military infrastructure around Dresden was flattened and ultimately this led to the great success of the Lower-Silesia Offensive and the Vienna Offensive launched by the Soviets in the following months, due to the inability of OKW to meaningfully get supplies, munitions and men to the front and to rotate cleanly. It also completely removed Dresden as a chokepoint on the Elbe.
You can argue that without the bombing of Dresden, the allies would have still won, which is obviously true. But the same can be said for many bombing campaigns of late 44 and 45. The question you have to ask therefore is, how many lives did the deaths of 25,000 Germans in Dresden, save? The answer is, with a good degree of certainty, multiple orders of magnitude more. Compare the loss ratios on that sector of front in the Vistula-Oder offensive compared to the Lower-Silesia and Vienna offensives to see the difference it made to the casualties on the Soviet side of the Eastern front. It also wasn't a one off bombing raid either, after the city was flattened, the Allies kept coming back to it to make sure that the railways were not being repaired, and the factories were not being rebuilt or re set up. It was a huge strategic objective.
Now comes the question: Why is there so much fuss around Dresden?
and the answer ties in with many of the myths of WWII, which is Nazi propoganda mixed in with post-war revisionism. After Dresden, the Germans released media coverage that up to 490,000 Germans had been butchered at Dresden (the real number was around the 25,000 mark). Then, in the post war memories of many notable nazi's/Wehrmacht commanders, many desperately downplayed the importance of Dresden as a useful strategic location. For example, Eric Von Manstein spent almost a year in 1944 recovering from surgery in Dresden, and wrote in his memoirs that it was a peaceful city with no military significance. Guderian, likewise in his memoirs, said the same thing (Which is hilarious because in documented minutes of OKH high command, Guderian personally recommend Dresden to be a Verteidigungsbereich. During the cold war, Eastern sources were not available, so historians genuinely took and believed the provenance of Wehrmacht memoirs as accurate sources. This is also how the "clean wehrmacht" myth stems from, if you read Franz Halder/Rundstedt/Manstein's memoirs, you'd think the Wehrmacht were true professional soldiers with no ties to Nazism, which was far from the case.
Like the Clean Wehrmacht tales, when the Soviet archives were finally opened up alongside the Western equivalents post Cold war, much of the truth of Dresden came into light.
Do you know of a website where these soviet documents can be read in english?
Deeply evil.
Are Miller & Kirby coloured?Why the Dems always throw these coloured people to do their dirty work, same at the UN when they were doing those shameless vetoes.
There are countless videos/tiktoks of these scumbags doing things like this.
I'm wondering whether this is normal behaviour, as I think this is one of the first wars in the 'shorts' social media era. I haven't been keeping up with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, are similar videos being made in that conflict too?
You're right. I'll edit my post.
There are countless videos/tiktoks of these scumbags doing things like this.
I'm wondering whether this is normal behaviour, as I think this is one of the first wars in the 'shorts' social media era. I haven't been keeping up with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, are similar videos being made in that conflict too?
I think that was my next line of thinking too, given the immunity to do anything by the US and it's allies they are emboldened by it.It's almost certainly normal behaviour among soldiers, especially colonial invasion type forces. Just a digital version of what Roman, Mongol or whichever other empire's soldiers have done throughout history.
The gleeful and unrestrained filming of themselves though is probably more prevalent among the IDF than most forces though, because any objective analysis will show that the IDF is one of the least "moral" military forces existing today. No other state gets to be as blatant about it's dehumanization and degradation of an enemy, because no other state gets to wholesale invade another's territory and (perhaps until very recently) have the entire western media line up to defend it's actions.
Put another way, China's erasure of the Uighur population is horrific but you won't see western news sources praising China's actions on that point. I think the carte blanche provided by the US emboldens the IDF in a unique way.
Easier to do questionable shit when you've got a minority as the face.Why the Dems always throw these coloured people to do their dirty work, same at the UN when they were doing those shameless vetoes.
Re: Dresden
Historians and commentators who consider Dresden revenge bombing ought to take a trip to the Soviet Archives and US/UK archives to read the documents and sources pertaining to the decision making before and during the bombing of Dresden.
A few points to consider anyhow:
1) By 1945 the Germans knew they were losing, (despite internal propaganda to the contrary) and their strategy revolved around the concept of 'Verteidigungsbereich', a series of military chokepoints on strategic locations along the Eastern front that were to be held at all costs. All expenses were not to be spared in making sure that the Germans held on to these positions because if they fell then that entire section of the front would fall. Heinz Guderian was responsible for designation of these defensive chokepoints along the Southern sector of the Eastern Front, and he personally chose Dresden. Dresden was vital strategically because it was a) relatively untouched by Western bombing as it was in the far south eastern corner of Germany and therefore had the vast majority of its infrastructure, both civilian and military, in tact. b) It sat on the border between the east and western banks of the Elbe. The closest crossing of the Elbe was +-150 miles from Dresden. If Dresden could be held, the Elbe provided a natural barrier against Soviet forces in the Southern sector of the Eastern Front.
2) As a follow up to the first point, The soviets by early 1945 were launching the Vistula-Oder offensive, which was some of the most brutal segments of the Eastern front. If you look at maps of the offensive, after a month of fighting, there were huge gains in the North/Center, but the Soviets were suffering huge casualties in the South. Why? Because German logistics infrastructure was practically intact. The railway intersection in Dresden could transport two entire German divisions a day to the front and back, allowing for much easier troop rotation, delivery of munitions and supplies as well as reinforcements to plug any gaps in the line. On a side note, it was averaged that 2150 Jews were being ferried to Auschwitz via Dresden per day, but that information only became available post war. Between January 15th and February the 9th, the Soviets request three separate occasions for the Western Allies to bomb Dresden. These requests were initially denied, because running Strategic bombing missions to that corner of Germany was deemed too much of a risk, as it would severely stretch the range of even the most capable escort-fighters at the time (P-51 Mustangs). However, as it looked like the Soviets were loosing momentum on the Southern Front by mid-February, the western allies decided it was the best thing to do. There was a genuine fear that the Soviet offensive had stalled in that region, so the decision was made to flatten it.
3) Two separate recommendations had been made for bombing attacks on Dresden before 1945, one being in December 1944, where Allied intelligence reported that there were 127 Military factories, housing 62,000 German Workers in the war effort. In these factories, production entailed ball bearings, tungsten rods, military telephones, shell munitions and aircraft spare parts. It was estimated around 19% of all German ball bearing production was handled in Dresden by December 1944.
4) As a direct result of the bombing, Military infrastructure around Dresden was flattened and ultimately this led to the great success of the Lower-Silesia Offensive and the Vienna Offensive launched by the Soviets in the following months, due to the inability of OKW to meaningfully get supplies, munitions and men to the front and to rotate cleanly. It also completely removed Dresden as a chokepoint on the Elbe.
You can argue that without the bombing of Dresden, the allies would have still won, which is obviously true. But the same can be said for many bombing campaigns of late 44 and 45. The question you have to ask therefore is, how many lives did the deaths of 25,000 Germans in Dresden, save? The answer is, with a good degree of certainty, multiple orders of magnitude more. Compare the loss ratios on that sector of front in the Vistula-Oder offensive compared to the Lower-Silesia and Vienna offensives to see the difference it made to the casualties on the Soviet side of the Eastern front. It also wasn't a one off bombing raid either, after the city was flattened, the Allies kept coming back to it to make sure that the railways were not being repaired, and the factories were not being rebuilt or re set up. It was a huge strategic objective.
Now comes the question: Why is there so much fuss around Dresden?
and the answer ties in with many of the myths of WWII, which is Nazi propoganda mixed in with post-war revisionism. After Dresden, the Germans released media coverage that up to 490,000 Germans had been butchered at Dresden (the real number was around the 25,000 mark). Then, in the post war memories of many notable nazi's/Wehrmacht commanders, many desperately downplayed the importance of Dresden as a useful strategic location. For example, Eric Von Manstein spent almost a year in 1944 recovering from surgery in Dresden, and wrote in his memoirs that it was a peaceful city with no military significance. Guderian, likewise in his memoirs, said the same thing (Which is hilarious because in documented minutes of OKH high command, Guderian personally recommend Dresden to be a Verteidigungsbereich. During the cold war, Eastern sources were not available, so historians genuinely took and believed the provenance of Wehrmacht memoirs as accurate sources. This is also how the "clean wehrmacht" myth stems from, if you read Franz Halder/Rundstedt/Manstein's memoirs, you'd think the Wehrmacht were true professional soldiers with no ties to Nazism, which was far from the case.
Like the Clean Wehrmacht tales, when the Soviet archives were finally opened up alongside the Western equivalents post Cold war, much of the truth of Dresden came into light.
320m
Preach!so glad The Other is not in power now.
In my utopian Nuremberg for these spokesmen, the 2 smug guys have to go first and this freak has to go last, because he's breaking the gallows once the stool is kicked away.
Possible for PR reasons but wouldn’t surprise me if this guy jumped at the chance to do it.Why the Dems always throw these coloured people to do their dirty work, same at the UN when they were doing those shameless vetoes.
Re: Dresden
Historians and commentators who consider Dresden revenge bombing ought to take a trip to the Soviet Archives and US/UK archives to read the documents and sources pertaining to the decision making before and during the bombing of Dresden.
A few points to consider anyhow:
1) By 1945 the Germans knew they were losing, (despite internal propaganda to the contrary) and their strategy revolved around the concept of 'Verteidigungsbereich', a series of military chokepoints on strategic locations along the Eastern front that were to be held at all costs. All expenses were not to be spared in making sure that the Germans held on to these positions because if they fell then that entire section of the front would fall. Heinz Guderian was responsible for designation of these defensive chokepoints along the Southern sector of the Eastern Front, and he personally chose Dresden. Dresden was vital strategically because it was a) relatively untouched by Western bombing as it was in the far south eastern corner of Germany and therefore had the vast majority of its infrastructure, both civilian and military, in tact. b) It sat on the border between the east and western banks of the Elbe. The closest crossing of the Elbe was +-150 miles from Dresden. If Dresden could be held, the Elbe provided a natural barrier against Soviet forces in the Southern sector of the Eastern Front.
2) As a follow up to the first point, The soviets by early 1945 were launching the Vistula-Oder offensive, which was some of the most brutal segments of the Eastern front. If you look at maps of the offensive, after a month of fighting, there were huge gains in the North/Center, but the Soviets were suffering huge casualties in the South. Why? Because German logistics infrastructure was practically intact. The railway intersection in Dresden could transport two entire German divisions a day to the front and back, allowing for much easier troop rotation, delivery of munitions and supplies as well as reinforcements to plug any gaps in the line. On a side note, it was averaged that 2150 Jews were being ferried to Auschwitz via Dresden per day, but that information only became available post war. Between January 15th and February the 9th, the Soviets request three separate occasions for the Western Allies to bomb Dresden. These requests were initially denied, because running Strategic bombing missions to that corner of Germany was deemed too much of a risk, as it would severely stretch the range of even the most capable escort-fighters at the time (P-51 Mustangs). However, as it looked like the Soviets were loosing momentum on the Southern Front by mid-February, the western allies decided it was the best thing to do. There was a genuine fear that the Soviet offensive had stalled in that region, so the decision was made to flatten it.
3) Two separate recommendations had been made for bombing attacks on Dresden before 1945, one being in December 1944, where Allied intelligence reported that there were 127 Military factories, housing 62,000 German Workers in the war effort. In these factories, production entailed ball bearings, tungsten rods, military telephones, shell munitions and aircraft spare parts. It was estimated around 19% of all German ball bearing production was handled in Dresden by December 1944.
4) As a direct result of the bombing, Military infrastructure around Dresden was flattened and ultimately this led to the great success of the Lower-Silesia Offensive and the Vienna Offensive launched by the Soviets in the following months, due to the inability of OKW to meaningfully get supplies, munitions and men to the front and to rotate cleanly. It also completely removed Dresden as a chokepoint on the Elbe.
You can argue that without the bombing of Dresden, the allies would have still won, which is obviously true. But the same can be said for many bombing campaigns of late 44 and 45. The question you have to ask therefore is, how many lives did the deaths of 25,000 Germans in Dresden, save? The answer is, with a good degree of certainty, multiple orders of magnitude more. Compare the loss ratios on that sector of front in the Vistula-Oder offensive compared to the Lower-Silesia and Vienna offensives to see the difference it made to the casualties on the Soviet side of the Eastern front. It also wasn't a one off bombing raid either, after the city was flattened, the Allies kept coming back to it to make sure that the railways were not being repaired, and the factories were not being rebuilt or re set up. It was a huge strategic objective.
Now comes the question: Why is there so much fuss around Dresden?
and the answer ties in with many of the myths of WWII, which is Nazi propoganda mixed in with post-war revisionism. After Dresden, the Germans released media coverage that up to 490,000 Germans had been butchered at Dresden (the real number was around the 25,000 mark). Then, in the post war memories of many notable nazi's/Wehrmacht commanders, many desperately downplayed the importance of Dresden as a useful strategic location. For example, Eric Von Manstein spent almost a year in 1944 recovering from surgery in Dresden, and wrote in his memoirs that it was a peaceful city with no military significance. Guderian, likewise in his memoirs, said the same thing (Which is hilarious because in documented minutes of OKH high command, Guderian personally recommend Dresden to be a Verteidigungsbereich. During the cold war, Eastern sources were not available, so historians genuinely took and believed the provenance of Wehrmacht memoirs as accurate sources. This is also how the "clean wehrmacht" myth stems from, if you read Franz Halder/Rundstedt/Manstein's memoirs, you'd think the Wehrmacht were true professional soldiers with no ties to Nazism, which was far from the case.
Like the Clean Wehrmacht tales, when the Soviet archives were finally opened up alongside the Western equivalents post Cold war, much of the truth of Dresden came into light.
The war is about Netanyahu buying time until he feels he's recovered in the polls and can win an election again.
Deeply evil.
How is this discussed among the "average" Israeli? It is crazy to me that this could be obvious and just accepted by people. Are people so blinded by blood lust and revenge that they don't care?
Are Miller & Kirby coloured?Easier to do questionable shit when you've got a minority as the face.
No.There are countless videos/tiktoks of these scumbags doing things like this.
I'm wondering whether this is normal behaviour, as I think this is one of the first wars in the 'shorts' social media era. I haven't been keeping up with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, are similar videos being made in that conflict too?
It means a country of 10 million people is mocking the world, including the United States of America!What does the sifting mean? They’re checking it for contraband?
Mimicking flour preparation, some places they sift before using get rid of larger clumps or other debris.What does the sifting mean? They’re checking it for contraband?
They are mocking everyone. No respect to anyone. You could send them 100 billion dollars, defend them at the Security Council and literally fight alongside them, and they will still make fun of you. Ungrateful!Mimicking flour preparation, some places they sift before using get rid of larger clumps or other debris.
There's nothing genuine about these videos other than psychological torture of their victims and a middle finger to the UN in this instance.