P51-B What gives

[Charbroiled]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: Capt Henry

Terminus has it right, time to move on. Japan is just baiting the forum at this point. He's expressed his view, others have expressed theirs, and we're going to need to agree to disagree.

That's just exactly the problem. Those who would rather trash Japan can't seem to agree to disagree. They would rather be free to attempt to get away with categorical statements that he is incorrect, like you have just done, than agree to disagree.

Japan has perfectly valid points in the way he defines Soviet "victory" (not that I necessarily agree with him). Real gentlemen would acknowledge his points and THEN point out that they disagree with them, NOT dismiss them as INCORRECT. The REAL problem here is the lack of gentlemen [:-]

I disagreed with Japan's statement, but offered no arguements, because I had no wish to attempt to change his mind. He can believe what he wants.

However, I disagree with your statement, but this time I will offer a rebuttal since you seem to imply that not offering a rebuttal is "ungentlemanly".

The only purpose for a person to "acknowledge his points" is to attempt to persuade someone to reevaluate their point of view and/or change their minds. If that person is from a different culture and/or is stubborn, all that the "acknowledge his points" usually achieves is a flamewar. It is not rude or "ungentlemanly" to dismiss someone as being INCORRECT. It is my belief and I have a right to it. It does not mean that I am correct, it just means that I believe something different. If I felt the topic and/or arguement was important enough, then I would provide agrument points...as I have just done. Everything does NOT have to be a debate.[:-]

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Charbroiled

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: Capt Henry

Terminus has it right, time to move on. Japan is just baiting the forum at this point. He's expressed his view, others have expressed theirs, and we're going to need to agree to disagree.

That's just exactly the problem. Those who would rather trash Japan can't seem to agree to disagree. They would rather be free to attempt to get away with categorical statements that he is incorrect, like you have just done, than agree to disagree.

Japan has perfectly valid points in the way he defines Soviet "victory" (not that I necessarily agree with him). Real gentlemen would acknowledge his points and THEN point out that they disagree with them, NOT dismiss them as INCORRECT. The REAL problem here is the lack of gentlemen [:-]

I disagreed with Japan's statement, but offered no arguements, because I had no wish to attempt to change his mind. He can believe what he wants.

However, I disagree with your statement, but this time I will offer a rebuttal since you seem to imply that not offering a rebuttal is "ungentlemanly".

The only purpose for a person to "acknowledge his points" is to attempt to persuade someone to reevaluate their point of view and/or change their minds. If that person is from a different culture and/or is stubborn, all that the "acknowledge his points" usually achieves is a flamewar. It is not rude or "ungentlemanly" to dismiss someone as being INCORRECT. It is my belief and I have a right to it. It does not mean that I am correct, it just means that I believe something different. If I felt the topic and/or arguement was important enough, then I would provide agrument points...as I have just done. Everything does NOT have to be a debate.[:-]

It's truly a shame that you completely failed to grasp my intent and decided to go off on a tirade. [8|]

Gentlemanly conduct has nothing to do with rbuttal or the lack thereof.

"We disagree": Gentlemanly

"You are incorrect": Ungentlemanly, arrogant and insulting.


The former, while taking a stance against a viewpoint is neither overly dismissive nor insulting.

The latter is not only overly dismissive and arrogant it is also a poorly vieled insult.

[RUPD3658]

ORIGINAL: Gem35


Yes, but after the germans bombed pearl.......

Thank you Senator Blutowski.

"Over? Nothing is over until we say it is over! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?" [:D]

[Capt Henry_MatrixForum]

Hans,

Sorry if I gave the impression that I was dismissing Japan's comments categorically. To be clearer, maybe I should have said was something similar to

While I don't agree with everything that Terminus says, given that this thread is about the P-51b I believe him to be correct that, at least in this thread, we should move on. Japan's statements such as "Na, Soviets won WW2, no questions about it." or "I think no one disagrees that the Soviets won the war..." or "One can not make any other claims then saying that Soviet Union was the winner of WW2." suggest that he is just attempting to get a rise out of people on the forum rather than encourage measured discussion of a question which is certainly very complex and can be viewed from many different sides, some of which Japan presents very well. Some responses to his arguments suggest that he is getting this "rise" and this path of discussion will likely prevent any honest and positive exchange of ideas. I am not attempting to offer any opinion on the accuracy of his comments and am not taking any position on this particular issue in this post.

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: Gem35

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: m10bob





As would every male in my family alive at that time.

I'd almost call "Japan's" post a troll comment, but I don't think Japan understands just what was wrong with it... Maybe we should just pardon him his ignorance...

Yes, but after the germans bombed pearl it was clear how we helped the russians by consuming most of the world's gasoline.[8D]

and coffee.....

[crsutton]

The Twelve Commandments of Flaming

1. Make things up about your opponent: It's important to make your lies sound true. Preface your argument with the word "clearly." "Clearly, Fred Flooney is a liar, and a dirtball to boot."

2. Be an armchair psychologist: You're a smart person. You've heard of Freud. You took a psychology course in college. Clearly, you're qualified to psychoanalyze your opponent. "Polly Purebread, by using the word 'zucchini' in her posting, shows she has a bad case of ***** envy."

3. Cross-post your flames: Everyone on the net is just waiting for the next literary masterpiece to leave your terminal. From rec.arts.wobegon to alt.gourmand, they're all holding their breaths until your next flame. Therefore, post everywhere.

4. Conspiracies abound: If everyone's against you, the reason can't possibly be that you're a ****head. There's obviously a conspiracy against you, and you will be doing the entire net a favor by exposing it.

5. Lawsuit threats: This is the reverse of Rule #4 (sort of like the Yin & Yang of flaming). Threatening a lawsuit is always considered to be in good form. "By saying that I've posted to the wrong group, Bertha has libeled me, slandered me, and sodomized me. See you in court, Bertha."

6. Force them to document their claims: Even if Harry Hoinkus states outright that he likes tomato sauce on his pasta, you should demand documentation. If Newsweek hasn't written an article on Harry's pasta preferences, then Harry's obviously lying.

7. Use foreign phrases: French is good, but Latin is the lingua franca of flaming. You should use the words "ad hominem" at least three times per article. Other favorite Latin phrases are "ad nauseum," "vini, vidi, vici," and "fettuccini alfredo."

8. Tell 'em how smart you are: Why use intelligent arguments to convince them you're smart when all you have to do is tell them? State that you're a member of Mensa or Mega or Dorks of America. Tell them the scores you received on every exam since high school. "I got an 800 on my SATs, LSATs, GREs, MCATs, and I can also spell the word 'premeiotic'."

9. Accuse your opponent of censorship. It is your right as an American citizen to post whatever the hell you want to the net (as guaranteed by the 37th Amendment, I think). Anyone who tries to limit your cross-posting or move a flame war to email is either a communist, a fascist, or both.

10. Doubt their existence: You've never actually seen your opponent, have you? And since you're the center of the universe, you should have seen them by now, shouldn't you? Therefore, THEY DON'T EXIST! This is the beauty of flamers' logic.

11. Lie, cheat, steal, leave the toilet seat up.

12. When in doubt, insult: If you forget the other 11 rules, remember this one. At some point during your wonderful career as a flamer you will undoubtedly end up in a flame war with someone who is better than you. This person will expose your lies, tear apart your arguments, make you look generally like a bozo. At this point, there's only one thing to do: insult the dirtbag!!! "Oh yeah? Well, your mother does strange things with vegetables."



Uh......hello! P51-B. Remember?[:-]

[Capt Henry_MatrixForum]

Just out of curiousity, is the absence of the P-51b causing problems for you or are other fighters being produced in sufficient quantities that its a minor annoyance?

[Terminus]

No reason it should be a problem. It's a minor annoyance at most.

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: Capt Henry

Just out of curiousity, is the absence of the P-51b causing problems for you or are other fighters being produced in sufficient quantities that its a minor annoyance?

No, I don't miss it. The P38J is the war winnng fighter in WITP. Great range and carries 1,000 lb bombs. I find that in May of 1944, I am using them (P38) a lot to attack ports and shipping. Because of the range and bomb load they are much more effective than even B25s and Beaufighters. Would be nice to see the P51-B though. Just out of curiosity.

[LargeSlowTarget]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

The Twelve Commandments of Flaming

[snip]

LOL, this post deserves to be duplicated on its own into a sticky thread [:D]


Oh, and I do not miss the P-51B. As JFB, I actually do not miss any of the Allied late-war fighter planes - they are real killers...

[erstad]

I think a Miller Lite drunk in a P-51B would Taste Great!

[NormS3]

Dependign on the altitude, i would politely disagree and say it would be Less Filling![:D]

[bradfordkay]

My problem is that Chez doesn't miss my fighters either... his pilots have shot them down in record numbers! 

[RevRick]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

It is 4-44 and I am producing about 100 a month. Yet I see no reinforcment air groups that have these planes and no exsisting air group that can upgrade to them. Am I missing something?

Perhaps we are giving them all to the Russians. Of course, they can have some of the 1,293,459 boomerangs that I now have on hand.....

This is a stock game.

That is one reason I play with PDU on. I'd much rather have P51B/Cs in squadron use than P-40E or N. And if there is a way to avoid using the P-39D as anything other than a ground attack plane, or as the P-38G trainer, I'd love to find that. I've even considered switching slots with the Peashooter and the P-35. Those slots have the planes a little more maneuverable than a hog on ice.

[Nemo121]

[left]BAH I can't BELIEVE people are disagreeing over who won World War II when the REAL question is WHAT won World War II..... and the answer is, OBVIOUSLY,[/left][left] [/left] [center]The P-51 B[/center]

[Nomad]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

[left]BAH I can't BELIEVE people are disagreeing over who won World War II when the REAL question is WHAT won World War II..... and the answer is, OBVIOUSLY,[/left][left] [/left] [center]The P-51 B[/center]

No, it was the C-47

[Nemo121]

As per the rules of flaming I hereby declare you to be an:
 [center]Alfresco Fascist [:D][/center][center] [/center][center]P.s. Provide the documentary evidence to back up your claim. I have sources but I won't show them to you until you show me yours ---Ooer missus.  [:D] [:D][/center] 

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

[left]BAH I can't BELIEVE people are disagreeing over who won World War II when the REAL question is WHAT won World War II..... and the answer is, OBVIOUSLY,[/left][left] [/left] [center]The P-51 B[/center]

It is obvious to me that you as a young child were not properly toilet trained. I know this stuff, having taken many courses on the internets related this this subject and harley davidson repair.

It is a well known historical fact that the P51-B was held out of action in the Pacific due to that Chinese guy's, (President Mao) heavy investment in Allison engine stock. He refused to allow any aircraft containing a Merlin engine to come withing the borders of his country. And as the saying went, "what Mao wants, Mao gets". I would provide you the link but don't want to upset you.[:D]

[Zond]

ORIGINAL: Japan

Well i still think Soviet was the Winner..

Here is why:

Soviet gained the most of WW2, - A whole bunch of new nations under its command (Poland, Checkoslovakia, Bulgaria, Romania, Yugoslavia, Estland, Lithuinia, Lativa... ect ect ect...) Thay were exploited for Resourses, Industry, and evan skilled workers, professors, recharch personell ect ect ect... 

Sorry for hijacking the thread. [:D]
Soviet Union never commanded or was in position to exploit Yugoslavia after WW2. Tito managed to gain indenpendent position towards Warsaw Pact and Yugoslavia gained a lot by trading with USSR (for instance - shoes and furniture for natural resources or military technology know-how). On a important railroad junction in present Croatia near the Hungarian border during the 80s,every 5 minutes a train composition departed for USSR filled with various goods. So it was more the other way around [:D]

Also adding Tito's partisans on a War in Europe team effort list. [;)]

[Terminus]

Nobody is arguing over who won WWII. One poster advanced a notion that he's completely alone in holding (on this forum) and that was it.