• Create Account

    In less than 1 min, By registering, you'll be able to discuss, chat, share and private message with other members of our community. All 100% free

    SignUp Now!

Russian President: Obama a 'thinker... unlike other people'

yam? it's like all those debates where suddenly you change the subject or try to distract etc because you're getting beat. that's getting yammed. you have a right to make whatever associations come into your head as just the natural first relations you make when you think of things. you don't have to try to keep asking if i'm gay. it's never gonna happen but be you son, try hero of you two haven't already.

we stands for americans. when a war is won we win. the military is not by themselves and civilians are not the fan club. go to school. learn your history.

you ain't out there defending the country in any way shape or form, so what are you talking about? military? you? you think bulletproof vests would be the deciding factor in a one on one war sans nukes between the us and russia. oh yeah not to mention you don't even know where afghanistan is located!
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif
roflmao.gif


he was right obama's smarter. we are in a better position. less nukes in a stockpile between the two countries that could destroy the globe many times over really doesn't make a difference anyway.

sorry, but thanks son.

country-distribution-2008.png


to put it more clearly into context russia is actually behind china, france and the uk in spending when compared to us. it's simply the way it is. no whacky tim mcviegh conspiracy theories can change the numbers.

(good site steve)
 
okay, but i believe you are really missing the mark guy. i think the point is you need to first demonstrate exactly the vests we use currently and exactly the kind the russians use. troof essentially said despite the fact we spend $711 billion on our military and they spend $70 billion if we remove nukes we need to look at before anything else vests. so you need to show how in a war between us and the russian federation one on one sans nukes how vests would be the deciding factor as to who wins given all the other variables. it's a ridiculous argument dude you should back out and just let him keep digging his own grave.

try the math.

(lol)

thanks and b waitin...



I am going to try and understand your words "" if ""I can .You can use this link to find out more about the vest .http://www.google.com/ .

What is this ? one on one sans nukes

Are you trying to say ? What effects that vest would be after a nuke war ?
 
to put it more clearly into context russia is actually behind china, france and the uk in spending when compared to us. it's simply the way it is. no whacky tim mcviegh conspiracy theories can change the numbers.


It took a pie chart to figure that out ?
 
He was trying to say that the country that spends the most money militarily always wins the war, but that has proven not to be the case many times throughout history.

Then we were trying to break down the numbers to find out what exactly the money was being spent on- housing, testing, legal, weapons, salary... etc.
 
I am going to try and understand your words "" if ""I can .You can use this link to find out more about the vest .http://www.google.com/ .

What is this ? one on one sans nukes

Are you trying to say ? What effects that vest would be after a nuke war ?

ask your boy truth he decided that even though we outspend them by hundreds of billions, that's non intelligence agencies like cia, bullet proof vests would be the main things we should look at if the war were one on one sans (meaning without) nuclear weapons. you actually do get it thouh you don't quite see it. it makes no sense and troof knows it that's why he's back to posting childrens photos instead of discussing the issue. vests will not be making the sole difference. not even close.
 
It took a pie chart to figure that out ?

the original debate was about who benefits more with a reduction of nukes. the answer is we do. t=nukes are known as the great equalizers. there was a time after ww2 when yeah we needed to worry about russia. now? things are much different. the only reason we have to fear them really is nukes. even the numbers of counties sympathetic to them more than us or even equally has been reduced to nothing. china itself are closer to us than them. soon cuba is sure to be a growing ally as well. nukes benefit them. that's what the charts do is they do more than show hot air and talk. they back up that talk.

you're right troof is wrong.
 
Lets talk about if I raced my car against Jimmie Johnson's, but first we remove the engine in his NASCAR.
 
ask your boy truth he decided that even though we outspend them by hundreds of billions, that's non intelligence agencies like cia, bullet proof vests would be the main things we should look at if the war were one on one sans (meaning without) nuclear weapons. you actually do get it thouh you don't quite see it. it makes no sense and troof knows it that's why he's back to posting childrens photos instead of discussing the issue. vests will not be making the sole difference. not even close.


If this world had no nukes just conventional weapons . The vest would be a major part of the military uniform . Like it is today for combat ready troops . They do save lives .

As I have said the military budget is very large and expensive to maintain . The biggest difference between Russia's military budget and and the US . is the advancement of weapons . Russia will use a ax to do what the US uses a scalpel for . That technology is not cheap .I do understand what your saying .
 
Did we ever answer the question: how many times have nukes been used in war and how many times has body armor been used in war?
 
the original debate was about who benefits more with a reduction of nukes. the answer is we do. t=nukes are known as the great equalizers. there was a time after ww2 when yeah we needed to worry about russia. now? things are much different. the only reason we have to fear them really is nukes. even the numbers of counties sympathetic to them more than us or even equally has been reduced to nothing. china itself are closer to us than them. soon cuba is sure to be a growing ally as well. nukes benefit them. that's what the charts do is they do more than show hot air and talk. they back up that talk.

you're right troof is wrong.


The whole world would benefit from not having nukes . The reason the US and Russia are the 2 top country's that try to reduce them is because they have the most .
 
How many nukes did Vietnam have during our war with them? If they didn't have nukes we would of won that war in a few months- I mean with how much more money we spend militarily than they do right???

:)
:)
:)
 
09-25-2003, 11:13
If we consider our own advice: "Don't bunch up - one round will get you all", then we'd realize that tactical nukes would not have helped.

Politically and morally, nukes are for "in extremis" use. Militarily, since the NVA did not "bunch up", they would not have served. It was rare when we could catch them in the open in significant numbers, and even then, not in the numbers/size/mass where nukes would offer an advantage. Further, there would be a long time lag for command authorization for release on any target.

The use on Japan was justified and necessary. As proven by the losses at Pelelieu, Iwo, and Okinawa, and with Japan showing no evidence of backing off even after the defeat of Germany, a necessary invasion of Japan itself would have cost a million or more of us, and millions of them.

What should have worked in Vietnam was cutting off their lines of supply at the source rather than trying to disrupt them somewhere along the line on jungle trails.

If LBJ had mined Haiphong Harbor, as Nixon later did, and if North Vietnam's entry points (sea and rail) had been interdicted (blockaded) early on, then we might have weakened the flow enough to find, fix, and destroy them.

A little political pressure on the non-involved nations who were supplying them would have helped too.
 
I think it's the history channel that has a show on the book Art of War and touches on Vietnam- pretty interesting stuff.
 
Registrarse / Join The Forum

Mexican Forums

Ad

Back
Top