Can the US win a war ? ...

page: 10
6
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 07:39 PM
link   

We have 128000 nukes.we can destroy the planet.


Do you have wet dreams at night knowing that your country can destroy the world?




posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


Doesn't matter he is way off.
We maintain an arsenal of about 5,500 warheads. That's about 1200 less than Russia.




posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 10:55 PM
link   
Actually, I don't think he was "wrong," at least not in a misinformed sense. I think he was being sarcastic. I'm 90% sure, anyways. Some people (somehow) haven't figured out that sarcasm is not usually an easy thing to detect in typing. How people aren't aware of that simple fact, I never have been able to understand...



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by mattifikation
Actually, I don't think he was "wrong," at least not in a misinformed sense. I think he was being sarcastic. I'm 90% sure, anyways. Some people (somehow) haven't figured out that sarcasm is not usually an easy thing to detect in typing. How people aren't aware of that simple fact, I never have been able to understand...


For one, I do not consider it sarcasm when he made an entire thread devoted to it.

Secondly he is not the first or last American that I've met with such misguided views.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 05:05 PM
link   
Why single out Americans? I've talked to plenty of people from plenty of other countries who had similar beliefs about themselves. I'm pretty sick and tired of the anti-American prejudice on these boards...

I mean, what gives? No other country does bad things, or what?



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Anti-American prejudice? I've had to put up with some select Americans harassing me just because I am Canadian, especially on the internet. How is it prejudice when it is Americans who go around with these extremist views of their country? I don't see non-Americans going around spewing American nationalist propaganda.

It's fine by me to be nationalist American, but to go around and proclaim the US to be supreme ruler of the world because they can destroy it... I just won't stand for the crap.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
I just won't stand for the crap.


Well, then, sit down?

I blame Canadians for Celine Dion. How come you couldn't keep her up there? And don't say that your beer compensates for her, either.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by mattifikation
Why single out Americans? I've talked to plenty of people from plenty of other countries who had similar beliefs about themselves. I'm pretty sick and tired of the anti-American prejudice on these boards...

I mean, what gives? No other country does bad things, or what?


It isn't that...

We see all kinds of ignorant posts by chest pounders who think that by spewing ignorant rhetoric they are making up for what the have perceived as attacks on Americans. When in reality most of what appears as anti-American to some is most of the time somebody simply expressing their frustrations.

Take a look at this trash talk here for example. No wonder people think what they do about the US.

On the other hand we have people who like to clump us all together and make blanket statements about us. Not realizing that that's just as ignorant. Here is something that many here at ATS forget. We here in the US have a disproportionate amount of pubescent teenage boys with too much time on their hands while school is out that have access to computers and the internet.

Couple that with the real ignorant classes and we have a recipe for disaster one that gives most of us a bad reputation.





[edit on 13-8-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Reply to post by Skelkie3
 


yes. its pretty obvious no? I think you are confusing war with reconstruction efforts


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 10:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


Then you haven't been looking hard enough. In particular, there's a few folks around here that are absolutely in love the Earth's Eternal Masters from China and/or Russia. It's not just Americans at all.

I don't know a single person who has a problem with Canada, or Canadians. I'm not sure who you ran into, but we have a word for those that can't be used on this web site. That word is definitely not "Americans."

That thread by esecallum proved me wrong though. I honestly thought he was being sarcastic with his post in this thread. That's pretty sad that somebody would think that way. I assure you though, I've seen more than just Americans making posts like that.

I don't like being lumped in with people or posts like that. That's not the majority viewpoint in this country at all. If you have 1,000 people walking through Time Square going about their daily business and keeping to themselves and 1 homeless guy screaming at the top of his lungs about the end of the world, does that mean everyone in Times Square thinks the world is about to end?

At any rate, coming into a thread titled "Can the US win a war" is definitely not going to help you avoid posters who like to brag about US military power. I mean... that's the topic of the thread. Of course people are going to talk about our military. I think our military policies are as bass-ackwards as the rest of the world does, but that's not the point of the thread.

The question asked is, "can the U.S. win a war?"

I understand why you don't like hearing Americans brag, but why does it bother you that some people came to this thread and answered "Yes?" The topic isn't about what it means to "win," or "nobody wins in war," or any of the myriad of other philosophical pearls of wisdom that follow those lines... the topic is about the ability of our military to overcome another.

If it perturbs you so much to see Americans talk about such a thing, then why would you even read a thread about exactly that topic? Would you like it if somebody started a thread asking if Canada can win a war, and I came in and started bashing nationalist Canadians for answering the question?



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 12:26 AM
link   
In a world with only one super power it's natural that you only are going to have people that are for america or againts her.

I'm anti-american on principle, as I would be anti-chinese if they were the ones holding all the power, don't take it personally.

Having been the beneficiary of the pax americana all my life, i suppose i should be a lot more thankful, and in many ways I am and truly admire your country, but that doesn't blind me to wrongs you have done all over the world. Notice that I'm not saying that the chinese/russian/european would be better.

Anyway, that's my anti-american perspective.

On topic:

I think presently no other nation in the world can face the US 1vs1. The only defence against the US presently is if you have your own nuclear weapons, and that's the reason that NK and Iran so desperately want them.
Maybe China in another 50 years.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by madeioo
In a world with only one super power it's natural that you only are going to have people that are for america or againts her.

I think presently no other nation in the world can face the US 1vs1. The only defence against the US presently is if you have your own nuclear weapons, and that's the reason that NK and Iran so desperately want them.
Maybe China in another 50 years.


I see three world superpowers with about equal capabilities (not including nukes), those being the US, Russia, and China.

I strongly believe that if China fought the US 1 on 1 in conventional warfare they would stand a chance, especially in most Pacific engagements.

I also believe that Russia could topple the US through unconventional means. Russia is too large to avoid a land invasion, so most of their military will be focused on three factors: national defense, offensive capability (bombers, cruise missiles, subs, etc), and special forces. I have no doubt Spetsnaz would easily infiltrate and wreck havoc around mainland US while the US drags on a slow campaign in the Russian homeland. Spetsnaz could make 9/11 an hourly occurance, and such actions would really bring the US population to its knees when they learn what real fear is. At least that's how I see it



posted on Aug, 15 2009 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
I have no doubt Spetsnaz would easily infiltrate and wreck havoc around mainland US while the US drags on a slow campaign in the Russian homeland. Spetsnaz could make 9/11 an hourly occurance, and such actions would really bring the US population to its knees when they learn what real fear is. At least that's how I see it


And you are greatly underestimating US Special Operations Forces. You seem to be under the impression that the US would only conduct a traditional campaign and not cut SOF loose.



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
I have no doubt Spetsnaz would easily infiltrate and wreck havoc around mainland US while the US drags on a slow campaign in the Russian homeland. Spetsnaz could make 9/11 an hourly occurance, and such actions would really bring the US population to its knees when they learn what real fear is. At least that's how I see it


And you are greatly underestimating US Special Operations Forces. You seem to be under the impression that the US would only conduct a traditional campaign and not cut SOF loose.


No, I'm not under that impression. US special forces are good for surgical strikes against specific targets, Spetsnaz are good for mass terrorism and massacre. Russia has much more experience experiencing REAL terrorism within its boarders, and so they've adapted by exploiting the same tactics against their enemies. They are not really limited in their capability since they are only controlled by the autonomous powers of the Russian FSB; the Russian government doesn't even have to give them orders.



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


That sounds more like the Rangers than the Special Forces. Two separate things there. I wouldn't doubt the Special Forces' ability to carry out "terrorism" missions, however I think they'd be more likely to go after military targets than civilian targets. That bit might just be wishful thinking on my part, though.



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by esecallumWe Americans don't declare wars.We defend America. We are the most civilised race on the planet.


Give it a rest will you mate? Nobody in the rest of the world believes America and her lies any more.

You people are fed a diet of lies and more lies. If a lie is told often enough, it becomes fact. If the facts supporting the lie are themselves believable, the legitimacy of the lie grows with it..

As is the case with your media. If the media, especially Hollywood, gets in on the act, legitimate facts are changed to suit American politics or are used to portray America as the No 1 Hero on the block.

So when Colin Powel sat behind his desk in the Security Council meeting and held up a plastic bottle and declared that it contained a sample of Anthrax developed by Saddam Hussein and smuggled out of Iraq, they and the rest of the world (backed by American lies) believed him.

That you (America) don't declare wars is true. You did not declare war on Iraq or Afghanistan, yet your country - aided and abetted by mine, did invade those two countries.

I suppose one could forgive the naievity of the American people as a whole, and one could forgive the stupidity of the American military's top
'thinkers and planners' but let's face it, you deserve each other.

On the one hand the great US public believes what the President, his Generals and their media machines tell them whilst on the other, they simple cannot believe or want to believe, that their President, his military and civil leaders have got it so awfully wrong.

Can the US win a modern, conventional war against a similar opponent? No, I believe not.

In the next few years, we will see the world's eventual superpower emerge and that will be China - on her own or as a co-operative union with India.

Meanwhile should America ever be foolish enough to try to stamp it's dwindling authority on the world's stage and bring even so called rogue countries like Iran or N Korea to heel through some kind of military action, I suspect that the great American public would turn their backs on her leaders.

It's not only military might and technology that can win wars, it's also the public's opinion and their will to continue the conflict against ever mounting casualties.

No amount of lies or propoganda can ever disguise the number of flag draped metal boxes or the convoys of ambulances that take the maimed to hospital.

As for being the most civilised country in the world - yeah, right!



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
No, I'm not under that impression. US special forces are good for surgical strikes against specific targets, Spetsnaz are good for mass terrorism and massacre. Russia has much more experience experiencing REAL terrorism within its boarders, and so they've adapted by exploiting the same tactics against their enemies. They are not really limited in their capability since they are only controlled by the autonomous powers of the Russian FSB; the Russian government doesn't even have to give them orders.


Got a point. More like US Special Forces are actual "special forces" and Spetsnaz are like "Get in there and raise hell"?



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by mattifikation
That sounds more like the Rangers than the Special Forces. Two separate things there. I wouldn't doubt the Special Forces' ability to carry out "terrorism" missions, however I think they'd be more likely to go after military targets than civilian targets. That bit might just be wishful thinking on my part, though.


Well, neither Rangers or SF are instructed to do "terrorism" missions, as you said. SF is about unconventional warfare against military targets; their whole deal is to get the civilians on their side, not to blow them up.



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


Would that not terrify you, if you were the enemy?



posted on Aug, 16 2009 @ 08:20 PM
link   
the real question isnt "can the US win a war", but "can the citizens of the US win a war against the government"?

i have a strong feeling that the next huge war we get into isnt going to be cause by some other country. most of the time, its not another country.. its our own government that likes to start wars and tell the people some lame reason for going to war.

this time around, you need to ask "am i prepared to defend myself and fight back" if the time comes to that?






top topics



 
6
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join