VIDEO: Students Struggle to name a single just war the U.S fought

First topic message reminder :

Ahead of Veterans’ Day, Eduardo Neret traveled to Howard University to ask students if there has been any U.S. war that was justified.

Most students said no war was justified, including WWII.




https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=13977

Simple wow.

Not even the American war of independence?

Some said the Civil war, but WW2 many did not think was justified in fighting the Nazi's of the Japanese?

Seriously?

I would love to know what history they are actually being taught?

As are they not aware that Nazi Germany declared War on the US and the Japanese attacked the US?

Original Quill wrote:

phildidge wrote:This is the biggest argument against Quills crackpot claims. The very fact when the US joined the war it was the western Theater that became the priority and not the Pacific. If Both Roosevelt and Churchill conspired to get the US into the war on the British side. Then it would make far more sense for them to have Germany provoked into attacking US forces, navy etc.

I agree, the European war was the primary concern.  But, indeed, Germany was provoked into declaring war on the US.  On December 11, 1941, Germany was called upon to honor it's commitment to declare war on anyone warring with their partner, Japan.  So, he did so.

For four days Churchill and Roosevelt held their breath, wondering whether Hitler would follow the Axis pact.  After all, Japan started it, and for that reason Hitler hesitated for 96 hours.  Hitler no doubt knew that he had been hornswoggled, but he went through with it nonetheless.

The reality is that war with the United States had been included in Hitler’s agenda for years, that he had deferred hostilities only because he wanted to begin them at a time, and under circumstances, of his own choosing, and that the Japanese attack fitted his requirements precisely. It had been an assumption of Hitler’s since the 1920s that Germany would at some point fight the United States. Already in the summer of 1928 he had asserted in his second book (not published until I did it for him in 1961, as Hitlers zweites Buch) that strengthening and preparing Germany for war with the United States was one of the tasks of the National Socialist movement. Because his aims for Germany’s future entailed an unlimited expansion and because he thought the United States might at some time constitute a challenge to German domination of the globe, a war with the United States had long been a part of the future he envisioned. It would come either during his own rule or during that of his successors.

https://www.historynet.com/hitler-declared-war-united-states.htm

Learn some real history Quill

Nonsense, your cite merely argues that Hitler wanted war with the US. Gerhard L. Weinberg, "Why Hitler Declared War on the United States," in HistoryNet. We may or may not agree on that, but it is wholly off-point. We are talking about Roosevelt/Churchill, and what they knew about, and planned for with regard to Japanese intentions.

Those plans probably calculated on Hitler declaring war on the US, as evidenced by what actually happened. But that has little to do with the provocation of the Japanese.

Once again, you can't process. You cannot logically recognize that both articles might be true, without contradiction between them. Roosevelt/Churchill may well have manipulated the Japanese and Hitler may have welcomed it.

Your problem isn't history; your problem is perception of logic.

Original Quill wrote:Nonsense, your cite merely argues that Hitler wanted war with the US.  Gerhard L. Weinberg, "Why Hitler Declared War on the United States," in HistoryNet.  We may or may not agree on that, but it is wholly off-point.  We are talking about Roosevelt/Churchill, and what they knew about, and planned for with regard to Japanese intentions.

Those plans probably calculated on Hitler declaring war on the US, as evidenced by what actually happened.  But that has little to do with the provocation of the Japanese.

Once again, you can't process.  You cannot logically recognize that both articles might be true, without contradiction between them.  Roosevelt/Churchill may well have manipulated the Japanese and Hitler may have welcomed it.

Your problem isn't history; your problem is perception of logic.

lol, so when faced with facts you get ansty
The fact is your views onChurchill and Roosevelt are not based on historical reality, but a percieved and biased view you have formed against each of them . The reality is Quill and on each and everytime we have debated this. Your history is utterly poor.

Not only did you post the views from a link, without the link which favoured your bias. You failed to post the link, because it was easily rebuked as nonsense.

That is being dishonest on your part

The reality is where a person wants something to be true. Like any religious radical, they will ignore all evidence and invent things to make their views fit. The reality is here, you have no idea about WW2 and i actuallu do, being as I studied this
Its why you always end up screwing up and myself correcting you

There is no logic to your claims. They are based on your paranoia, a bias and even worse a view you want to believe formed from fanatasy. Like any religious zealot. You never presented a single shred of evidence. It was only ever born from paranoia. With a view of you wanting to believe it was premeditated

The reality is as seen Hitler already had plans to go to war with the US. Hence your view in hindeight would be laughed out of just about every academic history Unisversity in the US

Its why I dont trust you to speak honestly on matters of history

As you were exposed here and badly so for posting views without a link. Which gave a two sided view on this. You never posted the link, because you knew the rebuttal made you look stupid. This is why you are not fit to teach. As you would teach a distorted and dishonested view of this part of history

Face facts mate, you got busted badly here

Plenty more where that came from.

Never mind past wars, the prospect of future wars is what terrifies me. Cos it will be cyberwarfare. The modern way!  And it will dwarf anything ever seen previously.


Don't wanna sound frivolous but I cannot WAIT for the next james bond flick. Action blockbusters are well researched and they seem to be one step AHEAD of govt intelligence agencies. Skyfall & Spectre mesmerised us!!

9/11 was predicted by moviemen like Oliver Stone & Michael Moore long before it happened. Strange!!

I agree with Rep. Steve King. We are heading for another civil war.

Jules wrote:Never mind past wars, the prospect of future wars is what terrifies me. Cos it will be cyberwarfare. The modern way!  And it will dwarf anything ever seen previously.


Don't wanna sound frivolous but I cannot WAIT for the next james bond flick. Action blockbusters are well researched and they seem to be one step AHEAD of govt intelligence agencies. Skyfall & Spectre mesmerised us!!

9/11 was predicted by moviemen like Oliver Stone & Michael Moore long before it happened. Strange!!

Really?

Yes Didge.

You are intelligent enough to realise that I do not mean they knew the EXACT date or nature of the attacks! But they have both said in documentaries that they could sense something was in the air and they could sense a build up to a major atrocity.


These two men are not just ordinary movie directors they are historians, investigative journalists and bestselling authors. Their research work brought them in close contact with the 'bad guys' and their affiliates ..... so both men are right in their claims that they were indeed a step ahead of the feds.

Hence why some of their movies were about events that subsequently happened. Intelligence-gathering at their own expense, gave them the material for their movie plots.

Jules wrote:Yes Didge.

You are intelligent enough to realise that I do not mean they knew the EXACT date or nature of the attacks! But they have both said in documentaries that they could sense something was in the air and they could sense a build up to a major atrocity.


These two men are not just ordinary movie directors they are historians, investigative journalists and bestselling authors. Their research work brought them in close contact with the 'bad guys' and their affiliates ..... so both men are right in their claims that they were indeed a step ahead of the feds.

Hence why some of their movies were about events that subsequently happened. Intelligence-gathering gave them the material for their movie plots.

I am intelligent enough  to know what you claim is false
As that is not a prediction, even more so based on your claim of 9/11
Basing views on hindsight after events to words previously said. Is not a prediction

So did they predict 9/11?

No ad please do not even attempt to claim tyey did, because they never did

You've never had a foreboding feeling that something big was about to happen?

Moore said close relatives of Bin Laden who were settled in the US suddenly fled the country leaving all their vintage car collections and other prized possessions behind, about a week before the attacks.



Like it or not, Didge, they knew something was in the air,  and when the atrocity did happen it did not surprise them.
As usual we'll have to agree to disagree and I'm fine with that.

Jules wrote:You've never had a foreboding feeling that something big was about to happen?

Moore said close relatives of Bin Laden who were settled in the US suddenly fled the country leaving all their vintage car collections and other prized possessions behind, about a week before the attacks.



Like it or not, Didge, they knew something was in the air,  and when the atrocity did happen it did not surprise them.
As usual we'll have to agree to disagree and I'm fine with that.

1) Name the family members? What Moore said was and I know it was a pack of lies to sell his video after the event on the war of terror. Or do you ever fact check Jules

2) Like it or not, you are easily sewayed without ever checking anything I guess

Its not even a case of disagreeing. Its simple false your claims here by them

phildidge wrote: Or do you ever fact check Jules

It depends.
My posts and opinions  are based on things I have already seen, I don't have to go back and double check.
If this means you will not confer the badge of authenticity and your blessings upon my posts, so be it.
I like both men and I have followed their work for decades.


Given your strictness for accuracy, and your constant accusations of ''hypocrisy''  at the members on here ...….
.... Perhaps you will now turn your criticisms to the politicians who apparently lie & lie & lie nearly everytime they open their mouth?

On one particular day during his campaigning last week, Boris made a series of claims, all of which were easily shown to be huge porkies, or plain nonsense.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/its-not-just-boris-johnsons-lying-its-that-the-media-let-him-get-away-with-it/ar-BBWWWmw?ocid=spartanntp
https://www.ft.com/content/645d8786-d9f2-11e9-8f9b-77216ebe1f17

So did the Magic" Grandpa" , but you never noticed that did you ?

Jules wrote:

phildidge wrote: Or do you ever fact check Jules

It depends.
My posts and opinions  are based on things I have already seen, I don't have to go back and double check.
If this means you will not confer the badge of authenticity and your blessings upon my posts, so be it.
I like both men and I have followed their work for decades.


Given your strictness for accuracy, and your constant accusations of ''hypocrisy''  at the members on here ...….
.... Perhaps you will now turn your criticisms to the politicians who apparently lie & lie & lie nearly everytime they open their mouth?

On one particular day during his campaigning last week, Boris made a series of claims, all of which were easily shown to be huge porkies, or plain nonsense.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/its-not-just-boris-johnsons-lying-its-that-the-media-let-him-get-away-with-it/ar-BBWWWmw?ocid=spartanntp
https://www.ft.com/content/645d8786-d9f2-11e9-8f9b-77216ebe1f17

All ireelevant Jules, when you made claims, you have not backed up
I am sure Boris has told many porkies, as generally all politicians do
You made claims on 9/11 which are not based on evidence but a view to make something fit in hindsight
That is not a prediction in any sense of the word

phildidge wrote:

Jules wrote:

It depends.
My posts and opinions  are based on things I have already seen, I don't have to go back and double check.
If this means you will not confer the badge of authenticity and your blessings upon my posts, so be it.
I like both men and I have followed their work for decades.


Given your strictness for accuracy, and your constant accusations of ''hypocrisy''  at the members on here ...….
.... Perhaps you will now turn your criticisms to the politicians who apparently lie & lie & lie nearly everytime they open their mouth?

On one particular day during his campaigning last week, Boris made a series of claims, all of which were easily shown to be huge porkies, or plain nonsense.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/its-not-just-boris-johnsons-lying-its-that-the-media-let-him-get-away-with-it/ar-BBWWWmw?ocid=spartanntp
https://www.ft.com/content/645d8786-d9f2-11e9-8f9b-77216ebe1f17

All ireelevant Jules, when you made claims, you have not backed up
I am sure Boris has told many porkies, as generally all politicians do
You made claims on 9/11 which are not based on evidence but a view to make something fit in hindsight

That is not a prediction in any sense of the word

Maybe you are focusing too hard on the accuracy of the term ''prediction'' but anyway I scoured YT and unearthed this vid. From c. 09:00 onwards you will see Oliver Stone say all the obvious signs were there, that an imminent terror attack was coming. It was predictable on that basis hence my use of the term.

(I also like that O. S. makes a point i made earlier myself - that it's 'inside' people who spill the beans. Hence more info can be garnered from what the baddies themselves voluntarily spill to journalists, reporters, tv networks whom they trust, than can be garnered by the govt agencies paid to spy on them.)

Here's a joke I adapted from another joke today and sent to edds, who sent me an eye-roll emoji. Y'all can tell me whether I truly deserved that or not:

A patriotic English woman gets a tattoo of Winston Churchill high up on her left thigh and of Margaret Thatcher high up on her right. 


Worried that they're difficult to recognize, she goes to a pub, takes off her knickers, hikes up her dress and asks a guy, "Can you tell who these Prime Ministers are?" 


The guy responds, "I don't recognize the ones on the left and right, but the one in the middle is definitely Boris Johnson!"

Jules wrote:

phildidge wrote:

All ireelevant Jules, when you made claims, you have not backed up
I am sure Boris has told many porkies, as generally all politicians do
You made claims on 9/11 which are not based on evidence but a view to make something fit in hindsight

That is not a prediction in any sense of the word

Maybe you are focusing too hard on the accuracy of the term ''prediction''  but anyway I scoured YT and unearthed this vid. From c. 09:00 onwards you will see Oliver Stone say all the obvious signs were there, that an imminent terror attack was coming. It was predictable on that basis hence my use of the term.

But its nothing more than hindsight, as what he is doing like many its making claims after an event and trying to make things fit to promote their view.

The very fact there had been a failed similar attack, by Al-qaeda, proves these people are being very dishonest in their approach

To say an immiment attack is coming and then claim this precdicts 9/11 is simple foily

As of course there was warnings of an attack and of other attacks happenning to US personnel around the globe

Hence your claim stands as unsubstanicated

So unless you have them making predictions prior to the event

Then their claims are spurious to say the least in regards to 9/11

nicko wrote:So did the Magic" Grandpa" , but you never noticed that did you ?

If you mean Corbyn - he is not a liar.
Life would be easier for him if he was a pathological liar like so many of his rivals.
What makes his life hard is his unflinching honesty.

Look, he has set his stall out with searing honesty, he has revealed his proposals and his vision of the world. Take it or leave it.
It's one thing to reject his policies if you find them unattractive - it's another thing to accuse him of lying.  
I'm not a supporter, as he is further left than I would prefer but I don't see him as a liar.

Ben Reilly wrote:Here's a joke I adapted from another joke today and sent to edds, who sent me an eye-roll emoji. Y'all can tell me whether I truly deserved that or not:

A patriotic English woman gets a tattoo of Winston Churchill high up on her left thigh and of Margaret Thatcher high up on her right. 


Worried that they're difficult to recognize, she goes to a pub, takes off her knickers, hikes up her dress and asks a guy, "Can you tell who these Prime Ministers are?" 


The guy responds, "I don't recognize the ones on the left and right, but the one in the middle is definitely Boris Johnson!"

That is hilarious

Don’t encourage him didge.

Jules wrote:

nicko wrote:So did the Magic" Grandpa" , but you never noticed that did you ?

If you mean Corbyn - he is not a liar.

He is a compulsive liar and is also a vile antisemite. That is beyond dispute

http://www.dailyglobe.co.uk/comment/jeremy-corbyn-is-a-serial-liar/

https://medium.com/@takooba/the-mounting-lies-of-jeremy-corbyn-56b0c5e739e3

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/11/03/doesnt-media-scrutinise-corbyns-lies-nhs/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6686593/Jeremy-Corbyns-40-years-plots-lies-intimidation-chaos.html

eddie wrote:Don’t encourage him didge.

Ben Reilly wrote:Here's a joke I adapted from another joke today and sent to edds, who sent me an eye-roll emoji. Y'all can tell me whether I truly deserved that or not:

A patriotic English woman gets a tattoo of Winston Churchill high up on her left thigh and of Margaret Thatcher high up on her right. 


Worried that they're difficult to recognize, she goes to a pub, takes off her knickers, hikes up her dress and asks a guy, "Can you tell who these Prime Ministers are?" 


The guy responds, "I don't recognize the ones on the left and right, but the one in the middle is definitely Boris Johnson!"

Her Beaver is Boris the Leaver?

phildidge wrote:

eddie wrote:Don’t encourage him didge.

Pfff. You’re as bad as each other.

phildidge wrote:

Jules wrote:

If you mean Corbyn - he is not a liar.

He is a compulsive liar and is also a vile antisemite. That is beyond dispute

http://www.dailyglobe.co.uk/comment/jeremy-corbyn-is-a-serial-liar/

https://medium.com/@takooba/the-mounting-lies-of-jeremy-corbyn-56b0c5e739e3

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/11/03/doesnt-media-scrutinise-corbyns-lies-nhs/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6686593/Jeremy-Corbyns-40-years-plots-lies-intimidation-chaos.html

Waving RW rags at me leaves me stone cold, Didge - they are even bigger liars than the people they like to accuse.

Jules wrote:

phildidge wrote:

He is a compulsive liar and is also a vile antisemite. That is beyond dispute

http://www.dailyglobe.co.uk/comment/jeremy-corbyn-is-a-serial-liar/

https://medium.com/@takooba/the-mounting-lies-of-jeremy-corbyn-56b0c5e739e3

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/11/03/doesnt-media-scrutinise-corbyns-lies-nhs/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6686593/Jeremy-Corbyns-40-years-plots-lies-intimidation-chaos.html

Waving RW rags at me leaves me stone cold, Didge - they are even bigger liars than the people they like to accuse.

Oh my, so you denying the lies that Corbyn claimed?

These were in all the main media, you can fact check for yourself

[*]Invited two IRA members to parliament two weeks after the Brighton bombing.

[*]Attended Bloody Sunday commemoration with bomber Brendan McKenna.

[*]Attended meeting with Provisional IRA member Raymond McCartney.

[*]Hosted IRA linked Mitchell McLaughlin in parliament.

[*]Spoke alongside IRA terrorist Martina Anderson.

[*]Attended Sinn Fein dinner with IRA bomber Gerry Kelly.

[*]Chaired Irish republican event with IRA bomber Brendan MacFarlane.

[*]Attended Bobby Sands commemoration honouring IRA terrorists.

[*]Stood in minute’s silence for IRA gunmen shot dead by the SAS.

[*]Refused to condemn the IRA in Sky News interview.

[*]Refused to condemn the IRA on Question Time.

[*]Refused to condemn IRA violence in BBC radio interview.

[*]Signed EDM after IRA Poppy massacre massacre blaming Britain for the deaths.

[*]Arrested while protesting in support of Brighton bomber’s co-defendants.

[*]Lobbied government to improve visiting conditions for IRA killers.

[*]Attended Irish republican event calling for armed conflict against Britain.

[*]Hired suspected IRA man Ronan Bennett as a parliamentary assistant.

[*]Hired another aide closely linked to several convicted IRA terrorists.

[*]Heavily involved with IRA sympathising newspaper London Labour Briefing.

[*]Put up £20,000 bail money for IRA terror suspect Roisin McAliskey.

[*]Didn’t support IRA ceasefire.

[*]Said Hamas and Hezbollah are his “friends“.

[*]Called for Hamas to be removed from terror banned list.

[*]Called Hamas “serious and hard-working“.

[*]Attended wreath-laying at grave of Munich massacre terrorist.

[*]Attended conference with Hamas and PFLP.

[*]Photographed smiling with Hezbollah flag.

[*]Attended rally with Hezbollah and Al-Muhajiroun.

[*]Repeatedly shared platforms with PFLP plane hijacker.

[*]Hired aide who praised Hamas’ “spirit of resistance“.

[*]Accepted £20,000 for state TV channel of terror-sponsoring Iranian regime.

[*]Opposed banning Britons from travelling to Syria to fight for ISIS.

[*]Defended rights of fighters returning from Syria.

[*]Said ISIS supporters should not be prosecuted.

[*]Compared fighters returning from Syria to Nelson Mandela.

[*]Said the death of Osama Bin Laden was a “tragedy“.

[*]Wouldn’t sanction drone strike to kill ISIS leader.

[*]Voted to allow ISIS fighters to return from Syria.

[*]Opposed shoot to kill.

[*]Attended event organised by terrorist sympathising IHRC.

[*]Signed letter defending Lockerbie bombing suspects.

[*]Wrote letter in support of conman accused of fundraising for ISIS.

[*]Spoke of “friendship” with Mo Kozbar, who called for destruction of Israel.

[*]Attended event with Abdullah Djaballah, who called for holy war against UK.

[*]Called drone strikes against terrorists “obscene”.

[*]Boasted about “opposing anti-terror legislation”.

[*]Said laws banning jihadis from returning to Britain are “strange”.

[*]Accepted £5,000 donation from terror supporter Ted Honderich.

[*]Accepted £2,800 trip to Gaza from banned Islamist organisation Interpal.

[*]Called Ibrahim Hewitt, extremist and chair of Interpal, a “very good friend”.

[*]Accepted two more trips from the pro-Hamas group PRC.

[*]Speaker at conference hosted by pro-Hamas group MEMO.

[*]Met Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh several times.

[*]Hosted meeting with Mousa Abu Maria of banned group Islamic Jihad.

[*]Patron of Palestine Solidarity Campaign – marches attended by Hezbollah.

[*]Compared Israel to ISIS, Hamas, Hezbollah and al-Qaeda.

[*]Said we should not make “value judgements” about Britons who fight for ISIS.

[*]Received endorsement from Hamas.

[*]Attended event with Islamic extremist Suliman Gani.

[*]Chaired Stop the War, who praised “internationalism and solidarity” of ISIS.

[*]Praised Raed Salah, who was jailed for inciting violence in Israel.

[*]Signed letter defending jihadist advocacy group Cage.

[*]Met Dyab Jahjah, who praised the killing of British soldiers.

[*]Shared platform with representative of extremist cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.

[*]Compared ISIS to US military in interview on Russia Today.

[*]Opposed proscription of Hizb ut-Tahrir.

[*]Attended conference which called on Iraqis to kill British soldiers.

[*]Attended Al-Quds Day demonstration in support of destruction of Israel.

[*]Supported Hamas and ISIS-linked Viva Palestina group.

[*]Attended protest with Islamic extremist Moazzam Begg.

[*]Made the “case for Iran” at event hosted by Khomeinist group.  

[*]Photographed smiling with Azzam Tamimi, who backed suicide bombings.

[*]Photographed with Abdel Atwan, who sympathised with attacks on US troops.

[*]Said Hamas should “have tea with the Queen”.

[*]Attended ‘Meet the Resistance’ event with Hezbollah MP Hussein El Haj.

[*]Attended event with Haifa Zangana, who praised Palestinian “mujahideen”.

[*]Defended the infamous anti-Semitic Hamas supporter Stephen Sizer.

[*]Attended event with pro-Hamas and Hezbollah group Naturei Karta.

[*]Backed Holocaust denying anti-Zionist extremist Paul Eisen.

[*]Photographed with Abdul Raoof Al Shayeb, later jailed for terror offences.

[*]Mocked “anti-terror hysteria” while opposing powers for security services.

[*]Named on speakers list for conference with Hamas sympathiser Ismail Patel.

[*]Criticised drone strike that killed Jihadi John.

[*]Said the 7/7 bombers had been denied “hope and opportunity”.

[*]Said 9/11 was “manipulated” to make it look like bin Laden was responsible.

[*]Failed to unequivocally condemn the 9/11 attacks.

[*]Called Columbian terror group M-19 “comrades”.

[*]Blamed beheading of Alan Henning on Britain.

[*]Gave speech in support of Gaddafi regime.

[*]Signed EDM spinning for Slobodan Milosevic.

[*]Blamed Tunisia terror attack on “austerity”.

[*]Voted against banning support for the IRA.

[*]Voted against the Prevention of Terrorism Act three times during the Troubles.

[*]Voted against emergency counter-terror laws after 9/11.

[*]Voted against stricter punishments for being a member of a terror group.

[*]Voted against criminalising the encouragement of terrorism.

[*]Voted against banning al-Qaeda.

[*]Voted against outlawing the glorification of terror.

[*]Voted against control orders.

[*]Voted against increased funding for the security services to combat terrorism.


[/list]https://order-order.com/2017/06/08/100-times-jeremy-corbyn-sided-terrorists/

Down, boy!!
You'll do yourself a mischief with this level of excitement!
Night.

Jules wrote:Down, boy!!
You'll do yourself a mischief with this level of excitement!
Night.

Are you calling me a dog now?
No mischief here, just am wondering when you are going to be able to get your head out of the sand in regards to Corbyn?

phildidge wrote:

Jules wrote:Down, boy!!
You'll do yourself a mischief with this level of excitement!
Night.

Are you calling me a dog now?
No mischief here, just am wondering when you are going to be able to get your head out of the sand in regards to Corbyn?

  What a great idea!

DIDGE, THE JUNKYARD DAWG!
Cuts and pasties of all RW blogs,
He barks through the fence,
But fails to make sense,
So he fetches another cup 'o grog