Given a chance would you kill baby Hitler?

[Anomalocaris]

The so called "Sichelschnitt" certainly sruvived contact. It worked even better than Manstein had expected.

Perhaps the Allies simply worked worse than expected? 

As for Dunkirk there are lots of contradictory explanations about that from Hitler's own WWI recollection that the terrain in the area was unsuitable for tank warfare to the very probable suggestion that the idea originated with Von Rundstedt and not Hitler.  German infantry divisions largely had horse-drawn artillery and did not move anywhere near as fast as the panzer divisions.  Re-grouping the panzers for a drive against France while giving the infantry time to move up their heavy guns does make some sense.   Add in Goering's bullshit about the Luftwaffe's ability to prevent an evacuation  and you end up with a situation of counting your chickens before the eggs hatch.

Hannible's plans also worked as far as we can tell perfectly at cannae.   A plan that is far outside the conventional notion of what is plausible, executed very forcefully and quickly, fast enough get inside the enemy's observe, orient, decide and act loop to prevent the enemy from adapting, and backed by high quality staff work that prevents rapid build up of internal friction, usually survive encounter enemy sufficiently intact as to remain clearly recognizable until it attains its objectives.

From 1939 to early 1943, the most important element German military successes against enemies of comparable or superior strengths can almost all be pinned down to the ability to get inside the enemy's OODA loop.   From mid 1943 onwards, it was the Soviet who were able to consistent get inside German OODA loops.  That was probably the underlying reason why war on the east went from German tactical supremacy to Soviet tactical supremacy so quickly, with very little in the way of a period of evenly matched stalemate.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I'm not giving you anything on the sly. The only difference between what the USA does when it instigates wars, and what another power does is which side of the conflict you belong to. If it's the other side it's labelled "terrorism" and if its your side "counter-terrorism". Labelling ISIL a terrorist organisation is disingenuous - they are taking over land by military conflict, exactly what has been done for millennia, and exactly how the USA became the USA.

Well, duh. All nations treat their own involvement in a conflict as righteous, and the enemy's as illegitimate.

The more truthful, more honest thing we could say is that we want to put military conflict behind us as a species; it's in our past and we want to learn from it and move on from it.

Sure. Let me know when you think that'll happen.

You want data? I'll give you data.

1898-1934 the USA instigated the Banana Wars. This involved the USA instigating war, sorry I mean terrorist activity, with a number of Central American nations such as Mexico, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Dominican Republic, and others; the reasons were for the USA's economic interests in the region, and it left those countries economically devastated, and even today they continue to be third-world regions of the world.

"I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents." (War Is a Racket, 1935)

Shall I continue?

As I've already noted, you're supporting a present-tense claim with historical events. By that same token, we could criticize Australia for its racism based on its policies of the 1930s.

The 1954 Guatemalan coup d'état was a covert terrorist operation carried out by the CIA that disposed the democratically-elected head of state in Guatemala, and installed a US-backed military dictatorship.

Indeed. No one here is arguing the moral superiority of Americans. You are being asked to support the claim that the United States is the largest terrorist country in the world.

The Vietnam War, perhaps not started by the USA, but their involvement in terror raised it to a different level and left Vietnam devastated for decades. Many war crimes including the torture and murder of POWs, and the slaughtering of innocent civilians were either committed or supported by the US military.

Since 1980 the USA has been conducing terrorist activity in the middle east, and other places, including in: Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Nicaragua, Lebanon, Panama, Haiti, Sudan, Kosovo, and other countries.

One man's war is another man's terror, apparently. I'm certainly not justifying any of them when I point out that classing war as terrorism in order to rescue a weak point is pretty silly. You clearly don't know how to support a point with data. When I asked you to do that, the appropriate response would be to present the number of terrorist incidents committed by the US, and also the number of terrorist acts committed by the other states of the world. That constitutes support. This, however, is a litany of anecdotes lacking the background information necessary to support your point.

Since 2002 they have operated an illegal concentration-camp/death-camp in Cuba in which detainees have been tortured, killed, and denied their rights under the Geneva Conventions.

The claim that the USA is the worlds leading terrorist state is easily supported with data.

If it is so easy, you should be able to do it.

Don't go thinking that I love all Muslims. I don't. I specifically despise their religion, and Scientology - and I'll tell you why. Because right from the beginning, Islam was not only a religion, but also a political persuasion. Other religions, like Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism don't restrict political views. They can influence them of course, but they don't have political views that are intertwined with their religions the way that Islam does.

No one said you did, dumbass. I was pointing out how you're being a dick when you wish for violence amongst Americans, many of whom -- myself included -- have spoken up against the foreign policy mistakes of the last fifteen years.

Again, all I wish is for the US government and civilians to feel the same oppression supported by the US government and military elsewhere. Not more, not less, the same.

Go fuck yourself, then, with a cactus.

And I would also like Bush, Cheney, Obama, and everyone else guilty of war crimes, of the UN convention against torture, and other international crimes to be held accountable.

I absolutely agree.

You don't seem to realise that the misery that the USA has created through terrorist acts (most of them illegal) are still being felt, and will be felt for centuries to come.

Actually, I do, given my personal background. The difference between you and me is that I'm wise enough to understand that the answer to America's misdeeds is not more suffering, but for us Americans to install a government which reflects the desires of the people and not the corporate oligarchs.

As much as anything else I want the US government disposed of by military force so they cannot continue their illegal military terrorist activities.

lol, you're funny. Have you been drinking?

Opinion polls don't span the globe, they take opinion in one place. I've already given you examples of why the USA is a terrorist state and needs to be disposed, it's up to you to provide counter evidence. If you want a Formal Debate just say so, but otherwise bring your evidence to the table.

A survey is a fucking opinion poll, whether it crosses a border or not is irrelevant. The fact is that an opinion poll is not support. Hopefully you're smart enough to see the point.

When I asked you for numbers, I meant direct numbers supporting your claim comparing the terrorist activities of America versus those of the other nations.

Either you have that data, or you don't. I think it's clear at this point that you don't. I think you're forgetting the terror committed by Russia, in the main; your ideological blindness has you committing such a juvenile blunder as forgetting the largest nation on Earth, with its Chechnian and Georgian wars, not to mention its assassinations and its involvement now in the Syrian debacle. Were I to take up your mistake and support a current claim with historical example, I'd point out to you the Soviet invasions of East Germany, Poland, Hungary, and Afghanistan, as well as the domestic terror practiced by that regime.

Or we could talk about the terror Mao inflicted in his "Great Leap Forward".

You should certainly be counting those instances, by your own logic, flawed though it is. Let me know when our toll of victims has hit 30 million before we've even crossed our own borders, eh?

The fact that you are ignoring these regimes merely underlines the point that your dislike is emotionally driven, irrational, and impedes your thinking in ways that are obvious to everyone who reads your drivel.

[brewer]

Pssst: Me thinks Aractus doth protest to much.

[robvalue]

So are we killing him or not?

I got bored and went back and killed a bunch of other babies. I hope they weren't anyone important.

[Thumpalumpacus]

The Germans had spent the last decade to form independent tank units, acting as a formidable strike force, whereas the allies still viewed them as infantery support units.

That's pretty much what I said, yes.

[Fake Messiah]

Or maybe just go in time and persuade those teachers at art class to let him enter that painting school, because some speculate that he was just frustrated because of that. Maybe he could have been a happy little painter like Bob Ross.

I think that people are mostly products of their time and even the Hitler wasn't the biggest butcher in XX. century.

Funny thing is that Jeb! gets asked that considering that for years there have been speculation that Bush family was one of the main shareholder companies that funded Hitler to rise to power.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/se...ndworldwar

[IATIA]

Pretty much everyone was on board with Hitler in the beginning.

[vorlon13]

So are we killing him or not?

I got bored and went back and killed a bunch of other babies. I hope they weren't anyone important.

Making baby jerky ?

Gonna keep it all to urself ??

[brewer]

So are we killing him or not?

I got bored and went back and killed a bunch of other babies. I hope they weren't anyone important.

I think the majority says not, but I'm not going back to tally.

Killed a dozen babies this AM making omelets. Now them was some mighty fine tasting dead babies.

[abaris]

From 1939 to early 1943, the most important element German military successes against enemies of comparable or superior strengths can almost all be pinned down to the ability to get inside the enemy's OODA loop.

Most importantly, they could keep up the charade of basically repeating the Schlieffen-Plan. Noone on the allied side expected them to to break through the ardennes. They considered them impassable for tanks and didn't take into account the work the German pioneers did. Nonetheless, veterans spoke about the biggest traffic jam in history and air raids could have done away with the German deployment easily.