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.

 

A coalition of U.S.-U.K.-France-Germany is fearsome

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sandman210372
DW,

What?

Cheers

S

You insult a friend of mine, you insult me...clear on this front?




posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 04:40 PM
link   
im sorry!

ive had a bad day and my post when far far beyond where it was supposed to go and ended up as abuse towards the french millitary.

3 points i would disagree with you about though lonestar.

1) britain got fairly heavily bombed and suffered a lot more in the blitz than you made it look like.
2) Britain played a major part in the second world war.
3) i still count the falklands war as a fairly large millitary achievement due to the distances involved and the numerical superiority of the well dug in argentinians.

apart from the above i did act like an ass and would like to apologise to anyone ive offended especially the french millitary.

Justin



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 05:04 PM
link   
DW,

Whatever.

I knew WP was a kid, I did not realise you were as well.

Cheers

S

p.s. For future reference let people fight there own corners. You have just come across as a petulant child. I thought you were going to be someone worth reading, but you have no credibility with me now.



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 05:08 PM
link   
hey sandman you talking about me in your ps or about devil wasp?

Justin



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Justin,

The clue is in the opening "DW".

Cheers

S



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 05:16 PM
link   
sorry sandman
as i said im having a bad day

Justin



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Lonester, agree with Most of your points I think Justin Barton wants to start a my armies better than yours type argument.

However have to take exeption to this quote


Originally posted by Lonestar24
And you didnt have a "huge" part in winning: it took heavy sacrifices by the Russians and the USA to win this war. Actually Western Europe (where most of the british fighting took place) was not very heavily defended compared to other areas. And your war economy was about to collapse.


Firsltly, are you saying that Britain didn't make heavy sacrifices during WW II ? Britain gave every thing it had in the cause of standing up to the Axis powers both as you mention economicly and militarily , the argument can be made that Britain sacrificed her very Empire for the cause.

Secondly, don't forget the contribution that the British Empire made in world war II Canada , India , Australia, New zealand and far more British influence bought theese countries in to the fight and they all played a significant role in the outcome.

Thirdly, British forces served all over the globe , dont forget the campaign in North Africa and the landings in Sicily and throughout the far east, its insulting to the thousands who served and died in theese theatres.

Fourthly, Devil wasp made a great point, if Britain had fallen where would the second front been established from , the one that the Soviets desperately needed to be established?

fith point, Winston Churchills influence, in convincing the Americans that the defeat of Germany should be the priority to the Allies they could have just left us to it and contended with the Japanese.

Finally Western Europe wasn't that heavily defended? allright the Germans were fighting on two fronts but i think this is a bit of a silly comment to make not just for the sake of demeaning British forces but American ones too who also were in case your not aware some what heavily commited in that theatre , never heard of Fortress Europe? what about the battle of the Bulge ? tell the Americans who died there that western Europe wasn't heavily defended what about the battle for Antwerp, operation Varsity the Rhine crossing? German resistance here was fierce in one day 1,078 men of the British 6th Airborne Division were killed or wounded.

I could go on , like I say I agree with virtually all of your post , and I dont buy in to this French Bashing myself.

But as to your point on britain in WW II as you put it misinformation needs correction.



[edit on 15-2-2006 by buckaroo]



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 06:03 PM
link   
The coalition mentioned isn´t too far fetched ...

Just imagine the NWO or any crazy terrorist group to place a dirty bomb in a city or river along the french-german border (Strassbourg / Rhine for example) and blame Iran for.
You´ll have a coalition of - all - NATO countries followed by an invasion of Iran faster as you can say Amen.

France has oversea interests in Africa (Algeria, Ivory Coast, ...) and elsewhere.
World War III would be on the doorstep.

France has a muslim population of 10% and a community of 700.000 jews = civil war.

Remember you read it here first.



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 09:13 PM
link   
They.. the French won't fall for it..



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 09:43 PM
link   
With the aforementioned countries leading the charge against Iran, one can only imagine the mass destruction and hell they could rain on both Iran and possibly Syria, if they back Iran.


Dont forget us aussies, we have heaps of second hand junk and our p.m just loves to rub shoulders with the big kids in the playground. We have a great history of sending our guys in as cannon fodder whenever were asked.



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sandman210372
DW,

Whatever.

I knew WP was a kid, I did not realise you were as well.

Cheers

S

p.s. For future reference let people fight there own corners. You have just come across as a petulant child. I thought you were going to be someone worth reading, but you have no credibility with me now.

Gee didnt think being able to get married means I am now a kid, thanks for the all important flash message mate


Just because I disagree with you over insulting my friend?
You want me to just "ingnore" it and mabye it wont exist?
Yeah no offence mate but we learned from that mistake.



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 08:17 AM
link   
DW,

Why are we having this argument again?

We went down this road 12 months ago and agreed to disagree about our opinions of WP?

Cheers

S



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sandman210372
DW,

Why are we having this argument again?

We went down this road 12 months ago and agreed to disagree about our opinions of WP?

Cheers

S

Did we go back in time 12 months?
No, you isulted a friend ,I am simply saying you are insulting me by doing that.



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 09:17 AM
link   
DW,

If you feel that my statement of facts about another poster on his site is an insult to you then fair enough.

That is your decision and I cannot change that. However, I will not censor my opinions as long as they fit the guidelines of the site. If you feel that further posts of mine will cause you further offence of your delicate sensibilities then I suggest you add me to your ignore list.

Should the Mods feel my behaviour needs altering then fair enough.

Cheers

S


[edit on 16-2-2006 by Sandman210372]



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 11:25 AM
link   
Oh my goodness, you miss one day of ATS and this happens?

Well, for the record, Sandman if you so feel inclined to for no reason jump a the oppirtunity to bash a “child” then It really makes you look like a well rounded adult.

Oh and by the way, cheers.



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 02:02 AM
link   
Westy,

Glad to see you are fit and well.

ATS would just not be the same for me without you.

Cheers

S



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 04:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
I would have to imagine a first strike of the air defense network with Cruise missile before B-2s are sent in. There not much of a defense for cruise missiles and you can weaken the defenses the B-2 will have to encounter to get in to drop their bunker busters.
[edit on 15-2-2006 by ShadowXIX]

cruise missiles fly low and below 1 mach. They are fired during night time and very probable they will be fired from Mediteranean sea to avoid detection. so they have to fly over iranian western mts.

If I were in charge of iranian defence network, I would send as many as 5000 iranian special forces to bases in the western mts in grps of 5 (1000 bases, each base covering a radius equal to anti aircraft systems' range), all armed with the new domestically built manpads(Misaq 2) (or the newest vrs. of russian igla), and equipped with domestically built Thermal Detection/Night Vision (6x zooming) Systems (foreign built vrn preferred).
Their Task: To guard iranian air space from cruise missiles during night time

iranian terrain index is like this - "Iran Elevation Map"




Originally posted by Daedalus3
So the final deal is whether the Iranians can do anything about the B-2s and lesser a/c..
Lets talk about that..

iranian Tomcats could be used to intercept B2s. Iran still operates some (57-44-25-16) f-14s. Not only iran manufactures 70% of f-14 parts, iran is now able to assemble entire TF30 engines for tomcats from domestically-manufactured parts.
iranians have upgraded the AWG-9 and manufacture upgraded AIM-54A phoenix missiles for f-14.

Another rumour that's been circling aorund is that somehow iranians have got their hands on mig-31s. I try to find the source. very interesting article that says mig-31s have been spotted by both american and uae pilots.

RESPECT



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 05:26 AM
link   
Why would it be better to launch cruise missles from the Mediterraineanrather than the Guld and/or other places??

How would the F-14s detect the B-2??



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
Why would it be better to launch cruise missles from the Mediterraineanrather than the Guld and/or other places??
How would the F-14s detect the B-2??

1. Iran keeps an eye on us naval ships' activities in the gulf, and any such move to launch cruise missiles will result in a retaliatory act by launching anti-ship cruise missiles, iran possesses.
2. i do not recall exactly but I remember reading somewhere that cruise missiles could be indeed detected in the early stages of projection. (correct me, if i'm wrong)

once a B-2 drops a bomb (bunker buster in this case), it could be spotted in the radar network, and from there, f-14s take care of it. iranian nuke program sites is located around iranian territory (as many as 40 sites), making b-2 vulnerable to interceptors after they are spotted. US cannot afford to lose any B-2s.
no to mention, russian s-400s are supposed to detect b-2 stealth bombers, so they are not that stealthy afterall

RESPECT



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 06:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
With the aforementioned countries leading the charge against Iran, one can only imagine the mass destruction and hell they could rain on both Iran and possibly Syria, if they back Iran.


Germany isn't allowed to wage war (besides directly defending), the UK doesn't have the money, and has stated it won't participate, and I doubt the french would do much...just not enough reasons - Iran isn't their problem.

The US? Not enough resources right now. Maybe in a few years.




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join