BLU
Active topics


  2. An exception though: I cant wait till the USD gets stronger. My freelance salary (paid in USD) suffers very badly
  3. Originally posted by wtshnnfb01:[..]

    First off, we used nukes to prevent greater casultys on both sides. Second off, like Russia woulnd't have nuked Berlin if they had beat us to it.


    Yes, in the end less people died thanks to it l, but you can't say dropping an atomic bomb on a city full of civilians is a good thing.
  4. Originally posted by yuri31:[..]

    Yes, in the end less people died thanks to it l, but you can't say dropping an atomic bomb on a city full of civilians is a good thing.


    Bad things happen in war. Nothing you can do about it. Personally, I believe war should be fought as violently as possble, and it reminds people of the horrors, and keeps them from starting another one.

    Also, anyone else ever notice how yesterdays enemie always turns into tommorows ally?
  5. Originally posted by wtshnnfb01:[..]

    Bad things happen in war. Nothing you can do about it. Personally, I believe war should be fought as violently as possble, and it reminds people of the horrors, and keeps them from starting another one.

    Also, anyone else ever notice how yesterdays enemie always turns into tommorows ally?


    So Afghanistan will joint forces with the US to invade Pakistan?

  6. Originally posted by wtshnnfb01:[..]

    Bad things happen in war. Nothing you can do about it. Personally, I believe war should be fought as violently as possble, and it reminds people of the horrors, and keeps them from starting another one.

    Also, anyone else ever notice how yesterdays enemie always turns into tommorows ally?


    Interesting point of view Aaron, but the way I see it, the more violent you guys go in Iraq, there is more reason for extremists to attack you. These people always have their revenge, whether they deserve it or not, what they believe is their rightful revenge will happen, whether it is cursing a soldier or throwing a stone or flying a couple of planes into a couple of towers.

    I see the extremist propaganda even in Iran increase dramatically when your soldiers do something violent, and I hate that. This guy they have declared our president is an extremist as well, and if you listen to his speeches he always gives examples of violence by the US and Israel, and how they have plans to destroy Islam, and that's how he's fooling the lower class people to support him and to not want to be friends with the west.

    About yesterday's enemies and today's allies, that could be true, tho I've seen vice versa as well. Israel was Iran's greatest ally in the region till the revolution, now they are Iran's greatest enemy in the world. Iraq and Saddam were supported by the US in the 80s, and look how that one turned out. And yet they are your friends now...it just goes to show that you can't count on anything when it comes to war and politics.
  7. Originally posted by Ali709:[..]

    Interesting point of view Aaron, but the way I see it, the more violent you guys go in Iraq, there is more reason for extremists to attack you. These people always have their revenge, whether they deserve it or not, what they believe is their rightful revenge will happen, whether it is cursing a soldier or throwing a stone or flying a couple of planes into a couple of towers.

    I see the extremist propaganda even in Iran increase dramatically when your soldiers do something violent, and I hate that. This guy they have declared our president is an extremist as well, and if you listen to his speeches he always gives examples of violence by the US and Israel, and how they have plans to destroy Islam, and that's how he's fooling the lower class people to support him and to not want to be friends with the west.

    About yesterday's enemies and today's allies, that could be true, tho I've seen vice versa as well. Israel was Iran's greatest ally in the region till the revolution, now they are Iran's greatest enemy in the world. Iraq and Saddam were supported by the US in the 80s, and look how that one turned out. And yet they are your friends now...it just goes to show that you can't count on anything when it comes to war and politics.


    I was just commenting on how fickle global alliances are. I mean look at Japan nowadays. Sure, we nuked them, and they commited some of the most heinous war crimes of the second world war against our troops, but now there arguebaly our biggist ally in Asia. Also, the keeping war violent thing only works against sain leaders.

    In any case, I think you country may be on the verge of a civil war, in which case all the US has to do is sit back, and support the side we like with supplies, airstrikes, and Green Berets to provide training. If it dont work out well, a conventional ground campaign would be just as effective a few years down the road. Possibly more so, since our enemies numbers will have been drained, and the u.S. military is upgrading much of its equipment over the next few years.
  8. Originally posted by wtshnnfb01:[..]

    I was just commenting on how fickle global alliances are. I mean look at Japan nowadays. Sure, we nuked them, and they commited some of the most heinous war crimes of the second world war against our troops, but now there arguebaly our biggist ally in Asia. Also, the keeping war violent thing only works against sain leaders.

    In any case, I think you country may be on the verge of a civil war, in which case all the US has to do is sit back, and support the side we like with supplies, airstrikes, and Green Berets to provide training. If it dont work out well, a conventional ground campaign would be just as effective a few years down the road. Possibly more so, since our enemies numbers will have been drained, and the u.S. military is upgrading much of its equipment over the next few years.


    no thank you.


  11. Actually I really dont picture a full ground campaign. I more or less picture a series of Direct Action Missions.

    Something I dont think we have ever discussed. Does anyone else think that the U.S. should have stayed in Somalia after the Black Hawk Down incident? Every military acount ever written agrees that fater that battle we had the advantage. The American Policticians just didn't have the stomach. If theres one country America should have styaed the course, thats diffinently it.
  12. Originally posted by wtshnnfb01:[..]

    Actually I really dont picture a full ground campaign. I more or less picture a series of Direct Action Missions.

    Something I dont think we have ever discussed. Does anyone else think that the U.S. should have stayed in Somalia after the Black Hawk Down incident? Every military acount ever written agrees that fater that battle we had the advantage. The American Policticians just didn't have the stomach. If theres one country America should have styaed the course, thats diffinently it.


    I could not disagree more.

    I believe there is nothing more severely anti-American than foreign interventionism and entangling alliances. It is in the constitution, back in the 90's something Republicans had the balls to care about.

    But, with the resurgence of Libertarian Republicanism, perhaps there is light at the end of they very long government tunnel,
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.