White Doors Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 Waning, or they're smart enough to realize that if they tone it down the Americans will leave... Gee, sounds like heads they win, tails we lose. Neat how that works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 (edited) Hold on. When "straight up combat" is brought up - often the declarant is speaking of a knife fight, rather than unfair use of technology. ??? My Dad can beat up your Dad? Is this what this thread has come to? Unfair? Wtf?? Edited January 8, 2008 by White Doors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 ???My Dad can beat up your Dad? Is this what this thread has come to? Unfair? Wtf?? I believe what the Suluco means is, when some one says straight up combat, they envision the two sides equally matched where in reality the US has no equals. In other words their hypothetical reality is not reality at all, the the US does what every tactician would do, use the assets and reources to overwhelm and dominate the battlefield. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 I believe what the Suluco means is, when some one says straight up combat, they envision the two sides equally matched where in reality the US has no equals. In other words their hypothetical reality is not reality at all, the the US does what every tactician would do, use the assets and reources to overwhelm and dominate the battlefield. Yes, I know. But how far out there is that? This isn't an episode of American Gladiator or the World of Warcraft. Sometimes you think you are talking to adults and this crap comes out. boggles the mind sometimes is all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 Sometimes you think you are talking to adults and this crap comes out.boggles the mind sometimes is all. You realize Sully was refering to Keng?> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 Hold on. When "straight up combat" is brought up - often the declarant is speaking of a knife fight, rather than unfair use of technology. It's a war not a golf match, there is no unfair use of technology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulaco Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 Yes, I know. But how far out there is that?This isn't an episode of American Gladiator or the World of Warcraft. Sometimes you think you are talking to adults and this crap comes out. boggles the mind sometimes is all. You misunderstand. I critiquing Kengs for his claim that in a "straight up fight" the US would not "fare near as well" as people believe. Rither kangs is talking about knife fighting in which case he is correct but his comment is irrelevant, or he is talking about full deployment of assets, in which case I am not sure what to make of his statement except that it strains credulity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 (edited) delete Edited January 8, 2008 by White Doors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 You misunderstand. I critiquing Kengs for his claim that in a "straight up fight" the US would not "fare near as well" as people believe. Rither kangs is talking about knife fighting in which case he is correct but his comment is irrelevant, or he is talking about full deployment of assets, in which case I am not sure what to make of his statement except that it strains credulity. gotcha, my mistake. a quote around 'unfair' would have made it clearer for me. thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 Remember, many of the insurgents that they engage in firefights consist of men and boys who wear no body armour and have substandard weaponry. Whatever the case, the greatest deficiency is the quality of the American soldier--they are not what they used to be, that's for sure. These are people taken out of highschools from impoverished parts of the country, people who have difficulty finding work, people who need money and don't know what they want to do in life. Utter nonsense....are we to believe that conscripts of wars past we markedly more intelligent and capable? Today's recruits are highly motivated to do what they do, in and out of the service, with no more failings than any other cross section of American occupations. Once they get in combat, they can't hack it, and once they finally get out of the military they have a slew of mental illnesses/emotional disorders. The whole concept of citizen soldiers may have been realistic back in 1776 or 1861, but things have changed, and expecting men from a consumeristic, liberal-democratic society to make good soldiers is ridiculous. Well, the "concept" was a good enough idea to kick your king in the ass and make it stick. The same concept works for Canada today. I don't think you know what "hack it" means. Note, I stated that China and Russia could give the Americans a run for their money, not Iran. Sure, right after they swim across the Pacific Ocean. Not only have the Americans projected power around the world, thay have the will to do it. China and Russia....not so much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 gotcha, my mistake.a quote around 'unfair' would have made it clearer for me. thanks I did a post graduate degree in understanding Sulaco...believe it or not, he has a legalistic mind. Hey Sunoco, by any chance do you still peroxide your hair blond to mislead the opposition? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulaco Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 I did a post graduate degree in understanding Sulaco...believe it or not, he has a legalistic mind.Hey Sunoco, by any chance do you still peroxide your hair blond to mislead the opposition? Har har har. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 (edited) This is hilarious. Who has more right to be in the area? The US Navy so far from home and yet if anybody buzzes them with a speedboat, it's an international incident. Condy, piss off. Edited January 8, 2008 by Higgly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulaco Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 This is hilarious. Who has more right to be in the area?The US Navy so far from home and yet if anybody buzzes them with a speedboat, it's an international incident. Condy, piss off. International waters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 International waters. And so if some jackass tells us that the Northwest Passage is "International Waters" what should we think? Thanks for your input. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 And so if some jackass tells us that the Northwest Passage is "International Waters" what should we think?Thanks for your input. Are you suggesting that the Straits of Hormuz are contested? Or you just feel the need to throw irrelevant and egregious analogies about without considering the consequences to your reputation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 Are you suggesting that the Straits of Hormuz are contested? Or you just feel the need to throw irrelevant and egregious analogies about without considering the consequences to your reputation? Of course they are contested. That has nothing to do with my reputation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 Of course they are contested. That has nothing to do with my reputation. Really now? Please source this international dispute. Who is contesting the Straights of Hormuz? Iran? No....Oman? No.....UAE? No...... What body of the UN has the contest been filed with? Your reputation hasn't improved.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 Really now? Please source this international dispute. Who is contesting the Straights of Hormuz? Iran? No....Oman? No.....UAE? No......What body of the UN has the contest been filed with? Your reputation hasn't improved.... Why don't we all take a moment to look at a map? And what do we see on the shores of the Straits of Hormuz? Do we see anything inside of the Beltway? Do we see anything inside of the Eastern Seaboard? Do we see any part of the United States of America? Do I see M.Dancer hoisting Condy Rice on a pike pole? Do we see anything that might give the US a legitmate claim to the waterway? Enquiring minds want to know. And by the way. China is holding your currency hostage and the price of gold is climbing.... Barak Obama. Maybe. Good luck. You had a window of opportunity when Russia crashed. The window has closed. Don't get me wrong. I am not delighted to see this. There is gonna be a lot of sacrifice ahead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 Why don't we all take a moment to look at a map? And what do we see on the shores of the Straits of Hormuz? Do we see anything inside of the Beltway? Do we see anything inside of the Eastern Seaboard? Do we see any part of the United States of America? Do I see M.Dancer hoisting Condy Rice on a pike pole? Do we see anything that might give the US a legitmate claim to the waterway? Enquiring minds want to know. The US isn't restricting anyones access to the Strait of Hormuz except Al Queda and other terrorist organizations. On the contrary, they are guaranteeing access to ships of all countries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 The US isn't restricting anyones access to the Strait of Hormuz except Al Queda and other terrorist organizations. On the contrary, they are guaranteeing access to ships of all countries. Well isn't that just hunky dory. I personally am guaranteeing access to the Orion Nebula. Enjoy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 Well isn't that just hunky dory. I personally am guaranteeing access to the Orion Nebula. Enjoy. It is hunky dory, there are many nations which depend far more on oil from the Gulf than the US. My guess is they are not unhappy to see US and other NATO ships in the area. You are guaranteeing nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulaco Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 I forget. What was the name of the last national entity which was forced to use explosive packed speed boats against the US Navy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 The whole concept of citizen soldiers may have been realistic back in 1776 or 1861, but things have changed, and expecting men from a consumeristic, liberal-democratic society to make good soldiers is ridiculous. Ding ding ding! New candidate for most ridiculous statement right here. Do you actually have a clue what you're talking about, or do you just pull this stuff out of your, ummm, hat? Go to youtube and search Canadians in Afghanistan. You'll find videos of the boys in action. The Red Devils on patrol get ambushed by a numerically superior foe. A firefight ensues. They're outnumbered about ten to one and at the end of the battle the tally stands at 0 Canadian casualties and over a hundred enemy dead. Pretty inferior fighting men eh? You'll see highly disciplined, trained and motivated men laying down devastating fire. Not with some superior weaponry either, small arms, grenades and a single Coyote. You'll find similar videos of British and American troops laying the smack down on the foe. Now how does any of this support your baseless and farcical assertions as to the inferiority of our troops? Answer. It doesn't. It merely serves to show that you are spouting off crap with no basis in fact what so ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moderateamericain Posted January 9, 2008 Report Share Posted January 9, 2008 This is such a non-issue, just like that hostage situation with the Royal Navy. Even if there was some shooting, neither side would use it as a pretext for war since neither side really wants a war at this point. The Americans are all bluff; their military isn't half as good as they make it out to be--one of the few things that the war in Iraq has proven. thats a joke right. we have a little over 3000 dead fighting basically police action at this point in a "war" that has lasted longer than world war 2. Have you ever looked at the confirm body counts for iraqi or afghani fighters? I'd say we are kicking fucking ass over there. The United States armed forces is the cream of the crop. No force in the world could match it. But what about CHINA you say. Sure they have the manpower but they dont have the ability to project that force. In a conventional battle in this day in age, nobody in the whole wide world would stand a chance against the US. And to think otherwise is comical at best. (since somebody is going to say it, I am not talk about the use of nuclear devices which would be akin to mass suicide for any country to use on us.) You might wanna keep up on current US arsenal vs rest of the world. You will see that save probably the United Kingdom, nobody is even close to as advance as us. In modern warfare its not the numbers that count, its how mobile is it and how fast can you respond. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.