he didn't hang up on her to dumb fat, turk fuck . . . she hung up god i hate this failed tv perseronality trying to make a name for himself my taking on the big boys . . . please go back to selling hot dogs at a hot dog stand and leave youtube PLEASE
O great, more of this Young Turks crap. How old are these hosts? Have they even gone through puberty yet? There ceases to be any requirement for talent in broadcasting anymore. This show needs to end. O and btw, if you turds actually listened to Micheal Savages show and not just clips, you would know if you ask him how he's doing he hangs up on you. He doesn't care if you love him or you hate him.
So are you going to talk politics or are you just criticizing how he handles his callers? It seems to me that the young turks are a dying breed; clinging to life, not well informed about anything.
@FriendlyCroock Try to rub two brain cells together and come up with an original thought. You right wingers listen to mental patients like Savage so he can tell you what to think and say. Go suck your own dick you faggot.
Here we are again from the The young Armenian Butchers the killers of million of children and women. Its a bloody shame that you have the balls to criticize someone else
I think its hilarious that Cenk makes such a big deal about Savage "hanging up on the caller," when Savage held for several seconds and asked twice what caller wanted. Do they actually pay Cenk for his opinions? I have a two-year old nephew who could provide more intelligent and coherent commentary than this guy.
Savage gets more listeners in a minute than this video has gotten in 9 months. This shows how influential this dumb turk is. He was replaced by the dummy Al Sharpton on MSNBC, that says something. Your ratings are that bad that they have to replace you with Al Sharpton.
@schmitty422 hahah funny. Show me his ratings son, Savage has about 10 million listeners a week, your man the dumb turk does not even have 10 million followers.
@schmitty422 Now I know your a liar, MSNBC has NEVER had ratings higher than any other news station. He was on the same time as Glenn Beck, believe me Glenn Beck had the higher ratings than all of the other stations combined. Also I am not a Glenn Beck fan at all
No his show on MSNBC did, and I'm not lying. And your whole point is because since Cenk has a smaller audience what he says is invalid? While that's obviously not true.
@schmitty422 Your wrong because I messed up, it was actually during the same time slot as Brett Bair on FNC, who has NEVER been in 2nd place in ratings during last couple of years. SO your wrong my friend
No, I trusted you were right about the timeslot, maybe you should watch Cenk's video about why he left MSNBC and you'll see what I'm talking about. And your core reason is wrong that because he has a smaller audience what he says is less right. If you don't think he's right then have reasons other than his audience is smaller than a different show.
Jealous bastard, you had lower ratings than Savage on TV! That is why they canceled your show idiot. According to every organization that monitors radio ratings, Savage is #2 both on radio and on the internet and is surging day by day. You on the other hand, had to kiss Al Gore's ass to get on his propaganda channel, make sure your true to your master and keep telling the lies of global warming. I am sure you will get 100,000 viewers a week.
Michael your always correct, Muslims Jews and communists are trying to destroy us. Sorry that Bastard Evil Gordon Brown didn't let you into England, Browns a bastard Traitor! The GB government is under the control of the evil communist EU and have made immigration only open to Muslims and Jews and not forgetting Rapist killers. Next time come through the French tunnel hiding in a lorry, then when customs get you say BUD BUD DING DING I'M A PAKISTANI IMMIGRANT. You will be treated like a king!
Fuck you you little shit!!!!!!! Savage is the man!!!!!!!! Let's see you call him up and debate with him!!!! I didn't think so!!!!!! You sissy ass liberal!!!!!!!!
But at the end of the day Michael Savage makes way more money than this dumb schmuck and has more listeners:) It's all good though, haters always make life a little interesting:)
I am a liberal democrat but like to listen to Mike when he spins yarns. His politics and mine are poles apart but he has wonderful stories. I think he lost his girlfriend to a hippie back in the day and has decided to hate the left from that point on.
The young turk trying to shit on someone that believes in something.The young turk is nothing but a turkey and you weakend what is surpose to be strong.Savage got it right.You suck the young turk is nothing but a fraud.Get the the fuck out here you little arab.
you stupid low life. you have not a clue.you mock a guy who has two Masters degrees,PH.D ,an I.Q. over 170 ,over 25 successful books' , and you act as though you're so intelligent ,but you're empty rhetoric . fumbling words ,you're out of your league dead head!
@backspace9766 So I AM SCUM, I am Liberal COMMUNIST scum, because i want the taxes on the rich to go up 5-10 percent, when in FACT they were much higher in years past and have gone no where but down yet Mike Savage will call me a communist liberal scum bag. yes what a VERY intelligent and thoughtful person he is.
@awsumpossum1 i know exactly what I'm talking about .I've been a listener for years.i suppose you think this tyt guy knows what he's talking about...right?
your statement about let's me know that you don't have a map or a clue. my advise ,do your research.
@awsumpossum1 what are you, brain dead? his whole damn rhetoric is shallow and empty.
oh!! wait, i guess if you count making fun and mocking Michael savage great and insightful,and you actually
agree with this bum?...what ,are you in the third grade? and FYI i love how you think you have me pegged. i don't watch Fox News. you sound like you're a special kinda Stupid.
@awsumpossum1 Seriously! all you have is to criticize a typo?.."STUPID" does that work for you?
Example: He acts like all it takes to understand communism is in a management course and it took Michael years to understand,Michael gave the woman a chance to talk and she didn't reply..so THEN did he hang up,
If you listened to him like you say you have ,then you've heard Michael savage debate MANY people. And this moron wants to make Michael to sound like a senile old man.
@backspace9766 Just because it took somone about 1 hour, and it took another guy multiple years to understand makes Michael Savage inteligent? Lolololol. And I dont listen to michael savage. Life is to short to be wasted on a fat bitter loser.
savage is a nut!! however, he does make a great number of valid points every night, not to mention he may be the most unintentionally funny radio personality in the industry.. i dont agree with everything he says, but its hard to turn off his show just cuz its great entertainment
TYT have no idea what they are talking about themselves. How ya doing? I'm doing a freaking radio show get on with what's on your mind....this caller must've had and IQ of 1 but yet "TYT" refuse to point that out. And for your information I searched Michael savage and that's how I heard of you. So how's that for ratings....u guys are clueless.
Truman's 1955 Memoirs states that the atomic bomb probably saved half a million US lives— anticipated casualties in an Allied invasion of Japan planned for November. Stimson subsequently talked of saving one million US casualties, and Churchill of saving one million American and half that number of British lives
@TheLoyalOfficer - I think Eisenhower, who was a general, would know more than the war about Truman who is a POLITICIAN.
"The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing ... I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon" --Dwight Eisenhower
Conservatards think a politician knows more about what's going on on the ground than generals now. Lol Ever considered Truman said it was necessary because he's the President who ordered it?
@TheLoyalOfficer - Again, Churchill, a politician, knows more about the war than a GENERAL? lol
"And since when is Truman's view not important? He MADE the decision!"
I never said it wasn't important, I said of course he would say it's correct because, as you yourself just said, he made the decision. Of course a person who makes a decision is likely to claim it's correct. Lol
No, but Brigadier General Bonnie Fellers was. Fellers wrote this memo for General MacArthur, "Neither the atomic bombing nor the entry of the Soviet Union into the war forced Japan's unconditional surrender. She was defeated before either these events took place."
@A86 Defeated, but did not surrender. And they had that RIDICULOUS set of demands after the Potsdam Declaration as of July 26, 1945. The Japs were out of their fucking minds.
@TheLoyalOfficer - Where did I say their determination to not surrender was not silly? It was. However, you still failed the burden of proof that the A bombs were necessary. As Eisenhower and Fellers said they had little to do with their surrender, it had more to do with the fact they were ALREADY DEFEATED before the first A-bomb even fell as you just said.
Savage is right the American people are SICK and TIRED of anyone against the Unites States of America! You progressive liberal and far left radicals need to wake up and see the writing on the wall YOU ARE DONE!! The Young Turk is a perfect example of liberal media, which is a waste!
@TheLoyalOfficer - TYT is the most popular news show on the Internet FYI. Over one billion views. You just helped them add another one. Thanks for playing. ;)
@TheLoyalOfficer - Better than Savage's ratings. He isn't getting a billion views/listeners.
Also, don't talk about statism when you support a guy in favor of the Patriot Act, Guantanamo Bay, the government controlling women's bodies and engaging in social interventionism like banning gay marriage and forbidding some religions from building places of worship (like mosques). You're as statist as they come.
@A86 It's NOT a billion listeners! It's 270,000 liberals watching 100 vids each or however the math works out. Again - I'm not impressed. Michael Savage supports the Patriot Act? Controlling women's bodies? (I guess that is what being anti-abortion means to you - "body control"??) He was against a mosque on GROUND ZERO - not just any mosque anywhere.
Your post is loaded with so much Red double-speak and nonsense that it scarcely merited a response.
@TheLoyalOfficer - I said views, dumbass. Not subscribers. Two different things. A billion views and 270,000+ subscribers. Jesus.
Yes, the government has to control women's bodies to disallow them from having abortions. That's the government trying to tell people what to do with their own bodies and FORCIBLY disallowing them from doing something with it against their will.
If he's against a mosque at Ground Zero he's against religious freedom. Should no church be allowed in Nagasaki?
@TheLoyalOfficer - And yes, he supports the Partiot Act and all the other statist measures I mentioned earlier. You're a Fascist cockmunch just like him.
@A86 Cockmunching is the priority for libtards such as yourself. Gayness is the purview of the left...
As for Savage, he might support the Patriot Act (I doubt he does fully) but I certainly don't. I am not a clone of him politically, but he is far more on the mark than cenk and his RedTurk crew.
@TheLoyalOfficer - Lol While we lefties support the right to be gay and be married you righties actually practice homosexuality. Need I list all the Republicans and conservative political and religious leaders who have either come out as gay or been discovered in gay relationships? ;)
Thanks for proving Savage is a Fascist and that you're a proto-Fascist. Thanks for showing you're a dumbass as Cenk has said many times that he's a capitalist and actually claims in the video Marxism is silly.
@TheLoyalOfficer - As opposed to rightists who are gay and in the closet? At least leftists who are gay have the courage to not hide in the closet and preach religious bullshit against it.
BTW, Fascism is a right-wing ideology, dumbass. You're as big a statist as all the Nazis. Right down to your desire to outlaw abortion and have the government control women's bodies, tell Muslims where they can and cannot build a mosque and your desire to control who can and cannot get married. Fuck off.
@TheLoyalOfficer - Well, not "fuck off" because part of me hopes you respond again so I can continue verbally cutting you down. What I meant was "fuck yourself", which I'm sure you do on a regular basis.
@TheLoyalOfficer - lol I'm not a liberal. Typical conservatard, when hit with the facts your only response is childish name-calling. I understand though, you can't argue with the facts. ;) Congrats on your ideas bankrupting the country though.
@A86 What "facts"? The number of views that cenk's crap gets? Some of my typos? Bring me some real facts and I'll be happy to read them. Of course, you have none.
You are not a liberal? You sure sound like one. What are you then?
@TheLoyalOfficer - The fact that you're a fascist-leaning statist and your hero Michael Savage could never dream of getting Cenk's ratings. Also, that your ideology has turned America into a third world shithole.
@TheLoyalOfficer - If you believe in banning gay marriage, banning abortion, banning Muslims from building mosques near the WTC site, believe in people being forced to pay taxes for unwanted war spending, believe in the government getting involved in helping corporations and businesses bust unions, believe in citizens paying taxes to fund corporations, etc. you are a statist. Those are all statist actions.
@A86 I don't believe in any of that stuff. However, I do think that Muslims should not build a mosque near the WTC, they should show some sensitivity and class. But I don't think that government should be involved. I don't believe in abortion on demand, either.
I don't think that Savage believes in much of that either. I don't listen to him on a regular basis, but from what I have heard, he does not follow those beliefs.
@TheLoyalOfficer - Okay, so should Christians not build churches near Nagasaki or Hiroshima? Or how about Christians building churches near sites where they slaughtered Indians believing Gawd told them it was okay?
@A86 First of all, WW2 was not a religious struggle like this one - the comparision is idiotic. Likewise with the equally silly Indian crap. You are just flailing around now. Second of all, the A-Bombs were completely justified, as Japan was NOT going to surrender without them. Comparing them to 9/11 is ridiculous.
1) Doesn't matter. Most American soldiers were Christian and used Christian teachings to justify their actions and comfort themselves. FDR referenced "the Lord" in his decisions; 2) This is not completely a religious struggle. It's also a nationalist struggle. Some terrorists aren't that religious (many of them smoke, drink liquor, etc.) and are in it more for their feelings of nationalism and anti-Westernism. Does that matter to you? Probably not.
@TheLoyalOfficer - I also referenced Manifest Destiny, which WAS partially religious.
"as Japan was NOT going to surrender without them"
Nonsense:
(.) ihr (.) org / jhr / v16 / v16n3p - 4 _ Weber (.) html
Japan was already in the process of preparing to surrender when we bombed them. Even gov documents from back then indicate the US's main reason for bombing was to scare the Soviets out of invading a surrendering Japan by displaying US power.
@A86 Bullshit. Do you know anything about the Anami coup attempt and the hiding of the Emperor's message - obviously not. They almost didn't surrender WITH the 2 A-bombs. Japan was "in the process"? What "process"?? You just say "I surrender" - it's that simple. And Japan was not going to with the atomic bombs. You say you are not some libtard, and yet you spew plenty of their bile...
@TheLoyalOfficer - "Do you know anything about the Anami coup attempt"
I know all about it, the Anami coup attempt failed and Anami didn't represent the majority of officials in the Japanese military and government. The A-bombing actually renewed the resolve of some Japanese people because it enraged them (any surprise?), that's why they almost didn't surrender.
I think US military officials and generals who said Japan was about to surrender, as well as Japanese documents, know more than you.
@A86 More nonsense. Japan was not about to surrender. What documents are you talking about? What "process"? The officers launched the coup AFTER the bombs were dropped. And even then they almost succeeded. What would have been their response to a surrender attempt without the bombs? The generals would certainly have gone along - after all, they did not want to surrender.
@TheLoyalOfficer - You obviously did not read that link I sent you. I'll send it again:
(.) ihr (.) org / jhr / v16 / v16n3p - 4 _ Weber (.) html
From the link, "The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing ... I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon," Fmr. President and General Ike Eisenhower, 1963.
In any case, if the Japanese wanted to surrender, they should have. They had weeks, if not months, of total hopelessness in which to surrender. They refused, they got nuked, and then they ALMOST did not surrender ANYWAY, and by great luck, the message of the Emperor got out past the officer coup and they finally surrendered. You claim you know the Anami coup - and yet you should know how close they were to not surrendering even AFTER the bombs.
@TheLoyalOfficer - You have to delete the parentheses around the dots, close all the spaces and put "h t t p" and all the stuff before the first dot. -__-
"They had weeks, if not months"
That's because there was a lot of political disagreement over surrendering, the majority of government officials didn't support surrendering until the people started starving because of food shortages. The nuke just renewed their resolve. They just surrendered because the nuking destroyed more food.
@A86 Yeah, "SOME" Allied military officials. Hardly a consensus.
The Jap cause was definitely hopeless at many junctures - the loss of Okinawa, Iwo Jima, the entrance of the Soviets into the war, the destruction of their navy in the Marianas and at Leyte Gulf. What, short of a bloody invasion of Japan (which is what the A-bombs were trying to AVOID) could have been done to make them surrender? What difference would 2-4 weeks have made? You claim you are not a libtard - sure sound like one!
@TheLoyalOfficer - The same could be said of your worldview. Only SOME military officials agree with you, hardly a consensus.
"What, short of a bloody invasion of Japan"
Actually an invasion would have killed less civilians than the A-bombs which combined killed over 300,000 people. An invasion would have killed much less. There was no official plan for citizen resistance. Your question is a false dilemma because they would have surrendered on their own without an invasion or an A-bomb.
@A86 The invasion of Kyushu alone would have caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands! Are you insane? Japan was bristling with defenses, and judging from the Japanese fanaticism on Okinawa, how hard would they have fought on Japan proper?
Please. Get out of your PC stupor... They were NOT going to surrender without an invasion or A-bomb. If they were going to, why didn't they? Why was there a coup at all - AFTER the A-bombs?
@TheLoyalOfficer - "would have caused the deaths of hundreds of thosuands"
According to whom? And who said said an invasion was necessary? All we had to do was continue to starve Japan and they would surrender in a couple of weeks with no invasion or nuke necessary. Japanese fanaticism was hardly universal, the majority of officials were signaling throwing in the towel.
How the fuck is quoting US government intelligence political correctness? Do you even know what political correctness is?
@A86 They had WEEKS to do so - if not months. Their situation was hopeless for a long time. That is my point. They could have surrendered and many different junctures and they chose not to.
So they fight to the bitter and bloody end in Okinawa, but not in Kyushu? That makes absolutely no sense and proves to me that you are just bending your predictions to suit your argument.
They weren't exactly moving on a set deadline. There was also no universal movement in the Japanese government to launch a huge attack, that plan was controversial and opposed by many in their government.
They fought to the bitter and bloody end? When was this? They still had hundreds of thousands of volunteers even after they nuking. If they really wanted to die how the fuck would you threaten them with death?
@TheLoyalOfficer - Your "logic" makes about as much sense as threatening a suicide bomber by threatening to blow him up.
You claim the Japanese were willing to fight to the death no matter how many of them were extinguished but extinguishing some suddenly made them change their minds even though the nukings took out mostly civilians and left tens of thousands of troops and hundreds of thousands of volunteers intact? Obviously it wasn't the nuke that made em stop.
The Japanese were concerned about our terrible new weapon, and since they had no way of stopping its delivery, then they could have been just picked apart by nukes. (Little did they know that we were out of them for a while...)
As for this hunger mythology, they had stockpiled enough food to fight if they wanted to. There is NO evidence that they were "a couple of weeks from starvation." Yet again, more made-up crap by you to support your PC argument.
@TheLoyalOfficer - That makes no sense since you claim they were not afraid to die. Why would someone who wants to fight to the last man, woman and child be afraid of a bomb? We'd been boming them. This was just a bigger one with more after affects.
"hunger mythology"
Lol These are Allied and Japanese forces talking about their low rations of food. If you're going to make up BS like claiming they had enough food for several more weeks or months back it up with official sources.
@TheLoyalOfficer - You still haven't shown a single shred of information to back up your theory. You've said things that contradict it since you noted they continued fighting even after they were nuked. If they were that scared of the nuke they would have surrendered right away just hours after they got bombed. They had the technology to get in contact with the Allies the same day. You're helping back up the fact it had to do with lacking some logistic for carrying on (hint: food).
@A86 They did surrender after Nagasaki! That's when they surrendered - once the Anami coup was foiled and the Emperor's message successfully hidden from the plotters who wanted to continue the war.
@TheLoyalOfficer - You again just proved the only reason they surrendered is because the majority of Japanese officials wanted to. That's what I've been saying. There wasn't a big change in opinion in the Japanese government after the bombing aside from how the nukings would put a strain on already limited food and medical supplies. There were more people in the government who wanted to continue the war AFTER the nuking.
@TheLoyalOfficer - Alright, time to hit you with the facts. On July 30 Ambassador Sato wrote, "There is no alternative but immediate unconditional surrender if we are to prevent Russia's participation in the war." On Aug 2 he wrote, "it should not be difficult for you to realize that ... our time to proceed with arrangements of ending the war before the enemy lands...is limited, on the other hand it is difficult to decide on concrete peace conditions here at home all at once."
@TheLoyalOfficer - That was just 4 days before the Hiroshima nuking. The Soviets had declared open war on Japan and were set to invade the Japanese mainland around the same time. You think it's just coincidence the US decided to nuke Japan the same week the Soviet Union was going to start sending forces to take over Japan the way the Allies did with Germany? The US didn't want a repeat of what was happening with dividing up Germany between the West and the East.
@A86 With what landing craft? With what navy? The Soviets were not capable of invading Japan, especially with its bristling defenses. There is no evidence that there was any change in the food status following Nagasaki, either. You are just pulling that out of your ass. Bottom line - they were afraid of the bomb, and almost did NOT surrender even with it being used (Anami coup.)
They had plenty of time to surrender earlier. They did not. They got nuked. Then they surrendered. Done.
@TheLoyalOfficer - What are you talking about? The Soviets were the second or third most powerful military force on the planet in 1945 (the British would be either third or second at that point). There are tons of Soviet landing craft dating back to 1918. Just type in "Soviet navy" in Google. You think they didn't have a navy in 1945? LMAO They had 59 destroyer-leaders and 218 submarines in 1941.
@TheLoyalOfficer - "There is no evidence that there was any change in the food status"
Are you...kidding? Over 300,000 people died in a few weeks. The demand for emergency food, water and medical supplies to be rushed over to Nagasaski and Hiroshima was enormous. Japan had to literally beg other countries for food, water and medical supplies just for the 2011 Quake this year and that Kobe earthquake back in the mid-90s. You can imagine several million homeless and radon sickness victims.
There is little evidence to support this and fewer actual military intelligence, you even offered evidence to the contrary showing there was less willingness to surrender AFTER the bombing. That's why you have not linked a single source.
You can't even logically backed up your opinion - how would threatening a person who wants to go out in a blaze of glory with death scare them? That's like threatening a BDSM addict with whipping him. Lol
@A86 Sure - they wanted to die in a decisive battle, not vaporized from the sky. If the bomb was not such a big deal as you say, then why did the Emperor mention it in his surrender speech - you know the one that was nearly stolen by the coup plotters after the Nagasaki bomb?
You just flailing in your PC self-hate now. And you did say you were a leftie earlier - this A-bomb guilt trip certainly confirms it. Our country is dying because of you Obamaclowns.
@TheLoyalOfficer - I didn't say it did not matter at all but your "logic" is ridiculous because the Japanese knew the A-bomb would not kill all people in Japan. Even with the A-bomb most would still die in the field.
"You just flailing in your PC self-hate now"
You obviously have no idea what the term "political correctness" means. What the fuck does PC (things like calling black people "African-American") have to with citing military intel? Self-hatred? Self-hatred about what?
@A86 Oh this anti-bomb nonsense is part-and-parcel of the PC lexicon. One of the first areas that PC seeks to infect is history - especially self-hate about everything we (or the West in general) has done.
The A-bombs were a necessary part of making Japan surrender. Deal with it.
@A86 Japan's reaction to the Potsdam Declaration of July 26, 1945:
Preservation of the Imperial institution and national polity, assumption by the Imperial Headquarters of responsibility for disarmament and demobilization, no occupation of the Japanese Home Islands, Korea, or Formosa, and delegation of the punishment of war criminals to the Japanese government.
Some "surrender"! Give me a fucking break. The Japs were kidding themselves, as are you. Solution: A BOMB. Check the w i k i
@TheLoyalOfficer - The Ambassador of Japan's letter to the Japanese Minister of Foreign Affairs a few days later, "There is no alternative but immediate unconditional surrender if we are to prevent Russia's participation in the war..." His response, "...our time to proceed with arrangements of ending the war before the enemy lands on the Japanese mainland is limited, on the other hand it is difficult to decide on concrete peace conditions here at home all at once."
@TheLoyalOfficer - So rightists believe in dropping A-bombs on civilians without a qualm? Okay, thanks for confirming that righties are sociopaths. Something we already knew anyway.
"What were they waiting for?"
You do know you can't get everyone in a government to agree upon an action overnight, right? Why do you ask such silly questions?
@TheLoyalOfficer - The Allies had to help Japan get back on its feet for years after Japan surrendered.
atomicbombmuseum (.) org/ 4 _ ruins (.) shtml
There is no way Japan could have realistically carried on a war with the United States June of 1945 speaking logistically. They couldn't even feed their own population anymore. Is everyone going to fight on an empty stomach? They were already approaching third world status in hunger when they surrendered.
Supporters of the bombings generally assert that they caused the Japanese surrender, preventing massive casualties on both sides in the planned invasion of Japan: Kyūshū was to be invaded in October 1945 and Honshū five months later. Some estimate Allied forces would have suffered 1 million casualties in such a scenario, while Japanese casualties would have been in the millions.
@TheLoyalOfficer - Obviously the problem with your argument has gone over your head: you're implying that all Muslims agreed with the 9/11 hijackers or implying that Islam inherently agrees with the 9/11 attack by having a problem with the mosque being built near the site. That's why people saying churches should not be built near any site where Christians killed Native Americans or bombed non-Christian places is equally silly. It implies all Christians or Christianity agreed with the action.
@A86 9/11 was done in the name of Islam, whether or not the majority of Muslims agreed with it is irrelevant. They should show some class and sensitivity (amazing that every damn person in the world demands and gets "sensitivity" except the West) and put their temple some place else.
Note that Islam loves to build mosques right on the sites of their conquests. Jerusalem is a perfect example. Tons of examples are all around India, too.
@TheLoyalOfficer - "9/11 was done in the name of Islam, whether or not the majority of Muslims agreed with it is irrelevant"
Okay, then Christians should be sensitive and not build a church near any place where an atrocity was committed in the name of Christianity. No churches near the Oklahoma building that Tim McVeigh took out, no churches anywhere along the Trail of Tears, no churches anywhere near where Europeans forced Africans or Natives to convert to Christianity at gun-point.
@TheLoyalOfficer - "Islam loves to build mosques right on the sites of their conquests"
Exact same with Christians. There are churches at Crusade battle points in Israel and churches were built in the Balkans where Christians defeated the Islamic Ottomans in battles.
But as a conservatard I'm sure you think it's okay when Christians do it. You're no different than Islamic fundies.
@A86 Well if that is the case then let's not compound the problem by building yet another one by Ground Zero. I'm a New Yorker, I don't want it, and the vast majority of the people in New York that I know don't want it - and I live in a very liberal neighborhood too.
They see through the "Cordoba" nonsense. Nothing but Islamic triumphalism. Not in my city.
@TheLoyalOfficer - As someone against authoritarianism I could care less what people want and don't want when it comes to the religious freedom of others. As long as a religious building isn't hurting anything people should be free to build it, just like Christians can build churches at sites near the Trail of Tears.
"Nothing but Islamic triumphalism"
LMAO The man who owns the mosque is a majority shareholder of Fox News. He worked for the Bush Administration. Hardly a radical. Turn off Fox.
@TheLoyalOfficer - Technically it's not even a mosque, it's a several-story building with one prayer room on one floor. That's not a mosque. There are no minarets or other parts of a mosque. The other floors and rooms have libraries, cooking classes, etc. That's like calling a 20-story entertainment building with one Christian or Jewish prayer room a "church" or a "synagogue". Your "logic" about the building is like saying a church with "Constantinople" in it is Christian triumphalism.
@A86 Yeah, "technically." Meanwhile it is funded by the Saudi radicals and going to be lauded around the Islamic world as a symbol of our surrender to their jihadist cause.
No thanks - put it some place else and show some class.
YOUNG TURKS is full of sh#t! get the fu*k outta here with ur liberal garbage..everything you liberals say, do, think is bull sh#t PERIOD n guess what u dumm fu*ks, i am a 25 year-old MINORITY,,& along with MANY other young MINORITIES out there, understand clearly the lies and falsehoods you have been spewing and spreading thoughout the years..conservatism is taking over..and like the mid-terms last year, we kickng yall da fu*k out!! haha now go suck a di*k u liberal faggot commy hahaha
he didn't hang up on her to dumb fat, turk fuck . . . she hung up god i hate this failed tv perseronality trying to make a name for himself my taking on the big boys . . . please go back to selling hot dogs at a hot dog stand and leave youtube PLEASE
slash20062006 1 week ago
simple; liberalism is a mental disorder. put the chip in your right hand and be done with it.
MrKeepitreal50 1 week ago
What a paranoid nutcase he is.The teaparty isn't right wing enough for this cretin.
DawnOfTheDead991 3 weeks ago
For Savage's defense: If I was a talk radio host, I'd get sick of callers asking me "how are you" day after day, year after year.
cennon 4 weeks ago
@cennon In Savage's non defense, why would someone become a talk show host if they weren't friendly and outgoing
DawnOfTheDead991 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
O great, more of this Young Turks crap. How old are these hosts? Have they even gone through puberty yet? There ceases to be any requirement for talent in broadcasting anymore. This show needs to end. O and btw, if you turds actually listened to Micheal Savages show and not just clips, you would know if you ask him how he's doing he hangs up on you. He doesn't care if you love him or you hate him.
Sumoto999 1 month ago
Comment removed
Sumoto999 1 month ago
So are you going to talk politics or are you just criticizing how he handles his callers? It seems to me that the young turks are a dying breed; clinging to life, not well informed about anything.
darrell6204 2 months ago
@darrell6204 You're not very bright.....Savage is a mental patient.
NewYorkCityUSA7 1 month ago
@NewYorkCityUSA7
well that`s because he`s sick of vermin like you
FriendlyCroock 1 month ago
@FriendlyCroock Try to rub two brain cells together and come up with an original thought. You right wingers listen to mental patients like Savage so he can tell you what to think and say. Go suck your own dick you faggot.
NewYorkCityUSA7 1 month ago
@NewYorkCityUSA7
oh you poor insecure little freak
you`re just scared cause the right wing got bigger and stronger very fast over the years
lol in the future they will line you up and shoot you communists one by one
FriendlyCroock 1 month ago
@FriendlyCroock I suggest you either get your doc to up your medications or kill yourself. Either way the world will be a better place.
NewYorkCityUSA7 1 month ago
@FriendlyCroock Living is for the young old fart.
Moviesandvideo 4 weeks ago
@FriendlyCroock There is nothing Friendly about a right wing nutcase like you. You represent that scumbag's fanbase very well.
DawnOfTheDead991 3 weeks ago
@DawnOfTheDead991
lol but you`re mentally ill
take a look at your comment it makes no sense
please libs have some mercy and don't give me anymore of your monkey brain opinions
FriendlyCroock 2 weeks ago
@FriendlyCroock Another Weiner fan pops out of a manhole to get a wi-fi signal
DawnOfTheDead991 2 weeks ago
Here we are again from the The young Armenian Butchers the killers of million of children and women. Its a bloody shame that you have the balls to criticize someone else
MrFangole 2 months ago
The Young Turds.
USA4July1776 2 months ago
I think its hilarious that Cenk makes such a big deal about Savage "hanging up on the caller," when Savage held for several seconds and asked twice what caller wanted. Do they actually pay Cenk for his opinions? I have a two-year old nephew who could provide more intelligent and coherent commentary than this guy.
thomda11 2 months ago
@thomda11
lol i agree that Cenk is the funniest idiot ever
it makes you laugh with his immense stupidity
seriously sometimes you don`t know if he`s serious, or just goofing around when he acts like this
FriendlyCroock 1 month ago
@FriendlyCroock Have fun living off welfare.
Moviesandvideo 4 weeks ago
Savage gets more listeners in a minute than this video has gotten in 9 months. This shows how influential this dumb turk is. He was replaced by the dummy Al Sharpton on MSNBC, that says something. Your ratings are that bad that they have to replace you with Al Sharpton.
TheRightThinker 2 months ago
@TheRightThinker
You have no idea what your talking about Cenk had better ratings than any other of the stations.
schmitty422 2 months ago
@schmitty422 hahah funny. Show me his ratings son, Savage has about 10 million listeners a week, your man the dumb turk does not even have 10 million followers.
TheRightThinker 2 months ago
@TheRightThinker
When he worked at MSNBC his ratings in his time slot were higher than any other TV station, I never said he had better ratings than Micheal Savage
schmitty422 2 months ago
@schmitty422 Now I know your a liar, MSNBC has NEVER had ratings higher than any other news station. He was on the same time as Glenn Beck, believe me Glenn Beck had the higher ratings than all of the other stations combined. Also I am not a Glenn Beck fan at all
TheRightThinker 2 months ago
@TheRightThinker
No his show on MSNBC did, and I'm not lying. And your whole point is because since Cenk has a smaller audience what he says is invalid? While that's obviously not true.
schmitty422 2 months ago
@schmitty422 His show on MSNBC had higher ratings than Glenn Beck? that is 100% false, look at Nielson ratings please before opening your mouth
TheRightThinker 2 months ago
@TheRightThinker I like that, "the Dumb Turk." That is good stuff.
willden15 2 months ago
@TheRightThinker
I did and I was right, the channel didn't always have better than Beck but at the end of Cenk's show his show did.
schmitty422 2 months ago
@schmitty422 Your wrong because I messed up, it was actually during the same time slot as Brett Bair on FNC, who has NEVER been in 2nd place in ratings during last couple of years. SO your wrong my friend
TheRightThinker 2 months ago
@TheRightThinker
No, I trusted you were right about the timeslot, maybe you should watch Cenk's video about why he left MSNBC and you'll see what I'm talking about. And your core reason is wrong that because he has a smaller audience what he says is less right. If you don't think he's right then have reasons other than his audience is smaller than a different show.
schmitty422 2 months ago
@TheRightThinker His ratings were good. Look it up smarty pants
Slotten68 2 months ago
Jealous bastard, you had lower ratings than Savage on TV! That is why they canceled your show idiot. According to every organization that monitors radio ratings, Savage is #2 both on radio and on the internet and is surging day by day. You on the other hand, had to kiss Al Gore's ass to get on his propaganda channel, make sure your true to your master and keep telling the lies of global warming. I am sure you will get 100,000 viewers a week.
TheRightThinker 2 months ago
Michael your always correct, Muslims Jews and communists are trying to destroy us. Sorry that Bastard Evil Gordon Brown didn't let you into England, Browns a bastard Traitor! The GB government is under the control of the evil communist EU and have made immigration only open to Muslims and Jews and not forgetting Rapist killers. Next time come through the French tunnel hiding in a lorry, then when customs get you say BUD BUD DING DING I'M A PAKISTANI IMMIGRANT. You will be treated like a king!
numptyfuckup 3 months ago
communisim is bull shit. and liberals are slowly dragging us there, but socialism first.
HogansDisciple 3 months ago
This guy is the typical wimpy ass liberal
frankdooly 3 months ago
Liberals suck!
frankdooly 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Fuck you you little shit!!!!!!! Savage is the man!!!!!!!! Let's see you call him up and debate with him!!!! I didn't think so!!!!!! You sissy ass liberal!!!!!!!!
cornucopia4444 3 months ago
I agree with most of what Savage said. Maybe this moronic "Turk" should call and debate him. Nah, he doesn't have the balls.
bull864 4 months ago
@bull864
You need professional help then.
Nutcase!
MrReco12 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrReco12 Ain't that the pot calling the kettle black???
bull864 3 months ago
@MrReco12 I'm fine, but thanks for your concern.
bull864 3 months ago
But at the end of the day Michael Savage makes way more money than this dumb schmuck and has more listeners:) It's all good though, haters always make life a little interesting:)
24meshugat 4 months ago
love savage. tyt suck
rugerp9045 4 months ago
I am a liberal democrat but like to listen to Mike when he spins yarns. His politics and mine are poles apart but he has wonderful stories. I think he lost his girlfriend to a hippie back in the day and has decided to hate the left from that point on.
Mountchoirboy 4 months ago
The young turk trying to shit on someone that believes in something.The young turk is nothing but a turkey and you weakend what is surpose to be strong.Savage got it right.You suck the young turk is nothing but a fraud.Get the the fuck out here you little arab.
brsfan66 4 months ago
This guy making the commentary is ignorant and needs to fact check.
beaudavidson 4 months ago
you go mike
nickjames46 4 months ago
somebody strangle this dick head making the commentary
Derrski89 4 months ago
Way to go Mike. I always agreed with you and I do now.
dao3rd123 4 months ago
you stupid low life. you have not a clue.you mock a guy who has two Masters degrees,PH.D ,an I.Q. over 170 ,over 25 successful books' , and you act as though you're so intelligent ,but you're empty rhetoric . fumbling words ,you're out of your league dead head!
backspace9766 4 months ago
@backspace9766 So I AM SCUM, I am Liberal COMMUNIST scum, because i want the taxes on the rich to go up 5-10 percent, when in FACT they were much higher in years past and have gone no where but down yet Mike Savage will call me a communist liberal scum bag. yes what a VERY intelligent and thoughtful person he is.
BloodJunkie11 4 months ago
@BloodJunkie11 I'm not quite for sure if we're on the same page.
I'm just talking about the tyt guy who mocks people like he so intelligent and has no idea what he's talking about.
taxes has nothing to do with my comment. And no, I'm not calling a you a scum bag for being a liberal .
backspace9766 4 months ago
@backspace9766 has no idea what he is talking about? lololol
awsumpossum1 4 months ago
@awsumpossum1 i know exactly what I'm talking about .I've been a listener for years.i suppose you think this tyt guy knows what he's talking about...right?
your statement about let's me know that you don't have a map or a clue. my advise ,do your research.
backspace9766 4 months ago
@backspace9766 yeh ive beenlistening for about 3 years. And.... Give me an example...? and I know TYT DOES get some things wrong. But saying
"HE HAS NO IDEA WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT.....I wont give examples because i dont have any because im a moron... Eer i mean.. HE IS A COMMUNIST"
Is so lame dude. Go back to foxnews forums
awsumpossum1 4 months ago
@awsumpossum1 what are you, brain dead? his whole damn rhetoric is shallow and empty.
oh!! wait, i guess if you count making fun and mocking Michael savage great and insightful,and you actually
agree with this bum?...what ,are you in the third grade? and FYI i love how you think you have me pegged. i don't watch Fox News. you sound like you're a special kinda Stupid.
backspace9766 4 months ago
@backspace9766 You capitalized "stupid". Your very bright kiddo =). And Im still waiting for those examples.... OR RIGHT you dont have any.
awsumpossum1 4 months ago
@awsumpossum1 Seriously! all you have is to criticize a typo?.."STUPID" does that work for you?
Example: He acts like all it takes to understand communism is in a management course and it took Michael years to understand,Michael gave the woman a chance to talk and she didn't reply..so THEN did he hang up,
If you listened to him like you say you have ,then you've heard Michael savage debate MANY people. And this moron wants to make Michael to sound like a senile old man.
backspace9766 4 months ago
you see,you can't think for your self ,so all you want to do is passively get me to explain it to you
so you can have a foundation for an argument . i gave you a couple examples,but i don't think that is enough
for your wondering, puzzled mind."Intelligence" get some.
and by the way ...it's "yeah" not" yeh"
backspace9766 4 months ago
@backspace9766 Just because it took somone about 1 hour, and it took another guy multiple years to understand makes Michael Savage inteligent? Lolololol. And I dont listen to michael savage. Life is to short to be wasted on a fat bitter loser.
awsumpossum1 4 months ago
@awsumpossum1 you really are at a lose. you missed the boat when it comes to logic.
don't write again. you're a waste of time. you can't fix stupidity
backspace9766 4 months ago
@backspace9766 you mean "loss". Damn dude your a failure.
awsumpossum1 4 months ago
savage is a nut!! however, he does make a great number of valid points every night, not to mention he may be the most unintentionally funny radio personality in the industry.. i dont agree with everything he says, but its hard to turn off his show just cuz its great entertainment
traffy22 4 months ago
your commentary sucks dude. Why don't you make logical arguments instead of this garbage bashing rhetoric? cause your a fag
JParker2121 4 months ago
Savage is a cock sucker
Tzimnewman3 4 months ago
Michael Savage makes me sick.
Fatcatnevercameback 5 months ago
TYT have no idea what they are talking about themselves. How ya doing? I'm doing a freaking radio show get on with what's on your mind....this caller must've had and IQ of 1 but yet "TYT" refuse to point that out. And for your information I searched Michael savage and that's how I heard of you. So how's that for ratings....u guys are clueless.
DominicanSheik 5 months ago
@DominicanSheik i couldn't agree more Dominican
backspace9766 4 months ago
Mental instabilty? It's called intelligence...shock value=ratings...Get it? He's a radio host.
Plus Savage has the education and experience, which is why people listen to him.
socal2121 5 months ago 2
@socal2121 People listen to Savage because they are a paranoid, psychotic bullies, too stupid to realize how completely ignorant and dishonest he is.
DawnOfTheDead991 2 weeks ago
Daddy issues.
Amino2 5 months ago
Comment removed
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
(cont)
Truman's 1955 Memoirs states that the atomic bomb probably saved half a million US lives— anticipated casualties in an Allied invasion of Japan planned for November. Stimson subsequently talked of saving one million US casualties, and Churchill of saving one million American and half that number of British lives
Truman, Stimson, Churchill. Stop being a douche.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - I think Eisenhower, who was a general, would know more than the war about Truman who is a POLITICIAN.
"The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing ... I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon" --Dwight Eisenhower
Conservatards think a politician knows more about what's going on on the ground than generals now. Lol Ever considered Truman said it was necessary because he's the President who ordered it?
A86 5 months ago
@A86 And Stimson? Churchill? And since when is Truman's view not important? He MADE the decision!
Eisenhower was NOT EVEN IN THE THEATRE! He was the European Commander, not the Pacific one.
MacArthur supported the use of the A-bomb. After all, he had been fighting the Japs for almost 3 years. Much more weight than Ike.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - Again, Churchill, a politician, knows more about the war than a GENERAL? lol
"And since when is Truman's view not important? He MADE the decision!"
I never said it wasn't important, I said of course he would say it's correct because, as you yourself just said, he made the decision. Of course a person who makes a decision is likely to claim it's correct. Lol
A86 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - "Eisenhower was NOT EVEN IN THE THEATRE!"
No, but Brigadier General Bonnie Fellers was. Fellers wrote this memo for General MacArthur, "Neither the atomic bombing nor the entry of the Soviet Union into the war forced Japan's unconditional surrender. She was defeated before either these events took place."
A86 5 months ago
@A86 Defeated, but did not surrender. And they had that RIDICULOUS set of demands after the Potsdam Declaration as of July 26, 1945. The Japs were out of their fucking minds.
Solution: A Bombs.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - Where did I say their determination to not surrender was not silly? It was. However, you still failed the burden of proof that the A bombs were necessary. As Eisenhower and Fellers said they had little to do with their surrender, it had more to do with the fact they were ALREADY DEFEATED before the first A-bomb even fell as you just said.
A86 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@A86 Churchill knew more about the Pacific theatre than Ike, definitely.
And what about Stimson and MacArthur? Plus Truman, plus the Anami coup, plus the absurd reaction to the Potsdam Declaration of 26 July.
Dude, quit while you're behind. Give it up! Stop being a douche. The A-bombs were ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY.
Deal with the PWNRship. I'm happy to enlighten you. It's a service I provide free of charge. :-D
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
SAVAGE ROCKS.. you ScMuck!!!
naio1869 5 months ago
LOL Savage is BAD ASS!!! LOL
GOOEYJIZZ 5 months ago
Michael Savage Rules. He just proved his point by your stupid comments in the video.
pilotdude53 6 months ago
Savage is right the American people are SICK and TIRED of anyone against the Unites States of America! You progressive liberal and far left radicals need to wake up and see the writing on the wall YOU ARE DONE!! The Young Turk is a perfect example of liberal media, which is a waste!
Helpinglittlepeople 6 months ago
Conservative talk radio is dying?
Hardly, cenk. Meanwhile you bolshevik "turks" have ZERO ratings. And even then you have commericals at the end!
WEAK
TheLoyalOfficer 6 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - TYT is the most popular news show on the Internet FYI. Over one billion views. You just helped them add another one. Thanks for playing. ;)
A86 6 months ago
@A86 Yeah - their 270,000 thousand subscribers watching all of their vids and blowing the "brilliant" cenk's brain.
I'm not impressed. Hardly a movement. More like some libtards who subscribe to the dying philosophy of statism.
TheLoyalOfficer 6 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - Better than Savage's ratings. He isn't getting a billion views/listeners.
Also, don't talk about statism when you support a guy in favor of the Patriot Act, Guantanamo Bay, the government controlling women's bodies and engaging in social interventionism like banning gay marriage and forbidding some religions from building places of worship (like mosques). You're as statist as they come.
A86 6 months ago
@A86 It's NOT a billion listeners! It's 270,000 liberals watching 100 vids each or however the math works out. Again - I'm not impressed. Michael Savage supports the Patriot Act? Controlling women's bodies? (I guess that is what being anti-abortion means to you - "body control"??) He was against a mosque on GROUND ZERO - not just any mosque anywhere.
Your post is loaded with so much Red double-speak and nonsense that it scarcely merited a response.
TheLoyalOfficer 6 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - I said views, dumbass. Not subscribers. Two different things. A billion views and 270,000+ subscribers. Jesus.
Yes, the government has to control women's bodies to disallow them from having abortions. That's the government trying to tell people what to do with their own bodies and FORCIBLY disallowing them from doing something with it against their will.
If he's against a mosque at Ground Zero he's against religious freedom. Should no church be allowed in Nagasaki?
A86 6 months ago
@A86 Are you equating Nagasaki with 9/11?
TheLoyalOfficer 6 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - It could be considered a war crime. Or, I could mention there are Japanese Buddhist temples near Pearl Harbor.
A86 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - And yes, he supports the Partiot Act and all the other statist measures I mentioned earlier. You're a Fascist cockmunch just like him.
A86 6 months ago
@A86 Cockmunching is the priority for libtards such as yourself. Gayness is the purview of the left...
As for Savage, he might support the Patriot Act (I doubt he does fully) but I certainly don't. I am not a clone of him politically, but he is far more on the mark than cenk and his RedTurk crew.
TheLoyalOfficer 6 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - Lol While we lefties support the right to be gay and be married you righties actually practice homosexuality. Need I list all the Republicans and conservative political and religious leaders who have either come out as gay or been discovered in gay relationships? ;)
Thanks for proving Savage is a Fascist and that you're a proto-Fascist. Thanks for showing you're a dumbass as Cenk has said many times that he's a capitalist and actually claims in the video Marxism is silly.
A86 6 months ago
@A86 Yeah, as opposed to the leftists who are just... gay. No need to hide. Ah - anyone who disagrees with your statist agenda is a proto-fascist.
A leftist capitalist? Please. All we need do is pull down the mask, and cenk's (and your) statism will come through.
TheLoyalOfficer 6 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - As opposed to rightists who are gay and in the closet? At least leftists who are gay have the courage to not hide in the closet and preach religious bullshit against it.
BTW, Fascism is a right-wing ideology, dumbass. You're as big a statist as all the Nazis. Right down to your desire to outlaw abortion and have the government control women's bodies, tell Muslims where they can and cannot build a mosque and your desire to control who can and cannot get married. Fuck off.
A86 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - Well, not "fuck off" because part of me hopes you respond again so I can continue verbally cutting you down. What I meant was "fuck yourself", which I'm sure you do on a regular basis.
A86 5 months ago
@A86 How weak... Typical libtard response - hot air insults because your political ideas are backrupt.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - lol I'm not a liberal. Typical conservatard, when hit with the facts your only response is childish name-calling. I understand though, you can't argue with the facts. ;) Congrats on your ideas bankrupting the country though.
*It's "bankrupt" you moron, not "backrupt".
A86 5 months ago
@A86 What "facts"? The number of views that cenk's crap gets? Some of my typos? Bring me some real facts and I'll be happy to read them. Of course, you have none.
You are not a liberal? You sure sound like one. What are you then?
You were the one who started the name-calling.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - The fact that you're a fascist-leaning statist and your hero Michael Savage could never dream of getting Cenk's ratings. Also, that your ideology has turned America into a third world shithole.
A86 5 months ago
Comment removed
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - If you believe in banning gay marriage, banning abortion, banning Muslims from building mosques near the WTC site, believe in people being forced to pay taxes for unwanted war spending, believe in the government getting involved in helping corporations and businesses bust unions, believe in citizens paying taxes to fund corporations, etc. you are a statist. Those are all statist actions.
A86 5 months ago
@A86 I don't believe in any of that stuff. However, I do think that Muslims should not build a mosque near the WTC, they should show some sensitivity and class. But I don't think that government should be involved. I don't believe in abortion on demand, either.
I don't think that Savage believes in much of that either. I don't listen to him on a regular basis, but from what I have heard, he does not follow those beliefs.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - Okay, so should Christians not build churches near Nagasaki or Hiroshima? Or how about Christians building churches near sites where they slaughtered Indians believing Gawd told them it was okay?
A86 5 months ago
@A86 First of all, WW2 was not a religious struggle like this one - the comparision is idiotic. Likewise with the equally silly Indian crap. You are just flailing around now. Second of all, the A-Bombs were completely justified, as Japan was NOT going to surrender without them. Comparing them to 9/11 is ridiculous.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - "WW2 was not...religious"
1) Doesn't matter. Most American soldiers were Christian and used Christian teachings to justify their actions and comfort themselves. FDR referenced "the Lord" in his decisions; 2) This is not completely a religious struggle. It's also a nationalist struggle. Some terrorists aren't that religious (many of them smoke, drink liquor, etc.) and are in it more for their feelings of nationalism and anti-Westernism. Does that matter to you? Probably not.
A86 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - I also referenced Manifest Destiny, which WAS partially religious.
"as Japan was NOT going to surrender without them"
Nonsense:
(.) ihr (.) org / jhr / v16 / v16n3p - 4 _ Weber (.) html
Japan was already in the process of preparing to surrender when we bombed them. Even gov documents from back then indicate the US's main reason for bombing was to scare the Soviets out of invading a surrendering Japan by displaying US power.
A86 5 months ago
@A86 Bullshit. Do you know anything about the Anami coup attempt and the hiding of the Emperor's message - obviously not. They almost didn't surrender WITH the 2 A-bombs. Japan was "in the process"? What "process"?? You just say "I surrender" - it's that simple. And Japan was not going to with the atomic bombs. You say you are not some libtard, and yet you spew plenty of their bile...
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - "Do you know anything about the Anami coup attempt"
I know all about it, the Anami coup attempt failed and Anami didn't represent the majority of officials in the Japanese military and government. The A-bombing actually renewed the resolve of some Japanese people because it enraged them (any surprise?), that's why they almost didn't surrender.
I think US military officials and generals who said Japan was about to surrender, as well as Japanese documents, know more than you.
A86 5 months ago
@A86 More nonsense. Japan was not about to surrender. What documents are you talking about? What "process"? The officers launched the coup AFTER the bombs were dropped. And even then they almost succeeded. What would have been their response to a surrender attempt without the bombs? The generals would certainly have gone along - after all, they did not want to surrender.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - You obviously did not read that link I sent you. I'll send it again:
(.) ihr (.) org / jhr / v16 / v16n3p - 4 _ Weber (.) html
From the link, "The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing ... I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon," Fmr. President and General Ike Eisenhower, 1963.
A86 5 months ago
@A86 The link does not work.
In any case, if the Japanese wanted to surrender, they should have. They had weeks, if not months, of total hopelessness in which to surrender. They refused, they got nuked, and then they ALMOST did not surrender ANYWAY, and by great luck, the message of the Emperor got out past the officer coup and they finally surrendered. You claim you know the Anami coup - and yet you should know how close they were to not surrendering even AFTER the bombs.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - You have to delete the parentheses around the dots, close all the spaces and put "h t t p" and all the stuff before the first dot. -__-
"They had weeks, if not months"
That's because there was a lot of political disagreement over surrendering, the majority of government officials didn't support surrendering until the people started starving because of food shortages. The nuke just renewed their resolve. They just surrendered because the nuking destroyed more food.
A86 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - Had the nuking not happen some Allied military officials believe the Japanese would have surrendered about 2-4 weeks later.
A86 5 months ago
@A86 Yeah, "SOME" Allied military officials. Hardly a consensus.
The Jap cause was definitely hopeless at many junctures - the loss of Okinawa, Iwo Jima, the entrance of the Soviets into the war, the destruction of their navy in the Marianas and at Leyte Gulf. What, short of a bloody invasion of Japan (which is what the A-bombs were trying to AVOID) could have been done to make them surrender? What difference would 2-4 weeks have made? You claim you are not a libtard - sure sound like one!
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - The same could be said of your worldview. Only SOME military officials agree with you, hardly a consensus.
"What, short of a bloody invasion of Japan"
Actually an invasion would have killed less civilians than the A-bombs which combined killed over 300,000 people. An invasion would have killed much less. There was no official plan for citizen resistance. Your question is a false dilemma because they would have surrendered on their own without an invasion or an A-bomb.
A86 5 months ago
@A86 The invasion of Kyushu alone would have caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands! Are you insane? Japan was bristling with defenses, and judging from the Japanese fanaticism on Okinawa, how hard would they have fought on Japan proper?
Please. Get out of your PC stupor... They were NOT going to surrender without an invasion or A-bomb. If they were going to, why didn't they? Why was there a coup at all - AFTER the A-bombs?
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - "would have caused the deaths of hundreds of thosuands"
According to whom? And who said said an invasion was necessary? All we had to do was continue to starve Japan and they would surrender in a couple of weeks with no invasion or nuke necessary. Japanese fanaticism was hardly universal, the majority of officials were signaling throwing in the towel.
How the fuck is quoting US government intelligence political correctness? Do you even know what political correctness is?
A86 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - "If they were going to, why didn't they?"
Because we bombed them before they could. That's what I've been saying. Are you having trouble keeping up with the conversation?
A86 5 months ago
@A86 They had WEEKS to do so - if not months. Their situation was hopeless for a long time. That is my point. They could have surrendered and many different junctures and they chose not to.
So they fight to the bitter and bloody end in Okinawa, but not in Kyushu? That makes absolutely no sense and proves to me that you are just bending your predictions to suit your argument.
Lame.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - "They had WEEKS to do so - if not months"
They weren't exactly moving on a set deadline. There was also no universal movement in the Japanese government to launch a huge attack, that plan was controversial and opposed by many in their government.
They fought to the bitter and bloody end? When was this? They still had hundreds of thousands of volunteers even after they nuking. If they really wanted to die how the fuck would you threaten them with death?
A86 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - Your "logic" makes about as much sense as threatening a suicide bomber by threatening to blow him up.
You claim the Japanese were willing to fight to the death no matter how many of them were extinguished but extinguishing some suddenly made them change their minds even though the nukings took out mostly civilians and left tens of thousands of troops and hundreds of thousands of volunteers intact? Obviously it wasn't the nuke that made em stop.
P.S. - it was the hunger.
A86 5 months ago
@A86 P.P.S. It was the bomb.
The Japanese were concerned about our terrible new weapon, and since they had no way of stopping its delivery, then they could have been just picked apart by nukes. (Little did they know that we were out of them for a while...)
As for this hunger mythology, they had stockpiled enough food to fight if they wanted to. There is NO evidence that they were "a couple of weeks from starvation." Yet again, more made-up crap by you to support your PC argument.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - That makes no sense since you claim they were not afraid to die. Why would someone who wants to fight to the last man, woman and child be afraid of a bomb? We'd been boming them. This was just a bigger one with more after affects.
"hunger mythology"
Lol These are Allied and Japanese forces talking about their low rations of food. If you're going to make up BS like claiming they had enough food for several more weeks or months back it up with official sources.
A86 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - You still haven't shown a single shred of information to back up your theory. You've said things that contradict it since you noted they continued fighting even after they were nuked. If they were that scared of the nuke they would have surrendered right away just hours after they got bombed. They had the technology to get in contact with the Allies the same day. You're helping back up the fact it had to do with lacking some logistic for carrying on (hint: food).
A86 5 months ago
@A86 They did surrender after Nagasaki! That's when they surrendered - once the Anami coup was foiled and the Emperor's message successfully hidden from the plotters who wanted to continue the war.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - You again just proved the only reason they surrendered is because the majority of Japanese officials wanted to. That's what I've been saying. There wasn't a big change in opinion in the Japanese government after the bombing aside from how the nukings would put a strain on already limited food and medical supplies. There were more people in the government who wanted to continue the war AFTER the nuking.
A86 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - Alright, time to hit you with the facts. On July 30 Ambassador Sato wrote, "There is no alternative but immediate unconditional surrender if we are to prevent Russia's participation in the war." On Aug 2 he wrote, "it should not be difficult for you to realize that ... our time to proceed with arrangements of ending the war before the enemy lands...is limited, on the other hand it is difficult to decide on concrete peace conditions here at home all at once."
A86 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - That was just 4 days before the Hiroshima nuking. The Soviets had declared open war on Japan and were set to invade the Japanese mainland around the same time. You think it's just coincidence the US decided to nuke Japan the same week the Soviet Union was going to start sending forces to take over Japan the way the Allies did with Germany? The US didn't want a repeat of what was happening with dividing up Germany between the West and the East.
A86 5 months ago
@A86 With what landing craft? With what navy? The Soviets were not capable of invading Japan, especially with its bristling defenses. There is no evidence that there was any change in the food status following Nagasaki, either. You are just pulling that out of your ass. Bottom line - they were afraid of the bomb, and almost did NOT surrender even with it being used (Anami coup.)
They had plenty of time to surrender earlier. They did not. They got nuked. Then they surrendered. Done.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - What are you talking about? The Soviets were the second or third most powerful military force on the planet in 1945 (the British would be either third or second at that point). There are tons of Soviet landing craft dating back to 1918. Just type in "Soviet navy" in Google. You think they didn't have a navy in 1945? LMAO They had 59 destroyer-leaders and 218 submarines in 1941.
A86 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - "There is no evidence that there was any change in the food status"
Are you...kidding? Over 300,000 people died in a few weeks. The demand for emergency food, water and medical supplies to be rushed over to Nagasaski and Hiroshima was enormous. Japan had to literally beg other countries for food, water and medical supplies just for the 2011 Quake this year and that Kobe earthquake back in the mid-90s. You can imagine several million homeless and radon sickness victims.
A86 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - "they were afraid of the bomb"
There is little evidence to support this and fewer actual military intelligence, you even offered evidence to the contrary showing there was less willingness to surrender AFTER the bombing. That's why you have not linked a single source.
You can't even logically backed up your opinion - how would threatening a person who wants to go out in a blaze of glory with death scare them? That's like threatening a BDSM addict with whipping him. Lol
A86 5 months ago
@A86 Sure - they wanted to die in a decisive battle, not vaporized from the sky. If the bomb was not such a big deal as you say, then why did the Emperor mention it in his surrender speech - you know the one that was nearly stolen by the coup plotters after the Nagasaki bomb?
You just flailing in your PC self-hate now. And you did say you were a leftie earlier - this A-bomb guilt trip certainly confirms it. Our country is dying because of you Obamaclowns.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - I didn't say it did not matter at all but your "logic" is ridiculous because the Japanese knew the A-bomb would not kill all people in Japan. Even with the A-bomb most would still die in the field.
"You just flailing in your PC self-hate now"
You obviously have no idea what the term "political correctness" means. What the fuck does PC (things like calling black people "African-American") have to with citing military intel? Self-hatred? Self-hatred about what?
A86 5 months ago
@A86 Oh this anti-bomb nonsense is part-and-parcel of the PC lexicon. One of the first areas that PC seeks to infect is history - especially self-hate about everything we (or the West in general) has done.
The A-bombs were a necessary part of making Japan surrender. Deal with it.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - LMAO So Ike Eisenhower was part of a political correctness lexicon?
You're cracked. You've lost your argument so now you blame in a librul conspiracy like rightists typically do when they can't prove their nonsense.
A86 5 months ago
@A86 Japan's reaction to the Potsdam Declaration of July 26, 1945:
Preservation of the Imperial institution and national polity, assumption by the Imperial Headquarters of responsibility for disarmament and demobilization, no occupation of the Japanese Home Islands, Korea, or Formosa, and delegation of the punishment of war criminals to the Japanese government.
Some "surrender"! Give me a fucking break. The Japs were kidding themselves, as are you. Solution: A BOMB. Check the w i k i
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - The Ambassador of Japan's letter to the Japanese Minister of Foreign Affairs a few days later, "There is no alternative but immediate unconditional surrender if we are to prevent Russia's participation in the war..." His response, "...our time to proceed with arrangements of ending the war before the enemy lands on the Japanese mainland is limited, on the other hand it is difficult to decide on concrete peace conditions here at home all at once."
A86 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheLoyalOfficer - So rightists believe in dropping A-bombs on civilians without a qualm? Okay, thanks for confirming that righties are sociopaths. Something we already knew anyway.
"What were they waiting for?"
You do know you can't get everyone in a government to agree upon an action overnight, right? Why do you ask such silly questions?
A86 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - The Allies had to help Japan get back on its feet for years after Japan surrendered.
atomicbombmuseum (.) org/ 4 _ ruins (.) shtml
There is no way Japan could have realistically carried on a war with the United States June of 1945 speaking logistically. They couldn't even feed their own population anymore. Is everyone going to fight on an empty stomach? They were already approaching third world status in hunger when they surrendered.
A86 5 months ago
@A86 Then they should have surrendered! What were they waiting for?
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@A And scroll down, libtard:
Supporters of the bombings generally assert that they caused the Japanese surrender, preventing massive casualties on both sides in the planned invasion of Japan: Kyūshū was to be invaded in October 1945 and Honshū five months later. Some estimate Allied forces would have suffered 1 million casualties in such a scenario, while Japanese casualties would have been in the millions.
(cont)
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheLoyalOfficer - Did you read this conservatard?
"Supporters of the bombings generally assert"
That's saying this is a PERSONAL OPINION, not a fact.
A86 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - Obviously the problem with your argument has gone over your head: you're implying that all Muslims agreed with the 9/11 hijackers or implying that Islam inherently agrees with the 9/11 attack by having a problem with the mosque being built near the site. That's why people saying churches should not be built near any site where Christians killed Native Americans or bombed non-Christian places is equally silly. It implies all Christians or Christianity agreed with the action.
A86 5 months ago
@A86 9/11 was done in the name of Islam, whether or not the majority of Muslims agreed with it is irrelevant. They should show some class and sensitivity (amazing that every damn person in the world demands and gets "sensitivity" except the West) and put their temple some place else.
Note that Islam loves to build mosques right on the sites of their conquests. Jerusalem is a perfect example. Tons of examples are all around India, too.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - "9/11 was done in the name of Islam, whether or not the majority of Muslims agreed with it is irrelevant"
Okay, then Christians should be sensitive and not build a church near any place where an atrocity was committed in the name of Christianity. No churches near the Oklahoma building that Tim McVeigh took out, no churches anywhere along the Trail of Tears, no churches anywhere near where Europeans forced Africans or Natives to convert to Christianity at gun-point.
A86 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - "Islam loves to build mosques right on the sites of their conquests"
Exact same with Christians. There are churches at Crusade battle points in Israel and churches were built in the Balkans where Christians defeated the Islamic Ottomans in battles.
But as a conservatard I'm sure you think it's okay when Christians do it. You're no different than Islamic fundies.
A86 5 months ago
@A86 Well if that is the case then let's not compound the problem by building yet another one by Ground Zero. I'm a New Yorker, I don't want it, and the vast majority of the people in New York that I know don't want it - and I live in a very liberal neighborhood too.
They see through the "Cordoba" nonsense. Nothing but Islamic triumphalism. Not in my city.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - As someone against authoritarianism I could care less what people want and don't want when it comes to the religious freedom of others. As long as a religious building isn't hurting anything people should be free to build it, just like Christians can build churches at sites near the Trail of Tears.
"Nothing but Islamic triumphalism"
LMAO The man who owns the mosque is a majority shareholder of Fox News. He worked for the Bush Administration. Hardly a radical. Turn off Fox.
A86 5 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer - Technically it's not even a mosque, it's a several-story building with one prayer room on one floor. That's not a mosque. There are no minarets or other parts of a mosque. The other floors and rooms have libraries, cooking classes, etc. That's like calling a 20-story entertainment building with one Christian or Jewish prayer room a "church" or a "synagogue". Your "logic" about the building is like saying a church with "Constantinople" in it is Christian triumphalism.
A86 5 months ago
@A86 Yeah, "technically." Meanwhile it is funded by the Saudi radicals and going to be lauded around the Islamic world as a symbol of our surrender to their jihadist cause.
No thanks - put it some place else and show some class.
TheLoyalOfficer 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheLoyalOfficer - "it is funded by the Saudi radicals and going to be lauded around the Islamic world as a symbol of our surrender"
Source? Lemme guess: Glenn Beck, right?
A86 5 months ago
no justice is right! that's why C.A. walked away.
Duran09007fan 6 months ago
YOUNG TURKS is full of sh#t! get the fu*k outta here with ur liberal garbage..everything you liberals say, do, think is bull sh#t PERIOD n guess what u dumm fu*ks, i am a 25 year-old MINORITY,,& along with MANY other young MINORITIES out there, understand clearly the lies and falsehoods you have been spewing and spreading thoughout the years..conservatism is taking over..and like the mid-terms last year, we kickng yall da fu*k out!! haha now go suck a di*k u liberal faggot commy hahaha
etonga100 6 months ago
we need a starbucks coffee party instead of a tea party
smoking1212 7 months ago
Seems like this channel wouldn't be able to exist if it wasn't for truly innovative and interesting conservative media programs, TYT is MSNBC light.
skumrock 7 months ago
The idiot on this video is a FN lunatic!! Im totally amused by how far up OBUMMERS ass the young turks head is!!! hahaha
It says on the header, "is it because of his ratings" hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha FUcken ha
Is that why he is rated number 3 in the U.S.??? Fucken libby libs man, always twisting the truth!!!!
pianomanroc 7 months ago