NO apology forthcoming, but I will accept your offer to buy me a pint. The fact that you made that statement in the thread does not alter the wording of your poll.

And with that, I can hear my bed calling me. Won’t it be quiet tomorrow with so many at OW. I’ve got your mobile Rob, I’ll ring you when I’m ready for my pint.;)

Regards,

kev35

I’m guessing the Hedgehog did not feel too good the day after either.
Seriously though they do sadly get hit a lot by cars, ……

No. I think you’ll find they generally only get hit the once. My aunt’s dog was so stupid he used to charge at them if he found one in the garden. The dog would rush into the house squealing with spines sticking out of various parts of his anatomy while you could hear the hedgehog laughing as he strolled away unscathed.

Regards,

kev35

Which was?

That you wanted no change. Which at that point was exactly what you got. Whether there will be a dedicated airshow/photograph forum in future I don’t know. But at that time that was the poll you posted and the way it was worded gave the answer you wanted. Isn’t it a common tactic used when you want the answer directed in your favour?

regards,

kev35

Rob.

With all due respect you are guilty yourself of twisting things to suit your own point of view. Your poll for a photographic forum was constructed in such a way that you received the answer you wanted to hear. I asked the straightforward yes or no question which got an overwhelming positive response and you locked the thread because it contradicted your views. That is not moderation, the automatic gainsaying of something you personally don’t want to hear.

I have expressed my views privately to the webmaster and the concerns I have about a moderator being in that position.which The reasons I outlined privately to the webmaster are still of concern to me.

You may note that I do occasionally discuss aviation, memorialisation and remembrance, or you may choose to concentrate on the fact that I have strong views on moderation and what I consider to be the abuse of that position by moderators.

Regards,

kev35

Yes it was necessary. Japanese units continued to fight did they not? The Japanese started the war, others ended it for them. By the method of ending the war chosen, I still contend that millions of lives were saved. The fact that Russia entered the war would not have stopped the fighting. Look at the campaign across the islands, how many Japanese were captured? Do you really think the Russian invasion of Manchuria would have made that much difference? The Japanese propensity for fighting to the death rather points to the opposite.

Regards,

kev35

Sure that hadn’t anything to do with the American and European automobile crisis of the 1970s?? :diablo: :diablo: :diablo: :diablo:

Ben, that was uncalled for. You’ve obviously spent no time at all with anyone who was a victim of Japanese incarceration.

regards,

kev35

Ben.

Are you a straight forward historian? Or do you prefer the Revisionist viewpoint? Focussing on a pointless debate about the use of the atom bomb only serves to distract from what went previously. Is that so easily forgotten? It was not about revenge or frightening the Russians, it was about ensuring that the war ended, there and then. The Japanese could have unconditionally surrendered after the first atom bomb was dropped. They chose not to. Have you asked yourself why? Is it not true that Japanese units continued to fight after the surrender and that some committed suicide rather than stop Fighting? That shows the mentality of the Japanese people and is clear evidence of why the use of the atom bomb was necessary.

Have you no concern for the evil perpetrated by the Japanese from the moment they attacked China?

Regards,

kev35