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

12467…12

Comments

  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    A pussy?? I've always thought the guys who needed to pick a up a big bad weapon to feel safe were the real pussies.
    when one side has a gun and you dont. guess who wins?
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    It takes much more courage to live without fear.
    I live without fear everyday. if I lived in north korea, I might not feel so safe.
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    jlew24asu wrote:
    when one side has a gun and you dont. guess who wins?

    I live without fear everyday. if I lived in north korea, I might not feel so safe.


    I'm not buying a gun out of fear. It ain't my style.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    jlew24asu wrote:
    when one side has a gun and you dont. guess who wins?

    the one without the gun wins.


    just ask Gandhi. ne beat the british empire with simply his will and coordination, and they had all the guns


    and besides, your other guy with the gun is imaginary, at best
  • Vedderlution_Baby
    Vedderlution_Baby Posts: 2,535
    I would just like to point out that Polk, president of the united states of america, initiated the Mexican-american war by sending in troops into mexico then telling the public that they attacked first.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    my2hands wrote:
    the only 2 countries you could list with a straight face are russia and china. china has no navy and is historically isolationist. and russia has its won problems to worry about, let alone invading and occupying a large country like the US for no reason?

    you cant give an example.

    jlew, please dont dismiss this. really think about it for a while dude.
    i'm not worried about a country invading us. I do not think we should be defenseless, however.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    I'm not buying a gun out of fear. It ain't my style.
    me neither. I hate guns. you are speaking about countries, not me and you.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:
    I would just like to point out that Polk, president of the united states of america, initiated the Mexican-american war by sending in troops into mexico then telling the public that they attacked first.
    well back then part of texas was mexico after it won independence from spain. a war was fought, borders changed. I like texas
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    jlew24asu wrote:
    i'm not worried about a country invading us. I do not think we should be defenseless, however.

    ok, so how much is needed? you said you wanted to be the strongest and best? that means we continue in the current direction full speed ahead.


    i would prefer to be "the best" and the "strongest" in health care, education, civil rights, economy, etc... instead we will continue to focus on dominating the globe with violence, when we could dominate it with our hearts and minds. what a fucking waste this human race is sometimes.
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    jlew24asu wrote:
    well back then part of texas was mexico after it won independence from spain. a war was fought, borders changed. I like texas

    you cant even admit that the mexican war was an act of agression by the US to aquire the west :rolleyes:

    and thats a fact
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    my2hands wrote:
    you cant even admit that the mexican war was an act of agression by the US to aquire the west :rolleyes:

    and thats a fact
    I know. we have been monsters since the beginning of time.
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    the country founded and expanded by violence and invasion is paranoid of the same fate. imagine that :rolleyes:


    the only group of people that should have had nuclear weapons were the fucking native americans
  • Vedderlution_Baby
    Vedderlution_Baby Posts: 2,535
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I know. we have been monsters since the beginning of time.


    I know. we have been angels since the beginning of time.
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I know. we have been monsters since the beginning of time.

    no one said that. the truth is the truth.

    you really cant admit the mexican war was an act of aggresion and a land grab? you have to be fucking kidding


    do you dispute this?
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I know. we have been monsters since the beginning of time.

    to ignore the mistakes of yesterday is as bad as committing the original act. a knowledge of history and the mistakes are the key to making progress

    only a pussy cant admit his faults and wrong doings ;)
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    jlew24asu wrote:

    if we had no means of defense, what would stop anyone from invading us? or attacking us?


    this was your justification for our massive military earlier... now that you agree and say we wouldnt be invaded, what is the justification?
  • ProvidenceHunter
    ProvidenceHunter Posts: 52
    my2hands wrote:
    the one without the gun wins.


    just ask Gandhi. ne beat the british empire with simply his will and coordination, and they had all the guns


    and besides, your other guy with the gun is imaginary, at best



    Briton was also a country with educated some what informed citizens that knew it was fucked up to kill innocent people. And Briton did not have much of an interest in India any more.

    How do you think Gandhi's strategy would have worked against the Talaban, or Sadam, or Kim Joung Ill, or King Cobra.

    He was a good man and used the most effective strategy he could to accomplish change, but his way won't work in every situation.
    Peace through superior firepower!
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    my2hands wrote:
    this was your justification for our massive military earlier... now that you agree and say we wouldnt be invaded, what is the justification?
    i'm talking hypothetically. if we have no defense system, who would stop a country (any country, for no particular reason) from invading us?
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    jlew24asu wrote:
    i'm talking hypothetically. if we have no defense system, who would stop a country (any country, for no particular reason) from invading us?

    Superman? :confused:
  • Royals32
    Royals32 Posts: 160
    There are a lot of bullies out there, whether they are in the form of a country, a rebel army, a group of fundamentalists or whatever. "Invasion" isn't always as simple as a bunch of boats showing up at the beach and troops storming the coast. I really don't think anyone is realistically interested in "invading" the US in the traditional sense of the word.

    I do think however that the US is building an arsenal of weapons to deter anybody from even thinking about it. If I were a bully, I'd look for the weakest, most vulnerable place to attack. As long as the US has the military power it does (and even if it increases that power), potential attackers will have to think long and hard about the chances of success, and thusly, go somewhere else. Why attack a country you KNOW you can't beat.

    So stock up and make every potential "invader" just flip on by the USA chapter in his book of places to attack.
    #==(o )

    You are not your job.
    You are not how much money you have in the bank.
    You are not the car you drive.
    You are not the contents of your wallet.
    You are not your fucking khakis.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Superman? :confused:
    or batman or the ghostbusters. you just never know.

Categories