patrick.net

Ceffer says

I'll have to use this or a variation of this at my next checkup.

Patrick says

US did though sacrifice many men in that war. normandy was bloody.

True, quite a lot, though the Russians lost many more.

FortwayeAsFuckJoeBiden says

US did though sacrifice many men in that war. normandy was bloody.

With all due respect for the people that went to that war, the US didn't make any difference in the outcome. The US should have never been involved.

The Marshall Plan was important though, if it wasn't for that, all of Europe could have become part of the Soviet empire.

Hitler cut through the Russians like a hot knife through butter.
His strategic blunder was destroying Stalingrad to spite Stalin.
Had Hilter not wasted hundreds of thousands of men and time, he would have easily marched into Moscow.
Hitler arguably invented modern Western warfare.

richwicks says

US didn't make any difference in the outcome. The US should have never been involved.

The Soviets would have starved in 1943 and surrendered. Right now you are seeing Russia operate it's military without massive US (and British) aid that they had in WW2.

https://babylonbee.com/news/white-house-lit-up-with-symbol-of-religious-cult

Patrick says

How does the Fire Brigade work?

A Fire Brigade was a formation created by field level officers to plug a gap or take an objective. It was given a mix of small units specifically chosen for a task and given dedicated air and arty support and put under the command of an officer who can do whatever the hell he wants to make sure it's achieved.

British used soldiers from all over the world. Never gave credit.

E.g
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33317368
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/India_in_World_War_II

Like, everything that is sick, depraved, corrupt and criminal about DC?

richwicks says

With all due respect for the people that went to that war, the US didn't make any difference in the outcome.

If not for the English and Americans in the West, WWII would have ended with Soviet domination of Europe.

zzyzzx says

richwicks says

US didn't make any difference in the outcome. The US should have never been involved.

The Soviets would have starved in 1943 and surrendered. Right now you are seeing Russia operate it's military without massive US (and British) aid that they had in WW2.

... and they are failing to subdue a much smaller and weaker opponent.

In WWII the US has basically fed, clothed, provided arms and transportation for the Red Army and material for the stuff they manufactured themselves. But ignoramuses gonna ignorame (yes, invented word).

All the Soviets have to show for it is their enormous losses (of which they are idiotically proud) stemming mostly from flawed tactics and general disregard for human lives.

HeadSet says

If not for the English and Americans in the West, WWII would have ended with Soviet domination of Europe.

Again, that was accomplished with the Marshall Plan.

Remember, the USSR was on the side of the Allies.

RWSGFY says

All the Soviets have to show for it is their enormous losses (of which they are idiotically proud) stemming mostly from flawed tactics and general disregard for human lives.

The Soviets, and the Allies, both enormously overestimated their losses in WWII in order to divvy of the spoils of war.

We live today accepting as facts what was propaganda and just lies of the time. There's plenty.

richwicks says

The Soviets, and the Allies, both enormously overestimated their losses in WWII in order to divvy of the spoils of war.

Nice try. The reported Soviet losses went way up after USSR achives were (briefly) open in 1991-93. Like 2x up.

richwicks says

Again, that was accomplished with the Marshall Plan.

It was accomplished with brutal force of US military stationed in Europe. Where it was absent all agreements to hold fair elections were reneged by the USSR and countries were put under Soviet yoke up unitl 1989.

RWSGFY says

In WWII the US has basically fed, clothed, provided arms and transportation for the Red Army and material for the stuff they manufactured themselves.

Here, from the horses' mouths:

"I want to tell you what, from the Russian point of view, the president and the United States have done for victory in this war. ...The most important things in this war are the machines.... The United States is a country of machines. Without the machines we received through Lend-Lease, we would have lost the war." -- Joseph Stalin at the November 1943 Tehran conference

"If the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. One-on-one against Hitler's Germany, we would not have withstood its onslaught and would have lost the war. No one talks about this officially, and Stalin never, I think, left any written traces of his opinion, but I can say that he expressed this view several times in conversations with me." -- Nikita Khrushchev in his memoirs

Eric Holder says

Nice try. The reported Soviet losses went way up after USSR achives were (briefly) open in 1991-93. Like 2x up.

Well, give us a link..

Everybody lied about their losses in WWII, except perhaps the United States.

Eric Holder says

It was accomplished with brutal force of US military stationed in Europe. Where it was absent all agreements to hold fair elections were reneged by the USSR and countries were put under Soviet yoke up unitl 1989.

The US handed over countries like Poland to the USSR. Typical of the United States, they fucked over a lot of smaller allies that helped them. They did it to Vietnam. Before WWII, the agreement the US made with Ho Chi Minh was that if he supported the allies against Japan, the US would support Vietnam's bid for independence from France.

But France refused to join NATO if the US supported Vietnam's bid for independence, so the US reneged on their promise and that led to the Vietnam war because Minh found he got support from the USSR and China in his bid for independence. That war ultimately bankrupted the United States, which led to the "Nixon Shock" which started us off to doubling our national debt, every 8 years, from 1971 to now.

The US should have just gone to war with France. That would have been easy to win. They were already defeated. Not like we needed France in NATO anyhow. Fuck 'em.

https://t.me/TheBabylonBee/4032

The Ivies are whores. High class whores, but whores nonetheless. Immoral and unethical at core. I mourn that my nephew is one of the prison camp guards at Stanford, executing the vax mandates on the pups.
https://naomiwolf.substack.com/p/my-day-at-yale

Patrick says

Maybe I'm confusing the gay flag in the Vatican with the Vatican itself putting up such a flag. But Pope Francis has definitely been leaning that way

Looks like the pope is actively promoting sodomy:

Patrick says

Patrick says

Maybe I'm confusing the gay flag in the Vatican with the Vatican itself putting up such a flag. But Pope Francis has definitely been leaning that way

Looks like the pope is actively promoting sodomy:

thats gotta be photoshopped. there been a lot of made up bullshit about pope… all fake. like they wrote that he supports gay marriage. but he doesn’t.

FortwayeAsFuckJoeBiden says

thats gotta be photoshopped. there been a lot of made up bullshit about pope… all fake. like they wrote that he supports gay marriage. but he doesn’t.

It is just a matter of time.
When far left NGOs think he is great, then you know there is a problem.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/10/21/pope-francis-supports-same-sex-civil-unions?gclid=CjwKCAiAy_CcBhBeEiwAcoMRHK84q_rqvMFcvjWYBWh3EMVT48LbsifDdr9eAXDk81mmrUolD9RGdRoCj_wQAvD_BwE

Catholic church will recognize same sex marriages - it is just a matter of time and "education."

krc says

https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/10/21/pope-francis-supports-same-sex-civil-unions?gclid=CjwKCAiAy_CcBhBeEiwAcoMRHK84q_rqvMFcvjWYBWh3EMVT48LbsifDdr9eAXDk81mmrUolD9RGdRoCj_wQAvD_BwE

Click bait.

Go through their articles from years ago, and see if they are generally accurate or full of shit.

FortwayeAsFuckJoeBiden says

thats gotta be photoshopped

Seems to be real:

https://aleteia.org/2018/10/19/why-is-pope-francis-wearing-a-rainbow-hued-cross/

It is claimed that it just happens to be rainbow and has nothing to do with gayness. But:

https://the-american-catholic.com/2018/10/19/popewatch-rainbow-cross/

Pope Francis is either the stupidest pope in the history of the Church, completely oblivious as to how his rainbow cross would be perceived, or he is a fully paid up member of the Lavender Mafia.

richwicks says

Click bait.

A basic search will show numerous articles on the change towards homosexuality, same sex civil unions, and marriage on the part of the Catholic church.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/pope-francis-supports-same-sex-civil-unions-but-the-church-must-do-more
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/21/world/europe/pope-francis-same-sex-civil-unions.html

Are you saying the church is not headed in that direction or that these are completely fake and in fact the Catholic church
is still fundamentally opposed to same sex marriage and homosexuality?

I get that the leadership of the church may not reflect the values of certain geographies, but it is pretty clear that the Catholic church,
rightly or wrongly, is moving in the direction towards acceptance of LGBT values and incorporating those values into the Catholic institution -
which is critical for funding of LGBTQ programs etc... And while Pope Francis remains clear that "marriage"
is separate as covered by sacrament (I think his quote was "marriage is marriage" - whatever he meant by that),
certainly this is a significant change in outlook. Once you change the outlook, then you can change the institution.

krc says

Click bait.

Just recently: https://www.thetaskforce.org/faith-leaders-respond-to-pope-francis-comments-on-lgbt-people/
Not that I think a church needs to be cruel or mean; however, it should have some standards that are set.
You promote what you acknowledge and support.