It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Will the europeans ever be powerful?

page: 18
1
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by edsinger
And you think you have had 50 years of relative peace because of what?

Because of diplomacy and working together against an enemy although not loseing men and women in the field against this enemy.
Look at what happened after WW2, the whole of europe (or the free part) was up in arms together and supporting each other , with american help , which is another thing since most of europe liked america then and we both got along fine.


What you fail to realize is that the US taxpayer was paying the majority of the cost for that peace......




posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
What you fail to realize is that the US taxpayer was paying the majority of the cost for that peace......

And thier own.
Might I add the only real place russia could get into a strikeing range of the US mainland was from europe and to do so would mean takeing it, it suited the US to help us.
Also what diffrence does it make that you helped us?
We repaid everydebt with the highest currency available....human lifes.
The cost was too high...one wonders if the US is overchargeing...



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by edsinger
What you fail to realize is that the US taxpayer was paying the majority of the cost for that peace......

And thier own.
Might I add the only real place russia could get into a strikeing range of the US mainland was from europe and to do so would mean takeing it, it suited the US to help us.
Also what diffrence does it make that you helped us?
We repaid everydebt with the highest currency available....human lifes.
The cost was too high...one wonders if the US is overchargeing...


What a load of horse #! Do you really believe that? In the mid to late 1940's we could have taken over the world but instead tried to contain the communists. Europe was being rebuilt which is why we had to cover the 'military' budgets, but why should we now? You think the only reason we protected Europe was for our own interests? How selfish a thought and ignorant one I might add. We put OUR cities at risk to cover the European countries. You ever heard of MAD? The Russians knew, if they nuked Bonn, we would nuke a Russian city and then OUR cities would be targets....how naive can you be?

You remind me of a typical European that would still oppose the deployment of the Pershing II's.......it is a mindset that your type has, you fail to understand that the only way to avoid being attacked is to be stronger than your enemy.

The best defense is a better offense......or in the case of Europe, let Uncle Sam and the US taxpayer do it...


EDIT: I get a warning for what? Just so you know ignorant is not a bad thing when used in context. I am ignorant of diesel engines, dont know squat about them....and that is the context in which I used the word.

Or was it the Horse Puckey?

[edit on 28-2-2005 by edsinger]



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
What a load of horse #! Do you really believe that? In the mid to late 1940's we could have taken over the world but instead tried to contain the communists. Europe was being rebuilt which is why we had to cover the 'military' budgets, but why should we now? You think the only reason we protected Europe was for our own interests? How selfish a thought and ignorant one I might add. We put OUR cities at risk to cover the European countries. You ever heard of MAD? The Russians knew, if they nuked Bonn, we would nuke a Russian city and then OUR cities would be targets....how naive can you be?

DONT CALL ME IGNORANT!
I know exsactly how your country worked its forign policy, tell me that you placed armoured divisions in europe to protect us?
Tell me you set up nuclear strike bases in the UK to protect the UK????
You didnt, it was benificial for both sides to help each other!


You remind me of a typical European that would still oppose the deployment of the Pershing II's.......it is a mindset that your type has, you fail to understand that the only way to avoid being attacked is to be stronger than your enemy.

I am the type of european that DOESNT WANT TO GET INTO THE FIGHT!
GOT THAT THROUGH YOU SKULL?


The best defense is a better offense......or in the case of Europe, let Uncle Sam and the US taxpayer do it...

Wow the UK nor NATO done anything to help its defense, the whole UK part of NATO was a lie and we just sat with a finger up our rectums letting "uncle sam" gaurd us.
BS you know as well as I do we stood by you on the damm wall, we followed you everywhere you went as an ally, and you dare call us weak and cowardly?
Tell that to the families of the 85 dead men and women in iraq, the 1,078 killed in action in korea, the 56 KIA in gulf war 1 dont you DARE ever say that we havent repaid you or helped you!
We paid the highest price JUST LIKE YOUR COUNTRY , a life.



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
DONT CALL ME IGNORANT!
I know exsactly how your country worked its forign policy, tell me that you placed armoured divisions in europe to protect us?
Tell me you set up nuclear strike bases in the UK to protect the UK????
You didnt, it was benificial for both sides to help each other!


Well I am sorry in this case because you sure seem that way, failure to acknowledge the obvious. Why would the US put HER cities at risk to protect the Fulda Gap? Think MAN! Think!



Originally posted by devilwasp
I am the type of european that DOESNT WANT TO GET INTO THE FIGHT!
GOT THAT THROUGH YOU SKULL?


You sure your not French?



Originally posted by devilwaspWow the UK nor NATO done anything to help its defense, the whole UK part of NATO was a lie and we just sat with a finger up our rectums letting "uncle sam" gaurd us.


For the most part, yes. I wouldn't quite put it that way but Europe in general it fits. We spend 4% of our GNP to confront Communism whilst European nations spent 1-2% if we are lucky. The majority of the financial burden was paid by the US taxpayer for the protection of Western Europe So yes. We continue to subsidize economies over there with unneeded bases while we close ours at home and lay off our workers, so yes.




Originally posted by devilwaspBS you know as well as I do we stood by you on the damm wall, we followed you everywhere you went as an ally, and you dare call us weak and cowardly?


When I say that, as I have stated before the UK is the exception to that rule, but for the rest of Western Europe..yes.



Originally posted by devilwaspTell that to the families of the 85 dead men and women in iraq, the 1,078 killed in action in korea, the 56 KIA in gulf war 1 dont you DARE ever say that we havent repaid you or helped you!We paid the highest price JUST LIKE YOUR COUNTRY , a life.


As I have stated and will state again and again, you need to thank your government for having the foresight to recognize the threat and to do what it can to help confront it. Instead of kissing the arses of your across the channel buddies, you should be asking yourself if they would defend the UK if the need actually came to bear...



[edit on 1-3-2005 by edsinger]



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Well I am sorry in this case because you sure seem that way, failure to acknowledge the obvious. Why would the US put HER cities at risk to protect the Fulda Gap? Think MAN! Think!

You would do so since it is the quickest and easiest way to reach russia and therefore russian HQ.
Therefore makeing it easier to win a war with them, unless you want to drive over most of asia and siberia and the ural mountains...
The US didnt put her cities at risk, what exsactly is a tank division in , i dunno texas going to do about an airforce based in france or the UK or even iceland?




You sure your not French?

Pretty sure, considering I come from a 100% scottish family.



For the most part, yes. I wouldn't quite put it that way but Europe in general it fits. We spend 4% of our GNP to confront Communism whilst European nations spent 1-2% if we are lucky.

You want us to spend 4% of our GNP to confront china?
Why?
If you mean you spent that muc h in the cold war then yes I agree, you and the russians decided to play a "I've got a bigger submarine/tank/missile/nuclear warhead/plane than you" game....I lvoe the russian infatable sub idea though LOL bet the NSA/CIA/NRA must have had to change their trousers after seeing it lol.



The majority of the financial burden was paid by the US taxpayer for the protection of Western Europe So yes. We continue to subsidize economies over there with unneeded bases while we close ours at home and lay off our workers, so yes.

Yet again I must say you built bases over here yes but you as a whole didnt bring back our economey by building several bases in western germany or in scotland!





When I say that, as I have stated before the UK is the exception to that rule, but for the rest of Western Europe..yes.

NO you cant just make that decision the french have followed the US into gw1 hell they are not a warfareing people.
Most of western europe isnt, want to know why?
2 world wars and a large portion of their country destroyed or population killed.
The war in thier blood has been beaten out of them, why do you think the german army has such a hard time maintaining its numbers?
Also I think germany repaid you with all the weapon and jet tech they did and still are giveing you.




As I have stated and will state again and again, you need to thank your government for having the foresight to recognize the threat and to do what it can to help confront it.

Thank our government for sending our soldiers to fight someone elses war?
Thank our government for destroying 2 regimes that nethier had the willpower nor the might to harm us?
Yeah I reallly feel proud dont I.




Instead of kissing the arses of your across the channel buddies, you should be asking yourself if they would defend the UK if the need actually came to bear...
[edit on 1-3-2005 by edsinger]

Yes they would, at the current stage all our countries help each other.
Take the airbus or EF programs, multinational.
Take that search and rescue operation a few months ago, the french and RN worked together to try and find those men.



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 05:31 PM
link   
Quick question -

Is Ireland a part of the EU as it is today?

-wD



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by WeBDeviL
Is Ireland a part of the EU as it is today?


Yes Ireland is and it also employs the European Common Currency.

thanks,
drfunk



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by WeBDeviL
Quick question -

Is Ireland a part of the EU as it is today?

-wD

Ireland will always be a part of europe, the same with everycountry in europe...
BTW, nice job by the irish with the english

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
You would do so since it is the quickest and easiest way to reach russia and therefore russian HQ. Therefore makeing it easier to win a war with them, unless you want to drive over most of asia and siberia and the ural mountains...The US didnt put her cities at risk, what exsactly is a tank division in , i dunno texas going to do about an airforce based in france or the UK or even iceland?


You still dont get it do you? Look let me make this as plain as I can for those who fail to understand history.

The United States put HER cities at risk from Soviet Nuclear Weapons. If the USSR had attacked Western Europe with conventional forces, which we theoretically had not enough to counter conventionally, the reaction was well stated that the Nuclear Genie would be unleashed on USSR homeland and that would incite a retaliation to the US homeland. It is called MAD and it protected Western Europe for 50 years whether or not you are to naive to see it...I shall not argue this with you anymore as it is obvious that you have not researched the Cold War much......




Originally posted by devilwasp
You want us to spend 4% of our GNP to confront china?
Why?If you mean you spent that muc h in the cold war then yes I agree, you and the russians decided to play a "I've got a bigger submarine/tank/missile/nuclear warhead/plane than you" game....I lvoe the russian infatable sub idea though LOL bet the NSA/CIA/NRA must have had to change their trousers after seeing it lol.



Not at all, but please do not sell advanced weapons to them as the UK will probably be involved in a war for the liberation of Taiwan.. are you really understanding of the Global situation?


Originally posted by devilwasp
Yet again I must say you built bases over here yes but you as a whole didnt bring back our economey by building several bases in western germany or in scotland!



Well of course not, but it sure as hell subsidized it and STILL does.


Originally posted by devilwasp
NO you cant just make that decision the french have followed the US into gw1 hell they are not a warfareing people.Most of western europe isnt, want to know why?2 world wars and a large portion of their country destroyed or population killed.The war in thier blood has been beaten out of them, why do you think the german army has such a hard time maintaining its numbers?Also I think germany repaid you with all the weapon and jet tech they did and still are giveing you.


Hogwash! Pure and simple, its been 50 years, that excuse no longer holds merit, and as for the German comment, PLEASE Grow up!



Originally posted by devilwasp
Thank our government for sending our soldiers to fight someone elses war?
Thank our government for destroying 2 regimes that nethier had the willpower nor the might to harm us?Yeah I reallly feel proud dont I.



Well it is obvious then to the most casual of observers that you do not recognize the threat to your own nation, good thing you are still young and that your LEADERS, old and wise do.....




Originally posted by devilwasp
Yes they would, at the current stage all our countries help each other.
Take the airbus or EF programs, multinational.Take that search and rescue operation a few months ago, the french and RN worked together to try and find those men.


Again HOGWASH, Sure you cooperate with some things but you are not one nation and if it works so damn well how come you couldn't take care of troubles in your own precious backyard? Bosnia? It is nice to be patriotic and such but you also must recognize reality and take a look at the bigger picture...sell to China...go ahead and when your own weapons kill your own people and you loose the technological advantage just to make a buck, you will see.......just as we did with Clinton's Gyroscope giveaway for campaign funds.


The youth today is so misguided and naive.....



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
You still dont get it do you? Look let me make this as plain as I can for those who fail to understand history.

Let me tell you, I am showing you how we percieve your help, You are showing me how YOU percieve your help.


The United States put HER cities at risk from Soviet Nuclear Weapons. If the USSR had attacked Western Europe with conventional forces, which we theoretically had not enough to counter conventionally, the reaction was well stated that the Nuclear Genie would be unleashed on USSR homeland and that would incite a retaliation to the US homeland.

Yes, and the US cities would STILL be under threat if the forces werent in europe, now wouldnt they?



It is called MAD and it protected Western Europe for 50 years whether or not you are to naive to see it...I shall not argue this with you anymore as it is obvious that you have not researched the Cold War much......

BTW I have researched it thank you very much.
I know the theory of MAD and its insane, ever heard of WW1?....wonder how that got started???





Not at all, but please do not sell advanced weapons to them as the UK will probably be involved in a war for the liberation of Taiwan.. are you really understanding of the Global situation?

We sell who we want to and what we want to, dont you think boeing giveing them top grade aero tech is a little bit dangerous yet there is no US outcry there....

The "liberation" of taiwan as the US sees it is to simply give the US another strikeing platform from which to attack china, perfect little island to mount an invasion force from...Tell me I am wrong here.



Well of course not, but it sure as hell subsidized it and STILL does.

Oh so it "counts" now? this differs from what you implied earleir.



Hogwash! Pure and simple, its been 50 years, that excuse no longer holds merit, and as for the German comment, PLEASE Grow up!

Really?
So the german jet and missile tech and gun tech wasnt used or exploited by the US military?
So the french forces in GW1 didnt exist?




Well it is obvious then to the most casual of observers that you do not recognize the threat to your own nation, good thing you are still young and that your LEADERS, old and wise do.....

Yes, a threat...
Remind me again what was it?
Oh yes WMD yes....funny didnt the CIA deny this after the war?....





Again HOGWASH, Sure you cooperate with some things but you are not one nation and if it works so damn well how come you couldn't take care of troubles in your own precious backyard?

Is serbia/bosnia "in our backyard"...no its in the balklands quite a distance away.
We co-operate on a daily basis, european space program is one example...


Bosnia? It is nice to be patriotic and such but you also must recognize reality and take a look at the bigger picture..

Funny last time I checked the UK was still thre and had went in with the US.
So much for NO european support.....



.sell to China...go ahead and when your own weapons kill your own people and you loose the technological advantage just to make a buck,

Yes....from the other side of the planet....yes....are you saying Mig fighters can fly fly intercontinental now?




you will see.......just as we did with Clinton's Gyroscope giveaway for campaign funds.

Yes, and how many wars did clinton get into?


The youth today is so misguided and naive.....

Yes, quite a bit mroe than the older generation that have severly screwed up my and my fellow youths lives....thank you very much for brining us terrorism, war, nuclear weapons, biological and chemical weapons, genocide,murder, rape, pedophelia and most of the ills of society....yes thank you very much....



posted on Mar, 1 2005 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwaspLet me tell you, I am showing you how we percieve your help, You are showing me how YOU percieve your help.


Look I could give a crap less how you perceive fact no matter how misguided, the fact remains our cities were at risk to keep the USSR from romping through the Fulda Gap.....search for it and maybe you can grasp it.


Originally posted by devilwasp
Yes, and the US cities would STILL be under threat if the forces werent in europe, now wouldnt they?


Absolutely not, we could have let them run through the continent and it would have never escalated to a nuclear confrontation, the USSR never considered actually doing it because they KNEW the US would retaliate with nuclear weapons...why can you not grasp a simple yet proven concept?



Originally posted by devilwasp
BTW I have researched it thank you very much.
I know the theory of MAD and its insane, ever heard of WW1?....wonder how that got started???


What? Of course its insane that is why the acronym works so well but IT WORKED!




Originally posted by devilwasp
We sell who we want to and what we want to, dont you think boeing giveing them top grade aero tech is a little bit dangerous yet there is no US outcry there....


Their is a far difference between an airbus 300 and a Typhoon or Aster missile system.....lame argument young one.....


Originally posted by devilwasp
The "liberation" of taiwan as the US sees it is to simply give the US another strikeing platform from which to attack china, perfect little island to mount an invasion force from...Tell me I am wrong here.


You are wrong.....so wrong your not even close to being in reality. We don't even have any bases there....attack China? Are you serious? That is a huge market for cooperations not armies.....geez brainwashed by liberalism and you want to join the Royal Navy? Better keep your opinions to yourself then, well actually it would be a good thing as then you can see the real world and why you actually have a Navy, there are bad people out there you know...





Originally posted by devilwasp
Really?So the german jet and missile tech and gun tech wasnt used or exploited by the US military?So the french forces in GW1 didnt exist?



Ok ok ok ...whatever, the British must have got the jet technology also huh? Who are you kidding? that was 50 YEARS ago......Gulf war 1 French forces (Foreign Legion) did a fine job but most of them are not French.



Originally posted by devilwasp
Yes, a threat...Remind me again what was it?
Oh yes WMD yes....funny didnt the CIA deny this after the war?....


No not WMD, but WMD in the possession of those that WANT to use them, hence I don't see anyone but Radical Islam proclaim that they will use them. WAKE UP!!




Originally posted by devilwaspIs serbia/bosnia "in our backyard"...no its in the balklands quite a distance away.
We co-operate on a daily basis, european space program is one example...


NO NO NO! Bosnia is part of your Precious Europe in which you speak and you and your European brothers stood by and watched genocide, you can not in any fashion deny this. You know how I know? Because the US did the exact same thing and even offered to support a European operation to quell the violence but your 'brothers' yellow actions let it get to the point that the US DID put a stop to it against the great UN's wishes one more time.





Originally posted by devilwasp
Funny last time I checked the UK was still thre and had went in with the US.
So much for NO european support.....


Well ok after all the fighting was done and the US gave the ultimatums, the Europeans KEPT the peace, they didn't win it.




Originally posted by devilwasp
Yes....from the other side of the planet....yes....are you saying Mig fighters can fly fly intercontinental now?



Are you really that naive? I mean seriously? If China invades Taiwan ok course the UK has no bases near so the US carriers will be the launch point but the UK will have boots and other aircraft involved in that operation if it ever happens and you know it.



Originally posted by devilwasp
Yes, and how many wars did clinton get into?


hmmm lets see how many time did Clinton deploy troops? Many but how many troops would Bush have had to deploy if Clinton had had a backbone in the early nineties.....there is your appeasement again.....North Korea ring a bell?





Originally posted by devilwasp
Yes, quite a bit mroe than the older generation that have severly screwed up my and my fellow youths lives....thank you very much for brining us terrorism, war, nuclear weapons, biological and chemical weapons, genocide,murder, rape, pedophelia and most of the ills of society....yes thank you very much....



Oh that was a cop out..............Every SINGLE one of those you listed existed before my generation.....Nuclear was even around before my time.....but one thing you need to look at, in the last 50 years there has been less deaths in the West to war and these things in which you speak than the previous 50.............Young and Naive....and gullible.




[edit on 1-3-2005 by edsinger]



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 01:27 PM
link   
Firstly I am sorry for takeing so long.


Originally posted by edsinger
Look I could give a crap less how you perceive fact no matter how misguided, the fact remains our cities were at risk to keep the USSR from romping through the Fulda Gap.....search for it and maybe you can grasp it.

Tell me, does the US look out for ALL threats it faces?



Absolutely not, we could have let them run through the continent and it would have never escalated to a nuclear confrontation, the USSR never considered actually doing it because they KNEW the US would retaliate with nuclear weapons...why can you not grasp a simple yet proven concept?

Yet, wouldnt the US be in a far more dangerous position had europe fallen?




What? Of course its insane that is why the acronym works so well but IT WORKED!

Yeah, this time.
Before it didnt.





Their is a far difference between an airbus 300 and a Typhoon or Aster missile system.....lame argument young one.....

Actually not, you need a hell of a lot of co-operation from all sides to get it out of the shop.



You are wrong.....so wrong your not even close to being in reality. We don't even have any bases there....attack China? Are you serious? That is a huge market for cooperations not armies.....geez brainwashed by liberalism and you want to join the Royal Navy? Better keep your opinions to yourself then, well actually it would be a good thing as then you can see the real world and why you actually have a Navy, there are bad people out there you know...

Yeah thats it just keep the insults comeing...
I'm joining the RN because I care about my country, and care about what the military does and how it does it.
Oh and BTW why should I not voice my opinions?
Isnt that what the military fights for, sure I need to respect and shut up sometimes but most of the time opinions and views are welcome.

Tell me the US doesnt see taiwan as a stageing area...If you do I'm afraid you are blind.
Its like the cuban missile crisis.
I wouldnt call myself "brainwashed" by "liberalism" and also get that two part BS out of your head, there are more than 2 parties in the world.





[
Ok ok ok ...whatever, the British must have got the jet technology also huh?

Yeah, we developed our own, 2 weeks behind the german projects.
The american forces took the gear and gave us a small portion of the tech.


Who are you kidding? that was 50 YEARS ago......Gulf war 1 French forces (Foreign Legion) did a fine job but most of them are not French.

So what?
Your going on about something 60 YEARS ago, thats 6 decades.
So what?
Last time I checked the US is using mercenaries in iraq , most of them arent american.




No not WMD, but WMD in the possession of those that WANT to use them, hence I don't see anyone but Radical Islam proclaim that they will use them. WAKE UP!!

Actually if you look they say they want to destroy anti islamics and secondly no middle eastern country has the tech to hit us, has the will power to try it and not got a chance in hell of suceeding.




NO NO NO! Bosnia is part of your Precious Europe in which you speak and you and your European brothers stood by and watched genocide, you can not in any fashion deny this.

Yes bosnia is part of it, JUST by the skin of its teeth.
Actually WE went in or are you denying Merlin helicopters are based at Banja Luka airport?



You know how I know? Because the US did the exact same thing and even offered to support a European operation to quell the violence but your 'brothers' yellow actions let it get to the point that the US DID put a stop to it against the great UN's wishes one more time.

We went in before the americans you fool!
23 june 1995; british forces sent in.
30 aug 1995; NATO airstrikes.
Gee sooo much for no european involvement.






Well ok after all the fighting was done and the US gave the ultimatums, the Europeans KEPT the peace, they didn't win it.

23 June 1995, British forces sent in 1,200 troops.....




Are you really that naive? I mean seriously? If China invades Taiwan ok course the UK has no bases near so the US carriers will be the launch point but the UK will have boots and other aircraft involved in that operation if it ever happens and you know it.

Why would we want to get involved?
Has the taiwanese govenment asked us directly to protect them?
What tactical or strategic value does it have?
Apart from a stageing post into china...



hmmm lets see how many time did Clinton deploy troops? Many but how many troops would Bush have had to deploy if Clinton had had a backbone in the early nineties.....there is your appeasement again.....North Korea ring a bell?

Last time I checked, NK wasnt planning on nukeing the US.
Probably more since it would have stirred up mroe hate.






Oh that was a cop out..............Every SINGLE one of those you listed existed before my generation.....Nuclear was even around before my time.....but one thing you need to look at, in the last 50 years there has been less deaths in the West to war and these things in which you speak than the previous 50.............Young and Naive....and gullible.
[/qutoe]
Not really, micheal jackson ring a bell?
And come on, the US and the western world is still trying to make perfect weapons, pin point accuracy with a nuke. WTF!
Sarin,anthrax, chemical weapons.
The US alone supplied weapons to a known "rogue" state.
The US also used agent orange in vietnam!
The older generations, includeing yours, has severly scrwed up my and my fellow younger genereations lifes for a considerable ammount of time.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 11:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
Firstly I am sorry for takeing so long.


No probs same here




Originally posted by devilwasp
Yet, wouldnt the US be in a far more dangerous position had europe fallen?



No necessarily you know, I mean Europe was laid waste and the USSR could not have afforded to rebuild it in the first place, look at East Germany for my proof... It would not have been a good thing for sure but St. Louis would not have needed to have been in the Nuke cross hairs either. One other point since you hate America so much, let me explain what the US did after that terrible war, it did what no other victor had ever done, it stopped, de-armed and rebuilt the losers and the winners. Never has that happened and in 1945, the world including the UK and Europe could have been ours in less than 24 months.....but we didn't and that should speak much to you and your 'apparent' recollection of history.



Originally posted by devilwasp
Yeah, this time.Before it didnt.


So MAD didn't work the first time? huh? Am I missing something here? When did 2 nations have the ability to completely destroy each other and probably mankind in the process ever fail?





Their is a far difference between an airbus 300 and a Typhoon or Aster missile system.....lame argument young one.....


Originally posted by devilwasp
Actually not, you need a hell of a lot of co-operation from all sides to get it out of the shop.


You know damn good and welll what I meant......






Originally posted by devilwasp
Yeah thats it just keep the insults comeing...
I'm joining the RN because I care about my country, and care about what the military does and how it does it.
Oh and BTW why should I not voice my opinions?
Isnt that what the military fights for, sure I need to respect and shut up sometimes but most of the time opinions and views are welcome.


You would know if I were insulting you, defensive aren't we? What I meant about not voicing your opinions, is that when your ass is on the line and you spew those Utopian turdflower ideas you will get kindly convinced otherwise, TRUST me I know and I was in the Navy and that is not the place to be talking this peace nick crap. The whole point of the Navy;s existence or at least its main goal is to never be used in the first place. It is called deterrence and that is a concept you fail to grasp very well.





Originally posted by devilwasp
Tell me the US doesnt see taiwan as a stageing area...If you do I'm afraid you are blind.Its like the cuban missile crisis. I wouldnt call myself "brainwashed" by "liberalism" and also get that two part BS out of your head, there are more than 2 parties in the world.


Hell no! You cant invade China by sea? Your kidding right?

Liberalism henceforth in our conversations will mean utopian....ok?







Originally posted by devilwaspYeah, we developed our own, 2 weeks behind the german projects.The american forces took the gear and gave us a small portion of the tech.


No we just gave Von Brown and others like him citizenship and before you think that Germany had the better technology, the P-51 was the king of the skies, the Me-262 didn't have the range (yet) and last I heard the Germans had GIVEN UP on the A-Bomb.





Originally posted by devilwasp
So what?Your going on about something 60 YEARS ago, thats 6 decades.
So what?Last time I checked the US is using mercenaries in iraq , most of them arent american.


Well in the posistions that count they are ONLY US mostly EX-MILITARY and I will stop there. And most of the contractors are American, the laborers are not.





Originally posted by devilwasp
Actually if you look they say they want to destroy anti islamics and secondly no middle eastern country has the tech to hit us, has the will power to try it and not got a chance in hell of suceeding.



Oh man you need to do some reading m8, Iran can HIT you NOW! Non nuke of course but they could hit you ol Buzz/V2 style......We do not know what the North Koreans have given them and to be diligent about it, they are rumored to already have at least 2 10kT tactical Nukes that might be warhead size bought in the early 90's although the tritium is #e by now but that ol Pakistani guy was selling that also.....

Did you know that Saudi Arabia bought ICBM's from CHINA in the 80's......think about that one....






Originally posted by devilwaspYes bosnia is part of it, JUST by the skin of its teeth.Actually WE went in or are you denying Merlin helicopters are based at Banja Luka airport?


SO what? you have a few Helicopters at an airport. We had F-117's getting shot down! You also have some Tornado's there but in %'s you again plus the US were the only countries to commit sizable forces.








Originally posted by devilwaspWe went in before the americans you fool!23 june 1995; british forces sent in.30 aug 1995; NATO airstrikes.Gee sooo much for no european involvement.


Look lets not play that game ok you will loose. The only way the UK was even willing to do it was when they had the commitment that Uncle Sam would commit the forces necessary to do the job. Of course the Europeans had to put the first boot down and that was probably requested by the US as the people here were not exactly happy about another Clinton excursion, albeit this one was needed.




Originally posted by devilwasp
23 June 1995, British forces sent in 1,200 troops.....


SO what man! We sent 10,000! Plus covered the majority of the COSTS! Again I might add.




Originally posted by devilwasp
Why would we want to get involved?Has the taiwanese govenment asked us directly to protect them?What tactical or strategic value does it have?
Apart from a stageing post into china...



It is not a strategic target at all, it is a thriving DEMOCRACY that has technology that we do not feel the RED Chinese should have yet and just why do you think China wants it so bad, the oil is to the south in the Spratley's m8.




Originally posted by devilwaspLast time I checked, NK wasnt planning on nukeing the US.Probably more since it would have stirred up mroe hate.


Lets see here ---- hmmmmmm

1951 ring a bell?







Originally posted by devilwasp
Not really, micheal jackson ring a bell?And come on, the US and the western world is still trying to make perfect weapons, pin point accuracy with a nuke. WTF!Sarin,anthrax, chemical weapons.The US alone supplied weapons to a known "rogue" state.The US also used agent orange in vietnam!The older generations, includeing yours, has severly scrwed up my and my fellow younger genereations lifes for a considerable ammount of time.


So did Germany France and the UK? Whats your point? Its called Capitalism and it does things that are not in the best inerstests at times. Agent Orange? Now I want to insult but I wont...Do you even know what the hell it was used for?

You are one of these people that would cry about DDT also and with the Full knowledge that its ban probably cost more human lives that Stalin and Hitler combined...geez......LIBERAL/UTOPIAN whatever..



History lesson part 7 over.....







[edit on 2-3-2005 by edsinger]

[edit on 2-3-2005 by edsinger]



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 01:54 AM
link   


You would know if I were insulting you, defensive aren't we? What I meant about not voicing your opinions, is that when your is on the line and you spew those Utopian turdflower ideas you will get kindly convinced otherwise, TRUST me I know and I was in the Navy and that is not the place to be talking this peace nick crap. The whole point of the Navy;s existence or at least its main goal is to never be used in the first place. It is called deterrence and that is a concept you fail to grasp very well.


Maybe in the good ol' US navy ED, but in the RN, opinions and views are encouraged to be expressed, same as across the British Armed Forces.

And our Navy's aim is not for "detterence". Its stated aim is the protection of UK interests both at home and abroad, including fisheries protection, Sanctions enforcement, drug enforcement, and humanitarian relief.

Check it out:

Royal Navy



Hell no! You cant invade China by sea? Your kidding right?


For an ex-military man Ed, you are not the supreme strategist. A sea invasion of China? Or an invasion of China for that matter? Why? What for?

China has one of the largest and most capable shallow water fleets in the world, and would tear apart and invasion fleet that it would see coming for months. Not a good plan, you need a staging area, and Taiwan is that.



Well in the posistions that count they are ONLY US mostly EX-MILITARY and I will stop there. And most of the contractors are American, the laborers are not.


Really? Thought they where South Africans, former-SAS and other assorted hard men from around the globe, not mainly American by a long shot.



Oh man you need to do some reading m8, Iran can HIT you NOW! Non nuke of course but they could hit you ol Buzz/V2 style......We do not know what the North Koreans have given them and to be diligent about it, they are rumored to already have at least 2 10kT tactical Nukes that might be warhead size bought in the early 90's although the tritium is by now but that ol Pakistani guy was selling that also.....


Care to back this claim up Ed? Last time I checked, Iran only had the missiles with a range to, at most, hit Northern Turkey/Southern Greece. And why would they want to hit us? The UK alone could incinerate the place, plus we are reasonably pally with them.



Did you know that Saudi Arabia bought ICBM's from CHINA in the 80's......think about that one....


Wasn't aware China has enough ICBM's to sell? They only have a few hundred of any decent range, and what on earth would Saudi want with them? Most of China's missiles are IRBM's meant for the local Strategic theater.



SO what? you have a few Helicopters at an airport. We had F-117's getting shot down! You also have some Tornado's there but in %'s you again plus the US were the only countries to commit sizable forces.


Thanks for the vote of confidence there Ed. We have, and have had, more than a few Helo's and soem Tornado's. In Kosovo, whilst you where busy bombing the Serbs (to no avail), we where itching with an entire Airborne Brigade to go in and do something on the ground.

Would stay and engage more, but I have work to do, so will come back laters....

(PS:You do spout a load of crock sometimes, although it is entertaining to read on a Thurs morning at work...
)



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 05:53 AM
link   
fas.org... That has some information on Iran's missiles. Not one can hit America yet, but to be honest, let Iran make Nuclear Power stations.

Who are we to say who can and cannot have nuclear weapons and power stations? After all, Israel being the only Nuclear Power in that region (Major power), is causing more harm then good. Once Iran, Syria, etc, have Nuclear Weapons maybe Israel will stop need to 'bullying' other Nations about.



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 06:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
No necessarily you know, I mean Europe was laid waste and the USSR could not have afforded to rebuild it in the first place, look at East Germany for my proof... It would not have been a good thing for sure but St. Louis would not have needed to have been in the Nuke cross hairs either. One other point since you hate America so much, let me explain what the US did after that terrible war, it did what no other victor had ever done, it stopped, de-armed and rebuilt the losers and the winners. Never has that happened and in 1945, the world including the UK and Europe could have been ours in less than 24 months.....but we didn't and that should speak much to you and your 'apparent' recollection of history.

Funny, wasnt the building of nuclear weapons called "arming" ?
The USA did increase its budget and size when it became aparant that the USSSR might become a threat.




So MAD didn't work the first time? huh? Am I missing something here?

How did WW1 start?
By one man shooting another.
Thats it.


When did 2 nations have the ability to completely destroy each other and probably mankind in the process ever fail?

In WW1 they had the ability to wipe out a decent portion of the worlds population.
Also if we did lose WW1, most of the world would be under the command of a crazy man.





You know damn good and welll what I meant......

What the diffrence in tech and equipment?
Get real ever tried inventing tech to get something that weighs 9,999kg in the air and super sonic?
Pretty hard.
Now try and get something that weighs 276.8 tonnes into the air...a bit harder yes no?

The two projects are massive and very highly orginised.






You would know if I were insulting you, defensive aren't we?

Actually its you who has been on the offensesive, Im passing comment on the remarks your makeing.



What I meant about not voicing your opinions, is that when your ass is on the line and you spew those Utopian turdflower ideas you will get kindly convinced otherwise, TRUST me I know and I was in the Navy and that is not the place to be talking this peace nick crap.

My future job is to blow someone up with 4.5inch naval rifle from several miles away, where is the peace in that?
If I wanted to stop fighting I'd be a doctor or medic.
Also what is so wrong about "peace" ?
Do you WANT war?


The whole point of the Navy;s existence or at least its main goal is to never be used in the first place. It is called deterrence and that is a concept you fail to grasp very well.

The main job of the navy or any armed service is to protect the country, her citizens, forign intrests and her allies.
This can mean a lot of things, I think i grasp it very well.






Hell no! You cant invade China by sea? Your kidding right?

You cant invade china persay but as you and so many of your american counterparts have pointed out you COULD get into china from taiwan.
Tell me crossing 100 miles is a big challange for the USMC?
They managed to take islands full of enemy that outnumbered them.


Liberalism henceforth in our conversations will mean utopian....ok?

No.








No we just gave Von Brown and others like him citizenship and before you think that Germany had the better technology, the P-51 was the king of the skies,

Really, so the fact that the spitfire managed to do the same job and just as good means it was the "other" king of the skies?


the Me-262 didn't have the range (yet) and last I heard the Germans had GIVEN UP on the A-Bomb.

Yes yet, what about the the V3?
Many german tech given a few more months and we would have had one hell of a time winning the war.






Well in the posistions that count they are ONLY US mostly EX-MILITARY and I will stop there. And most of the contractors are American, the laborers are not.

...........Right so the other contractors are getting the unhamane jobs while the american ones are staying for the pictures....





Oh man you need to do some reading m8, Iran can HIT you NOW! Non nuke of course but they could hit you ol Buzz/V2 style......We do not know what the North Koreans have given them and to be diligent about it, they are rumored to already have at least 2 10kT tactical Nukes that might be warhead size bought in the early 90's although the tritium is #e by now but that ol Pakistani guy was selling that also.....

Yeah, can you show me the missiles and nukes they have that could reach me?
Also why would they nuke me?
My country would nuke thiers.
Thereby destroying themselves, even if they do have a large religios part of their country their leaders are not stupid.


Did you know that Saudi Arabia bought ICBM's from CHINA in the 80's......think about that one....

No, I actually thought it was americans that supplied them with it...oh well must just have been those bio and chem weapons.







SO what? you have a few Helicopters at an airport. We had F-117's getting shot down! You also have some Tornado's there but in %'s you again plus the US were the only countries to commit sizable forces.

Thats now, we sent over 1,200 troops.
Also do we own F-117's?
No we own tornados, can we send F-117's?
No, can we send tornados? Yes.









Look lets not play that game ok you will loose. The only way the UK was even willing to do it was when they had the commitment that Uncle Sam would commit the forces necessary to do the job. Of course the Europeans had to put the first boot down and that was probably requested by the US as the people here were not exactly happy about another Clinton excursion, albeit this one was needed.
[/qoute]
No let us "play the game" and I will take my chances.
I lose ,then I lose.
If I win ,then I win.
There is no loss of face in accepting defeat.






SO what man! We sent 10,000! Plus covered the majority of the COSTS! Again I might add.

1,200 is a large number, about a fifth of our marine core's size.
You obviosly are going to send more troops because you can and that is your tactics.
Also you are going to cover the most of the costs because you can afford it and decided to take control.





It is not a strategic target at all, it is a thriving DEMOCRACY that has technology that we do not feel the RED Chinese should have yet and just why do you think China wants it so bad, the oil is to the south in the Spratley's m8.
[/qoute]
Actually they feel right now that they want statues quo.
Not full joining with china but not seperation.
Look, mate the oil we need is in the north sea, middle east.
If we need to go there then we would go there.
Chinese airforfce would be the only threat and as you americans so LOVE to do, the PLANA doesnt have the tech to hurt us.





Lets see here ---- hmmmmmm

1951 ring a bell?

Lets see here--- hmmm

Does "Soverign State" ring a bell?
They wouldnt try and nuke SK any how since america would nuke them since american/UN troops are there.








So did Germany France and the UK?

Notice how i said "western world"


Whats your point? Its called Capitalism and it does things that are not in the best inerstests at times.

Its not democracy! "not in the best inerstests at times." it never does any thing right ANY TIME!


Agent Orange? Now I want to insult but I wont...Do you even know what the hell it was used for?

To kill NK troops, now tell me doesnt the US hate Chemical and bio weapons if so then why does it have the worlds largest collection of them?


You are one of these people that would cry about DDT also and with the Full knowledge that its ban probably cost more human lives that Stalin and Hitler combined...geez......LIBERAL/UTOPIAN whatever..

What?
Banning the use of chemical and biological weapons has killed MORE people, get real!
Its stop an inhumane way of fighting a war.




History lesson part 7 over.....

Correct that please, it should be; "Biased history lesson part 7 from propaganda manual 1982 over"


[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 09:50 AM
link   


Originally posted by devilwasp
So MAD didn't work the first time? huh? Am I missing something here?

How did WW1 start?
By one man shooting another.
Thats it.


It was hardly a situation of mutually assured destruction, populations were never in danger of being wiped out.




When did 2 nations have the ability to completely destroy each other and probably mankind in the process ever fail?

In WW1 they had the ability to wipe out a decent portion of the worlds population.
Also if we did lose WW1, most of the world would be under the command of a crazy man.


lol, WW1 was largely a European war a sixable percentage of the worlds popultaion was nnever in danger. Are you even thinking about what you're saying, or just typing BS on purpose.



Yes yet, what about the the V3?
Many german tech given a few more months and we would have had one hell of a time winning the war.


The V3 would hvae done nothing to stop the allied progress, what in the hell are you talking about ? Do you even know what the V3 was ?

Gawd there's so much crap in this post I can't be bothered responding to any more of it. Good Luck Ed, you must be very patient.



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
It was hardly a situation of mutually assured destruction, populations were never in danger of being wiped out.

It was a prelude to it, is what I am getting at.



lol, WW1 was largely a European war a sixable percentage of the worlds popultaion was nnever in danger. Are you even thinking about what you're saying, or just typing BS on purpose.

Lets see, germany becomes world naval and land and air power, does that threaten the worlds population?
Also might I add this is your take on dont try and force me into a "choice" of one of the two.



The V3 would hvae done nothing to stop the allied progress, what in the hell are you talking about ? Do you even know what the V3 was ?

The V3 and varios other tech, is what I am talking about, would have hurt us badly and probably delayed the war.
Tell me that if the germans had gotten more tiger tanks or more jet planes built we wouldnt have lost the war?
[qutoe]
Gawd there's so much crap in this post I can't be bothered responding to any more of it. Good Luck Ed, you must be very patient.

Rogue, you are jumping in yet again to another one of my posts, are you doing thsi on purpose or just you dont like me?



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Germany was never in danger of taking over the world and killing a sizable percentage of the world's population in WW1.

Whilst some German technology was impressive ( in WWII ) it was harder to get the prototypes into production. The German scientists suffered from multiple chains of command and inter agency secrecy, not to mention lack of resources.
If this technmology had been around in 1941 against Russia then the outcome could very well have been different. Imagine Tigers and Panthers in 1941 instead of the tin cans they used then....it may well have been a different outcome before Moscow.

If Germany had stayed in the war longer they would have copped the bomb as well, so maybe it was lucky for them.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join