I hope he never suffered because of it like many did.
Nope. He was with the Manhattan Project in summer of 1946.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I hope he never suffered because of it like many did.
Yes but it’s commonly done by presidents of both parties. Bubba, O, and Joe are just as guilty as W and Dumb Don. Don’t you agree?
What do the Rosenbergs have to do with Patton's alleged crazy plan to nuke our Russian ally? An interesting point is that president Truman finally fired his aging general, MacArthur, who mismanaged the Korean conflict when his crazy rants about nuking China went public.
As I thought. Your bias is showing. You somehow think the Ds are better. There is absolutely no evidence this is true.No. I don't agree. Iraq was a completely idiotic blunder brought to you by Clean Break Strategy and Afghanistan was about ENRON... big campaign contributor of Dubya's.
Wrong. They knew radiation made nukes different. They may not have known to what extent, but they knew the bomb was much more powerful and dangerous.In 1945 nukes were just considered bigger and better bombs. There wasn't the horror of using them that exists now.
As I thought. Your bias is showing. You somehow think the Ds are better. There is absolutely no evidence this is true.
Only because your Communist brethren were successful in spreading their cancerous filth all over the globe.The OP is wrong.
We would have failed, and Frace and Great Britain would have turned its collective back on the US.All this being said, WHAT IF, Patton's suggestion was followed through by either land invasion or nuclear gravity bombs? How would the world dynamic be different today?
How would we have failed with Moscow and Stalingrad both in ruins and the Russkies totally helpless at that point? The Soviets would've had no choice BUT to surrender. Thus averting the 45 year Cold War and possibly quashing your Communist influence across the globe.We would have failed, and Frace and Great Britain would have turned its collective back on the US.
How would we have failed with Moscow and Stalingrad both in ruins and the Russkies totally helpless at that point? The Soviets would've had no choice BUT to surrender. Thus averting the 45 year Cold War and possibly quashing your Communist influence across the globe.
Gulags were death camps where they simply used starvation and exposure to kill people rather than zyklon BGulags were prison camps where sure people died, but they didn't gas thousands with Zykon B then there were all the other death camps like Belzec and Treblinka, by the way they had their share of Ukrainian guards you are talking total bollocks.
That is not what i asked you uneducted foolYour post 92 tells me all i need to know about your mentality.
Calm down arsehole we know where you are coming from, now sit the f'' down.That is not what i asked you uneducted fool
Cite a post where I implied I want Russia destroyed or shut the fuck up.
You made an accusation now back it up or it proves you are a cowardly little lying sack of trasj
They have a deranged fixation with Russia instead of worrying about their own country going to rat shit.Why do you care what kind of government Russia has?
So 26 million dead people in the soviet union were not enough for you?How would we have failed with Moscow and Stalingrad both in ruins and the Russkies totally helpless at that point? The Soviets would've had no choice BUT to surrender. Thus averting the 45 year Cold War and possibly quashing your Communist influence across the globe.
No you little cocksuckerCalm down arsehole we know where you are coming from, now sit the f'' down.
And now you’re a democrat?I was a Republican for 35 years until just before we invaded Iraq. I resigned....of course it didn't matter .
In 1998 the PNAC signatories couldn't trick Clinton into attacking Iraq.
They have a deranged fixation with Russia instead of worrying about their own country going to rat shit.