Again a Western country bends over

Cohaagen · 03-24-10, 08:24 AM

If debate is won solely through smothering the opposing argument under sheer weight of cut n' pasted text from the first page of a Google search, then there is no doubt you have carried the motion, Stealth Hunter. If, however, one is interested in hard facts, physical evidence, photographs, eyewitness accounts, direct reference to specific events, well...

Posting enormous chunks of text - complete with irrelevancies - does not make up for a complete lack of proof, no matter how intellectually intimidating you might wish its appearance to be. In that entire post (and I did read it all) you've come up with one on-the-spot reference to someone talking about soldiers requesting mustard gas (nothing about it being deployed), and the same old claim about bombing which first surfaced in 1986. If you had read the very recent and thorough paper I linked to, you'll have seen that this is exactly the kind of after-the-fact inference it deals with.

The popular and attractive image of the evil empire hosing down jundies with poison gas is a case of falsehood repeated until it becomes (in the popular mind, at least) true.

Neither is your case helped by posting photographs purportedly of gas attacks in "Mesopotamia" which are actually a mixture of scenes from the Somme, East Africa, Loos, etc. The captions about "retreating Huns" are a bit of a giveaway.

03-24-10, 08:24 AM	#15
Cohaagen Frogman Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: UK Posts: 296 Downloads: 43 Uploads: 0	If debate is won solely through smothering the opposing argument under sheer weight of cut n' pasted text from the first page of a Google search, then there is no doubt you have carried the motion, Stealth Hunter. If, however, one is interested in hard facts, physical evidence, photographs, eyewitness accounts, direct reference to specific events, well... Posting enormous chunks of text - complete with irrelevancies - does not make up for a complete lack of proof, no matter how intellectually intimidating you might wish its appearance to be. In that entire post (and I did read it all) you've come up with one on-the-spot reference to someone talking about soldiers requesting mustard gas (nothing about it being deployed), and the same old claim about bombing which first surfaced in 1986. If you had read the very recent and thorough paper I linked to, you'll have seen that this is exactly the kind of after-the-fact inference it deals with. The popular and attractive image of the evil empire hosing down jundies with poison gas is a case of falsehood repeated until it becomes (in the popular mind, at least) true. Neither is your case helped by posting photographs purportedly of gas attacks in "Mesopotamia" which are actually a mixture of scenes from the Somme, East Africa, Loos, etc. The captions about "retreating Huns" are a bit of a giveaway.