Liberal-Sl@yer
Certified BF2S Asshole
+131|6905|The edge of sanity

ATG wrote:

You call it funding terror, I call it the price of doing business in Colombia.
Not to get on your case or anything but couldn't the exact same be said when we funded the warriors of god in afghanastan during the 80's when they were invaded by the Soviet Union? Oh, well i guess the administration at the time didn't realise that the lesser of two evils was not really the lesser of two evils.

*TANGENT*
But really the dissolvation of the Soviet Union was not as benificial as the United States and NATO had hoped. In fact the Soviet Union kept our "now" enemies in check. All the soviets had to do was press thier tumb on North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, Iran, and China to bend them to thier will. If we had kept the Soviets in for longer with a slow transition instead of the eruption and dissolvation that it was then it would have been better not only for the countries in question but also for the United States as well.
/*TANGENT*
lowing
Banned
+1,662|7100|USA

Turquoise wrote:

Good points, lowing.  I was actually about to post something like that.

Most societies that exist today were not indigenous to the areas they currently reside in.
LOL< Thanks, but bubbalo doesn't talk to me anymore and even if he did, he would have never conceded to the point anyway.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|7010

lowing wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

ATG wrote:


No ROE, no living witnesses.

No problem.

If they were fully unleashed.
You really are a fool if you think that.  An indigenous forces will always win eventually, excepting surrender.  And I doubt they'll surrender.
Hmmm, the American Indians didn't win. I don't think the Aborigines won against you either, did they???
Point taken.

A further proviso ought be added relating to huge technological imbalances, and forces who are into genocide.

The Aborigines never mounted a determined defence, so they're covered by "excepting surrender".
lowing
Banned
+1,662|7100|USA

Bubbalo wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:


You really are a fool if you think that.  An indigenous forces will always win eventually, excepting surrender.  And I doubt they'll surrender.
Hmmm, the American Indians didn't win. I don't think the Aborigines won against you either, did they???
Point taken.

A further proviso ought be added relating to huge technological imbalances, and forces who are into genocide.

The Aborigines never mounted a determined defence, so they're covered by "excepting surrender".
Oops, my previous post was wrong. Good to see you are talking to me again anyway.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|7010
No, it was right, it's just that half of it had an implication that was wrong.............sort of......................

I'm not an idiot, honest.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|7100|USA

Bubbalo wrote:

No, it was right, it's just that half of it had an implication that was wrong.............sort of......................

I'm not an idiot, honest.
I noticed that, I apologize for being wrong when I said that you stopped talking to me.

Last edited by lowing (2007-03-23 18:00:53)

TrollmeaT
Aspiring Objectivist
+492|7121|Colorado
https://www.alvarezwaxmodels.com/Images/Film%20Images/wak-neek-sculpt.jpg
Anybody wanna bannana?

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard