But, you will note that I did not get into the name calling (or at least not first :)
We could have carried on the debate about WWII. It was interesting to me, being a bit of a buff on the subject. I could have pulled out figures on troop sizes, head-to-head comparisons of weapons (the Soviets had stronger and more plentiful armor, massive and effective artillery, etc), production numbers, arms shipping methods/ETAs, tactics, etc. But, a lot of it was just speculation anyway, as there is no way to really see what would happen.
Tommy's retort was simply that the P51 would have saved the day; eerily reminiscent of Goering's claims that England could be brought to it's knees by airpower alone, or that Stalingrad could be supplied from the air. I think he made that argument because he's a bit of an aviation buff.
Yes, it does seem that the main purpose of this forum is not debate, even heated debate, but an outlet of frustrations for a minority of posters. I pity them. They obviously lead sad and pathetic little lives. For my part, I've found that some of these debates help me to see the viewpoint of others, and, if not agree, at least understand where they are coming from. |
