anyone going to the inauguration?

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2924626
Journey, you're the one trying to rewrite history, not me. It has been said time and time again by EXPERTS on Pearl Harbor, that Japanese pilots PURPOSELY flew their injured planes and hit any ground target that was available. Where exactly are you getting your expert sources on the subject? Is the "History Of The World According To Journey" available in paperback?
This is an excerpt from the book - Thunder Gods The Kamikaze Pilots Tell Their Story By Hatsuho Naito Translated by Mayumi Ichikawa. 215 pages. Illustrated. Kodansha International/Farrar, Straus & Giroux. $18.95.
Almost a year before Pearl Harbor, Gen. Hideki Tojo, the war minister, ordered the publication of a code called ''Ethics of Battle'' for the armed forces. Even without mentioning the divinity of the Japanese Emperor - whose name was frequently invoked to inspire soldiers and civilians to turn the war into a holy cause - the fanatical military code laid the groundwork for the kamikaze pilot program: It justified self-immolation, if necessary, in the name of personal and national honor.
''A sublime sense of self-sacrifice must guide you throughout life and death,'' the code said. ''Do not think of death as you use up every ounce of your strength to fulfill your duties. Make it your joy to use every last bit of your physical and spiritual strength in what you do. Do not fear to die for the cause of everlasting justice. Do not stay alive in dishonor. Do not die in such a way as to leave a bad name behind you!''
So I imagine that any honorable Japanese pilot that was damaged and still over Pearl Harbor, honored this code, knowing very well they would die. You call it what you want Mr. History.
I love it when anyone disputes the Word Of Journey, they are deemed liberals.
I find it amazing how one person can be the expert for any historic situation that arises. Do you just sit on the crapper with a history book at your side, trying to memorize interesting historical tidbits so you can completely annoy any person you talk to that really doesn't care what you know?
wow, you are saying the same thing he is, just you want to call it Kamikaze, and he doesn't.
Then you accuse him of rewriting history. When you're the one wanting to expand the Kamikaze definition to include people who flew into ships after their plane was damaged, vs the actual Kamikaze squadrons who took off for the whole purpose of flying into ships. Where the name Kamikaze actually came from.
Can't you just see it for what it is, instead of blubbering on, digging yourself in a deeper hole.
 

oscardeuce

Active Member
bionicarm ,
Is your Dad Welch,Rasmussen,Sanders,Sterling or Taylor? I wish I'd met those men.
The brother of one of my best friends (a F-51 pilot in Korea) is on eternal patrol on the USS Arizona.
Pilots generally paid attention to the plane they were attacking. Some had gunners in the back seat. You would attack that aircraft in a different manner than a single seat fighter.
Both sides kept surprisingly good records of losses.
 

gypsana

Active Member
bionicarm=troll. Do not think he is here primarily for the saltwater hobby if you look at his thread history. If you ignore it maybe it will go away other than that it can argue with one's self.
 

veni vidi vici

Active Member
Originally Posted by hlcroghan
http:///forum/post/2924123
Okay, that is not very nice. It also does not help in this discussion when you talk about killing someone's pets.
As for the banning of firearms, they are quite correct that cities and smaller areas are doing it. In the City of Chicago it is illegal to own a handgun. How is that for supporting the 2nd Amendment? In fact if they find you with one I believe it is a minimum of 5 years or something crazy like that.
Its a maximum of 6 months and or a hefty fine.This ordnance is going to be short lived after the US Supreme Court ruling finding it Unconstitutional.Plus it hasnt worked,Chicago is once again the murder capital of the USA.
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2924634
The Founding Fathers didn't write that line with the intention of the US being the freedom saviors of the world. It was a statement against the oppression of English rule. It afforded all American citizens the right to go out and make a life for themselves. It doesn't say We The American People Will Go Forth and Provide These Same Freedoms To Any Nation That Wants To Follow Them. We are not the Democracy Cops of the world. We don't have the right to push our beliefs on another society just because we think it would be better for them. So why not go invade the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark? Those are coutries run by a Monarchy aren't they? I'm sure they'd prefer the American-way of democracy over thiers. Shoot, I'm sure the Russians and Chinese would prefer our way of life as well. That's called World Domination. That's when the Big Red Button gets pushed and we all go see that Creator that's called out in that same line you quoted.
You people are the ones who keep saying our Constitution was based on the principles of christianity and religious beliefs. So please don't try and spin the 'creator' word some other way that we very well know what they intended it to mean.

So what you are saying is Life Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness is only right born to American citizens. The rest of the world doesn't get these rights. What you are also saying is these rights can't be obtained in a Monarchy or any other form of government except a democracy. And what you are also saying is because it doesn't state we should promote these values in other countries specifically that we should not. Yet The things that these documents and the constitution clearly touch on, (bigger government) it is ok to ignore. which is it, do we abide by these documents or do we not? I am confused.
And please show me which religion calls their god specifically the Creator and only the creator. And the constitution is different than the declaration of Independence. This is the declaration we are talking about, not the constitution.To separate documents with two separate purposes.
 

stdreb27

Active Member

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/2925208
So what you are saying is Life Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness is only right born to American citizens. The rest of the world doesn't get these rights. What you are also saying is these rights can't be obtained in a Monarchy or any other form of government except a democracy. And what you are also saying is because it doesn't state we should promote these values in other countries specifically that we should not. Yet The things that these documents and the constitution clearly touch on, (bigger government) it is ok to ignore. which is it, do we abide by these documents or do we not? I am confused.
And please show me which religion calls their god specifically the Creator and only the creator. And the constitution is different than the declaration of Independence. This is the declaration we are talking about, not the constitution.To separate documents with two separate purposes.
I'm not getting how All men
endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights.
Doesn't mean ALL MEN...
If you were watching a guy dig a ditch with his hands and you were leaning on a shovel, you'd be a pretty big prick if you didn't offer him the shovel, and if he'd never heard of it. Try to talk him into using it.
 

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by gypsana
http:///forum/post/2925049
bionicarm=troll. Do not think he is here primarily for the saltwater hobby if you look at his thread history. If you ignore it maybe it will go away other than that it can argue with one's self.

And what rock did you crawl out from under? Did you get bored answering the same hundred questions about ich, QT tanks, what kind of fish can I add to my tank, what's this red stuff on my rocks, etc.? Decided to come to the Aquarium board an be obnoxious for a change?
 

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2924653
wow, you are saying the same thing he is, just you want to call it Kamikaze, and he doesn't.
Then you accuse him of rewriting history. When you're the one wanting to expand the Kamikaze definition to include people who flew into ships after their plane was damaged, vs the actual Kamikaze squadrons who took off for the whole purpose of flying into ships. Where the name Kamikaze actually came from.
Can't you just see it for what it is, instead of blubbering on, digging yourself in a deeper hole.
stdreb (what exactly is that an acronym for anyway?), the only reason I keep elaborating about kamikaze pilots is because journey had to bring out his Mr. History hat and do his standard correcting of someone about a simple statement made in the context of a conversation. I stated my father shot down two Jap zeros, journey goes on his history rampage about the exact number of zeros that were shot down at Pearl, how there were no kamikaze pilots at Pearl, blah, blah, blah. I woldn't dwell on the subject if journey didn't continually pipe in with his supposed expertise on every historical subject ever discussed on this site.
 

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/2925208
So what you are saying is Life Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness is only right born to American citizens. The rest of the world doesn't get these rights. What you are also saying is these rights can't be obtained in a Monarchy or any other form of government except a democracy. And what you are also saying is because it doesn't state we should promote these values in other countries specifically that we should not. Yet The things that these documents and the constitution clearly touch on, (bigger government) it is ok to ignore. which is it, do we abide by these documents or do we not? I am confused.
And please show me which religion calls their god specifically the Creator and only the creator. And the constitution is different than the declaration of Independence. This is the declaration we are talking about, not the constitution.To separate documents with two separate purposes.
Do you honestly think the authors of the Declaration were thinking that far ahead into the future to even fathom the impact of what type of government they were creating, and that it could possibly affect people in other countries that at the time, they didn't even know existed? If other countries want to pursue those same values, fine, let them do it. But you are saying the US should be the one to go out and 'assist' these people pursue these desires. I'm saying it's none of our business. If a country that is run by a Monarchy wants to change to a more Democratic society, and the majority of people agree with it, go for it. But the US has no business going to Denmark and telling the people, "I think our Democratic values are better than the edicts you follow under a Monarchy rule. We think you need to change since we feel it would be better for your people."
Are you a religious person? Are you going to tell me you've never heard the word Creator used as a reference to God? I don't read the bible, but if I'm not mistaken, the word Creator is used in that book on several occasions. Hello journey, you out there? We need a historical check here....
 

1journeyman

Active Member

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2925416
stdreb (what exactly is that an acronym for anyway?), the only reason I keep elaborating about kamikaze pilots is because journey had to bring out his Mr. History hat and do his standard correcting of someone about a simple statement made in the context of a conversation. I stated my father shot down two Jap zeros, journey goes on his history rampage about the exact number of zeros that were shot down at Pearl, how there were no kamikaze pilots at Pearl, blah, blah, blah. I woldn't dwell on the subject if journey didn't continually pipe in with his supposed expertise on every historical subject ever discussed on this site.
I "piped" in because you were wrong... The entire conversation evolved because I posted a 1 sentence correction to your post about kamakazis being used at Pearl Harbor. I then used that example to show how we all in fact DO need to study history from a variety of sources.
I have NEVER claimed I'm an expert. In fact, I'm the one running around telling people we ALL need to study history
more while you're claiming you can't trust history...
Bionic, in order for threads in the Aquarium to have any worth errors must be corrected. You seem to take it as a personal affront anytime you are shown to be in error. If it bothers you, fact check your posts before hitting enter. I certainly do before I post anything...
I don't just correct those on the "Left". I lost count of how many times I corrected the "Obama is a Muslim" statement over the past 6 months.
When someone posts an inaccuracy, I correct it. Feel free to do the same when I post something you find to be in error.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2925429
Do you honestly think the authors of the Declaration were thinking that far ahead into the future to even fathom the impact of what type of government they were creating, and that it could possibly affect people in other countries that at the time, they didn't even know existed?
Yes, absolutely. They were fully aware that what they were doing was truly historic. They were justifying their actions for the whole world to see. Don't forget, by the time the Declaration was written the Colonial powers of Europe had discovered and colonized across the whole world.
Originally Posted by Bionicarm

Are you a religious person? Are you going to tell me you've never heard the word Creator used as a reference to God? I don't read the bible, but if I'm not mistaken, the word Creator is used in that book on several occasions. Hello journey, you out there? We need a historical check here....
Darth's question to you regarding the word Creator was to show which religion specifically calls their god "Creator" exclusively; not if the Bible uses the word "Creator".
 

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2925416
stdreb (what exactly is that an acronym for anyway?), the only reason I keep elaborating about kamikaze pilots is because journey had to bring out his Mr. History hat and do his standard correcting of someone about a simple statement made in the context of a conversation. I stated my father shot down two Jap zeros, journey goes on his history rampage about the exact number of zeros that were shot down at Pearl, how there were no kamikaze pilots at Pearl, blah, blah, blah. I woldn't dwell on the subject if journey didn't continually pipe in with his supposed expertise on every historical subject ever discussed on this site.
school email address std = student reb = my initials 27 = the # of reb's before me
there weren't. unless you want to change the definition of Kamikaze
 

bionicarm

Active Member

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2925438
I "piped" in because you were wrong... The entire conversation evolved because I posted a 1 sentence correction to your post about kamakazis being used at Pearl Harbor. I then used that example to show how we all in fact DO need to study history from a variety of sources.
I have NEVER claimed I'm an expert. In fact, I'm the one running around telling people we ALL need to study history
more while you're claiming you can't trust history...
Bionic, in order for threads in the Aquarium to have any worth errors must be corrected. You seem to take it as a personal affront anytime you are shown to be in error. If it bothers you, fact check your posts before hitting enter. I certainly do before I post anything...
I don't just correct those on the "Left". I lost count of how many times I corrected the "Obama is a Muslim" statement over the past 6 months.
When someone posts an inaccuracy, I correct it. Feel free to do the same when I post something you find to be in error.

I was wrong by simple definition. I called them kamilaze pilots. The Japenese pilots with damaged planes crashed on purpose to inflict more damage, as opposed to trying to get back to their ship. Call them suicide runs if you want. I get chastised because I used a term that pretty much every other person I know that remembers WW2 would use the exact same term for that action. Why? Because that's how it's portrayed in the movies and media. You take the anal view and correct me simply because the term didn't come into play until later in the same war. The problem with you is your little interventions do nothing more than make you appear to be this snide know-it-all. Do you think I have any respect for you whatsoever because of you think you're the resident expert in history? Never claim to be an expert. Please. You sure spend a lot of time correcting people here for not being an expert. I'll ask again, where do you come up with all your facts? What are these illustrious resources you use to come up with these instant tidbits of history? You didn't just post a 1 sentence response. You seemed to know that there were EXACTLY 29 Japanese planes that went down in Pearl. What book of magic did you use to find that information?
 

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2925448
Yes, absolutely. They were fully aware that what they were doing was truly historic. They were justifying their actions for the whole world to see. Don't forget, by the time the Declaration was written the Colonial powers of Europe had discovered and colonized across the whole world.
Darth's question to you regarding the word Creator was to show which religion specifically calls their god "Creator" exclusively; not if the Bible uses the word "Creator".

Give me direct quotes from anyone in the Second Continental Congress that's states that one reason for craeting a Democracy was to be able to spread those principles across the world. The Thirteen original Colonies where at war with England and the British Empire. Their whole concentrated effort was to break free from that rule. They weren't concerned with other colonies that were popping up elsewhere in the world. They had their own problems to deal with.
Let's go back to what started the argument about the word Creator. I implied that they used the word Creator in that line as an implied reference to their ties to religious beliefs. Darth goes off on this tangent about what specific religion uses the word Creator. It had nothing to do with my statement. I could care less which specific religions believe that Creator is the same as God. If the Founding Fathers didn't intend it to be a religious tie in, why did they put the word in there the first place?
I know you history experts hate referencing Wikipedia, however, they break down every major word in this historic line. When you click on the word 'Creator', it takes you here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creator_deity
Read that topic to see which religions base their faiths on creationism.
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2925633
Give me direct quotes from anyone in the Second Continental Congress that's states that one reason for craeting a Democracy was to be able to spread those principles across the world. The Thirteen original Colonies where at war with England and the British Empire. Their whole concentrated effort was to break free from that rule. They weren't concerned with other colonies that were popping up elsewhere in the world. They had their own problems to deal with.
Give me direct quotes where the second constitutional congress stated that the government is to give money and food to the populace should they not afford them. Give me direct quotes stating only certain guns are ok for ownership and others are not. I can give direct quotes on these issues stating just the opposite of what you support and our government has done anyway.
Either you believe in these documents as they were written or you don't. In your case you do not, unless it suits your agenda and beliefs.
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
I know many a person that do not belong or follow a religion but believe in a "creator". Believing in a "creator" does not mean a practicing or following of religion.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2925633
Give me direct quotes from anyone in the Second Continental Congress that's states that one reason for craeting a Democracy was to be able to spread those principles across the world. The Thirteen original Colonies where at war with England and the British Empire. Their whole concentrated effort was to break free from that rule. They weren't concerned with other colonies that were popping up elsewhere in the world. They had their own problems to deal with.....
So, if that is true, why didn't they simply say "All colonists" instead of "all men"?
Jefferson was arguing against the Imperial powers of the day, not just England.
 

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2925996
So, if that is true, why didn't they simply say "All colonists" instead of "all men"?
Jefferson was arguing against the Imperial powers of the day, not just England.
Why didn't they say "all men and women", or "all men in every civilized world"? Who knows why they phrased it the way they did. The whole issue is Darth wants to imply they intended it to mean we as Americans should force our Democratic philosophies on anyone we see fit. We should go forth and spread the "American Way" on all these semi-developed countries that don't know who they want to be. All that does is create conflict. Didn't we rail Russia for attacking Afghanistan and Ukraine? They just wanted to extend their political beliefs on those countries. What's the difference with them invading those countries and what we did to Iraq?
So I'll ask again, if they didn't use the word Creator to reflect their religious beliefs, why did they use that word?
 
Top