Darling Nikki practices oral-podiatral autoeroticism:
Oh, yeah it’s the indefensible assertion that espionage, sabotage, and spot raids posed no threat to the war effort. Interesting how you try to avoid saying this now that you realize it was so stupid.”
I’m not avoiding it in the least. I’ll repeat it again for you if you like. Invasion, espionage, sabotage and spot raids posed zero threat to slow or cripple the American war effort in the Pacific. That’s what I asserted in my original column and I haven’t moved one iota from that position.
Moreover, I’ll now add with complete confidence that this was known to every single member of both the American and Japanese high commands at the time.
Malkin asserted that those four factors had the potential to cripple the war effort without any basis at all; it seems strange that some should try to place the complete burden of proof on her opponents. But so be it. First, the amount of damage required to have such an effect is a finite figure. 100 percent would certainly suffice to do so, one percent certainly would not, given an estimated wastage rate of 7 percent.
Considering that the amount of damage done at Pearl Harbor only amounted to .63 percent of our 1940/41 aircraft production and 9.1 percent of our 1940/41 shipping production in terms of tonnage, (none of which was actually lost, as the destroyer Cassin was the most recently built vessel destroyed, having been commissioned in 1936), it is obvious to any rational observer that the cumulative effect of any smaller raids or attempts at sabotage would have been completely negligible, and in terms of potential effect on the war effort, zero.
Nikki, you’re done asking questions until you answer this one specifically and unevasively. Explain how invasion, sabotage, espionage and spot raids on the part of the Japanese military or ethnic Japanese civilians resident in America could have had any effect on the war effort. Play evasive games and you’re off to Palookaville.
UPDATE – Unsurprisingly, Nikki didn’t even attempt to answer the question, but instead responded with a barrage of tangential and irrelevant questions. So, s/he is off to join the two trolls previously banned. I am perfectly willing to engage in reasonable debate with anyone on anything, but if one refuses to answer direct questions, repeatedly demonstrates disingenuous problems with reading comprehension or plays evasive semantic games, one will soon find oneself riding the ejection seat. Unlike nearly every other commentator on the political scene, I permit comments and enjoy participating in substantive debate here, but I have zero interest in wasting any more time on foolish trolls than is necessary to establish their petty nature.