You can't take a credit for winning it in that manner when they had 20 nukes pointed at different locations in the world including major cities under a button. To my opinion they gave up because they migt of been more sane than people that kept on provoking.
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Is the middle east becoming a modern Vietnam?
Poll
Is the middle east becoming the new Vietnam?
| Yes | 41% | 41% - 47 | ||||
| No | 28% | 28% - 32 | ||||
| Don't know/Don't care | 6% | 6% - 7 | ||||
| Go fuck yourself | 24% | 24% - 28 | ||||
| Total: 114 | ||||||
Not sure how much provocation was going on, and as I said - whether they collapsed their own or as a result of us is a seperate conversation. Reference Bismark comment for further analogy.alpinestar wrote:
You can't take a credit for winning it in that manner when they had 20 nukes pointed at different locations in the world including major cities under a button. To my opinion they gave up because they migt of been more sane than people that kept on provoking.
Except that the US could attack Russia (USSR, rather), but not vice versa. And once the USSR collapsed, there wasn't really any nuclear threat to the NATO powers.alpinestar wrote:
You can't take a credit for winning it in that manner when they had 20 nukes pointed at different locations in the world including major cities under a button. To my opinion they gave up because they migt of been more sane than people that kept on provoking.
It dosen't make sense, Who " provoked " the USSR ? No one !
It was a Scummy Country and we are all glad its Gone. For all the people and countries Who claimed
" the USSR is misunderstood, USSR mothers love their Babie's Too ! "
No one Not one person " mourned their loss of power or tried to prop them up when the collapse began.
That is becuase Deep inside, every hypocrite liberal Knew the USSR was Evil."
and that is why we Wraped it up and bought all their old nukes and destroyed them, To keep them fom falling into the Wrong hands.
It was a Scummy Country and we are all glad its Gone. For all the people and countries Who claimed
" the USSR is misunderstood, USSR mothers love their Babie's Too ! "
No one Not one person " mourned their loss of power or tried to prop them up when the collapse began.
That is becuase Deep inside, every hypocrite liberal Knew the USSR was Evil."
and that is why we Wraped it up and bought all their old nukes and destroyed them, To keep them fom falling into the Wrong hands.
lmao good question!!!PspRpg-7 wrote:
Haha, why'd you put 'go fuck yourself'?
The US did dump nukes in a ring around them. That's a somewhat........aggressive move.Horseman 77 wrote:
It dosen't make sense, Who " provoked " the USSR ? No one !
Yes and no. It's lot better for many of the people who were under it, but there are lots of people who miss a second superpower balancing stuff out.Horseman 77 wrote:
It was a Scummy Country and we are all glad its Gone.
Just to show how not misunderstood they are: why do you think Stalin conquered all those countries on the Russian border?Horseman 77 wrote:
" the USSR is misunderstood, USSR mothers love their Babie's Too ! "
I'll bet the Cubans did. That's one. I'm sure we could find a second if we really tried.Horseman 77 wrote:
No one Not one person " mourned their loss of power or tried to prop them up when the collapse began.
Yeah........AFAIK there weren't a whole lot of Liberals singing the USSR's praises.Horseman 77 wrote:
That is becuase Deep inside, every hypocrite liberal Knew the USSR was Evil."
Define "wrong hands".Horseman 77 wrote:
and that is why we Wraped it up and bought all their old nukes and destroyed them, To keep them fom falling into the Wrong hands.
Horseman 77 wrote:
It doesn't make sense, Who "provoked "the USSR? No one !
We dumped them? The missiles in Europe were not Deep strike, those were Silo'd in the Interior USA. The USSR had a very large numerical advantage in Medium and Short range Mobile Launchers. Next!Bubbalo wrote:
The US did dump nukes in a ring around them. That's a somewhat........aggressive move.
Horseman 77 wrote:
It was a Scummy Country and we are all glad its Gone.
Balancing it out? The USA did not need balancing, After W.W.II it could have easily laid low every other Threat and potential threat. It did not. Nor did it expand its borders. Next !Bubbalo wrote:
Yes and no. It's lot better for many of the people who were under it, but there are lots of people who miss a second superpower balancing stuff out.
Horseman 77 wrote:
" the USSR is misunderstood, USSR mothers love their Babbie's Too ! "
Because they were Weakened from years of war and he exploited it to expand his empire. People dug tunnels Drove bulldozers thru and sailed balloons over his barriers and did anything to escape him. Next!Bubbalo wrote:
Just to show how not misunderstood they are: why do you think Stalin conquered all those countries on the Russian border?
Horseman 77 wrote:
No one Not one person "mourned their loss of power or tried to prop them up when the collapse began.
You mean Castro. Please stay current, Cubans come here floating on inner tubes, in Trucks and cars lashed to 55 gal. Drums. They always have. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. they risk their lives to try and many don't make it. Next !Bubbalo wrote:
I'll bet the Cubans did. That's one. I'm sure we could find a second if we really tried.
Horseman 77 wrote:
That is because Deep inside, every hypocrite liberal Knew the USSR was Evil."
They ( like you ) were the only people who supported them, Just like your words Below.Bubbalo wrote:
Yeah........AFAIK there weren't a whole lot of Liberals singing the USSR's praises.
Sorry Mr. liberal, but those are your own words. Next !Bubbalo wrote:
there are lots of people who miss a second superpower balancing stuff out.
Horseman 77 wrote:
and that is why we Wrapped it up and bought all their old nukes and destroyed them, To keep them from falling into the Wrong hands.
People that would use them for Evil. Next !Bubbalo wrote:
Define "wrong hands".
Last edited by Horseman 77 (2006-06-23 11:21:17)
[qoute=CameronPoe]Is the middle east becoming a modern Vietnam?[/qoute=CameronPoe]
Would this be in the sense that China is backing the Iraqis, the terrorist are wearing uniforms, the dense jungles of Iraq, we are fighting the spread of communism through Asia, there is a draft in America, there are high casualties in Iraq, a democrat started the war, the use of agent orange, America is restraining itself from venturing into "North Iraq" which is controlled by the communists, there are 550,000 US troops in Iraq, or the fact that Ho Chi Mein's government was defeated in a day and Ho Chi Mein went into hiding until he was caught and put on trail?
I see so many similarities, can you be more specific before you give the impression that it's just the same old hippie wanna bes that say every war is another Vietnam just so they can protest it like in the "glory days".
Yeah, go hemp.
Would this be in the sense that China is backing the Iraqis, the terrorist are wearing uniforms, the dense jungles of Iraq, we are fighting the spread of communism through Asia, there is a draft in America, there are high casualties in Iraq, a democrat started the war, the use of agent orange, America is restraining itself from venturing into "North Iraq" which is controlled by the communists, there are 550,000 US troops in Iraq, or the fact that Ho Chi Mein's government was defeated in a day and Ho Chi Mein went into hiding until he was caught and put on trail?
I see so many similarities, can you be more specific before you give the impression that it's just the same old hippie wanna bes that say every war is another Vietnam just so they can protest it like in the "glory days".
Yeah, go hemp.
LOL I love sarcasm. +1 for you. The Jungles or Iraq are dangerous you know. Life expectansy is 18 sencond for a new replacement in Iraq.....just like it was in Vietnam dont you know. I mean we use agent orange over there too and all....i mean come on look at all the bushes we get to kill. 2.5k deaths in iraq compared to the 50k+ deaths in Vietnam. Come on people wake the hell up there is no comparison in these 2 wars. I mean shit the dems are complaining about this war when they started fucken vietnam. I guess since they didnt start it though that automatically makes it an unjust war. Also go back through history and see which party has started more wars....hint it isnt the republican party. Anyone heard of the Bay of Pigs disaster. Thank JFK(Dem) for that massacre. Tried to have Castro assasinated and ended up getting troops killed.Major_Spittle wrote:
[qoute=CameronPoe]Is the middle east becoming a modern Vietnam?[/qoute=CameronPoe]
Would this be in the sense that China is backing the Iraqis, the terrorist are wearing uniforms, the dense jungles of Iraq, we are fighting the spread of communism through Asia, there is a draft in America, there are high casualties in Iraq, a democrat started the war, the use of agent orange, America is restraining itself from venturing into "North Iraq" which is controlled by the communists, there are 550,000 US troops in Iraq, or the fact that Ho Chi Mein's government was defeated in a day and Ho Chi Mein went into hiding until he was caught and put on trail?
I see so many similarities, can you be more specific before you give the impression that it's just the same old hippie wanna bes that say every war is another Vietnam just so they can protest it like in the "glory days".
Yeah, go hemp.
what do you mean by "is it becoming?" It already is!! Same as all of america's wars since the ww2.
ƒ³
Soo I guess that means we lost the Korean War, Gulf War I, Bosnia, Libya, and a few other small conflicts huh. Makes a crapload of since to me....not. Cold War even ring a bell...and yes there were skirmishes between US and USSR during the cold war. We won that one. Only few that i can think of as having been losses would have been Somalia (Not sure outcome on this), Bay of Pigs (JFK), and the fight for Panama(Oh wait we won that one too). Then of course vietnam...which realistically was won after the Tet Offensive but political unrest forced us to pull out.oug wrote:
what do you mean by "is it becoming?" It already is!! Same as all of america's wars since the ww2.
MONEY MONEY MONEY.....Thats why a state of war exists there in the first place. A large state (Example: USA) needs to have continuous low level conflicts around the world to support some of its industries such as weapons technology. OIL also is something that powerful states need to control to control transport needs for the world..................THE WRITING IS ON THE WALL FOR EVERYONE TO SEE
Um our weapons industries dont need wars to have constant business. We sell to foreign countries as well as in our own. The military also has plenty of contracts for these companies to improve gun and bullet designs as well. As for the us being there for oil....ignorance. We have Kuwait, Alaska, Texas, Oklahoma, Phillipines to name a few as resources for oil. Even mass amounts of oil offshore in the Gulf of Mexico. Your right in large nations needing oil....but we have no say on what Iraq does with its oil. Their government is the one in control of that not us. Oh i forgot to mention Saudi Arabia as an oil supplier, Venezuela and a few other South American countries.hilltop2bit wrote:
MONEY MONEY MONEY.....Thats why a state of war exists there in the first place. A large state (Example: USA) needs to have continuous low level conflicts around the world to support some of its industries such as weapons technology. OIL also is something that powerful states need to control to control transport needs for the world..................THE WRITING IS ON THE WALL FOR EVERYONE TO SEE
The point was that the US could strike the USSR with nukes, the USSR could not strike the US. And when the USSR tried to get that ability (Cuba), the US just about went to war.Horseman 77 wrote:
We dumped them? The missiles in Europe were not Deep strike, those were Silo'd in the Interior USA. The USSR had a very large numerical advantage in Medium and Short range Mobile Launchers. Next!
Uh-huh.........so why were Americans worried about a Soviet invasion of Europe, and why did they have so much trouble in Vietnam (regardless of whether you felt the US won or lost, you have to admit that they didn't do anything "easily")Horseman 77 wrote:
Balancing it out? The USA did not need balancing, After W.W.II it could have easily laid low every other Threat and potential threat. It did not. Nor did it expand its borders. Next !
What the hell do people trying to escape the USSR have to do with why it was created???? Those countries were claimed as a buffer zone: Russia spent many years being attacked on several fronts, and that was Stalins solution. So, I guess you did misunderstand a little after all, eh?Horseman 77 wrote:
Because they were Weakened from years of war and he exploited it to expand his empire. People dug tunnels Drove bulldozers thru and sailed balloons over his barriers and did anything to escape him. Next!
Sure, but I'll bet life was a hell of a lot better for those that couldn't get out when the Russians were sending aid.Horseman 77 wrote:
You mean Castro. Please stay current, Cubans come here floating on inner tubes, in Trucks and cars lashed to 55 gal. Drums. They always have. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. they risk their lives to try and many don't make it. Next !
Which doesn't mean I miss the USSR, but rather wish it had been replaced with another superpowerHorseman 77 wrote:
They ( like you ) were the only people who supported them, Just like your words Below.Sorry Mr. liberal, but those are your own words. Next !Bubbalo wrote:
there are lots of people who miss a second superpower balancing stuff out.
Oh, yes. Because the US never does anything wrong. Ever.Horseman 77 wrote:
People that would use them for Evil. Next !
Exactly, no comparison, the answer to this post would be a resounding no.(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:
What an original idea. Comparing IRAQI FREEDOM to Vietnam. No comparison, old topic.
EDIT: American Military Casualties in Iraq
Date Total In Combat
American Death
Since war began (3/19/03): 2503 2019
Since Capture of Saddam (12/13/03): 2038 1713
Since Handover (6/29/04): 1637 1387
Since Election (1/31/05): 1067 902
American Wounded Official Estimated
Total Wounded: 18490 20000 - 48100
Latest Fatality June 16th, 2006
Vietnam over 58,800 casualties. Vietnam was a country being Invaded by the Communist Government that took power therein the North, unlike the democratic govt of the South. We know why we are in IRAQ. We have a mission militarily to be there. What do you want the United Nations to take over militarily. I seriously hope not. The conflicts in the Middle-East that you are worried about, is only a part of the current world events. We can't just pull out, and we will not pull out until the mission is safe to stand down. Oh and one more thing . We Will Win. Period.
" The USSR could not strike the USA " WTF ??Bubbalo wrote:
The point was that the US could strike the USSR with nukes, the USSR could not strike the US. And when the USSR tried to get that ability (Cuba), the US just about went to war.
Does everyone see this ? This may be my last response to bubalo as it seems he really has no grasp at all on reality.
This is not an insult just a cold observation, Brutal honesty at the most.
perhaps you didn't read. The USSR could strike the USA. Somehow you missed forty years of history, Oh well, big surprise, what year are you in ? Missiles that could reach into the interior of the USSR ( not her Client states ) were ICBMs. Intercontinental (get it ? ) which would have been launched from the USA over the Pole. Check it out, don't make me be redundant.
Horseman 77 wrote:
Balancing it out? The USA did not need balancing, After W.W.II it could have easily laid low every other Threat and potential threat. It did not. Nor did it expand its borders. Next !
Because the soviets were very aggressive They had already grabbed East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Poland, etc Jesus! I can't believe I have to even say this.Bubbalo wrote:
Uh-huh.........so why were Americans worried about a Soviet invasion of Europe,
Because not being an aggressive nation we only wanted to contain them in Korea, Vietnam, Europe, not attack and occupy. This left them every possible advantage as they could change and constantly adapt to overcome our static defense and hold the line tactics. Advances in technology favor the attacker. If we wanted to do anything more we could have knocked any of the above flat, Seeded it with grass and sent over some buffalo.Bubbalo wrote:
and why did they have so much trouble in Vietnam (regardless of whether you felt the US won or lost, you have to admit that they didn't do anything "easily")
Horseman 77 wrote:
Stalin moved easily into eastern Europe because they were Weakened from years of war and he exploited it to expand his empire. People dug tunnels Drove bulldozers thru and sailed balloons over his barriers and did anything to escape him. Next!
Yes 3 yearsBubbalo wrote:
What the hell do people trying to escape the USSR have to do with why it was created???? Those countries were claimed as a buffer zone: Russia spent many years being attacked on several fronts,
I understood and it is a weak assed argument and it seems everyone ( except you ) have all ready rejected it.Bubbalo wrote:
and that was Stalin's solution. So, I guess you did misunderstand a little after all, eh?
A Buffer Zone?
So that is a valid excuse to invade and oppress several countries and occupy them for 45 years, Because you need a buffer zone? You are not a liberal, you are an ardent of communist. Why is this? Communism is dead. It wasted generations of lives. Get with the program
Horseman 77 wrote:
You mean Castro. Please stay current, Cubans come here floating on inner tubes, in Trucks and cars lashed to 55 gal. Drums. They always have. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. they risk their lives to try and many don't make it. Next !
Not if you asked them. If The USSR could not make its own people within its borders content and stop them from trying to escape, you think they could do any better in a third world client state thousands of miles distant? It defies logic. They try to escape now and they tried to escape then, How do you miss all this. what do they teach you in your school?Bubbalo wrote:
Sure, but I'll bet life was a hell of a lot better for those that couldn't get out when the Russians were sending aid.
Sorry Mr. liberal, but those are your own words. Next !Bubbalo wrote:
there are lots of people who miss a second superpower balancing stuff out.
Yes, we believe you,Bubbalo wrote:
Which doesn't mean I miss the USSR, but rather wish it had been replaced with another superpower
Horseman 77 wrote:
People that would use them for Evil. Next !
There is a big difference between wong and Evil. Everyone makes mistakes. Can you tell me a more altruistic nation. Or a nation that had it within their power to easily subdue the world and its enemies and didn't? While your at it can you ever tell me Three American leaders who could be called "murderous " I never saw your repley to that one.Bubbalo wrote:
Oh, yes. Because the US never does anything wrong. Ever.
Last edited by Horseman 77 (2006-06-24 12:04:20)
lol tucker you really think you won all these wars? hahahaha
Take Bosnia for example... What exactly did you win there? The US forces were so scared of moving in, they hired the albanians to do it for them! You settled on air bomb strikes remember? Gulf War I? I don't remember saddam going anywhere... Or maybe that wasn't the goal back then... And how about Lybia? What did you win there? The biggest army in the world and you went to fight lybians... m16s vs shovels. Big win there.
Dont get me wrong though, the government did get what they wanted out of these wars, otherwise they wouldn't 've done 'em in the first place. But winning wasn't it. Like someone else said, you got an industry to feed. So don't be so happy. Your country had losses you don't even know about. And how could you since your media is just a government tool for mass manipulation. (and btw they're doing a great job at keeping you in the dark).
Take Bosnia for example... What exactly did you win there? The US forces were so scared of moving in, they hired the albanians to do it for them! You settled on air bomb strikes remember? Gulf War I? I don't remember saddam going anywhere... Or maybe that wasn't the goal back then... And how about Lybia? What did you win there? The biggest army in the world and you went to fight lybians... m16s vs shovels. Big win there.
Dont get me wrong though, the government did get what they wanted out of these wars, otherwise they wouldn't 've done 'em in the first place. But winning wasn't it. Like someone else said, you got an industry to feed. So don't be so happy. Your country had losses you don't even know about. And how could you since your media is just a government tool for mass manipulation. (and btw they're doing a great job at keeping you in the dark).
ƒ³
Personaly I thought we still had troops in that region, but thats ok buba put em there.oug wrote:
lol tucker you really think you won all these wars? hahahaha
Take Bosnia for example... What exactly did you win there? The US forces were so scared of moving in, they hired the albanians to do it for them! You settled on air bomb strikes remember? Gulf War I? I don't remember saddam going anywhere... Or maybe that wasn't the goal back then... And how about Lybia? What did you win there? The biggest army in the world and you went to fight lybians... m16s vs shovels. Big win there.
Dont get me wrong though, the government did get what they wanted out of these wars, otherwise they wouldn't 've done 'em in the first place. But winning wasn't it. Like someone else said, you got an industry to feed. So don't be so happy. Your country had losses you don't even know about. And how could you since your media is just a government tool for mass manipulation. (and btw they're doing a great job at keeping you in the dark).
Good thing you have all the " Real information " Since we have no Idea how to win wars, perhaps you and your country can show us some shining examples. Please ?
Yeah, but their oil is harder to get and daddy never fought with them.alpinestar wrote:
Maybe it's time america started picking on someone their own size say Russia they have weapons of mass destruction I think they would fuck Rice in the butt if she came over there for nuclear resolution talks lol.
BUt in all seriousness, I totally support our military. I may not support the decisions that are made for them, so far as where they are. Sure saddam was a threat and all that other debatble stuff. But the only person to have orchestrated an attack on american soil (and many other countries of course) is Osama. And he's still hangin out in the mountains with his dialysis machine. Mostly this war and the vietnam war are similar since they both just give/gave these people an easier way to kill americans.
just my opinions......thats all.
Last edited by MaximaRX (2006-06-25 13:04:53)
Vietnam - started with an attack on a US vessel (see: Golf of Tonkin Resolution).
Iraq War - started with an attack on US soil (see: USA Patriot Act and following declaration of War)
Vietnam - fought to liberate the South Vietnamese from the oppressive force of the North Vietnamese Communists.
Iraq War - fighting to liberate the Iraqis from the oppressive force of Muslim extremists.
Vietnam - most of military fighting is done against guerilla units - VietCong = insurgents.
Iraq War - fighting guerrilla insurgents.
Vietnam - Instituted a draft to meet troop ceilings in country.
Iraq War - Does not use draft (yet) - is content on calling reservists into Active Duty and then extending their tours of duty past what they originally were sent in for.
Vietnam - Communist forces (both guerilla and NVA) supplied by Russia.
Iraq War - Fighters backed by multi-million dollar terrorist organizations - most common weapons used are of Russian make/model.
The next thing we'll probably hear is something about "Peace with honor" or something borderline to what Nixon said, and then a promise of troop ceilings dropping.
If you can't see the similarities, you haven't looked at the whole picture.
Iraq War - started with an attack on US soil (see: USA Patriot Act and following declaration of War)
Vietnam - fought to liberate the South Vietnamese from the oppressive force of the North Vietnamese Communists.
Iraq War - fighting to liberate the Iraqis from the oppressive force of Muslim extremists.
Vietnam - most of military fighting is done against guerilla units - VietCong = insurgents.
Iraq War - fighting guerrilla insurgents.
Vietnam - Instituted a draft to meet troop ceilings in country.
Iraq War - Does not use draft (yet) - is content on calling reservists into Active Duty and then extending their tours of duty past what they originally were sent in for.
Vietnam - Communist forces (both guerilla and NVA) supplied by Russia.
Iraq War - Fighters backed by multi-million dollar terrorist organizations - most common weapons used are of Russian make/model.
The next thing we'll probably hear is something about "Peace with honor" or something borderline to what Nixon said, and then a promise of troop ceilings dropping.
If you can't see the similarities, you haven't looked at the whole picture.
Sorry man i can't do that, although my country was once the world's greatest power just like yours is today. All i can say is that they fucked up then just like you fucked up now. Its just the way things go...Horseman 77 wrote:
Since we have no Idea how to win wars, perhaps you and your country can show us some shining examples. Please ?
Honestly though, if it hadn't been for those damn preemptive wars that followed 9/11, i must say i would prefer the americans being the world's most powerfull than anyone else. Cause if you think about it, americans are quite soft... or so they have me thinking... Imagine what it will be like in a few years when the Chinese take up that role. (No use denying it, its their turn)
ƒ³
oh oh just came up with a way to win a war horseman77... Do NOT get involved in one.
And please tell the arrogants that surround you, what exactly do you mean when you say that the USSR were evil? You mean like the devil or sth? Booo im shakin
cant believe that a grown man can go on living thinking he's the good guys and the others are the bad guys. Grow up!! You watch too many hollywood action movies.
And please tell the arrogants that surround you, what exactly do you mean when you say that the USSR were evil? You mean like the devil or sth? Booo im shakin
cant believe that a grown man can go on living thinking he's the good guys and the others are the bad guys. Grow up!! You watch too many hollywood action movies.
ƒ³
So we shouldn't have enterd WWII by you account? We wouldn't be fighting over the same people now?
EVIL
Evil like after WWII they kept the Allied prisoners they had liberated from the Germans as a bargaining chip for Power and control in Post war Europe. When FDR and his contemporaries were more than fair with him. The Hostages became an Embarrassment to him, so they never came home. We only found out about it in 1996.
Stalin killed more jews by 1939 ( 7 million ) than Hitler did By 1945. Evil enough for you kid?
so please refrain foam trying to sound Tuff, Scary, Wise, Important, Potent, knowledgeable, Masculine, etc
" Add you own "
You apparently don't have enough to work with yet.
Usaully I Ignore minors as a rule. Sorry all !
EVIL
Evil like after WWII they kept the Allied prisoners they had liberated from the Germans as a bargaining chip for Power and control in Post war Europe. When FDR and his contemporaries were more than fair with him. The Hostages became an Embarrassment to him, so they never came home. We only found out about it in 1996.
Stalin killed more jews by 1939 ( 7 million ) than Hitler did By 1945. Evil enough for you kid?
so please refrain foam trying to sound Tuff, Scary, Wise, Important, Potent, knowledgeable, Masculine, etc
" Add you own "
You apparently don't have enough to work with yet.
Usaully I Ignore minors as a rule. Sorry all !
Last edited by Horseman 77 (2006-06-26 08:15:30)
What country do you speak for?oug wrote:
Sorry man i can't do that, although my country was once the world's greatest power just like yours is today. All i can say is that they fucked up then just like you fucked up now. Its just the way things go...Horseman 77 wrote:
Since we have no Idea how to win wars, perhaps you and your country can show us some shining examples. Please ?
Honestly though, if it hadn't been for those damn preemptive wars that followed 9/11, i must say i would prefer the americans being the world's most powerfull than anyone else. Cause if you think about it, americans are quite soft... or so they have me thinking... Imagine what it will be like in a few years when the Chinese take up that role. (No use denying it, its their turn)
We will out last China to just like the USSR. We heard all the Same lines from them and their ilk for 50 years.
They are just huge third world country of slaves. China's biggest threat is from he own people anyway. They wont stay down for ever.
PS Get comfy in the Dumpster of history with the USSR, but Stake out your turf as it will get crowded when the Chinese join you.
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Is the middle east becoming a modern Vietnam?