On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:56:08 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:53 AM, Muggles wrote:
On 12/8/2016 10:41 AM, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:28 AM, Muggles wrote:



snip

This documentary also showed how bits and pieces of unrelated intel were
just filed away in cabinets and some of it was never viewed again until
the people researching for this current documentary found the
declassified information, and put it together with other intel for
analysis.

There was information that the Japanese had a spy on Hawaii and that
Japan had their spy start reporting harbor activity twice a week vs.
once a week. US powers that be knew there was a spy, but the
information of increased surveillance never reached the right people who
could have prepared ahead of time for such an attack.

The government officials at the time were so paranoid that the Japanese
MIGHT find out what the US actually knew that they ended up not allowing
a system where analysts had access to ALL the intel so they could
interpret it and come to the conclusion that Japan was actually
*prepping* to attack Hawaii. Our government knew Japan was interested,
but didn't believe they had enough solid info to even tell the general
in charge at the time there was an eminent threat.


Bottom line is that the US knew the Japanese were going to attack.
Hardly a brilliant move on the part of the Japanese.

Even the general in charge of Pearl Harbor at the time didn't know that
there was an eminent threat because he didn't receive intel that was
vital to preparing for an eminent attack. My FIL was there that day,
and saw the planes overhead and initially had no idea what was happening
until bombs began falling. He and his work buddies were sipping on
their morning cup of coffee getting ready to do a normal days work.

The intel might have been messed up or it might have been withheld on
purpose...but we all know what happened and the end result.

WW-II is now over and my whole point is that Gingrich was way out of
line. As wrong as one can be.

Not as wrong as you just were, claiming that the one tweet was
"standalone", not taken out of context.

On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:49:33 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:45 AM, trader_4 wrote:
nerals" quite pukeable.

Maybe if you started with their full quotes, in context, you wouldn't
get sick as much?



!!!!IT WAS THE FULL ****ING QUOTE!!!!

Now, you're lying. It was immediately preceded by and obviously a part
of this:

€œDecember 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,€�

Now put the next one that you claim is standalone, needs no context,
after it:

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines,€� Gingrich added."


It's very different than if it had been what you claimed, just standalone.
And if you don't see that, there is something wrong with you and your
judgment. But feel free to keep digging yourself deeper.

On 12/8/2016 11:13 AM, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 11:10 AM, Muggles wrote:
On 12/8/2016 11:03 AM, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 11:00 AM, Muggles wrote:
On 12/8/2016 10:51 AM, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:34 AM, Muggles wrote:

snip
I don't think the US will ever make that same mistake again.

Jesus ****ing christ. Of course the US will keep making the same
mistake
over and over again. How did "911" work out for you?

I don't think anyone thought terrorists would hijack that many
planes at
the same time and fly them into buildings.

The level of horror that such people will go to has increased with each
new year.

Even the Japanese didn't attack the civilian population that day at
Pearl Harbor. But, today attacking civilians has no roadblock to it
for
those who are terrorists.


Agreed

I do understand what you're saying about all this..


OK and my apologies for all for cursing.


Thanks! I do understand.

Even Trump never got me that upset.

When I see a traitor in government I find it difficult to hold my temper.

I'm not so sure what he said makes him a traitor. He may just be one of
those people who doesn't apply a filter to what he's thinking.

Although, what he's saying is technically true, he doesn't take into
account how people will "hear" his comments because timing isn't an
issue when he's making what he believes to be factual statements.

When I told my husband I was getting a bit tired of hearing about Pearl
Harbor on the news and every program he watched, he didn't like me
saying that, either. For me, I was running on information overload, and
continually hearing story after story on the horrors that happened was
getting me really depressed. I'm aware of the horrors of what people
are capable of doing to each other, but there comes a time where I need
to get my mind on other things - you know what I mean, right??

--
Maggie

On 12/8/2016 11:41 AM, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:28 AM, Muggles wrote:



snip

This documentary also showed how bits and pieces of unrelated intel were
just filed away in cabinets and some of it was never viewed again until
the people researching for this current documentary found the
declassified information, and put it together with other intel for
analysis.

There was information that the Japanese had a spy on Hawaii and that
Japan had their spy start reporting harbor activity twice a week vs.
once a week. US powers that be knew there was a spy, but the
information of increased surveillance never reached the right people who
could have prepared ahead of time for such an attack.

The government officials at the time were so paranoid that the Japanese
MIGHT find out what the US actually knew that they ended up not allowing
a system where analysts had access to ALL the intel so they could
interpret it and come to the conclusion that Japan was actually
*prepping* to attack Hawaii. Our government knew Japan was interested,
but didn't believe they had enough solid info to even tell the general
in charge at the time there was an eminent threat.




Bottom line is that the US knew the Japanese were going to attack.
Hardly a brilliant move on the part of the Japanese.

My father was among the first of our troops to enter Nagasaki after the
war. It did not seem to work out so well for them.

Had Japan been brilliant they would have stayed the **** out.

I always thought that history was history but find today that history is
often re-written to benefit the new author by book sales and appearances
and enhanced reputation. I don't believe half the crap they say.

On 12/8/2016 11:19 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:53:36 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:48 AM, trader_4 wrote:


snip

More rewriting of history.




Obviously you have done no reading on WW-II

I've read-up extensively especially Churchill.

Maybe you need to do some reading too?



Let's review, shall we? You came here and made a post about
Newt's tweet:

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."

You told us with that post:

The above quote was a "stand alone" quote and was not been taken out of context. Had the statement been part of of a broader analysis it might have been a different issue but it's false no matter how one looks at it.

In fact, the quote was preceded immediately before by this tweet:

€œDecember 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,€�


So, let's put it together in context:

€œDecember 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,€�

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."


And you think I'm the one that can't read or get things right?
And note this isn't the first time you've done this, it's happened
many times before, where you don't have the basic facts, or have
them wrong.


Good grief... Instead of arguing about silly points so you can win, why
don't you just try to have a conversation like normal people?

--
Maggie

On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:49:33 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:45 AM, trader_4 wrote:
nerals" quite pukeable.

Maybe if you started with their full quotes, in context, you wouldn't
get sick as much?



!!!!IT WAS THE FULL ****ING QUOTE!!!!

Maybe you are missing what T-4 is trying to point out. I'm not getting into
the discussion related to whether Newt should have said anything or not,
just T-4's point about the context of the tweet you quoted.

Twitter only allows 140 characters per tweet. Very often a tweet has to be
split into two tweets in order to say everything that a person wants to say.

Newt posted a 130 character tweet, followed by a 136 character tweet. Both
tweets stayed below the 140 character limit. If you read them in order,
you could certainly interpret it the way T-4 has, i.e. as a warning.

"December 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and
shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned

75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines"

Note the connection between the 2 tweets: the word "surprise".

In T-4's opinion - and mine too - those 2 tweets *together* are the
"full F-ing quote"

On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:37:00 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:17 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 9:55:29 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
Though I've been keeping my political remarks to a minimum ...here is
the exact quote from Gingrich. He made this yesterday on the 75th
anniversary of Pearl Harbor:



"

snip

Had the statement been part of of a broader analysis it might have been
a different issue

Apparently it was part of a somewhat broader analysis.


No it wasn't he made two Tweets. Twitter is not the place to posit a
broad analysis. He made no praise anywhere of American values.

You really are an imbecile. He made two tweets and you totally ignored
the first, which puts it in context. You came here and told us it was
"standalone". That was false. The tweet that immediately preceded it,
shows he was speaking about learning the lessons of Pearl Harbor as they
still apply today.

€œDecember 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,€�

And since when must an entire thought, an entire discussion have to be
in one tweet? Who made that rule?





but it's false no matter how one looks at it.

How is it false? It was an attack that showed technological power
and professional brilliance. They succeeded in delivering a major
blow to the US Pacific Fleet, the list of ships sunk, aircraft
destroyed, is impressive. And they did it with very minimal losses.




snip


You're never going to have a perfect strike, the US carriers being out
to sea was a lucky thing for the US. But overall, it was a stunning
military engagement. The Japanese inflicted huge damage on us, with
very minimal losses to themselves. That is a major success in any
battle.


It was not a stunning victory by any means. A minute portion of the
fleet was sunk in port. All but one ship was put back in commission a
quick order.


Obviously you didn't look at the link I provided that identifies the
ships and when they were put back in service. Sixteen were hit, many
did not return to service until 1943 or 1944. Three were totally
destroyed as were 188 aircraft. It was a stunning military engagement
by any reasonable metric. The Japanese inflicted significant losses on
the US, while suffering very minimal losses themselves. That is the
standard for a successful military engagement. If the US fleet went
to sea, in one engagment that lasted a couple hours, they hit 16
Japanese ships, including most of their battleships,
sunk 3, put many others out of service for months to 3 years, wiped
out 188 aircraft, killed 2400, while suffering only very minimal
losses, WTF would you call that?

On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 12:30:11 PM UTC-5, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:49:33 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:45 AM, trader_4 wrote:
nerals" quite pukeable.

Maybe if you started with their full quotes, in context, you wouldn't
get sick as much?



!!!!IT WAS THE FULL ****ING QUOTE!!!!

Maybe you are missing what T-4 is trying to point out. I'm not getting into
the discussion related to whether Newt should have said anything or not,
just T-4's point about the context of the tweet you quoted.

Twitter only allows 140 characters per tweet. Very often a tweet has to be
split into two tweets in order to say everything that a person wants to say.

Newt posted a 130 character tweet, followed by a 136 character tweet. Both
tweets stayed below the 140 character limit. If you read them in order,
you could certainly interpret it the way T-4 has, i.e. as a warning.

"December 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and
shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned

75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines"

Note the connection between the 2 tweets: the word "surprise".

In T-4's opinion - and mine too - those 2 tweets *together* are the
"full F-ing quote"

Thank you! As so often, we agree. And I don't even care about message
packet size. If you're talking about a subject in any media, and you
say several things about the same subject, one directly after the
other, then you have to look at the whole thing. And in this case,
when you do, it changes it. I still would not have called what the
Japanese did brilliant on Pearl Harbor day, but it's also not the
standalone quote that Philo falsely claimed it to be either.

On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 10:53:32 -0600, philo wrote:

On 12/08/2016 10:48 AM, trader_4 wrote:


snip

More rewriting of history.




Obviously you have done no reading on WW-II

I've read-up extensively especially Churchill.

Maybe you need to do some reading too?

How about providing a few, peer reviewed citations, that prove
Roosevelt knew, BEFORE 7 December 1941, exactly when and where the
Japanese were going to attack?

If true, this would represent the highest form of treason by any
president in history.

On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 12:27:23 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 12/8/2016 11:19 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:53:36 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:48 AM, trader_4 wrote:


snip

More rewriting of history.




Obviously you have done no reading on WW-II

I've read-up extensively especially Churchill.

Maybe you need to do some reading too?



Let's review, shall we? You came here and made a post about
Newt's tweet:

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."

You told us with that post:

The above quote was a "stand alone" quote and was not been taken out of context. Had the statement been part of of a broader analysis it might have been a different issue but it's false no matter how one looks at it.

In fact, the quote was preceded immediately before by this tweet:

€œDecember 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,€�


So, let's put it together in context:

€œDecember 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,€�

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."


And you think I'm the one that can't read or get things right?
And note this isn't the first time you've done this, it's happened
many times before, where you don't have the basic facts, or have
them wrong.


Good grief... Instead of arguing about silly points so you can win, why
don't you just try to have a conversation like normal people?

--
Maggie

As usual, the village idiot weighs in. IMO, and in the opinion of at
least one other poster, it's not silly as to whether what Newt tweeted
was standalone, as Philo claims, or immediately preceded by another
tweet about Pearl that sets the context and paints a different picture.

And WTF exactly are you doing, when you engage in 100 posts about
something here?

On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 11:11:54 -0600, philo wrote:

On 12/08/2016 11:06 AM, Muggles wrote:


snip
I dunno ... My husband is a bit touchy on the subject of Pearl Harbor
because his dad was a crew member, and his ashes are spread over the
Arizona. I can understand what Gingrich was saying, but at the same
time I can understand why many people are offended by him saying it, too.



For Newt to have praised the Japanese attack is no different than had he
praised the "911" attackers for a brilliant surprise move.

That he chose Dec. 7th to make his disgusting remark makes it doubly so.

Absolutely nothing inappropriate when anyone tells the truth about
history, at any time.

The citizens of the USA need to be constantly reminded that we have
very capable adversaries who should not be underestimated. For
example, IMHO, Trump is underestimating the PRC, he is acting as if
all he understands about China he learned by watching the movie "The
Sand Pebbles".

Should he actually get us into some kind of trade war with China or
mishandle the South China Sea, I would not be surprised to see the
Chinese turn a couple of our $ multi-billion carriers into artificial
reefs.

On 12/8/2016 11:33 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:37:00 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:17 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 9:55:29 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
Though I've been keeping my political remarks to a minimum ...here is
the exact quote from Gingrich. He made this yesterday on the 75th
anniversary of Pearl Harbor:


snip

Had the statement been part of of a broader analysis it might have been
a different issue

Apparently it was part of a somewhat broader analysis.


No it wasn't he made two Tweets. Twitter is not the place to posit a
broad analysis. He made no praise anywhere of American values.

You really are an imbecile. He made two tweets and you totally ignored
the first, which puts it in context. You came here and told us it was
"standalone". That was false. The tweet that immediately preceded it,
shows he was speaking about learning the lessons of Pearl Harbor as they
still apply today.

You're not much of a people person, are you? Philo is obviously not an
imbecile. What he IS is someone who cares about what actually happened
to the people at Pearl Harbor.

If you understood people, you'd understand he's probably not the only
person to "hear" the same thing from the comments Gingrich made. It's
an emotionally charged issue, and you've shown you've no skill to
understand how or why people would respond emotionally to anything.

--
Maggie

On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 09:19:26 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:53:36 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:48 AM, trader_4 wrote:


snip

More rewriting of history.




Obviously you have done no reading on WW-II

I've read-up extensively especially Churchill.

Maybe you need to do some reading too?



Let's review, shall we? You came here and made a post about
Newt's tweet:

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."

You told us with that post:

The above quote was a "stand alone" quote and was not been taken out of context. Had the statement been part of of a broader analysis it might have been a different issue but it's false no matter how one looks at it.

In fact, the quote was preceded immediately before by this tweet:

“December 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,”


So, let's put it together in context:

“December 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,”

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."


And you think I'm the one that can't read or get things right?
And note this isn't the first time you've done this, it's happened
many times before, where you don't have the basic facts, or have
them wrong.

+1 well said.

His facts are clouded by emotion and a general dislike of Gingrich.

On 12/8/2016 11:56 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 12:27:23 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 12/8/2016 11:19 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:53:36 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:48 AM, trader_4 wrote:


snip

More rewriting of history.




Obviously you have done no reading on WW-II

I've read-up extensively especially Churchill.

Maybe you need to do some reading too?



Let's review, shall we? You came here and made a post about
Newt's tweet:

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."

You told us with that post:

The above quote was a "stand alone" quote and was not been taken out of context. Had the statement been part of of a broader analysis it might have been a different issue but it's false no matter how one looks at it.

In fact, the quote was preceded immediately before by this tweet:

€œDecember 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,€�


So, let's put it together in context:

€œDecember 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,€�

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."


And you think I'm the one that can't read or get things right?
And note this isn't the first time you've done this, it's happened
many times before, where you don't have the basic facts, or have
them wrong.


Good grief... Instead of arguing about silly points so you can win, why
don't you just try to have a conversation like normal people?



As usual, the village idiot weighs in. IMO, and in the opinion of at
least one other poster, it's not silly as to whether what Newt tweeted
was standalone, as Philo claims, or immediately preceded by another
tweet about Pearl that sets the context and paints a different picture.

And WTF exactly are you doing, when you engage in 100 posts about
something here?


It takes knowledge on how to "read" an entire scenario and understand
it. You, obviously, don't have that skill set.

--
Maggie

On 12/08/2016 11:44 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 10:53:32 -0600, philo wrote:

On 12/08/2016 10:48 AM, trader_4 wrote:


snip

More rewriting of history.




Obviously you have done no reading on WW-II

I've read-up extensively especially Churchill.

Maybe you need to do some reading too?

How about providing a few, peer reviewed citations, that prove
Roosevelt knew, BEFORE 7 December 1941, exactly when and where the
Japanese were going to attack?




Officially they knew an attack was eminent but did not know where or
when. It was generally thought to be the Philippines though.

If intelligence was purposely withheld, that's speculation.

On 12/08/2016 11:19 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:53:36 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:48 AM, trader_4 wrote:


snip

More rewriting of history.




Obviously you have done no reading on WW-II

I've read-up extensively especially Churchill.

Maybe you need to do some reading too?



Let's review, shall we? You came here and made a post about
Newt's tweet:

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."

You told us with that post:

The above quote was a "stand alone" quote and was not been taken out of context. Had the statement been part of of a broader analysis it might have been a different issue but it's false no matter how one looks at it.

In fact, the quote was preceded immediately before by this tweet:

€œDecember 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,€�


So, let's put it together in context:

€œDecember 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,€�

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."


And you think I'm the one that can't read or get things right?
And note this isn't the first time you've done this, it's happened
many times before, where you don't have the basic facts, or have
them wrong.




Moot point .

There is no good day to praise Japanese brilliance for the attack, but
Pearl Harbor day is certainly the worst possible day to do so.

Since the war did not end so well for Japan, the attack was hardly
brilliant...it was a fatal blunder. Japan never thought the US had the
guts or capability to fight back.

Had Newt used the word "dastardly" I doubt I would have raised an eyebrow.

I suppose you'd be fine if he described the "911" attack as
"professional brilliance." It was the ultimate act of cowards.

On 12/08/2016 11:26 AM, Frank wrote:
On 12/8/2016 11:41 AM, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:28 AM, Muggles wrote:




Bottom line is that the US knew the Japanese were going to attack.
Hardly a brilliant move on the part of the Japanese.

My father was among the first of our troops to enter Nagasaki after the
war. It did not seem to work out so well for them.

Had Japan been brilliant they would have stayed the **** out.

I always thought that history was history but find today that history is
often re-written to benefit the new author by book sales and appearances
and enhanced reputation. I don't believe half the crap they say.



That's why I have extensively read Churchill

In article ,
says...

On 12/8/2016 11:56 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 12:27:23 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 12/8/2016 11:19 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:53:36 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:48 AM, trader_4 wrote:


snip

More rewriting of history.




Obviously you have done no reading on WW-II

I've read-up extensively especially Churchill.

Maybe you need to do some reading too?



Let's review, shall we? You came here and made a post about
Newt's tweet:

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."

You told us with that post:

The above quote was a "stand alone" quote and was not been taken out of context. Had the statement been part of of a broader analysis it might have been a different issue but it's false no matter how one looks at it.

In fact, the quote was preceded immediately before by this tweet:

?December 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,?


So, let's put it together in context:

?December 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,?

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."


And you think I'm the one that can't read or get things right?
And note this isn't the first time you've done this, it's happened
many times before, where you don't have the basic facts, or have
them wrong.


Good grief... Instead of arguing about silly points so you can win, why
don't you just try to have a conversation like normal people?



As usual, the village idiot weighs in. IMO, and in the opinion of at
least one other poster, it's not silly as to whether what Newt tweeted
was standalone, as Philo claims, or immediately preceded by another
tweet about Pearl that sets the context and paints a different picture.

And WTF exactly are you doing, when you engage in 100 posts about
something here?


It takes knowledge on how to "read" an entire scenario and understand
it. You, obviously, don't have that skill set.

It appears that it's Philo that didn't "read" the entire scenario.

--
RonNNN

On 12/08/2016 11:39 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 12:30:11 PM UTC-5, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:49:33 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:45 AM, trader_4 wrote:
nerals" quite pukeable.

Maybe if you started with their full quotes, in context, you wouldn't
get sick as much?



!!!!IT WAS THE FULL ****ING QUOTE!!!!

Maybe you are missing what T-4 is trying to point out. I'm not getting into
the discussion related to whether Newt should have said anything or not,
just T-4's point about the context of the tweet you quoted.

Twitter only allows 140 characters per tweet. Very often a tweet has to be
split into two tweets in order to say everything that a person wants to say.

Newt posted a 130 character tweet, followed by a 136 character tweet. Both
tweets stayed below the 140 character limit. If you read them in order,
you could certainly interpret it the way T-4 has, i.e. as a warning.

"December 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and
shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned

75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines"

Note the connection between the 2 tweets: the word "surprise".

In T-4's opinion - and mine too - those 2 tweets *together* are the
"full F-ing quote"

Thank you! As so often, we agree. And I don't even care about message
packet size. If you're talking about a subject in any media, and you
say several things about the same subject, one directly after the
other, then you have to look at the whole thing. And in this case,
when you do, it changes it. I still would not have called what the
Japanese did brilliant on Pearl Harbor day, but it's also not the
standalone quote that Philo falsely claimed it to be either.





It's a moot point if Gingrich made a previous quote.

What I said stands. There is never a good day to call Japan's attack a
"brilliant" move and Pearl Harbor day is the worst of all possible days.

As I've said elsewhere had he called the attack a "dastardly deed" I'd
have been fine with it.


Thus far no one has been able to cite where Gingrich ...yesterday...had
any praise for Americans in his Twitter posts. If you can show me that
I'll drop my charge of treason.

On 12/08/2016 11:25 AM, Muggles wrote:

Even Trump never got me that upset.

When I see a traitor in government I find it difficult to hold my temper.

I'm not so sure what he said makes him a traitor. He may just be one of
those people who doesn't apply a filter to what he's thinking.

Although, what he's saying is technically true, he doesn't take into
account how people will "hear" his comments because timing isn't an
issue when he's making what he believes to be factual statements.

When I told my husband I was getting a bit tired of hearing about Pearl
Harbor on the news and every program he watched, he didn't like me
saying that, either. For me, I was running on information overload, and
continually hearing story after story on the horrors that happened was
getting me really depressed. I'm aware of the horrors of what people
are capable of doing to each other, but there comes a time where I need
to get my mind on other things - you know what I mean, right??




Sure I know what you mean. However...
Anyone who is in the public eye such as Gingrich is totally
irresponsible if they make a post which could be so horribly interpreted
....no matter what his real intent.

On 12/08/2016 11:33 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:37:00 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:17 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 9:55:29 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
Though I've been keeping my political remarks to a minimum ...here is
the exact quote from Gingrich. He made this yesterday on the 75th
anniversary of Pearl Harbor:



"

snip

Had the statement been part of of a broader analysis it might have been
a different issue

Apparently it was part of a somewhat broader analysis.


No it wasn't he made two Tweets. Twitter is not the place to posit a
broad analysis. He made no praise anywhere of American values.

You really are an imbecile. He made two tweets and you totally ignored
the first, which puts it in context. You came here and told us it was
"standalone". That was false. The tweet that immediately preceded it,
shows he was speaking about learning the lessons of Pearl Harbor as they
still apply today.

€œDecember 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,€�

And since when must an entire thought, an entire discussion have to be
in one tweet? Who made that rule?





but it's false no matter how one looks at it.

How is it false? It was an attack that showed technological power
and professional brilliance. They succeeded in delivering a major
blow to the US Pacific Fleet, the list of ships sunk, aircraft
destroyed, is impressive. And they did it with very minimal losses.




snip


You're never going to have a perfect strike, the US carriers being out
to sea was a lucky thing for the US. But overall, it was a stunning
military engagement. The Japanese inflicted huge damage on us, with
very minimal losses to themselves. That is a major success in any
battle.


It was not a stunning victory by any means. A minute portion of the
fleet was sunk in port. All but one ship was put back in commission a
quick order.


Obviously you didn't look at the link I provided that identifies the
ships and when they were put back in service. Sixteen were hit, many
did not return to service until 1943 or 1944. Three were totally
destroyed as were 188 aircraft. It was a stunning military engagement
by any reasonable metric. The Japanese inflicted significant losses on
the US, while suffering very minimal losses themselves. That is the
standard for a successful military engagement. If the US fleet went
to sea, in one engagment that lasted a couple hours, they hit 16
Japanese ships, including most of their battleships,
sunk 3, put many others out of service for months to 3 years, wiped
out 188 aircraft, killed 2400, while suffering only very minimal
losses, WTF would you call that?





Indeed he did make an additional Tweet that day but it does not change
what he said. He called a dastardly deed a "brilliant" one.


If you stuck a knife in the back of someone who was not looking, I'm not
sure if too many people would call you brilliant.

philo explained :
On 12/08/2016 10:28 AM, Muggles wrote:



snip

This documentary also showed how bits and pieces of unrelated intel were
just filed away in cabinets and some of it was never viewed again until
the people researching for this current documentary found the
declassified information, and put it together with other intel for
analysis.

There was information that the Japanese had a spy on Hawaii and that
Japan had their spy start reporting harbor activity twice a week vs.
once a week. US powers that be knew there was a spy, but the
information of increased surveillance never reached the right people who
could have prepared ahead of time for such an attack.

The government officials at the time were so paranoid that the Japanese
MIGHT find out what the US actually knew that they ended up not allowing
a system where analysts had access to ALL the intel so they could
interpret it and come to the conclusion that Japan was actually
*prepping* to attack Hawaii. Our government knew Japan was interested,
but didn't believe they had enough solid info to even tell the general
in charge at the time there was an eminent threat.




Bottom line is that the US knew the Japanese were going to attack.
Hardly a brilliant move on the part of the Japanese.

A documentary I watched just last night said that the Japanese declared
war on us 30 minutes prior to the attack. So they knew we knew, or at
least they thought we knew.

My father was among the first of our troops to enter Nagasaki after the war.
It did not seem to work out so well for them.

Had Japan been brilliant they would have stayed the **** out.

It didn't take them very long to realize what a big mistake they made,
but they surrendered too late.

On 12/08/2016 11:58 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:

history, at any time.

The citizens of the USA need to be constantly reminded that we have
very capable adversaries who should not be underestimated. For
example, IMHO, Trump is underestimating the PRC, he is acting as if
all he understands about China he learned by watching the movie "The
Sand Pebbles".

Should he actually get us into some kind of trade war with China or
mishandle the South China Sea, I would not be surprised to see the
Chinese turn a couple of our $ multi-billion carriers into artificial
reefs.




It's weird but I can see where Trump is coming from.

China is a Communist county so theoretically our enemy.

Taiwan is a free country (or territory ) so should be our friend.

That said, his approach is incredibly naive.

It is so much more complicated that he can comprehend.


By Trump not looking at the big picture is troubling to say the least.

On 12/08/2016 12:30 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:




Bottom line is that the US knew the Japanese were going to attack.
Hardly a brilliant move on the part of the Japanese.

A documentary I watched just last night said that the Japanese declared
war on us 30 minutes prior to the attack. So they knew we knew, or at
least they thought we knew.


In those days a 30 minute warning would never have gotten through to the
proper people in time. Even today a 30 minute warning would not have
been enough to prepare.

My father was among the first of our troops to enter Nagasaki after
the war. It did not seem to work out so well for them.

Had Japan been brilliant they would have stayed the **** out.

It didn't take them very long to realize what a big mistake they made,
but they surrendered too late.


Yep, That was my whole point, the decision to attack Pearl Harbor was
not a brilliant move at all. It was step one to the total annihilation
of Japan.

Even if Gingrich made one additional tweet that day that I initially
missed...it's his use of the word "brilliant" that rankled me for a
dastardly and cowardly deed.

On 12/08/2016 12:10 PM, RonNNN wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/8/2016 11:56 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 12:27:23 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 12/8/2016 11:19 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:53:36 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:48 AM, trader_4 wrote:


snip

More rewriting of history.




Obviously you have done no reading on WW-II

I've read-up extensively especially Churchill.

Maybe you need to do some reading too?



Let's review, shall we? You came here and made a post about
Newt's tweet:

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."

You told us with that post:

The above quote was a "stand alone" quote and was not been taken out of context. Had the statement been part of of a broader analysis it might have been a different issue but it's false no matter how one looks at it.

In fact, the quote was preceded immediately before by this tweet:

?December 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,?


So, let's put it together in context:

?December 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,?

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."


And you think I'm the one that can't read or get things right?
And note this isn't the first time you've done this, it's happened
many times before, where you don't have the basic facts, or have
them wrong.


Good grief... Instead of arguing about silly points so you can win, why
don't you just try to have a conversation like normal people?



As usual, the village idiot weighs in. IMO, and in the opinion of at
least one other poster, it's not silly as to whether what Newt tweeted
was standalone, as Philo claims, or immediately preceded by another
tweet about Pearl that sets the context and paints a different picture.

And WTF exactly are you doing, when you engage in 100 posts about
something here?


It takes knowledge on how to "read" an entire scenario and understand
it. You, obviously, don't have that skill set.

It appears that it's Philo that didn't "read" the entire scenario.




Still a moot point. The attack was not brilliant.

On 12/08/2016 12:00 PM, Stormin' Norman wrote:

And you think I'm the one that can't read or get things right?
And note this isn't the first time you've done this, it's happened
many times before, where you don't have the basic facts, or have
them wrong.

+1 well said.

His facts are clouded by emotion and a general dislike of Gingrich.



Indeed. Gingrich is a traitor and for such reasons I dislike him.

The fact that he made an additional tweet that day does not change what
he said

Per philo:
Bottom line is that the US knew the Japanese were going to attack.

When I was stationed at Hickam AFB, working the 4-midnight shift I used
to hitchhike into Waikiki every morning during the summer surf season.

One ride I got was from an old guy who claimed to have been manning the
radar installation near Wheeler AFB.

He claimed to have seen the attack coming on the radar, but higher-ups
blew him off both because radar was some sort of new-fangled thing that
nobody really understood and because they expected a flight of some sort
of US planes about that time.
--
Pete Cresswell

On 12/08/2016 10:20 AM, philo wrote:
....

You purposely chose to misread what I wrote.

No, I didn't...

I did NOT take Gingrich's quote out of context. That was the sum total
of his statement.
....

There's _always_ context around the rest of what was going that he was
responding to or that prompted it...I'm sure that one particular
sentence didn't just appear out of the blue.

Per philo:
For Newt to have praised the Japanese attack is no different than had he
praised the "911" attackers for a brilliant surprise move.

Right after 9/11, some talk show guy made a statement to the effect of
"Whatever those guys were, they were not cowards. Cowards to not
knowingly go to their deaths in support of their mission."

Needless-to-say he was eviscerated by the media and the public.

My thought was "Know your enemy."
--
Pete Cresswell

Per philo:
I did not see the movie but it was playing in Germany when I was
stationed there in 1970.

I gave it five stars and would recommend it to just about anybody.

While they were filming it, my brother was working as a CID agent in a
building in Pearl Harbor. He said it was a *really* weird feeling to
look out the window and see faux Jap zeros faux-strafing the buildings.
--
Pete Cresswell

Per philo:
No matter how you take it, Pearl Harbor day was a bad day to praise the
Japanese attack. Gingrich made no comment anywhere in praise of American
values.

Gingrich is the biggest gutless wonder I've yet seen in Trump's cast of
characters. As a veteran I find "Armchair Generals" quite pukeable.

The term I used to hear applied to Rumsfeld, Cheyney, and the like was
"Chicken Hawk". Rumsfeld's "You go to war with what you have.."
response made my want to puke.

Also, I have heard several people credit Gingrich with starting the
polarization between parties.... If that's true, I wonder if he has some
sort of psychological defect that prevents him from putting himself in
other people's shoes.
--
Pete Cresswell

Per Muggles:
Even the Japanese didn't attack the civilian population that day at
Pearl Harbor. But, today attacking civilians has no roadblock to it for
those who are terrorists.

The Rape of Nanjing:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQnBvs3LTZw
"The Rape of Nanjing" by Iris Chang

Unit 731:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdM3_kzhscM


Definitely NOT isolated atrocities... repeated over-and-over again
across Asia.

And Japan *still* has monuments honoring the perpetrators.
--
Pete Cresswell

On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 12:08:56 -0600, philo wrote:

On 12/08/2016 11:19 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:53:36 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:48 AM, trader_4 wrote:


snip

More rewriting of history.




Obviously you have done no reading on WW-II

I've read-up extensively especially Churchill.

Maybe you need to do some reading too?



Let's review, shall we? You came here and made a post about
Newt's tweet:

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."

You told us with that post:

The above quote was a "stand alone" quote and was not been taken out of context. Had the statement been part of of a broader analysis it might have been a different issue but it's false no matter how one looks at it.

In fact, the quote was preceded immediately before by this tweet:

“December 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,”


So, let's put it together in context:

“December 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,”

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."


And you think I'm the one that can't read or get things right?
And note this isn't the first time you've done this, it's happened
many times before, where you don't have the basic facts, or have
them wrong.




Moot point .

There is no good day to praise Japanese brilliance for the attack, but
Pearl Harbor day is certainly the worst possible day to do so.

Since the war did not end so well for Japan, the attack was hardly
brilliant...it was a fatal blunder. Japan never thought the US had the
guts or capability to fight back.


Do you not understand the difference between tactical and strategic?
The Japanese attack was a spectacular tactical success. The Japanese
political strategy was ill advised.


Had Newt used the word "dastardly" I doubt I would have raised an eyebrow.

I suppose you'd be fine if he described the "911" attack as
"professional brilliance." It was the ultimate act of cowards.

On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 12:39:14 -0600, philo wrote:

On 12/08/2016 12:00 PM, Stormin' Norman wrote:

And you think I'm the one that can't read or get things right?
And note this isn't the first time you've done this, it's happened
many times before, where you don't have the basic facts, or have
them wrong.

+1 well said.

His facts are clouded by emotion and a general dislike of Gingrich.



Indeed. Gingrich is a traitor and for such reasons I dislike him.

The fact that he made an additional tweet that day does not change what
he said

Go ahead, lay out your case for NG being a traitor, I would very much
like to read your justification for such a charge.

I suspect you will not be able to substantiate your assertion any
better than you were able to back-up your claim that Roosevelt knew
the exact time and place for all the 7 December 1941 attacks, prior to
7 December.

It happens that philo formulated :
On 12/08/2016 12:30 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:




Bottom line is that the US knew the Japanese were going to attack.
Hardly a brilliant move on the part of the Japanese.

A documentary I watched just last night said that the Japanese declared
war on us 30 minutes prior to the attack. So they knew we knew, or at
least they thought we knew.


In those days a 30 minute warning would never have gotten through to the
proper people in time. Even today a 30 minute warning would not have been
enough to prepare.

My father was among the first of our troops to enter Nagasaki after
the war. It did not seem to work out so well for them.

Had Japan been brilliant they would have stayed the **** out.

It didn't take them very long to realize what a big mistake they made,
but they surrendered too late.


Yep, That was my whole point, the decision to attack Pearl Harbor was not a
brilliant move at all. It was step one to the total annihilation of Japan.

Even if Gingrich made one additional tweet that day that I initially
missed...it's his use of the word "brilliant" that rankled me for a dastardly
and cowardly deed.

I agree that it was too close to giving praise for the attack even if
you don't ignore the context in which it was written. On a day of
rememberance, it is beyond me how anyone would say such a thing.

There seems to be something about Twitter that idle's the brain while
engaging the fingers.

On Thu, 08 Dec 2016 13:50:30 -0500, "(PeteCresswell)"
wrote:

Per philo:
For Newt to have praised the Japanese attack is no different than had he
praised the "911" attackers for a brilliant surprise move.

Right after 9/11, some talk show guy made a statement to the effect of
"Whatever those guys were, they were not cowards. Cowards to not
knowingly go to their deaths in support of their mission."

Needless-to-say he was eviscerated by the media and the public.

My thought was "Know your enemy."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamikaze

On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 1:39:18 PM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 12:00 PM, Stormin' Norman wrote:

And you think I'm the one that can't read or get things right?
And note this isn't the first time you've done this, it's happened
many times before, where you don't have the basic facts, or have
them wrong.

+1 well said.

His facts are clouded by emotion and a general dislike of Gingrich.



Indeed. Gingrich is a traitor and for such reasons I dislike him.

The fact that he made an additional tweet that day does not change what
he said

He didn't just make an "additional" tweet, he made a *previous* tweet
that puts what you quoted in a totally different context.

You can argue all day long as to whether the Japanese tactics were
brilliant or not but you cannot claim that:

1 - What you posted in your OP !!!!...WAS THE FULL ****ING QUOTE!!!!

(Your words, your emphasis.)

2 - That his comment was a standalone comment, unrelated to anything else
he said that day.

Make believe that he said what he said was in an email, unencumbered by a
140 character limit. Would you grab the second sentence and claim it was
a standalone comment because there was a carriage return or two between the
two sentences?

"December 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and
shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned.

75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."

"philo" wrote in message
news
The fleet was out to sea , so only a tiny handful of ships were sunk. Most
were re-floated quite rapidly.

The (few) carriers were at sea. At that time, the "fleet" was battleships.
All eight were either sunk or damaged badly enough so they were our of
service for times varying from months to years. Three cruisers too and some
destroyers and auxilaries. Not to mention planes. Here's a list...
http://www.pearlharbor.org/ships-and-aircraft.asp

"philo" wrote in message
news
On 12/08/2016 10:48 AM, trader_4 wrote:


snip

More rewriting of history.




Obviously you have done no reading on WW-II

I've read-up extensively especially Churchill.

Maybe you need to do some reading too?

Do you also watch? Try Oliver Stone's "The Untold History of the United
States". He obviously has a very dull axe to grind but makes some very good
points; many of which I and probably Stormin' Norman know to be correct
since we lived it.

If you do watch it - and I urge everyone to do so - you'll wind up with a
much better understanding of why we are where we are today.

On 12/08/2016 01:13 PM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On
The fact that he made an additional tweet that day does not change what
he said

Go ahead, lay out your case for NG being a traitor, I would very much
like to read your justification for such a charge.

I suspect you will not be able to substantiate your assertion any
better than you were able to back-up your claim that Roosevelt knew
the exact time and place for all the 7 December 1941 attacks, prior to
7 December.




Of course I have no idea what Roosevelt knew

but with Gingrich it's an easy case because we have all read his Tweet.

In my book when Gingrich did not say one word in praise of America but
instead called Japan's attack "brilliant" he's a traitor.

Had he used the word "evil" instead I'd not have gotten upset.

In my book it was a sneak attack in no way different from "911".


That said, had Japan won the war, they'd be calling the shots now, and
had the war ended in victory for them, then the Japanese might look at
it as brilliant. That did not happen.