As long as America is in war, there will be new apache night vision insurgent killing videos.
It's fucking awesome.
Good news everyone!
[QUOTE=paul simon;26285100]Good news everyone![/QUOTE]
What is it? Tell me, tell me, tell me!
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvNUBgylj3U[/media]
Hideo, oh mighty oracle! Another prediction is coming true!
Even the Roman Empire didn't last forever.
Needz moar realpolitik
[QUOTE=Killoch0;26279122]I would say there is a difference between british imperialism and american world policing.[/QUOTE]
So America doesn't try to force it's 'democracy' on to other countries?
[QUOTE=Arachnidus;26279765]Throughout history, all the major nations of the world were constantly at war. Rome, Russia, Han China, Japan, the British Empire. It just so happens that the US has less land mass than almost all of them, yet has more world influence then everyone combined.[/QUOTE]
iirc just after the second world war there was a short window of time where everywhere was at peace
[QUOTE=Radman;26286525]Even the Roman Empire didn't last forever.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but they didn't enforce rules for an abstract third party like the UN. They went around conquesting every single nation they encountered and then assimilated them into their glorious empire.
Odds are it's a mixed bag to do that. On one hand it's alot of power and land, and on the other you set yourself up for insurrection and overextending yourself.
Only time will really tell if that is what made them last so long or if that was a weakness.
[QUOTE=The golden;26282424]No, war is neither of those things. War is just fucking stupid. It solves nothing. Killing other humans solves jack-shit. It just creates more problems.[/QUOTE]
War is highly productive, brings countrymen together thus patriotism skyrockets, unleashes world tension, and in some cases brings peace. War is necessary, war is business, and business is good.
[QUOTE=GunFox;26282027]Unless it is China who decides to go all WWII Germany and rape Europe and Japan before the US decides to do anything about it. In which case....oops?[/QUOTE]
Err, how would China be able to do anything all the way over in Europe?
I swear, Americans and maps...
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;26287909]iirc just after the second world war there was a short window of time where everywhere was at peace[/QUOTE]
There was, everyone felt genuinely good, and just before all the "dirty commies" and "capitalist pigs" shit came along, it didn't matter if you support communism or capitalism, men were brothers even if they've never seen each other before, everyone was simply in a good mood to have stopped the fascist fucks and things are finally calmer. I wish the world would've stayed that way for more than just a year or so before the Cold War came along.
Yeah, Post WWII was a pretty good time for a year or two. Everyone had accomplished something immense as a group, and they had done it for a general idea of freedom and self-rule. It was about as close to global peace as we'll probably get for a while.
[QUOTE=Melnek;26288165]War is highly productive, brings countrymen together thus patriotism skyrockets, unleashes world tension, and in some cases brings peace. War is necessary, war is business, and business is good.[/QUOTE]
Because Vietnam made everyone wave American flags back home.
War drains resources, drains tax money, drains lives. War is never good for a country. Even Sun Tzu put in his Art of War, "No country benefits from prolonged warfare". I believe it's in the later chapters if you really want to look it up, though I haven't reread the book in a while.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;26289815]Because Vietnam made everyone wave American flags back home.
War drains resources, drains tax money, drains lives. War is never good for a country. Even Sun Tzu put in his Art of War, "No country benefits from prolonged warfare". I believe it's in the later chapters if you really want to look it up, though I haven't reread the book in a while.[/QUOTE]
Vietnam wasn't a war, it was a conflict. Also I hardly classify US waving their dicks in conflicts that do not belong to them as "wars".
[editline]25th November 2010[/editline]
It's not as black and white as to say, "war is bad/good" it has some the majority of cons yet also has some significant pros.
[QUOTE=Melnek;26290116]Vietnam wasn't a war, it was a conflict.[/QUOTE]
War is defined as armed conflict.
[QUOTE=Melnek;26290116]Also I hardly classify US waving their dicks in conflicts that do not belong to them as "wars".[/QUOTE]
... so, it's now the "Vietnam dick-waving conflict"? I always thought it was called the Vietnam [I]war[/I].
[QUOTE=jA_cOp;26290211]War is defined as armed conflict.[/quote]
A war is a conflict but a conflict is not necessarily a war.
[QUOTE=jA_cOp;26290211]... so, it's now the "Vietnam dick-waving conflict"? I always thought it was called the Vietnam [I]war[/I].[/QUOTE]
The only reason the US joined the Vietnam was to supposedly support their western and democratic allies, aka the same fucking excuse they use each time they invade a country or get involved in a war that does not belong to them.
[QUOTE=Melnek;26290432]A war is a conflict but a conflict is not necessarily a war.
[/QUOTE]
:geno:
[QUOTE=Melnek;26290432]A war is a conflict but a conflict is not necessarily a war.[/QUOTE]
Obviously, the keyword is [I]armed[/I]. Are you really denying that the Vietnam war was an armed conflict?
[QUOTE=Melnek;26290432]The only reason the US joined the Vietnam was to supposedly support their western and democratic allies, aka the same fucking excuse they use each time they invade a country or get involved in a war that does not belong to them.[/QUOTE]
No, it was part of the containment policy against the spread of communism. That was the main motivation.
[QUOTE=Melnek;26290432]A war is a conflict but a conflict is not necessarily a war.[/QUOTE]
It was a conflict untill the war started, then it was an armed conflict.
[QUOTE=jA_cOp;26290811]Obviously, the keyword is [I]armed[/I]. Are you really denying that the Vietnam war was an armed conflict?
No, it was part of the containment policy against the spread of communism. That was the main motivation.[/QUOTE]
It's still not a damn war, as the US did not wish to eliminate the entire country, nor did the congress officially announce a war, it was just trying to stop communism's advance and spread, as you've said. Therefore it is an invalid example to be brought up when I said this
[QUOTE=Melnek;26288165]War is highly productive, brings countrymen together thus patriotism skyrockets, unleashes world tension, and in some cases brings peace. War is necessary, war is business, and business is good.[/QUOTE]
[I]Everyone[/I] considered it to be a war, even at the time.
[editline]25th November 2010[/editline]
Also we'd be much better of in a kind of world peace than lots of wars.
[QUOTE=Melnek;26291531]It's still not a damn war, as the US did not wish to eliminate the entire country, nor did the congress officially announce a war, it was just trying to stop communism's advance and spread, as you've said. Therefore it is an invalid example to be brought up when I said this[/QUOTE]
You argue semantics too much.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;26291578]You argue semantics too much.[/QUOTE]
Excuse me for trying to be historically correct.
-snip-
'War on Terrorism' is already an endless war. Terrorism has been around since the Crusades (Hassissins, etc.) and predated even earlier, you can't just sign an instrument of surrender on a warship and say that you defeated Terrorism.
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;26292711]'War on Terrorism' is already an endless war. Terrorism has been around since the Crusades (Hassissins, etc.) and predated even earlier, you can't just sign an instrument of surrender on a warship and say that you defeated Terrorism.[/QUOTE]
It's as useless as the "war on poverty" to throw money around domestically at pointless projects.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;26293468]It's as useless as the "war on poverty" to throw money around domestically at pointless projects.[/QUOTE]
like health care or food stamps?
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;26295033]like health care or food stamps?[/QUOTE]
Just as there is always terrorism, there will always be poverty of some kind. To "fight" it by handouts will just drain money. Its better to reinvigorate the economy and create jobs as a tactic instead of setting up charity programs.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;26295163]Just as there is always terrorism, there will always be poverty of some kind. To "fight" it by handouts will just drain money. Its better to reinvigorate the economy and create jobs as a tactic instead of setting up charity programs.[/QUOTE]
many situations were the person can not work.
also also socialism kinda takes out the poor
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.