lights out!

[concerned citizen]

Bergermeister wrote:

<quoted text>
For a "carrier-based attack", the Pacific opponent would have only had to overtake the "strong" people of Panama to get the Canal?
Anyone out there know what the fortifications of the Panama Canal was like in Late '41/Early '42?
I'm interested. Thx.

In 1942, the panama canal was owned by USA, not panama and staffed by the strong us military (same ones at Pearl though)

[Red]

Ahau Kin wrote:

Behind this quaint style of thinking is the more sinister notion that every generation has its own 'homeland security' bent on restricting your freedoms for nebulous reasons.
Our opponents in WW2 did not possess intercontinental bombers or ICBM's. It is vanishingly unlikely that Akron could have been attacked by either opposing power. I'd consider that 'nebulous reasons'.
And the logistics of a carrier based air attack render that possibility nil. The European opponent was incapable of this, the Pacific opponent would have had to insert into the Atlantic via Cape Horn. Unlikely to do that completely undetected. And assuming they had sufficiently robust bombers (they didn't).
But people were fined and threatened with jail anyway.
Now they just wave vague threats of terrorism in our faces and whittle away at our freedoms.
'Nebulous Reasons'.

You're an idiot. If Germany had conquered Britain, and it came extremely close, the next stop for the Lutwaffe would have been the continental U.S., especially major manufacturing centers like Akron. Read your history.

[Red]

Ahau Kin wrote:

Behind this quaint style of thinking is the more sinister notion that every generation has its own 'homeland security' bent on restricting your freedoms for nebulous reasons.
Our opponents in WW2 did not possess intercontinental bombers or ICBM's. It is vanishingly unlikely that Akron could have been attacked by either opposing power. I'd consider that 'nebulous reasons'.
And the logistics of a carrier based air attack render that possibility nil. The European opponent was incapable of this, the Pacific opponent would have had to insert into the Atlantic via Cape Horn. Unlikely to do that completely undetected. And assuming they had sufficiently robust bombers (they didn't).
But people were fined and threatened with jail anyway.
Now they just wave vague threats of terrorism in our faces and whittle away at our freedoms.
'Nebulous Reasons'.

Also don't forget German U-boats were all up and down the Atlantic Coast during WW 2. If Germany could get submarines across the Atlantic to the shores of the U.S., it certainly could have done the same thing with planes under the right conditions.

[Gain Some Reality]

Hater wrote:

If you still don't get it then you are the only one, judging from how others have judged your commnets.

Yes, because you judging my comments represents what everyone else thinks. Stop fooling yourself.

[Hater]

Gain Some Reality wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, because you judging my comments represents what everyone else thinks. Stop fooling yourself.

The only fool here is yourself. Not one of those judgements is mine and that's the truth. Try reading the artilce and thinking before you post something that makes no sense.

[Scooter Moonpie]

Bergermeister wrote:

<quoted text>
Sorry, Scooter, navigatin''dem Niagara Falls with a Carrier is a beeotch!!

and

the St Lawrence seaway was built in the 1950s

B!tch. b!tch, b!tch.

Minor details. The Nips were smart... they'd have figgered out a way!

Niagra Falls my A$#!!!!!

; )