The U.S. has the biggest baddest military ever, fuck yeah!

Options
1…678911

Comments

  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    jlew24asu wrote:
    yup. I don't ever see a war with china happening. they seem quite passive and are a force to be reckon with.

    but IF that the ever came, I sure feel better that we would stand toe to toe with them and probably beat them. but they should wouldnt be able to breach our shores. contrary to spirl who thinks we will be speaking chinese. that sure gave me a good monday morning laugh.

    what good would it be to "stand toe to toe and beat them" if we destroy the planet in the process?
  • spiral out
    spiral out Posts: 1,052
    jlew24asu wrote:
    ok then tell me why the world, specifically america as you say, would be speaking chinese if we went to war?

    Why does my not thinking america is the best offend you so much? Am i not allowed a differing opinion.
    Keep on rockin in the free world!!!!

    The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    my2hands wrote:
    what good would it be to "stand toe to toe and beat them" if we destroy the planet in the process?
    not saying it would be a "good" thing to destroy the planet.

    but it is a good thing that china cant come over here and make it a western province.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    spiral out wrote:
    Why does my not thinking america is the best offend you so much? Am i not allowed a differing opinion.
    haha i'm not offended. but I think its laughable that somehow you believe america would be speaking chinese if we went to war with them. a comment I'm still waiting for you to explain
  • spiral out
    spiral out Posts: 1,052
    jlew24asu wrote:
    haha i'm not offended. but I think its laughable that somehow you believe america would be speaking chinese if we went to war with them. a comment I'm still waiting for you to explain

    Yes along with alot of the world is what i said jlew.

    I think they are the worlds next super power.
    Keep on rockin in the free world!!!!

    The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    spiral out wrote:
    Yes along with alot of the world is what i said jlew.

    I think they are the worlds next super power.

    in my opinion, they already are a superpower. but again, you comment s still laughable they america will be speaking chinese if we went to war
  • ProvidenceHunter
    ProvidenceHunter Posts: 52
    Kann wrote:
    Ok. Well just for the sake of the argument, the neighbouring danger with massive nuclear weapons being used (apart from the immediate deaths) is the high risk to throw some places into severe earthquake activities (the power released by the bombs will be absorbed by the earth, but not without consequences), volcanic activities, tsunamis and that type of stuff. We don't know for sure, but it's arguable.
    We do know how to build some very powerful stuff, the only problem is we can only imagine the consequences without any certainty.

    The earthquakes and other type consequences you mentioned are very unlikely. Most weapons are set to blast above surface for maximum effectiveness. Earth is very good shielding against such blasts. There were people in hiroshima in tunnels almost directly under ground zero that survived.

    The only way I see the type of consequences you are speaking of is if massive megaton sized war heads are placed deep in faults.
    Maybe I wasn't clear enough. War is something politics, businessmen and the military like to toy with. Good for them, but they should restrict to using weapons that can only affect them. The very notion behind a nuclear bomb for instance is immoral and stupid. You (not you you, but a general you) want to wage war, fine, just leave the others alone. Military vs military vs politicians (who should go to war as well), not vs civilians who generally didn't ask anything.

    Small tactical nukes could be very effective against only military targets. The notion of launching a megaton sized war head on Moscow or D.C. is immoral and stupid.

    I am not advocating using them I am just saying that they are not only for killing cities.

    On a side note the idea of war being restricted to military vs. military is recent and I would argue that it was the development of nuclear weapons is what changed the way wars were looked at and fought.
    Peace through superior firepower!
  • even flow?
    even flow? Posts: 8,066
    jlew24asu wrote:
    haha i'm not offended. but I think its laughable that somehow you believe america would be speaking chinese if we went to war with them. a comment I'm still waiting for you to explain


    The same "laughable" when a Yank pipes up that if it wasn't for them the world would be speaking German? Yeah both are pretty funny in their own way.
    You've changed your place in this world!
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    even flow? wrote:
    The same "laughable" when a Yank pipes up that if it wasn't for them the world would be speaking German? Yeah both are pretty funny in their own way.
    united states wasnt a super power in the 40s as it is today.
  • catefrances
    catefrances Posts: 29,003
    Specifics wrote:
    I don't think i could say anything that wasn't covered in my original post really,

    how are the abo's getting on these days?

    the indigenous australians are treated almost with as much indifference as they always have been.

    Specifics wrote:
    Fuck that, i'd be wearing a silk suit and squinting a lot. China has some dodgy civil rights records for sure, but i've never seen it fuck with anything much outside its own border, and the beauty of its culture far outweighs anything i've seen from the US (which also doesnt have a spotless civil rights record).

    Oh but we dream, so....

    what i get from this is that you have minimal principles when it comes to aligning yourself with 'the lesser of two evils'. you say that sure china has violated human rights but on a scale with the US it's basically incomparable. and it's fine cause they've hardly dont it outside its own borders. then you have a go at me by bringing up the indigenous australians and doing it in a derogatory manner, without even knowing my stance on the human rights issues of my own country.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    catefrances wrote:
    the indigenous australians are treated almost with as much indifference as they always have been.


    what i get from this is that you have minimal principles when it comes to aligning yourself with 'the lesser of two evils'. you say that sure china has violated human rights but on a scale with the US it's basically incomparable. and it's fine cause they've hardly dont it outside its own borders. then you have a go at me by bringing up the indigenous australians and doing it in a derogatory manner, without even knowing my stance on the human rights issues of my own country.
    dont sweat it care. he has a napoleon complex and uses message boards to compensate for this. feel sorry for him.
  • audome25
    audome25 Posts: 163
    even flow? wrote:
    The same "laughable" when a Yank pipes up that if it wasn't for them the world would be speaking German? Yeah both are pretty funny in their own way.

    no, not the whole world, just europe, asia and most africa. the parts the germans took without breaking a sweat.
  • audome25
    audome25 Posts: 163
    Specifics wrote:
    China has some dodgy civil rights records for sure, but i've never seen it fuck with anything much outside its own border, and the beauty of its culture far outweighs anything i've seen from the US (which also doesnt have a spotless civil rights record).


    thank you for actually making me laugh out loud. why fuck with people outside your broders when you can be so much worse within them.
  • audome25
    audome25 Posts: 163
    Specifics wrote:
    I have a feeling studying any form of american history would be an eye-opening lesson in propoganda.

    yes, go by feeling, it's much more accurate.

    Specifics wrote:
    is using it to attempt World domination. .

    there's your propganda.
  • Songburst
    Songburst Posts: 1,195
    audome25 wrote:
    no, not the whole world, just europe, asia and most africa. the parts the germans took without breaking a sweat.

    Oh for fuck sake. Tell me that you think that the US won WW2. There is no denying that they were a big part of the overall Allied victory but there is no doubt that the Russians won that war. Their complete disregard of human life and willingness to shovel millions of their own people into the fire is the only reason why WW2 didn't last 20 years. I mean, Roosevelt had to lie to America to even get involved in the first place. Both Roosevelt and Wilkie ran on a campaigns in 1940 that would have had the US stay out of "Europe's" war. Wilkie really did want to stay out of Europe.
    1/12/1879, 4/8/1156, 2/6/1977, who gives a shit, ...
  • audome25
    audome25 Posts: 163
    Songburst wrote:
    Oh for fuck sake. Tell me that you think that the US won WW2. There is no denying that they were a big part of the overall Allied victory but there is no doubt that the Russians won that war. Their complete disregard of human life and willingness to shovel millions of their own people into the fire is the only reason why WW2 didn't last 20 years. I mean, Roosevelt had to lie to America to even get involved in the first place. Both Roosevelt and Wilkie ran on a campaigns in 1940 that would have had the US stay out of "Europe's" war. Wilkie really did want to stay out of Europe.


    actually they're both the reason why that war didn't take 20 years, but had it just been the russians fighting the german in the east, with no pressure on germany from the west, the russians would not have beat them. how they fought that war, especially in their own lands woth their own resources is not a monument to intelligence.
  • catefrances
    catefrances Posts: 29,003
    audome25 wrote:
    actually they're both the reason why that war didn't take 20 years, but had it just been the russians fighting the german in the east, with no pressure on germany from the west, the russians would not have beat them. how they fought that war, especially in their own lands woth their own resources is not a monument to intelligence.

    WAR is hardly a monument to intelligence either. :)
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • Songburst
    Songburst Posts: 1,195
    audome25 wrote:
    actually they're both the reason why that war didn't take 20 years, but had it just been the russians fighting the german in the east, with no pressure on germany from the west, the russians would not have beat them. how they fought that war, especially in their own lands woth their own resources is not a monument to intelligence.

    They won that war by willing to endure more than the Germans. The entire German army could have fought solely on the eastern front and the Russians still would have broken them. The Russians were not skilled soldiers or anything like that but they had 10 men to every German. That first winter showed Germany that they were not winning that war no matter what they did.
    1/12/1879, 4/8/1156, 2/6/1977, who gives a shit, ...
  • Specifics
    Specifics Posts: 417
    catefrances wrote:
    the indigenous australians are treated almost with as much indifference as they always have been.




    what i get from this is that you have minimal principles when it comes to aligning yourself with 'the lesser of two evils'. you say that sure china has violated human rights but on a scale with the US it's basically incomparable. and it's fine cause they've hardly dont it outside its own borders. then you have a go at me by bringing up the indigenous australians and doing it in a derogatory manner, without even knowing my stance on the human rights issues of my own country.

    No, what i'm saying is that every country has Human rights issues, every single one, Aboriginies, Slavery, Death penalties, Tianeman square, on and on and on. China hasn't ever in my experience tried to propogandarise or justify this to the rest of the World, therefore everyone can kick back, ignore whats going on around them, and happily point fingers at everybody else, mostly China.
    I have chinese people living next door to me, freely here in London, to work for a while, they talk of the beauty of china and the souls of its people, and they are angry about civil rights there in EXACTLY the same way everybody from every country should be.
    China has currently somewhere in the region of 1.35 billion people, thats a lot of people to all be treating eachother with respect and dignity. It certainly doesn't happen in America where there are less half that number, it doesnt happen in the UK with 60 million, you can't do that in Australia where you have "only" 20 million.

    Thats also a lot of people to accept things they don't agree with.

    On the plus side, from a personal perspective (i admit i'm a little biased because i love so much of the culture), China has beauty, in fact everything beautiful about China is TRULY beautiful and i would swap that for a hamburger, a big ass car and a LOUD voice anyday of the week.

    So i would choose for the Beauty of the culture, the better, not the lesser.
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    catefrances wrote:
    WAR is hardly a monument to intelligence either. :)


    POST OF THE YEAR

Categories