Discovery disbands

[classic1]

There were never more than 15 Allied divisions in Europe in WW2.
On the Russian Front there were more than 400 Russian and Wermacht divisions fighting. 88% of the Nazi military dead died on the Russian Front.
The Allies never faced more than 50% of the Japanese Army in Asia. The brunt of the fighting in Asia was borne by the Chinese. Take a look at a map of Asia and see just how little territory was captured by US forces compared to the British and Indian Armies.
Hollywood isn't history.
Disco is. Get over it.

LOL

 

[jsull14]

Discovery Channel's signature shows right now are AFAIK 'Mythbuster', 'Dirty Jobs', and 'Surviverman'. The first is a show about two dudes and a few sidekicks who blow up stuff. The second is about a guy shoveling manure. The third is about another guy eating grubs and seal blubber. Those are fine shows if you want to connect with your inner dork, but there's nothing inherently 'evil' about it (the shows aren't sponsored by Nike, Dr.House?)

I was bummed when American Chopper left Discovery Channel. Sweet show.

 

[jsull14]

I read it. It makes no attempt to either exonerate or convict LA. That wasn't the purpose of the Vrijman report. It's purpose was to investigate how supposedly confidential information became non confidential, and to establish the culpability of the organizations involved. Both LNDD and WADA got a drubbing for unprofessional behavior.

Vrijman did go so far as to point out that doping protocols were not followed, and the test used was not certified, therefore the results were not valid. Same thing that happens when a cop nails you for speeding when the radar gun he used was out of adjustment, and he writes the wrong information on the ticket.

Was LA doping in 99? Probably. So was 90% of the peloton, and that's being generous. At the time, he was being accused of doping while Mr. 60% got a free ride and a prime DS position. The #1 French doper escaped a suspension in 98 to ride for several more Tours, so he gets off. What about Big Mig? He was winning in the days of uncontrolled EPO, yet he gets a pass, too. He was never caught, but by the standards of proof around here, he was guilty as sin. He hasn't said a peep about doping, either.

You don't hate LA because he was doping. You hate him because he's a loud, boorish American who showed that a non Euro could whip their best. Doping is just a convenient excuse, and a hollow one, given the fact that the rest of the peloton was doing exactly the same.

Great post as usual. You should write a book.

 

[jsull14]

Thanks for the French bashing. It really hurt my feelings.

Stop attacking the US and you won't have to hear it. You and House.

First, Armstrong could have switched methods after 1999 and began blood doping.

"Could have" #1

Second, after the test came about, the riders quickly figured out that if they micro-dosed EPO there would not a positve test result.

I guess David Millar and Iban Mayo are not as clever.

So, Armstrong could have avoided the EPO test by either micro-dosing or by blood doping, or both.

"Could have" #2

So, the fact that he did not test positive after 1999 does not establish that the 1999 results were incorrect.

Double negative #1

As for the conspiracy theory that somebody at the French lab spiked or manipulated the results because the French don't like Armstrong...Do you know if the people at the lab knew they were testing Armstrong's urine?

Do you even know if they did the test? Could they have just said they did? Is **** Pound going to question them?

Quite an unusual thing to say from somebody that must know what "blood doping" means. I know this is not proof. But its interesting.

"Not proof, but..." #1

Maybe it's just that I don't understand the guilty until proven innocent philosophy.

 

[fbircher]

You are of course right, a cheat is a cheat, no matter if he dabbles with T-patches or takes the $100.000 experimental drug. LA is singled out not because his doping was worse than other's (in fact, I wouldn't even know, and I don't know if anyone else has a definite answer to that). He's of course singled out because he was by far the most successful athlete during this time. Of course people go after the #1 (seven times!) not some schmuck at #58. It's human nature. I don't think many people see it as personal even (I don't), but when you're the #1 seven times, you make yourself the target no matter what. If LA had only won twice, JU two more, Basso and Kloeden maybe one, and some other schmuck the last one of the seven, we wouldn't talk about LA so much. It just seems that he profited most from whatever he did, so he'll be the guy we discuss. Get over it. We don't single him out, he did it himself when he won the 7 TdFs in a row.

ETA: and let me also say a few things about Disco, the sponsor. I don't understand the hate. Discovery Channel's signature shows right now are AFAIK 'Mythbuster', 'Dirty Jobs', and 'Surviverman'. The first is a show about two dudes and a few sidekicks who blow up stuff. The second is about a guy shoveling manure. The third is about another guy eating grubs and seal blubber. Those are fine shows if you want to connect with your inner dork, but there's nothing inherently 'evil' about it (the shows aren't sponsored by Nike, Dr.House?) So why the hate? I think it's a pity that a lot of sponsor money left the sport. There's nothing else to say.

Without stating so explicitly, many of the DC bashing threads and posts carry a clear implication: "DC is more unethical than other doping teams." That may not be your position, but it's clearly the position of many posters on this forum. While it's fair to say DC was more successful than other teams that doped, that is absoulutely not equivalent to saying they were more unethical, which is the clear implication of those who fixate upon their doping. And as far as "getting over it," LA retired two years ago and current-day cheaters continue to proliferate in pro cycling. I think it's time for the LA bashers to get over it, and focus on what's going on right now. And I agree with your statements about DC the sponsor.

 

[Jono L]

I assume that you are calling me a ********. If so, why do you think I am a ********? Is it because I disagree with you?

Not you specifically,

Point was, You're disapointed in Armstrong? How can you say good riddnace, he's a creep, basicaly consider him scum of the earth but then turn around and be 'disapointed' when he doesn't stick around, why one earth would he!

 

[limerickman]

There were never more than 15 Allied divisions in Europe in WW2.
On the Russian Front there were more than 400 Russian and Wermacht divisions fighting. 88% of the Nazi military dead died on the Russian Front.
The Allies never faced more than 50% of the Japanese Army in Asia. The brunt of the fighting in Asia was borne by the Chinese. Take a look at a map of Asia and see just how little territory was captured by US forces compared to the British and Indian Armies.
Hollywood isn't history.
Disco is. Get over it.

SB : that's way too complicated.

 

[Frigo's Luggage]

Stop attacking the US and you won't have to hear it. You and House.

"Could have" #1

I guess David Millar and Iban Mayo are not as clever.

"Could have" #2
Double negative #1

Do you even know if they did the test? Could they have just said they did? Is **** Pound going to question them?

"Not proof, but..." #1

Maybe it's just that I don't understand the guilty until proven innocent philosophy.

I never attacked the US. Do you think I am French or Iraqi?

So now you are saying that the results of the 1999 EPO tests were completely fabricated?

Please answer. Did you read the Vrijman report?

 

[thecyclist]

I guess David Millar and Iban Mayo are not as clever.

Millar didn't test positive.

 

[Colorado Ryder]

There were never more than 15 Allied divisions in Europe in WW2.
On the Russian Front there were more than 400 Russian and Wermacht divisions fighting. 88% of the Nazi military dead died on the Russian Front.
The Allies never faced more than 50% of the Japanese Army in Asia. The brunt of the fighting in Asia was borne by the Chinese. Take a look at a map of Asia and see just how little territory was captured by US forces compared to the British and Indian Armies.
Hollywood isn't history.
Disco is. Get over it.

WTF?



Division
Combat troops of the U.S. Army are classified by the weapons and methods used in combat.

Divisional facts:

• There were 5 types of divisions: infantry, mountain, armored, airborne, and cavalry.
• 91 divisions were mobilized during the war: 68 infantry divisions, 1 mountain division, 16 armored divisions, 5 airborne divisions, and 2 cavalry divisions.
• All divisions were activated in the United States except for the following divisions: Philippine (activated in the Philippines), Hawaiian (activated in Hawaii and renamed the 24th division), 25th (activated in Hawaii from troops of the Hawaiian division), and Americal (activated in New Caledonia.)
• There were three major theaters of operation during the war: Pacific (22 divisions were deployed to the Pacific), Mediterranean (15 divisions), and Europe (61 divisions). Seven divisions served in both the Mediterranean and European Theaters (1st, 3rd, 9th, 36th, 45th infantry divisions; 82nd airborne; and 2nd armored.)
• Two divisions were disbanded or deactivated before the end of the war: the Philippine division was destroyed and disbanded on 10 April 1942; and the 2nd Cavalary division was activated and inactivated twice: 15 Apr 41 to 15 Jul 42 and 23 Feb 43 to 10 May 44.
• Three divisions did not enter combat: 98th Infantry division, 13th Airborne division, and the 2nd Cavalary division.
• By June 1946, 74 divisions were inactivated or disbanded leaving 17 divisions on active duty.

http://www.historyshots.com/usarmy/backstory.cfm

Apparently it is way to complicated.

 

[FriendlyFred]

We can blab on here and point fingers until the cows come home. But who really gives a f*$k?

At the end of the day cycling is approximately $15,000,000 USD a year less well off, and no matter which way you spin it, that is not a good result.

Precisely. #1

 

[wineandkeyz]

WTF?



Division
Combat troops of the U.S. Army are classified by the weapons and methods used in combat.

Divisional facts:

• There were 5 types of divisions: infantry, mountain, armored, airborne, and cavalry.
• 91 divisions were mobilized during the war: 68 infantry divisions, 1 mountain division, 16 armored divisions, 5 airborne divisions, and 2 cavalry divisions.
• All divisions were activated in the United States except for the following divisions: Philippine (activated in the Philippines), Hawaiian (activated in Hawaii and renamed the 24th division), 25th (activated in Hawaii from troops of the Hawaiian division), and Americal (activated in New Caledonia.)
• There were three major theaters of operation during the war: Pacific (22 divisions were deployed to the Pacific), Mediterranean (15 divisions), and Europe (61 divisions). Seven divisions served in both the Mediterranean and European Theaters (1st, 3rd, 9th, 36th, 45th infantry divisions; 82nd airborne; and 2nd armored.)
• Two divisions were disbanded or deactivated before the end of the war: the Philippine division was destroyed and disbanded on 10 April 1942; and the 2nd Cavalary division was activated and inactivated twice: 15 Apr 41 to 15 Jul 42 and 23 Feb 43 to 10 May 44.
• Three divisions did not enter combat: 98th Infantry division, 13th Airborne division, and the 2nd Cavalary division.
• By June 1946, 74 divisions were inactivated or disbanded leaving 17 divisions on active duty.

http://www.historyshots.com/usarmy/backstory.cfm

Apparently it is way to complicated.

Be careful: Introducing facts into this discussion will only confuse the American-bashing Euro-jingos that inhabit this board...

 

[limerickman]

WTF?

Division
Combat troops of the U.S. Army are classified by the weapons and methods used in combat.

Divisional facts:

• There were 5 types of divisions: infantry, mountain, armored, airborne, and cavalry.
• 91 divisions were mobilized during the war: 68 infantry divisions, 1 mountain division, 16 armored divisions, 5 airborne divisions, and 2 cavalry divisions.

• 
  
  According to American records there were only 89 divisions in total in the US Army to 1944.
  
  Of the 89 divisions of the US army, approximately 25% of those divisions were
  never mobilised by the end of 1944.
  Which suggests that approximately 67 divisions were mobilised throughout World War 2.
  
  http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/wwii/usarmy/manpower.aspx
  
  

  There were three major theaters of operation during the war: Pacific (22 divisions were deployed to the Pacific)

  
  Incorrect.
  There were 21 divisions in the Pacific.
  Not 22.
  
  

  Mediterranean (15 divisions)

  
  Incorrect.
  There were 7 divisions in the Mediterranean
  Not 15.

 

[limerickman]

Be careful: Introducing facts into this discussion will only confuse the American-bashing Euro-jingos that inhabit this board...

Confuse?
He's confused quoting incorrect "facts" for one thing.

And I'm sure you'll take French-bashing American-jingo to task ?

 

[jhuskey]

Many brave people fought in WW II, I lost an uncle at Normandy and my father was wounded twice while in the Pacific. Many people from many places died.
How shall we honor them? By debating who died more?
All gave some.Some gave all!
That's all I have to say on the subject.

 

[limerickman]

Many brave people fought in WW II, I lost an uncle at Normandy and my father was wounded twice while in the Pacific. Many people from many places died.
How shall we honor them? By debating who died more?
All gave some.Some gave all!
That's all I have to say on the subject.

I agree.

These pissing contests are a waste of time.

 

[Colorado Ryder]

According to American records there were only 89 divisions in total in the US Army to 1944.

Of the 89 divisions of the US army, approximately 25% of those divisions were
never mobilised by the end of 1944.
Which suggests that approximately 67 divisions were mobilised throughout World War 2.

http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/wwii/usarmy/manpower.aspx



Incorrect.
There were 21 divisions in the Pacific.
Not 22.



Incorrect.
There were 7 divisions in the Mediterranean
Not 15.

Whatever your rationalization the end result is that there were significantly more than 15 Allied divisions in western europe.

 

[limerickman]

Whatever your rationalization the end result is that there were significantly more than 15 Allied divisions in western europe.

I never disputed that.

 

[Colorado Ryder]

I never disputed that.

That's good. The intent of my post was to show the facetious "facts" posted by SB.

 

[wineandkeyz]

Many brave people fought in WW II, I lost an uncle at Normandy and my father was wounded twice while in the Pacific. Many people from many places died.
How shall we honor them? By debating who died more?
All gave some.Some gave all!
That's all I have to say on the subject.

Amen.