well if they dont want to be alone, they better start by going to brokebutt mountain and seeing who they can make a love connection withOriginally Posted by "Clevor" Angel
well if they dont want to be alone, they better start by going to brokebutt mountain and seeing who they can make a love connection withOriginally Posted by "Clevor" Angel
He came dancing across the water
With his galleons and guns
Looking for the new world
In that palace in the sun
On the shore lay Montezuma
With his cocoa leaves and pearls
How can America honestly claim to be a believer of Democracy when they denounce what could Honestly be THE FIRST real democratic elections in the Palestinian territories?
Oh wait, they weren't for the group the US backed.
It makes sense now.
<cough> www.charginmahlazer.tumblr.com </cough>
Yeah they'll be free from illegal governemnt wire taps, internet monitoring, e-mail analaysis.Originally Posted by my porsche
Guess they'll move on to another country then
"A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'
perhaps we shall cleanse the gene pool where you live, it is obviously diseasedOriginally Posted by Matra et Alpine
UCP's NO. 1 Source for Enzo & 69 Camaro pic's
i'm wondering, did these simulations know what happens when a hydrogen bomb hits 4 million soldiers standing in line for a bowl of riceOriginally Posted by nota
If it were all out war, to the death kind of situation, the USA would not merely sit back and allow an invasion, sure maybe they could get hawaii, but the second they moved towards california, it would be over, no doubt in my mind
same thing if USA tried to invade China, it just wont happen
UCP's NO. 1 Source for Enzo & 69 Camaro pic's
ok, navy guy stepping in here to settle some military debates.
china can not, at this present day, mount a sustainable land attack on the mainland US. the reason why is the lack of a large-scale sea or air lift capability. they have the army to anihilate the US, but the can not get their tanks, planes, troops, food or supplies over here to do it. they have been working to substantially increase the size of their navy. as of right now they do not have a blue water navy to speak of. they are merely a regional navy, that doesnt project power further than the south china sea. on those same lines they dont have the platforms to project power ashore in the US. Their army is massive, and can most likely march through to europe and not be stopped, but thats where the geographic position of the US helps us out.
conclusion, china can not, at this time, launch an attack on mainland US. but in 10 years, that may be different. but by then bush wont be in office, and maybe we will be back to being the country everyone loves.
Honor. Courage. Commitment. Etcetera.
a lot of news sources have been saying this might actually be the chance HAMAS needed to disavow itself of militants within its structure. They were elected on a promise to remove corruption from within the Palestinian authority and to improve health and education. To do this they will need to stop encouraging and supporting militants blowing themsleves up in Israel. I believe that the only reason that HAMAS being voted in is a bad thing for the peace process is the US, who will most likely now completely ignore the Paelstinian authority
Depending on where you go, China and the States are the 3rd and 4th largest countries. As Cmcpokey said, the US has more shoreline and China would have to weave their boats through Japanese, Taiwanese and northern southeastern asia. A large portion of the military is made of obsolete soviet equipment. I don't know about armies or the navy but I do know that trying to gain air superiority against the US is pretty much impossible, our F-22 raptors are untouchable. That in itself is a huge disadvantage. Besides, everyone knows, well anyone not involved with the Bush administration, that you cannot defeat an enemy in their homeland easily, quickly, or completely. We found that out in Veitnam and we are finding out again in Iraq.
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin
OBSESSED is a word the lazy use to describe the DEDICATED!
These simulations probably did not involve the outcome of a Hydrogen bomb hitting 4 Million soldiers standing in line for rice. thats Culturally, Ethically, Morally and Militarily Insensitive.Originally Posted by werty
I agree that at the present time the US and China have more to gain by being allies as opposed to enemies.
I also must state that such arrogance as to US air/Sea superiority is a dangerous thing; the same words were said about Vietnam, if i recall correctly, and the US still lost that fight.
on Home turf you'd be surprised how hard people fight. And I've no doubt that, if invaded, the US would fight just as hard.
Come to think of it, when was the last time the US was invaded? I can't recall a time, other than of course the whole immigration/Native American thing.
<cough> www.charginmahlazer.tumblr.com </cough>
The U.S. didn't lose that fight. The U.S. won every battle in Vietnam. The troops were pulled out due to politics.Originally Posted by IBrake4Rainbows
'76 Cadillac Fleetwood Seventy-Five Limousine, '95 Lincoln Town Car.
Two of the 9/11 terrorists were making phone calls to al Qaeda members overseas. Maybe if the wire tapping (which isn't illegal, btw) and the Patriot Act were being done then as seriously as it is now, the 9/11 attacks could have been prevented.Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine
'76 Cadillac Fleetwood Seventy-Five Limousine, '95 Lincoln Town Car.
Next on Skewed History; When Fleet Retells the Vietnam War.Originally Posted by Fleet 500
Politics had a part to play, but also the fact that The US and it's Allies (Around 500 Australian Soldiers - Many Conscripted against their will) were indeed losing the war, despite winning a few battles.
Vietnam proved the US cannot properly fight Guerilla-Style Tactics, much like the War In Iraq, where they cannot distinguish the Enemy from the Friend. Only by understanding your enemy, and the reasons behind being in such a situation, can soldiers make such distinctions.
10 Years with Little or no success is not considered by any stretch of the Imagination a Victory.
<cough> www.charginmahlazer.tumblr.com </cough>
The U.S. could have bombed that country into oblivion. In fact, Presidential candidate Barry Goldwater said he could have won that war in about 6 months by launching a huge military attack. The U.S. certainly had the troops and equipment to do it.
Facts are facts... again, the U.S. won every battle in Vietnam.
'76 Cadillac Fleetwood Seventy-Five Limousine, '95 Lincoln Town Car.
Bombing a country into oblivion. Now THERES a solution to everything
I am the Stig
What do you mean they could of......they most certainly tried their darndest. The public outcry from such an attack could have proved Fatal for the Afformentioned government, that and the Humanitarian Issue, Having to Deal with War Crimes Charges........Oh, and the whole Deal with the Domino theory and how, after 10 years, they still did not displace communism from North Vietnam.Originally Posted by Fleet 500
And Facts are Facts when they are backed up with Information, otherwise their opinion.
I can see why arguing with you over such issues is becoming a irritation as opposed to a challenge for some members. you just never learn.
<cough> www.charginmahlazer.tumblr.com </cough>
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)