Hitler dolls comming soon!

Monkey Puzzle said:
The idea of war crimes is to stop people committing them, and punish them for committing atrocities such as mass killing, torture, rape etc. I'm not sure what is so stupid about that. Care to explain?
Click to expand...

in a world war there is no international treaties, allegiances or anything else. What's so hard to grasp. A world war is just that one huge battlefield. It's not pleasant but that's what it is.
 
Tefal said:
no they, slowly over a few weeks sent out bombers over cities, which did not have anti air defenses unlike military bases, or where well guarded by fighters like Tokyo, for a few weeks the bombers did nothing just flew over nice and slow, till everyone got used to them as just recon planes, then without word, nor warning the next time they flew over a little black dot fell from them.
Click to expand...


It could have just landed with a thud, it was new weaponology and failiure could happen. So the point is wherever one of those bombs was dropped it could have been a failed weapon and as you say captured and used to gain knowlege. I makes no difference where you drop it it can be captured if it fails to go off, unless dropped in the sea with adaquate depth.
 
HITMAN_LEON said:
. I makes no difference where you drop it it can be captured if it fails to go off, unless dropped in the sea with adaquate depth.
Click to expand...

It makes a huge difference where you fly a large slow unescorted bomber though...

One fighter plane could have stopped it, why do you think they didn't just bomb Tokyo?
 
AcidHell2 said:
And what happens if they didn't? They wasted a bomb that takes month to builds.
Click to expand...

The same thing could happen wherever you drop it, it was not the actual weapon damage that made the Japs surrender it was the impression that Japan could be wiped with little effort from the face of the planet. the same impression could have been give by dropping the weapon off shore to demonstarate the power available to allied forces.
 
Tefal said:
It makes a huge difference where you fly a large slow unescorted bomber though...

One fighter plane could have stopped it, why do you think they didn't just bomb Tokyo?
Click to expand...

You dont get the point, regardless of how dangerous the journey for the bomber is and where you drop the bomb there was a chance for the bomb to fail and be captured.
 
HITMAN_LEON said:
The same thing could happen wherever you drop it, it was not the actual weapon damage that made the Japs surrender it was the impression that Japan could be wiped with little effort from the face of the planet. the same impression could have been give by dropping the weapon off shore to demonstarate the power available to allied forces.
Click to expand...

but they didn't stop even when they bombed once city it was a only when they where shown that America would go city by city one by one destroying them all, that they stopped.
 
HITMAN_LEON said:
You dont get the point, regardless of how dangerous the journey for the bomber is and where you drop the bomb there was a chance for the bomb to fail and be captured.
Click to expand...

A very very hight chance around Tokyo, very very low around Hiroshima after a few weeks/months of getting them sued to the planes.

Your missing the point, there is no reason to waste a nuke on the sea ans say look what we could do to you, *pause for time to prepare defenses*, than to just wipe a city off the map and say, As you have seen we are willing to drop the bomb on you, we will carry on till you surrender.
 
HITMAN_LEON said:
They were stubborn and dam stupid :D.
Click to expand...

not really until that bomb exploded they where still under the impression that there was not enough fissile material in the world to build one, so they probbably thought their calculations where just slightly off, and America had gathers as much uranium/plutonium as possible, and so only had enough for one.

Thats not getting into the point that he Americans wanted to test bother simple uranium bomb, and the more complex plutonium device on a real life target to collect data.
 
DSCF0505.jpg

oh noes, it's Hitler :o
I remember watching a documentary once that said the first recorded usage of the word holocaust, was when we English wiped out most of the jews in our country many many moons ago.
 
Perywinkle said:
I remember watching a documentary once that said the first recorded usage of the word holocaust, was when we English wiped out most of the jews in our country many many moons ago.
Click to expand...

Thats dam true, we Brits really do invent some excelent concepts. Like I said no country has a clean record.
 
Indeed, and a collectable one at that and as such it'll have a limited run of about 10,000 worldwide. Nothing to get too uptight about is it? It may also surprise you to know that most of the figures will be sold in the USA and Hong Kong to collectors and NOT neo-nazis as the BBC is trying to imply.

It wasn't that long ago that a friend of mine was interviewed by the BBC about his plastic addiction. The interviewer was so taken aback by his collection of modern and WWII figures that he then spent a good part of the afternoon chatting about Action Man and his own childhood. He was especially taken by the Jerries which you can't blame him for as they just look better. No surprise really as their real uniforms where styled by Hugo Boss.
 
The Hermann Göring doll sounds interesting.
Can share clothes with your Barbie.

I can't be the only person who was wetting himself with laughter at this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom