You must log in or register to comment.
It’s kind of grimly amusing that before WWII, air power enthusiasts were certain that a few bombs dropped on cities would cause mass panic and the recipients would immediately quit fighting and sue for peace. Even though bombs were dropped on cities in WWI and it didn’t do anything except piss people off.
WWII started and Germany dropped a bunch of bombs on London and it didn’t do anything except piss people off. And then the Allies dropped 100X as many bombs on German cities and it didn’t do anything except piss people off.
Someone should tell her.
That they still havent shut the fuck up about it?
About what? WW2 or the IRA bombing campaign or the 7 July 2005 islamic bombings?
There is an extensive list of terror attacks on London on wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_London Which one do we not “shut the fuck up” about?
I don’t understand this post? Make london ww2 again?
It’s highlighting the discrepancy between media reactions to strikes in cities in the global south versus a western city, like London.
So east of Europe is now called South? Hmmmmm
I think that happened during the troubles didn’t it?
Most recently, 2005 Wikipedia
There’s quite a bit of difference between an IED in a bucket and a bomb from a military aircraft.
how would you charactize the difference?
Military hardware causes way more destruction.
You are confusing bombs for air strikes.Air dropped bombs account for 2% of war casualties 2015-2024, IEDs 21%, air strikes 45%.
The average deaths from any explosive ordinance is roughly 20 per “event” which may include multiple detonations and mixed ordinance.
deleted by creator
I stand corrected.
deleted by creator
