|
War of 1812?I think a lot of people posting here have, myself included. I got sent to the office because I corrected my history teacher’s comment that the USA has never been invaded by a foreign power.As long as I am not the only one who was suspended for correcting my teachers.Don't worry, I was aware of said lies IN high school. Having a voracious appetite for reading, particularly history, lead to some very interesting "debates" between me and my teachers...Yep. There's iggerance afoot. Though, it's partly the fault of the textbooks. Read "Lies My Teacher Told Me" by James Loewen if you want the straight skinny on the s@*~ you got fed in high school.This is very similiar to the first thing FDR did to...Wow, the Depression lasted until Lend Lease right before we entered WWII. Um, FDR did not "pull us out of the Depression". World War Two did...
Just wow...
No, you weren't :)
Mexican American war and WWII also. The teacher was a dumba##.
|
I had a English teacher who kept referring to ancient Celtic literature as "Seltic" literature. When I told her that the "Seltics" were a basketball team, and the "Keltics" were an ethnic group she responded "Oh, it doesn't matter, they're all dead now." You here that Ireland and Scotland? You're all dead!
But I never got sent to the principal for correcting a teacher. I went to nice private schools where they don't discourage students to think.
Mexican American war and WWII also. The teacher was a dumba##.
While US territory was invaded in WWII, I'm going to give the teacher a pass on the Mexican-American war. Fighting over disputed territory between the Rio Grande and Nueces rivers shouldn't be considered an invasion of US territory. It's awfully hair-splitty whichever direction you take on it and not worth calling out a teacher on.
Unless, of course, there was a Mexican offensive north of the Nueces or into Kansas...
|
|
Mexican American war and WWII also. The teacher was a dumba##.While US territory was invaded in WWII, I'm going to give the teacher a pass on the Mexican-American war. Fighting over disputed territory between the Rio Grande and Nueces rivers shouldn't be considered an invasion of US territory. It's awfully hair-splitty whichever direction you take on it and not worth calling out a teacher on.
Unless, of course, there was a Mexican offensive north of the Nueces or into Kansas...
A couple of pushes were made north of the Nueces but no territory was held, Santa Ana only wanted to attack the army not hold the towns.
A couple of pushes were made north of the Nueces but no territory was held, Santa Ana only wanted to attack the army not hold the towns.
Mexican American war and WWII also. The teacher was a dumba##.While US territory was invaded in WWII, I'm going to give the teacher a pass on the Mexican-American war. Fighting over disputed territory between the Rio Grande and Nueces rivers shouldn't be considered an invasion of US territory. It's awfully hair-splitty whichever direction you take on it and not worth calling out a teacher on.
Unless, of course, there was a Mexican offensive north of the Nueces or into Kansas...
Fair enough, but I wouldn't expect many people outside of Texas to know about them. They don't seem to have been much more than a sideshow.
Though I find it surprising that the fighting over the Aleutian islands Japan took was overlooked. Still, in the grand scheme of things, neither was really of great significance, given the fish frying in other places. I have doubts, for instance, the Japanese would really have been able to exploit the Aleutian bases and threaten the US Navy's Pacific supply lines, given their terrible supply situation and bad procurement everywhere.
|
|
A couple of pushes were made north of the Nueces but no territory was held, Santa Ana only wanted to attack the army not hold the towns.
Mexican American war and WWII also. The teacher was a dumba##.While US territory was invaded in WWII, I'm going to give the teacher a pass on the Mexican-American war. Fighting over disputed territory between the Rio Grande and Nueces rivers shouldn't be considered an invasion of US territory. It's awfully hair-splitty whichever direction you take on it and not worth calling out a teacher on.
Unless, of course, there was a Mexican offensive north of the Nueces or into Kansas...
Fair enough, but I wouldn't expect many people outside of Texas to know about them. They don't seem to have been much more than a sideshow.
Though I find it surprising that the fighting over the Aleutian islands Japan took was overlooked. Still, in the grand scheme of things, neither was really of great significance, given the fish frying in other places.
If the Japanese were able to take Midway then the Aleutian bases would have taken on a greater importance, as it would allow the Japanese to make a two pronged attack on the pacific coast.
|
|
Yeah the Japanese actually had military bases on the Aleutian islands in Alaska.Yeah, but it was a territory, not a state. And it's not like they seized the land from armed defenders at any rate.
Maybe grizzly bears. But grizzly bears aren't American citizens.
The Virgin Islands are an American territory not a state but if any nation were to invade them you better believe the USA would consider it an attack on sovereign American territory. The same attitude was held for Alaska and Hawaii before they became states.
Several 100 native Alaskans were killed and captured during the invasion. Some of the captured were never returned or heard from again.
Mexican American war and WWII also. The teacher was a dumba##.While US territory was invaded in WWII, I'm going to give the teacher a pass on the Mexican-American war. Fighting over disputed territory between the Rio Grande and Nueces rivers shouldn't be considered an invasion of US territory. It's awfully hair-splitty whichever direction you take on it and not worth calling out a teacher on.
Unless, of course, there was a Mexican offensive north of the Nueces or into Kansas...
Read up on Pancho Villa & Columbus, NM. 1916, I believe.
|
|
Read up on Pancho Villa & Columbus, NM. 1916, I believe.
Mexican American war and WWII also. The teacher was a dumba##.While US territory was invaded in WWII, I'm going to give the teacher a pass on the Mexican-American war. Fighting over disputed territory between the Rio Grande and Nueces rivers shouldn't be considered an invasion of US territory. It's awfully hair-splitty whichever direction you take on it and not worth calling out a teacher on.
Unless, of course, there was a Mexican offensive north of the Nueces or into Kansas...
Forgot about that one. Good catch.
|
|
The Virgin Islands are an American territory not a state but if any nation were to invade them you better believe the USA would consider it an attack on sovereign American territory. The same attitude was held for Alaska and Hawaii before they became states.
It was a joke.
Several 100 native Alaskans were killed and captured during the invasion. Some of the captured were never returned or heard from again.
That makes it a lot less funny.
|
|
Read up on Pancho Villa & Columbus, NM. 1916, I believe.
Mexican American war and WWII also. The teacher was a dumba##.While US territory was invaded in WWII, I'm going to give the teacher a pass on the Mexican-American war. Fighting over disputed territory between the Rio Grande and Nueces rivers shouldn't be considered an invasion of US territory. It's awfully hair-splitty whichever direction you take on it and not worth calling out a teacher on.
Unless, of course, there was a Mexican offensive north of the Nueces or into Kansas...
A bandit raid shouldn't qualify, even if pershing chased the dude all over the southwest...
This is very similiar to the first thing FDR did to...Wow, the Depression lasted until Lend Lease right before we entered WWII. Um, FDR did not "pull us out of the Depression". World War Two did...
Just wow...
Well remember what Biden promised us, that Obama would be challenged within 6 months. Maybe we'll get "lucky" and have WWIII start and we can get out of our economic depression. [/snark]
Ladies and Gentleman, I give you the first African American President Elect in the History of the United States. Ladies and Gentlemen, President Elect Barack Obama
Indeed, perhaps now many in the African American community can stop preaching victimization and others will stop listening to it.
Of course John McCain's greatest mistake was that he allowed himself to be born a white man, the shame.
Indeed, perhaps now many in the African American community can stop preaching victimization and others will stop listening to it.Of course John McCain's greatest mistake was that he allowed himself to be born a white man, the shame.
Wow. That snark didn't take long to appear.
Darn them uppity black folk getting themselves all elected through a well-organized political campaign as if they were white.
John McCain's mistakes were to sell out to the religious right, pick a novelty for a running mate, and pick guys who ran a disorganized campaign.
If the Japanese were able to take Midway then the Aleutian bases would have taken on a greater importance, as it would allow the Japanese to make a two pronged attack on the pacific coast.
Except no attack on the Pacific coast would have been coming. The attack on Pearl Harbor was supposed to be the knock-out blow to make sure we'd be too wary of going to defend the Philippines. The base in the Aleutians and prospective one on Midway were mainly just pickets on the defensive perimeter.
Wow. That snark didn't take long to appear.
Indeed, perhaps now many in the African American community can stop preaching victimization and others will stop listening to it.Of course John McCain's greatest mistake was that he allowed himself to be born a white man, the shame.
Actually the snark was about a war starting to get us out of the recession we are in. That is why it said [/snark] and not [snark].
Darn them uppity black folk getting themselves all elected through a well-organized political campaign as if they were white.
Huh? What are you talking about. I specificly said that I hoped that Obama would end the continuation of the idea of "victimization", you come back with a victimization statement. Kind of missed the point didn't you?
Darn them uppity black folk getting themselves all elected through a well-organized political campaign as if they were white.Huh? What are you talking about. I specificly said that I hoped that Obama would end the continuation of the idea of "victimization", you come back with a victimization statement. Kind of missed the point didn't you?
Didn't read like it. Read a whole lot more like stereotypical labeling of African-Americans as always playing the victim card, particularly with the comment about McCain's mistake of being born white.
|
|
Wow, the Depression lasted until Lend Lease right before we entered WWII. Um, FDR did not "pull us out of the Depression". World War Two did...
Just wow...
Learned that in high school, did you?
It's far more complicated than that, and the New Deal policies had mostly restored the economy to pre-crash levels by 1939. The war merely provided a boom.
Of course John McCain's greatest mistake was that he allowed himself to be born a white man, the shame.Sounds like another 'victimization' sermon getting started ...
Indeed, see how silly it sounds. :D
I hope that nobody voted for Obama based on his ethnicity, and I hope nobody decided to vote against McCain based on his ethnicity (and how it was similar to previous presidents). Just as I hope nobody voted for McCain for his ethnicity or against Obama for his. Of course, I know that that hope has little likelihood. But I would have another hope that at least people see how hypocritical the first situation is when they condemn the latter one.
As MLK said, let's judge people (good or bad) on the merits of their character and not on the color of their skin.
[url=smurf][/url]I wrote in Brainy Smurf. Cos he's blue.
|
|
Wow, the Depression lasted until Lend Lease right before we entered WWII. Um, FDR did not "pull us out of the Depression". World War Two did...
Just wow...
Learned that in high school, did you?
It's far more complicated than that, and the New Deal policies had mostly restored the economy to pre-crash levels by 1939. The war merely provided a boom.
17% unemployment in '39 was "pre-crash" levels?
According to most sources, we emerged from the depression in 39 when we borrowed a billion dollars to start our military buildup. This would indicate that, yes, the depression ended because of WW2, not the New Deal.
Side note, Great Britainm didn't emerge from the Depression until 1938, when it started to build up in anticipation of war...
And, as a side note, I could do without the condescention, thank you :)
|
|
Except no attack on the Pacific coast would have been coming. The attack on Pearl Harbor was supposed to be the knock-out blow to make sure we'd be too wary of going to defend the Philippines. The base in the Aleutians and prospective one on Midway were mainly just pickets on the defensive perimeter.
If the Japanese were able to take Midway then the Aleutian bases would have taken on a greater importance, as it would allow the Japanese to make a two pronged attack on the pacific coast.
I disagree, no attack on the pacific coast happened because the Japanese navy failed to hit their primary targets at Pearl Harbor, the aircraft carriers. If we had lost the carrier fleet to the Japanese it would have taken about two years longer to rebuild the pacific fleet allowing the Japanese to implement an attack on the pacific coast. The Japanese just failed to call off the Aleutian invasions or hoped to distract the US fleet from the south Pacific.
|
stuff concerning a previous post of mine...
I have no problem with welfare...
I have a problem with those that say it is unfair for them to be required to search for a job while on it. I have a problem with people who lived in Idaho and claimed to live in New Orleans so they could get a government check (katrina anyone?). I have a problem with those sipping vodka and surfing the web while sponging off of SSI, when they can could EASILY get a job inputting data into a computer (or whatever)...
So yeah, welfare should be reformed so it is easier to get help in legitimate situations such as your neighbor’s and perhaps yours. But not for people that think the government OWES them a living...
And when one has gotten back on their feet, they go back to work. That is what a "hand-up" is...
I disagree, no attack on the pacific coast happened because the Japanese navy failed to hit their primary targets at Pearl Harbor, the aircraft carriers. If we had lost the carrier fleet to the Japanese it would have taken about two years longer to rebuild the pacific fleet allowing the Japanese to implement an attack on the pacific coast. The Japanese just failed to call off the Aleutian invasions or hoped to distract the US fleet from the south Pacific.
At the risk of digressing from the thread further, what would or could an attack on the Pacific coast of the US have accomplished? Pretty much nothing. So such things never got beyond wild contemplation stage.
No, the plan was knockout blow and hope to not wake the sleeping giant (though Yamamoto really had no illusions on that score).
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
There actually were attacks on North American soil in WW2, several by the Japanese:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks_on_North_America_during_World_War_II
Of course John McCain's greatest mistake was that he allowed himself to be born a white man, the shame.
So Obama got elected because he was black?
LOL
Of course John McCain's greatest mistake was that he allowed himself to be born a white man, the shame.So Obama got elected because he was black?
LOL
Not exactly what I said. I was suggesting McCain might have lost because he was white, or at least some people chose not to vote for him because he DID look like all those other guys on the money.
|
|
Wow, the Depression lasted until Lend Lease right before we entered WWII. Um, FDR did not "pull us out of the Depression". World War Two did...
Just wow...
Learned that in high school, did you?
It's far more complicated than that, and the New Deal policies had mostly restored the economy to pre-crash levels by 1939. The war merely provided a boom.
17% unemployment in '39 was "pre-crash" levels?
According to most sources, we emerged from the depression in 39 when we borrowed a billion dollars to start our military buildup. This would indicate that, yes, the depression ended because of WW2, not the New Deal.
That ignores the steady increase in GDP and employment that occurred during the years between 1934 and 1939. Look, I don't want to argue with some lame right winger in denial about the effectiveness of the New deal in pulling America out the tailspin it was in and getting it back on track. I know you guys like living in fantasyland, but hey you lost, I officially don't have to listen to you guys anymore.
And, as a side note, I could do without the condescention, thank you :)
Wow, if you find it annoying, perhaps you shouldn't end your replies with snide asides. Just wow...
If the Japanese were able to take Midway then the Aleutian bases would have taken on a greater importance, as it would allow the Japanese to make a two pronged attack on the pacific coast.
Using what for an army? Supplying it how? Also they'd still have had to take out Hawaii or they'd face having their transports intercepted prior to attempting to land. Not that they'd actually attempt it - there is no invasion of America in Japanese military plans. Its simply not on the agenda no matter how well they do - maybe if they some how win endless shattering victories (better then they did historically (and they did well historically for the first six months)) then maybe they make a grab for the Panama Canal but that'd be it.
Read up on Pancho Villa & Columbus, NM. 1916, I believe.
Mexican American war and WWII also. The teacher was a dumba##.While US territory was invaded in WWII, I'm going to give the teacher a pass on the Mexican-American war. Fighting over disputed territory between the Rio Grande and Nueces rivers shouldn't be considered an invasion of US territory. It's awfully hair-splitty whichever direction you take on it and not worth calling out a teacher on.
Unless, of course, there was a Mexican offensive north of the Nueces or into Kansas...
A bandit raid shouldn't qualify, even if pershing chased the dude all over the southwest...
Still the British were marching all over the place during some parts of the War of 1812. They had occupied Maine at wars end and launched several attacks pretty deep into American territory.
Indeed, perhaps now many in the African American community can stop preaching victimization and others will stop listening to it.Of course John McCain's greatest mistake was that he allowed himself to be born a white man, the shame.
Wow. That snark didn't take long to appear.
Darn them uppity black folk getting themselves all elected through a well-organized political campaign as if they were white.
John McCain's mistakes were to sell out to the religious right, pick a novelty for a running mate, and pick guys who ran a disorganized campaign.
running in the same party as a president that is widely considered to have been an absolute failure sure didn't help either. Its hard to see how he could have done all that much better.
There actually were attacks on North American soil in WW2, several by the Japanese:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks_on_North_America_during_World_War_II
Some how sneaking a sub up to the coastline of the US and firing its deck gun at some buildings does not strike me as really qualifying as an invasion and its an attack only in a pretty loose sense of the term.
I disagree, no attack on the pacific coast happened because the Japanese navy failed to hit their primary targets at Pearl Harbor, the aircraft carriers. If we had lost the carrier fleet to the Japanese it would have taken about two years longer to rebuild the pacific fleet allowing the Japanese to implement an attack on the pacific coast. The Japanese just failed to call off the Aleutian invasions or hoped to distract the US fleet from the south Pacific.Except no attack on the Pacific coast would have been coming. The attack on Pearl Harbor was supposed to be the knock-out blow to make sure we'd be too wary of going to defend the Philippines. The base in the Aleutians and prospective one on Midway were mainly just pickets on the defensive perimeter.
If the Japanese were able to take Midway then the Aleutian bases would have taken on a greater importance, as it would allow the Japanese to make a two pronged attack on the pacific coast.
Even if the Pacific fleet had gone to the bottom it would not have resulted in an attack on the Pacific Coast.
#1 their plans just did not call for it. They were planning on setting up 'fortress islands' which were supposed to resist any American Counter Attack and bleed the Americans to the point where America just gave up on the war... this of course is a ludicrous fantasy but its the best teh Japanese could come up with.
#2 Even if they had chosen to modify their plans they still would have had to deal with America's Atlantic Fleet - which could have been switched to the Pacific in a crisis.
#3 Even if the Japanese then managed to engage and decisively defeat the Atlantic fleet they'd still have to deal with fact that any Japanese fleet approaching the Pacific Coast would be destroyed by America's land based air force.
#4 If they had some how come up with a means to defeat America's land based air force they'd still have to come up with an army capable of invading. They basically don't have such an army. Most of their ground forces spent the whole war in China since Japan was never able to actually conquer China. They have maybe a dozen divisions running around the South Pacific - which are pretty much currently all tied down where they are.
#5 Even if they had managed to free up three or four divisions and found transport to send them to the Pacific coast they'd have no way of maintaining a supply line to such forces.
#6 Even if they had managed to overcome that hurdle some how they'd have been crushed when the Americans brought up 10 divisions of hastily called up and armed troops since America can, if they need to, call upon a huge pool of military aged males while the Japanese just don't have much more then maybe three divisions they could possibly free up to make such a landing.
Maybe the Japanese make a grab for Panama with a couple of Special Landing force battalions but thats the most I could see them trying. San Fransisco is simply not a reasonable objective.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
Some how sneaking a sub up to the coastline of the US and firing its deck gun at some buildings does not strike me as really qualifying as an invasion and its an attack only in a pretty loose sense of the term.There actually were attacks on North American soil in WW2, several by the Japanese:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks_on_North_America_during_World_War_II
It's definitely an attack, and an interesting chapter in WW2 history :) The parts of the thread I saw just mentioned "attacks", so I figured I'd mention that they did indeed happen. But obviously invading the US was never on the radar - the goal was to keep the US from getting involved at all.
Not exactly what I said. I was suggesting McCain might have lost because he was white, or at least some people chose not to vote for him because he DID look like all those other guys on the money.Of course John McCain's greatest mistake was that he allowed himself to be born a white man, the shame.So Obama got elected because he was black?
LOL
I see how those two are totally different.
And it's now obvious to me that McCain's loss had nothing to do with the decisions he and his team made on the campaign trail. It's just because he looked like a white skinned fatcat.
It's all so clear.
Wow ... take a day off and the political posts go nutz ...
Well, Democrats, you have your mandate. Go forth and do something with it. Personally I loathe the inevitable increase in government and taxes, but the masses have spoken. That's what makes representative democracy a workable governmental system, freedom to make the descisions on who we are ruled by (and the responsibility to suffer under those choices).
I guess I will wait for a viable third party that will hopefully represent those of us who are tired of the politics of personality and the bribery of constituents with pork money. I had hopes of the Libertarians, but their amazingly inept choice of Barr as a nominee has really soured me on them, possibly forever.
Time to hunker down and hope I have a job come next year. Perhaps I should just stop paying my mortgage now to get on the list for a bailout. Should have gotten a sub prime one while I still could.
feh .... The bedraggled monkey shambles off to the PbPs
|
|
Not exactly what I said. I was suggesting McCain might have lost because he was white, or at least some people chose not to vote for him because he DID look like all those other guys on the money.
According to a survey i read yesterday on a german page it seems thet ethnicitity played a relatively minor role. Only 19% said that this had influenced their vote and to be honest I consider this to be great news.
From an outside point of view I think McCains crucial mistake was the election of Sarah Palin as his vice-president. He should have avoided at all costs any impressions that he would continue the mistakes his forerunner had made in plenty. And while Palin is a newcomer (and turned this into an advantage for McCain for a short time) it became clear soon that she represents the worst of the Republican Party (at least for all people sitting on the fence or just having another political position).
And now let's see how long the european love for the new president will last. ;)
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
Not exactly what I said. I was suggesting McCain might have lost because he was white, or at least some people chose not to vote for him because he DID look like all those other guys on the money.Of course John McCain's greatest mistake was that he allowed himself to be born a white man, the shame.So Obama got elected because he was black?
LOL
I get so tired of Republicans playing the race card all the time.
Seriously, people held a lot of things against McCain: his age, his Republicanism, his choice of Sarah Palin as VP, and his voting record. It would be a stretch to say that people voted against him because he was white.
My evidence for this belief?
Did some people vote for Barack because they think of him as 'black'? Maybe. Did some people vote against Barack because they think of him as 'black'? Yep. However, he won because he was dynamic, invigorating, offered hope, and represented change.
At the risk of digressing from the thread further, what would or could an attack on the Pacific coast of the US have accomplished?
Perhaps Japanese control of Alaska could have increased the common sense ratio up there. I can't believe they are going to elect a convicted felon to the Senate. First Bible Spice and now this.
|
|
I get so tired of Republicans playing the race card all the time.Wow, Pot meet Kettle.;-)
For the record though, have I ever played the race card? No. Saying McCain may have lost because he was white is the biggest bowl of sour grapes I've seen in a long time.
And, of course, I never said you did play the race card. What I was responding to was your hypocrisy - Democrats are just as guilty of playing the race card.
Look, I don't want to argue with some lame right winger in denial about the effectiveness of the New deal in pulling America out the tailspin it was in and getting it back on track. I know you guys like living in fantasyland, but hey you lost, I officially don't have to listen to you guys anymore.
[snark] wow, that's not insulting at all [/snark]
If you don't want to argue sometimes it's better not to. The line btwn the New Deal and the WWII buildup and their impact on pulling us out of the Depression has been debated for decades. And apparently continues to be. The tone of your argument detracts from its effectiveness.
Both were effective. You're arguing degrees.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
I get so tired of Republicans playing the race card all the time.Wow, Pot meet Kettle.;-)
For the record though, have I ever played the race card? No. Saying McCain may have lost because he was white is the biggest bowl of sour grapes I've seen in a long time.
And, of course, I never said you did play the race card. What I was responding to was your hypocrisy - Democrats are just as guilty of playing the race card.
Yep. I realize that. I was aiming for irony not hypocrisy.
It is hard to convey irony or sarcasm on the Internet though so it is easy to misunderstand. Perhaps 'pres man' has been being ironic in statements that implied John McCain may have lost because he was white. Hard to tell.
In interest of full disclosure, as a Canadian I'm not actually a 'Democrat' but probably would be if I lived in the States ... until a viable third party persuaded me otherwise.