The differences between America and Europe - Page 9

Pekka · June 24, 2002, 15:04

What what stupid about my argument? Yeah sure you can kill millions easily, anyone can do that, just let the fighters go and carpetbomb. Even easier, just launch full nuclear attack.

DanS, Yeah sure. I think i can agree with most of that. There should be a real fight against a good defender (which Iraq has to be excluded) and a good air force. Before that it's maybe just guessing.

Saint Marcus · June 24, 2002, 15:06

Quote:

Saint Marcus also doesn't know jack

And you are a fountain of wisdom

the sole difference between you an me is that I know I'm talking ****, whereas you're still in denial.

Rather sad how some people see the USA as this big megabeast, capable of destroying half the world with conventional weapons without much difficulty or setbacks. Rather stupid too.

DanS · June 24, 2002, 15:08

Heaven help us should we come to know whether we were right or wrong, even though we have to make sure that we are right. With these kinds of weapons, Stalin math looks almost parochial.

Az · June 24, 2002, 15:11

hey Marcus, can I quote you on that one ?

what's wrong with my arguement? don't you think that American Daizy cutters would cause some heavy damage to Canton , Shanghai , Beijing? I know that there are many Chinese cities, but there are also lots of american bombers.

Pekka · June 24, 2002, 15:14

Yes... Stalin also thought if he send million men in our tiny country, they'd run it over in a matter of days. And thousand fighters would bomb the hell out of it. He was wrong. Even with superior weaponry. It's just not that simple

.

edit: dalgetti, you sound like Stalin

.

Ned · June 24, 2002, 15:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Roland
"- the increasing independence of Europe (although they like to say it is the US that ignores them);"

Some may say that. For my taste, you can't ignore us enough as long as you don't get in our way.

"- the weakness of Europe to handle affairs even in Europe"

Then get out of europe and don't try blocking our integration.

"- the unwillingness to help the US defend itself"

You can have any help in defending yourself. But we don't feel like having people killed for dubya's reelection.

Roland, we simply can't be acting at cross purposes can we? If the United States is under threat of nuclear attack from Iraq, Europe should not be selling the materials needed to make nuclear weapons to Iraq. Our security interests are really intertwined.

With respect to United States interfering with Europe's internal affairs, where is coming from?

Finally, I would wholly agree that not one European should lose his life simply to advance the reelection of a US President. However, if there is a consensus view of both US parties on a course of action and the need European support, I hope you will be there for us.

BTW, Europe was there for us in the Gulf War even though the Democrat party was 100% opposed to the war. European support was well appreciated.

Ned · June 24, 2002, 15:21

Saint Marcus, why are you so anti-American?

Az · June 24, 2002, 15:21

pekka : he didn't have daizy cutters.

Ned · June 24, 2002, 15:26

On the China question, we had enough of the Chinese in the Korean War. We don't want to second helping -- ever!

However push came to shove, would probably fight a war in China much the way Cortes fought the Aztecs or we recently fought the Taliban. We would ally with enemies of the central government while providing command and control, and logistical support. We will find allies who would be willing to join our cause because our objective would not be to conquer China, but the liberate it.

Pekka · June 24, 2002, 15:37

dalgetti, and you say i have stupid arguments?

If you can't see the points, then you are not answering the real questions. Well.. if that wasn't irony of course.

Az · June 24, 2002, 15:40

hey , where did you see arguments? I'll edit them out , as soon as possible.

Panag · June 24, 2002, 16:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Dalgetti
hey Marcus, can I quote you on that one ?

what's wrong with my arguement? don't you think that American Daizy cutters would cause some heavy damage to Canton , Shanghai , Beijing? I know that there are many Chinese cities, but there are also lots of american bombers.

hi ,

an advanced fuel air device shall do more damage , ....

the US would win such a war , aldo , it would have to be "free" , no second front , ...

and it would need at least 3-4 carriers extra , then it would need about 8-10 type 741 subs extra , ....

, lets see , ah , find a trade partner for the same amount and at the same price , of loads of goods ,...

oh yeah ; public support , ..... that shall be a key point , ...

, everything there , ....

allas , maybe we might see the use of theater nuke's , ....that shall be fun , ....

have a nice day

panag > orders 25 cases of banana's , just in case , retreats to the bunker , ....just in case (!)

Saint Marcus · June 24, 2002, 17:22

Quote:

hey Marcus, can I quote you on that one ?

Sure

I'm not deluded enough to actually believe the crap I post.

Quote:

Saint Marcus, why are you so anti-American?

cause it suits me.

I'm a real playa hater.

and it's hilarious to see people react to crap I post.

Ned · June 24, 2002, 17:51

Yeah, it always seemed to me, Saint Marcus, that your own brand of anti-Americanism was really good natured. There are some here, though, that are very serious about it.

Az · June 24, 2002, 17:58

His brand is called trolling, Ned.

Saint Marcus · June 24, 2002, 18:00

haha. thanks

don't know if it is good natured though. Just awfully annyoning.

anyway, who is really serious about it? Serious and overly bigotted? I can think of nobody really. Some are serious, and moderate. Others are bigotted, but not very serious.

Saint Marcus · June 24, 2002, 18:03

Quote:

His brand is called trolling, Ned.

yup

Ned · June 24, 2002, 19:14

Back on topic for moment, couldn't part of problem in Europe be that they do not have a single command structure supported by all European countries "evenly?" No single European country can hope to match Russia, United States, China or India in power. As a result, the Europeans have an economic incentive to reduce military spending as much as possible, and rely instead upon the United States to take care of the "big picture."

This could and probably would change if the Europeans had a single Armed Forces.

Pekka · June 24, 2002, 19:19

Ned, I actually agree with you 200%. IMO that is excatly the problem and nothing else to it. To establish such command is tough though, and i have to be pessimist about it, i think it would take decades to make it really work and get the best out of it. Sadly enough, i think it'll take at least 50 years to work, maybe more, not less.

Saint Marcus · June 24, 2002, 19:45

integration is essential, and will happen over time. though it's not a priority yet.

Roland · June 25, 2002, 03:14

Dan:

"While I believe his aversion to use of force is a little odd, I'm sure he would return the sentiment."

I'm against wag the dog wars. For a list of use of force:

- Iraq 1990/91 - yes
- Bosnia - yes
- Kosovo - undecided
- Afghanistan - yes
- Iraq now - opposed

Wonder where you see a general aversion to use of force there.

Ned:

"Roland, we simply can't be acting at cross purposes can we?"

The US government behaves like it wouldn't matter to them. Why not try finding out ? Btw, the same cross purposes exist wrt Israel-Palestine. Dubya's last speech was useless at best, and we have no interest in a major ****-up there.

"With respect to United States interfering with Europe's internal affairs, where is coming from?"

European Monetary Union, EU military integration. The US has and is trying to undermine it. problem is they have to do it silently and success is limited.

"However, if there is a consensus view of both US parties on a course of action and the need European support, I hope you will be there for us."

If there is a consensus to happily walk into Iraq right now, than it is a consensus of dangerous lunatics. No thanx.

DinoDoc · June 25, 2002, 03:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Roland
I'm against wag the dog wars. For a list of use of force:

- Iraq 1990/91 - yes
- Bosnia - yes
- Kosovo - undecided
- Afghanistan - yes
- Iraq now - opposed

What are your reasons for supporting or being opposed to those actions?

Kropotkin · June 25, 2002, 03:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Dalgetti
Kropo : they're just a sect. "muslim feminists"...

How should you know, You shot 'em all at sight in good jewish style.

Roland · June 25, 2002, 03:46

"What are your reasons for supporting or being opposed to those actions?"

Weighing risks and benefits. With the current instability in the ME it is nuts to mess it all up with a war against Iraq, especially after Bush engaged in another round of heavy Sharon ass-kissing. Maybe he just misread his instructions of "ass-kicking" ?

Kropotkin · June 25, 2002, 03:57

And isn't moving more troops into a Saudi-arabia with a large anti-american population just asking for terrorism? I presume that's the place the should go to for a war against Iraq.

Az · June 25, 2002, 04:41

nice trolling , Kropo.

. I guess americans deserved that the WTC attacks.

Roland · June 25, 2002, 04:53

Dalgetti, there is a difference between causation and any moral verdict like guilt or "deserved".

Roland · June 25, 2002, 04:54

Apart from your avatar. That one's guilty of bad taste without further ado.

notyoueither · June 25, 2002, 05:25

America will win the conflict with radical Islam through strength. Agressors respect nothing else.

P_ussy-footing around active supporters of terrorism will get you nothing but ten-fold increases in terrorism. Smacking them down, hard is the only solution.

Show muslims sympathetic to the lunatics that the path they are on leads only to misery and suffering for their own families. They will cease to support the fanatics.

Remove all illusions of any possible victory. Then what would be the point?

Kropotkin · June 25, 2002, 05:32

Dal.: No it was not a troll. It was a short and simple way of pointing out that the US isn't popular in Saudi-arabia and it might not be to easy to start a ground war against Iraq this time around. As you might have noticed Osama Bin Ladin is saudian...

It hasn't to do with morals at all.