Just how dumb is the GOP base...?

S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
OddBall1st said:
Zero perception
Click to expand...
hey..anytime your up to critical thinking test..i'm game..i just totally beat a whole class and scored 10 points because i read and listened to instructions given by professor.

everyone else failed..those 10 will come in handy fo' shiznit:lol:
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
hey..anytime your up to critical thinking test..i'm game..i just totally beat a whole class and scored 10 points because i read and listened to instructions given by professor.

everyone else failed..those 10 will come in handy fo' shiznit:lol:
Click to expand...
Yet unable to answer the phone or wait tables.
 
Harrekin

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
pnwmystery said:
Haha thanks Red1966. I know that these debates can get heated, but if we can poke fun at each other in a light way it makes it all the better. :bigjoint:
Click to expand...
Ask Red how you burn someone's house down without anyone knowing.

Then ask him how his families (note: plural) died.

 
OddBall1st

OddBall1st

Well-Known Member
pnwmystery said:
Well looks like the history lesson is going to continue...

What are you talking about? Gibraltar was already secure; Eisenhower chose it as his HQ when the U.S. began to give direct military assistance to North Africa in 42. The Royal Navy controlled the Strait of Gibraltar, as they had since 1702. The aim of the Royal Navy was to never control the Mediterranean and during WW2 the Royal Navy Command decided to focus on the Strait of Gibraltar, Malta, and the Suez Canal, or in other words: securing the Allied supply lines and defending them.

In '42 the Jean Bart was not operational,. It was being refitted in Casablanca. During the landings of Operation Torch it opened fire from the port of Casablanca with its one functional turret. The USS Massachusetts silenced her by jamming the rotating mechanism. The Jean Bart was then sunk in harbor, she never left port and was refloated after the war. Moreover Casablanca is on the Atlantic coast of Morocco, and down - about 410km (something like 250 miles) from Gibraltar. Her guns cannot fire that far.

On the topic of the Regia Marina it was not capable of projecting its force past Ibiza in 1940, though it could harass Gibraltar. It was a known fact that the Regia Marina relied on small attack craft which were pretty successful, but their larger ships lacked radar, armor, and modern (for the time) range finders meaning that they were very weak.

I mean, the Battle of Taranto in 1940, one of the first actions was a first-of-its-kind surprise attack on the Regia Marina when it was in port in Taranto. It was actually studied by Japanese Naval officers in the lead up to Pearl Harbor because it was the first time an all out air attack had been launched against a naval force. This put half of the Regia Marina's larger ships out of commission for several months. This forced the Italian navy further North.

Then in '41 there was the Battle of Cape Matapan off the coast of Greece where the Regia Marina lost three heavy cruisers, and two destroyers.

By 1942 the Italians couldn't project force past Sardinia, and if I recall correctly (please correct me if I'm wrong) the major landings of Operation Torch were not in the Mediterranean but on the Atlantic.
Click to expand...



Like I said, the strait was not passible for warships until late 42,...it was mined, shore batteries, and had air cover.

Bart was a replacement for the dreadnaughts that had the back door, once finished she would have been more powerful, accurate and a threat than Bismarck. She had full power and one turret when attacked,...had Torch been three months later, Different story. The SODAKs were finished and the first thing they did, with factory workers still aboard, was get Bart. It had to be done first and earlier than the British wanted to do things. The British did not see eye to eye with the US and the US strategy. The British would not have been able to navigate the Med sea, as they thought they could,...ask HMS Barnham why you don`t go for the canal yet? Barnham would still be afloat had she not gone for the canal thinking everything was as hunky dory as you claim in Gibralta.

They way the US did it was the way to go. The Italian Navy (built by Japan) had to be pushed back passed Sicily. The US would not have been as successful had they taken British advice.

How could the British write they controlled the Med sea or Gibralta when all they did was lose ships because of it ?

Don`t listen to the British point of view, it`s all about them.

I`ve gotten pretty good at moving ships around and to go into the Med sea with the back door covered and then reinforced by Bart,...was the move of a loser. The Second SODAK North of 59, SO. Dakota I think was the back door gatekeeper,...until then, the MED. Sea navigation was out for America.

59 sank more than just Bart,...she took out the three subs indirectly by keeping them from leaving.

Most killing and dispatching was done indirectly, that`s a key when putting your Battleship on B-8 or h-7 or in the corners of the board.

Romo was delayed by restricting fuel so she could not be launched and out of the Med. All kinds of thing went bad for the Italian Navy because of their stupidity mostly. When the Italian Naval Might was finished, it was trapped. What good did that do them.

You fail to see the dangers of anything enemy Navy getting out of the Med Sea. Operation Torch prevented that. The British had no clue.

I stand by Torch as the first operation necessary. Anything else would be for show.
 
OddBall1st

OddBall1st

Well-Known Member
So you know the differences in magnitude and capabilities of the new modern BB`s, Nothing of the day stood a chance in the Med sea against the US SODAK Class. Gatekeeping at Gibralta was ask and do as it says,...unless you`re on Bart.
 
pnwmystery

pnwmystery

Well-Known Member
Siiiiiiiigh...

@OddBall1st You really need to just stop, and accept that I'm stating well known facts lest you become the model for the title of this thread.

The strait of Gibraltar was passable, it was controlled by the Royal Navy. This is a fact and a very well known one.

The Italian navy was not built by the Japanese, it was built the Italians, and the Jean Bart was a Richelieu-class battleship built to counter the new Italian battleships. The Jean Bart was not operational, it was incomplete in 1940 - another fact. While she was state of the art, she did not have a fire control radar, which is why she was unable to hit US ships so no, she was not more dangerous than the Bismark. She was sunk in harbor, she never left it because she could not.

The HMS Barham was sunk off the coast of Egypt by a U-Boat, this is another fact.

I'm sorry to break it to you, but your history is really really skewed. The US had pretty much nothing to do with the Middle East in World War II, unless you count North Africa as the Middle East (but really, it's North Africa). So that pretty much destroys your argument that we need to support Israel because we somehow magically liberated the Mid. East during World War II (which we didn't). QED.
 
OddBall1st

OddBall1st

Well-Known Member
pnwmystery said:
Siiiiiiiigh...

@OddBall1st You really need to just stop, and accept that I'm stating well known facts lest you become the model for the title of this thread.

The strait of Gibraltar was passable, it was controlled by the Royal Navy. This is a fact and a very well known one.

The Italian navy was not built by the Japanese, it was built the Italians, and the Jean Bart was a Richelieu-class battleship built to counter the new Italian battleships. The Jean Bart was not operational, it was incomplete in 1940 - another fact. While she was state of the art, she did not have a fire control radar, which is why she was unable to hit US ships so no, she was not more dangerous than the Bismark. She was sunk in harbor, she never left it because she could not.

The HMS Barham was sunk off the coast of Egypt by a U-Boat, this is another fact.

I'm sorry to break it to you, but your history is really really skewed. The US had pretty much nothing to do with the Middle East in World War II, unless you count North Africa as the Middle East (but really, it's North Africa). So that pretty much destroys your argument that we need to support Israel because we somehow magically liberated the Mid. East during World War II (which we didn't). QED.
Click to expand...

I haven`t sated anything hat is also well known.

Look at it the simplest way possible, the Mid East was taken, The USA is the reason the 3rd lost WWII, the Mid East is not taken by the 3rd anymore,....Summed up.

To the victor go the spoils..............
 
Aeroknow

Aeroknow

Well-Known Member
OddBall1st said:
I haven`t sated anything hat is also well known.

Look at it the simplest way possible, the Mid East was taken, The USA is the reason the 3rd lost WWII, the Mid East is not taken by the 3rd anymore,....Summed up.

To the victor go the spoils..............
Click to expand...
Do you know english?
Sorry if you do, but you make zero fucking sense. It's so hard to read your posts. It hurts!
 
OddBall1st

OddBall1st

Well-Known Member
I can, but then I wouldn`t be OB`1st.

It`s OK, not everyone can understand,...I get that a lot and If you don`t,.....You don`t.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top