Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: muckmaw on April 16, 2004, 10:42:05 AM
-
Alright, so I'm exagerating a bit, but here's an interesting item I heard last night on talk radio.
Now, break out your tin foil hats, cause it's quite a ride...
According to a commentator who's name I cannot recall, there is a reason Bush is adamantly sticking to the June 30 transition of power.
Apparently, the people we are fighting in Iraq are not Iraqi's. Though this has long been theorized, the people attacking US troops are Syrian and Iranian agents and regulars.
They are motiviated by the fear of having a puppet state of the US next door.
But here's Bush's deal, according to this commentator.
As of June 30th, Iraq is a soverign nation. If Syrians and Iranians cross the border to fight, Iraq can delcare war on either or both countries. Who will Iraq ask for help if they start fighting?
The US, of course. Now, would the US jump at an excuse to take out Syria and Iran?
Are we getting set up for another war?
It sounds like something out of left field...or right field, as the case may be.
My biggest objection would be that GWB would not start ANOTHER war before the November elections..
Anyway, I hope the tip foil hat helped.
-
I smell troll...(sniffs the air again...)
-
And they say Bush is a dummy. Sounds like a pretty good plan to me. :aok
-
Thats frikken awesome. War rules.
-
Lol, kind of ironic, Iraq conqueres the middle east. "We have to get saddam!, he's a threat to his neighbors!" Let's hope the next Iraqi leader we help gets the job done.(and doesn't turn on us like a rabbid doberman)
-
Hmmm, maybe Kuwait was just an excuse to go after Hussein? Maybe the real reason was because he failed to whup Iran? ;)
Someone call the Illuminati so we can get the real poop on this.
-
"As of June 30th, Iraq is a soverign nation. If Syrians and Iranians cross the border to fight, Iraq can delcare war on either or both countries. Who will Iraq ask for help if they start fighting?"
Um? The undermanned and pinned down US forces in Iraq who'd be hard pressed to fight the guerrilla's and insurgents and at the same time fight the Iranian or Syrian armed forces too? Don't forget to realize that neither Syria nor Iran had the snott kicked out of them over a decade ago as Iraq did.. Said snott kicking which Iraq never recovered from.
Regardless of that. Why even bother with a dog & pony show like that? After all everyone "knows" Saddams' WMD went to Syria right? And Syria is notorious for supporting terrorists.
While Iran has held westerners hostage in the past, supported terrorists too and had failed to comply with thier nuclear obligations.
So there are even MORE reasons to attack Syria and Iran than there ever was for the invasion if Iraq last year.
So why wait?
-
Originally posted by Westy
So why wait?
Relax grasshopper. In due time Syria and Iran will be dealt with.
-
By who? Swedish volunteers, such as yourself, making up some international "Bush Brigade" or the "LeiberRumsfeld Division"to fight alongside the US/UK forces in the Middle East?
-
Originally posted by Westy
Um? The undermanned and pinned down US forces in Iraq who'd be hard pressed to fight the guerrilla's and insurgents
That statment speaks volumes, Westy.
I never thought anyone could be so misguided in their assessment of the Iraqi Situation.
You really believe the we're pinned down and undermanned, or are you just hoping we are?
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
You really believe the we're pinned down and undermanned, or are you just hoping we are?
Relax, muck. "Pinned down and undermanned" is just another way of saying "surrounding the insurgents."
-
we are not undermanned over there. as for who is all there fighting, well i searched dead pallastines (how do you spell that), syrians, and some jordanians. and we watched iranians moving over the borders. as for the iranians, they were grabbing up land. and im sure that their secret services were planting moles in the villages along their border. everyone wants a peice of the pie over there. im tired of hearing people saying that we are getting handled over there by a bunch of rag bag fighters. we have to keep it politically correct so the rest of the world wont cry. its too bad that some innocent people are getting caught up in the cross fire (which im sure that the insurgents are happy about). if we could take off the political hand cuffs and do what we do best, this problem can be contained in no time. :aok
-
Originally posted by 101ABN
we are not undermanned over there. as for who is all there fighting, well i searched dead pallastines (how do you spell that), syrians, and some jordanians. and we watched iranians moving over the borders. as for the iranians, they were grabbing up land. and im sure that their secret services were planting moles in the villages along their border. everyone wants a peice of the pie over there. im tired of hearing people saying that we are getting handled over there by a bunch of rag bag fighters. we have to keep it politically correct so the rest of the world wont cry. its too bad that some innocent people are getting caught up in the cross fire (which im sure that the insurgents are happy about). if we could take off the political hand cuffs and do what we do best, this problem can be contained in no time. :aok
Ive been preaching exactly that for months.
I imagine its impossible to to your job when you have a camera at every corner looking to see if you shoot the terrorists in a politically correct manner...
All cameras out, I say.
PS: I'd like to cross post your comments to another board unless you object.
-
I'd like to hear more about what's really going on in Iraq from someone like you who has been there.
Sorry to hear you guys are pinned down and undermanned.:rolleyes:
-
"That statment speaks volumes, Westy. I never thought anyone could be so misguided in their assessment of the Iraqi Situation. "
Really? In reading many different pov's and angles on what the US adminsitration has been doing and what is occuring in Iraq I've come to have completely different opinions than yours. I honestly thought you made up half the crap you write but I now wonder what if your just ignorant, argumentative or your blind and someone else is reading the news to you and having fun putting a really odd spin on things for your undertst.
"You really believe the we're pinned down and undermanned, or are you just hoping we are?"
The US is undermanned and the guerrilla/insurgents have the US forces hands full. As for the "just hoping part" all I can say is your a fediddleing idiot.
Go to Iraq? No need for that. Just read the news and reports from somewhere else besides
http://allIsHunkyDoryforBushandOurTroops.andtheIraqPeopleLoveUs.com
101ABNN your the first person from anywhere to say that. Bush and Rumsfeld yank the homeward bound passes for the 20 thousand troops on thier way home and they are now going to be sending more? So if they are not undermanned it must be that Rummy and Bush want to ensure there are enough troops for a the "June 30th" independence parade for the Iraqi people to cheer for. Or they plan to open Iraq up as an R&R resort for the US armed forces?
-
Gee, Westy...
Your doom and gloom assessment would'nt have anything to do with a certain presidental wannabe who represents your home state in the senate, now would it?
-
That's a mighty moronic and false assumption on your party corky.
-
they are yanking the passes of those that are on the 6 month rotation, like marines for example. i was there for a year with my division and some were going to be there 18 months. they are keeping guys and gals there so the other units can refit. i know for a fact that ill be there again soon. i just got home a month ago and we are running all equipment through Depot level maintenance, and practicing live fire exercises every week. in other words we are gearing up to go somewhere soon. the whole problem started with the rumsfield plan (10 division army). we are spread out so far (korea, japan, bosnia, kosovo, macedonia) so in other words we are fighting wars for a 12-15 division army with a 10 division army.
-
Haven't I been saying this all along?
Man I hate being good...
-
Does anyone honestly think that most of US public and Congress will support another war? I certainly don't.
-
Originally posted by Westy
Um? The undermanned and pinned down US forces in Iraq who'd be hard pressed to fight the guerrilla's and insurgents
You're a joke.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Does anyone honestly think that most of US public and Congress will support another war? I certainly don't.
I agree, the public is war weary already.
Another conflict will surely sink Bush's re-election bid, IMO.
-
"You're a joke."
I win.
-
Originally posted by Westy
That's a mighty moronic and false assumption on your party corky.
You're big on names, huh?
When you're talking about moronic and false statments, this one comes to mind:
"The undermanned and pinned down US forces in Iraq who'd be hard pressed to fight the guerrilla's and insurgents".
You're still a joke, btw.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Does anyone honestly think that most of US public and Congress will support another war? I certainly don't.
There's a lot of people that remember well those 444 days in which Iran held America hostage. Syria has long needed a good bellybutton kikin'. Many American's would support action against these two countries if they invaded Iraq.
-
Like a HO dweeb you resorted right off the bat with with the retort and attack post; " misguided...pinned down and undermanned, or are you just hoping we are?."
Sorry bub. You lost the argument on the merge.
"Now, break out your tin foil hats.."
Heh. You're best bet is to just keep yours on to avoid looking like a tard with topics such as this
-
the whole problem started with the rumsfield plan (10 division army). we are spread out so far (korea, japan, bosnia, kosovo, macedonia) so in other words we are fighting wars for a 12-15 division army with a 10 division army.
All this time I thought it was Clinton who decimated the Army... ya learn something new every day.
:cool:
-
Originally posted by Westy
Like a HO dweeb you resorted right off the bat with with the retort and attack post; " misguided...pinned down and undermanned, or are you just hoping we are?."
Sorry bub. You lost the argument on the merge.
"Now, break out your tin foil hats.."
Heh. You're best bet is to just keep yours on to avoid looking like a tard with topics such as this
You done yet?
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Relax grasshopper. In due time Syria and Iran will be dealt with.
Beautiful.
When will our turn come?... :rolleyes:
Did Sweden vote for the "human rights for terrorists" resolution in the UN together with the US?
-
Originally posted by AKIron
There's a lot of people that remember well those 444 days in which Iran held America hostage. Syria has long needed a good bellybutton kikin'. Many American's would support action against these two countries if they invaded Iraq.
444 days? Hmmm. How long will it be the next time? Just remember, there will be no our muslim battalion.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
There's a lot of people that remember well those 444 days in which Iran held America hostage. Syria has long needed a good bellybutton kikin'. Many American's would support action against these two countries if they invaded Iraq.
Sure maybe many, but no where near most. Heck Bush's approval rating for this war is falling pretty steadily. Can you can you imagine if he went to Congress and said I need another $100,000,000,000+ to have another war? And what's he going to tell them, "Ah, they are an imminent threat to us.". He would get laughed out of the place.
And who would actuall fight the war?
-
And with what army do we expect to fight this war with.. You should check out the fantastic retention levels now that volunteer soldiers have been lied to and stop lossed twice now..
Im shure spirits will be high also especially after doing a year in bosnia, then afganistan then Korea, then iraq, then iraq again.. and then deploy to syria or Iran, or Afganistan..
whole hell of alot time to raise a family no? get that education? heh they are getting an education all right "Be all you can be."
anytroops with brains are going to get the hell out..risk vs reward just isn't there. If there was real threat vs the US then you pull the patriotic card but with no WMD meritless death only goes so far. Note the mass exodus of Special operations for mercenary outfits. what will be left is substandard lackeys who cant navagate.. those are who you trust to fight your wars for you.. Dont get me wrong well have a few crack divsions left but you should do your homework on guardsmen/reservists K/D over regular active troops K/D... its mindboggling.
next thing you know consription will make up 30%-50% of our force and trust me you dont want that.. Rangel is trying to pass a bill to do just that right now...(while i agree with his principles for the draft it would screwup our whole fighting force. and undermine the rest of our troops)
Thats why i said in the other post all those who love warfare so much lets see them enlistment papers, trust me the armed forces are going to need you.
You haven't noticed the recent advertising blitz for aimhigh, full steam ahead and be all you can be.. and they make it look so fun in commercials when reality it is far different:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0416/p01s01-usmi.html
I think the Jarines have retainment but thats about it.. They always have good retainment due to the quality of training they recieve..Honor etc...
Eaglers, Ripsnorts,yeagers Targets,Warmongers R US etc.. still waiting for your scanned images of them enlistment papers. If you sign up now you might get to the combat zone just in time before election and get your vote not counted like in the florida 2000 election...
put your body where your mouth is fellas, then youll get my respect.
America needs warriors like you..
DoctorYo
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
And who would actuall fight the war?
Estonians. They are so thankfull for NATO attack planes patrolling their airspace!
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
And who would actuall fight the war?
If I tell ya I have to shoot ya.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
If I tell ya I have to shoot ya.
By the way..... Don't you think, that Iraq war can be the end of NATO in present view? I mean, that NATO can re-organize into clean European defend system. Without USA and Turkish.
Let's look. The biggiest part of NATO members didn't support USA not in politial way nor in the war. From incident to incident, the part of countries who support USA in their operations is going smaller and smaller. USA can arrive the point when their partners will tell: "Thats all folks. Stop. We can not support you anyway. Your interests became too dangerouse not only for us, but for the whole world. We are out. "
In this case, NATO becoming unnessesary element in a global geopolitical system. Europian countries do not need "protect shield " with the label "Made in USA". Also they don't need american military bases. And sure, they don't need "american strategic interest" with the sight pointed to Europe.
How do you look onto this?
-
Unless america itself is attack we wont be going to war with any other countrys for a while. Unless you guys want to sign up ,and make money appear out of nowwhere to fund it. Also you will need to get support from a country in which half the people feel the president already mislead them on the basis for the invasion of iraq. Any talk of invading syria or iran is just tinfoil talk that makes the people that love war get all excited, and not change the channel.
-
Originally posted by Estel
By the way..... Don't you think, that Iraq war can be the end of NATO in present view? I mean, that NATO can re-organize into clean European defend system. Without USA and Turkish.
Let's look. The biggiest part of NATO members didn't support USA not in politial way nor in the war. From incident to incident, the part of countries who support USA in their operations is going smaller and smaller. USA can arrive the point when their partners will tell: "Thats all folks. Stop. We can not support you anyway. Your interests became too dangerouse not only for us, but for the whole world. We are out. "
In this case, NATO becoming unnessesary element in a global geopolitical system. Europian countries do not need "protect shield " with the label "Made in USA". Also they don't need american military bases. And sure, they don't need "american strategic interest" with the sight pointed to Europe.
How do you look onto this?
Estel, you forgot that NATO regulations have an article making the US a "leading force and main participant", just like Article 6 in Soviet Constitution.
And NATO has one clear and obvious purpose: agression against Russia and it's allies.
Europe is working on it's own armed forces, independant from the US.
I wonder why did France join military NATO alliance in 1999, while there was a strong opposition against slaughter of Yugoslavia among French military?...
-
Originally posted by Estel
By the way..... Don't you think, that Iraq war can be the end of NATO in present view? I mean, that NATO can re-organize into clean European defend system. Without USA and Turkish.
Let's look. The biggiest part of NATO members didn't support USA not in politial way nor in the war. From incident to incident, the part of countries who support USA in their operations is going smaller and smaller. USA can arrive the point when their partners will tell: "Thats all folks. Stop. We can not support you anyway. Your interests became too dangerouse not only for us, but for the whole world. We are out. "
In this case, NATO becoming unnessesary element in a global geopolitical system. Europian countries do not need "protect shield " with the label "Made in USA". Also they don't need american military bases. And sure, they don't need "american strategic interest" with the sight pointed to Europe.
How do you look onto this?
Looks to me like Europe would be saying "Hey thanks for watching our backs against the Russians. Listen, we don't need you anymore, so good luck with that whole war on terror thing."
Nice.
-
Estel, I think I'd like nothing better than for the US to withdraw both her armed forces and money (every cent) to her own shores. We can make new alliances and maintain a smaller defense force. Plenty of money left over to grow our nuclear arsenal. Of course we'll need the resolve to use those nukes in defense of our allies rather than sending troops. Hey, if I'm gonna dream I may as well dream big, right?
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Estel, I think I'd like nothing better than for the US to withdraw both her armed forces and money (every cent) to her own shores. We can make new alliances and maintain a smaller defense force. Plenty of money left over to grow our nuclear arsenal. Of course we'll need the resolve to use those nukes in defense of our allies rather than sending troops. Hey, if I'm gonna dream I may as well dream big, right?
:-) You are forgetting few things. For example, some weapon trading contracts, wich are based on NATO arrangements. What will do USA when EU will say: "we don't need some of your products"? I mean a problem of overproduction crisis. You will go again to fight some bananian republic to get another one commodity market? Or USA will shake a nuclear cudgel? Just I'm trying to understand, what way will be taken.
-
EU not need our products?!? I guess it could happen. ;)
What do we do now? We've long had a trade imbalance with Japan. We haven't fired any shots over this yet and we certainly haven't threatened to nuke them over it.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
EU not need our products?!? I guess it could happen. ;)
And what about steel problem? What about chicken meat? The World Trading Organization made a problem to USA metal sellers, due to lower taxes for export operators. WTO found there infringement of rules of a fair competition. USA goverment said - "We will check it." And nothing happens. Also the next problem will be with the GMP. Genetical modified products can become illegal or go for a limited sale in some countries. Mostly because results found by european scientists are very different from the results of USA scientists. For now EU is going to oblige USA manufacturers to make special marks on their products. But as you understand, this is only beginning.
P.S. Sorry, I'll continue debate with you later. Going to drink some beer with Boroda. Without backpapers :D
-
Maybe you're right Estel. Guess we're gonna need to set up more puppets all over the world. Enjoy your beer. :)
-
Originally posted by 101ABN
they are yanking the passes of those that are on the 6 month rotation, like marines for example. i was there for a year with my division and some were going to be there 18 months. they are keeping guys and gals there so the other units can refit. i know for a fact that ill be there again soon. i just got home a month ago and we are running all equipment through Depot level maintenance, and practicing live fire exercises every week. in other words we are gearing up to go somewhere soon. the whole problem started with the rumsfield plan (10 division army). we are spread out so far (korea, japan, bosnia, kosovo, macedonia) so in other words we are fighting wars for a 12-15 division army with a 10 division army.
I was wondering something from a previous post perhaps you could tell me. What is the ratio of rear echelon troops to infantry boots in the current US Army?
I realise it's probably pretty low for Abn forces but on average what would it be?
Bummer on extensions of a tour btw, happened to a friend of mine in the British army and was told by the Sergeant Major "If you can't take a joke you shouldn't have joined up laddy!!"
Where do they get Sergeant Majors from anyway is there like a factory somewhere stamping them out? Seems like they're all the same no matter which army....
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Estel, I think I'd like nothing better than for the US to withdraw both her armed forces and money (every cent) to her own shores.
Seriously. Can you imagine how much money you would save?
Heck the CIA budget is around 3 billion dollars and the FBI 4.3.
Can you imagine what they could do if of the US government spending 200 billion on the Iraq war if they gave it to those departments?!
It would kick the **** out of the war on terrorism.
Or what about if it went to paying off your debt, or tax cuts. Cripes about half your deficiate this year wouldn't be there.
-
"You done yet?"
Not as much as you are.
Turn em over men. He's starting to blacken too much on that side...
( Dr YO, Thrawn and others :) Well said and beers on me)
-
The only war on terrorism we'd need would be the one within our borders, which by the way we could then afford to secure. Much as I see this as an ideal to be sought, I know it will never happen. Likely it's one of those things like communism, looks good on paper.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
....And NATO has one clear and obvious purpose: agression against Russia and it's allies.....
LOL, yeah like the former Soviets are a threat anymore... your country could not field forces for a week without going into dire straits over simple issues such as supply. Let alone think of what will happen with your lack of training and lack of maintenance... yeah, NATO is quaking in their boots over the Soviet Bear threat!
LMFAO
Originally posted by Boroda
....Europe is working on it's own armed forces, independant from the US....
Yeah, that is going to happen.... who do you suppose will pay for it, and gee, who will run it? The Krauts are a great choice, but do you suppose Holland, Norway, Belgium, Poland are all going to throw their support behind that.... fat chance... to top it off, unless the Brits, Norway, and Belgium go in (not gonna happen) then it is a worthless force with no real bite... keep dreaming Boroda, I know it is hard for you to give up your commie mindset of annihilating the US, but you'd do better hoping to win the Commonwealth of Independant State Lottery....
:rofl
-
Originally posted by DoctorYo:
And with what army do we expect to fight this war with..
Hasn't Bush been talking about re-instituting the draft? That will get him re-elected for sure.
:rofl
-
(http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/images/smilies/yawn.gif)
-
Silly Iranian twit trying to nationalize his country's resources, who was he trying to kid anyhow.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Bodhi, when you get that big US Army surplus boot out of your mouth, read this:
http://www.eurunion.org/legislat/Defense/esdpweb.htm
http://www.tgarden.demon.co.uk/writings/articles/2001/010831bodo.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2574625.stm
France already has one fixed-wing carrier, and plans are drawn up for three more. One more for France, one for the UK and one for Germany in the near future. The French and British are now in the process of working out joint design and production of a European carrier force.
Edit: The European Air Force will be the largest air force in the world, second only to China.
"The EU nations together have elements of all of these air power capabilities. They field some 3235 combat aircraft with a total air force manpower of 380,000. If the NATO non-EU members are added (Czech Republic, Hungary, Iceland, Norway, Poland and Turkey) the numbers rise to 4281 combat aircraft and 530,000 men."
Having the numbers is not the same as being able to use the elements as coherent service. We can't even manage to sort out our agricultural policy, how the hell are we going to organize an Air Force?
History tells us that Europe cannot organize a piss-up in a brewery let alone a modern war-machine.
NATO was created because of the weakness of western (i.e. Democratic) Europe after the war and continues to exist because Europe is not willing to take the strain of looking after itself and it's interests: we would much rather have our welfare states than spend money to build a useful military.
Of the European countries only the UK and France can deploy forces for significant "war-fighting" (to use a horrible american expression) outside their own borders and only then with the support of the US military. Since France is not willing to follow US policy it's forces stay at home or are sent as small detachments, the UK Forces on the other hand have become mere auxilliaries to the US forces: well trained and motivated perhaps, but nowhere near as well equipped or supplied and totally dependent on the parent force for deployment and support.
-
Iran steps in to mediate Iraq crisis as Sadr softens tone (http://au.news.yahoo.com/040414/19/ok86.html)
Shifty buggers those Iranians.....invading Iraq with officials!!!!
Tronsky
-
As I said in another post, the region, then N. africa. It only makes sense, 100 years lapse in manifest destiny is much too long. H.G. Wells is turning like a piggy on a spit I dare say. *Storch beams gleefully* Good news indeed.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Pei, perhaps you should read the second link. Pay special attention to the "Medium Term European Air Power Integration" part.
They can plan all they want. It is not going to be much use because
A) It assumes that Europe will agree on foreign policy (see the last two years for examples of why this won't happen).
B) Almost every joint European venture ends up in squabbling, incompetence, waste and enough red tape to go to the Sun and back.
-
So why dont you sign up for the military storch. If you want america to become an imperial power once again we will need more troops.
Or are you just a coward that will gladly watch others die for your own agenda.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Bodhi, when you get that big US Army surplus boot out of your mouth...
Well there GS, you seem to know all... what is astounding is that you are not leading the EU's long term projections for a sizable military force that will rule the earth for eons....
:rolleyes:
Tell ya what Mr. Smarty, as Pei already put it, you can have all the numbers you want, but it means pizzle when you can not cooperate or project that force. The EU, WILL NEVER agree on a foreign policy, shared expense, or a common goal. Europe has always, and will always remain as squablers that will not find a common ground. Sadly, people such as you will continue to spout out how the world should be and will be, but in the end, you'll end up going down as knotheads that blow hard.
Maybe you'll learn, but I doubt it, that snobby eurotrash attitude is too firmly engrained in your pea brain.
-
The US is the supreme EVERYTHING in the world, hell we are the world. You want a new world order? guess what we are it. now go back in line, shut up and beg for aid like everyone else.
-
So, is everyone agreeing that I was right about this? Even before these reports came out?
-
I dunno but it was a great opportunity.
-
Last time I checked, Norway wasnt even part of the EU...moron.
-
Is paranoid schitsophrenia somekind of collective disease in US ?
hmm gotta buy some Drugs'R'Us stocks...
-
Actually many of us are multiphrenic and yes webe drugs would probably be a good stock to buy....if it existed. now pardon me while i boil some morningglory seeds. if i drink the tea then maybe i'll see things from the europerspective.
-
(http://www.millegratis.com/1m/ag/simpson/simpson_gif_animate_10_abe.gif)
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
Maybe you'll learn, but I doubt it, that snobby eurotrash attitude is too firmly engrained in your pea brain.
I'm pretty fed up of this "Eurotrash" argument.
What about inventing something like : Amerimorron ?
Anyone to propose another derogative term describing all stupid "voice of the neo-con" guys ?
-
Originally posted by straffo
I'm pretty fed up of this "Eurotrash" argument.
What about inventing something like : Amerimorron ?
Anyone to propose another derogative term describing all stupid "voice of the neo-con" guys ?
Ahhh...straffo theres nothing you or I could say to make neo-cons look or sound stupider than they already do themselves... :D
Tronsky
-
Originally posted by -tronski-
Ahhh...straffo theres nothing you or I could say to make neo-cons look or sound stupider than they already do themselves... :D
Tronsky
and Tronski from Oz scores a resounding 9.8 on the retort scale putting the rest of us to shame.....
-
I wanted to participate in this thread until it turned into another USA vs. Europe "neener neener neener" party.
I would, however, like to apologize on behalf of my nation for the storch issue. How he got loose is a mystery.
-
The global village idiot phenomenon is at work in every country, VOR, so no need to apologise. They have different accents but speak the universal language of stupid.
"By who? Swedish volunteers, such as yourself, making up some international "Bush Brigade" or the "LeiberRumsfeld Division"to fight alongside the US/UK forces in the Middle East?"
Sig material, Westy and right on the mark.
-
That's ok, while we're on the subject of apologies we'd like to apologise for letting Tony loose in Washington this weekend.
-
They can keep him. We should have changed the locks and left no forwarding address while he was away. Perhaps the US could make him Governor of New England or something.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
They can keep him. We should have changed the locks and left no forwarding address while he was away. Perhaps the US could make him Governor of New England or something.
Shaddup Dowding
-
Originally posted by Westy
By who? Swedish volunteers, such as yourself, making up some international "Bush Brigade" or the "LeiberRumsfeld Division"to fight alongside the US/UK forces in the Middle East?
ROTFLMAO :)
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
Ive been preaching exactly that for months.
I imagine its impossible to to your job when you have a camera at every corner looking to see if you shoot the terrorists in a politically correct manner...
All cameras out, I say.
PS: I'd like to cross post your comments to another board unless you object.
All cameras out? So you are willing to let the government do whatever the hell it wants to do, and they are the only ones who can tell us what happened?
You trust them more than I do.
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
Looks to me like Europe would be saying "Hey thanks for watching our backs against the Russians. Listen, we don't need you anymore, so good luck with that whole war on terror thing."
Nice.
I believe we have full European support on the war against terror
Its the war in Iraq that people have a problem with.
I want to know where in the hell the Iraqi oil is going? We have had control for a freaking year, paid Halliburton untold billions, and we are still paying 20 billions in reparations for Iraq. What is up with that?
-
dang, elevated to the position of tony blair!! wow i was hoping to be more like maggie. she wore cool pumps.
anyway jabs from fellow americans (most likely al gore supporters) notwithstanding, thank you.
i'm honored.
i agree with straffo, while i've never used the "term eurotrash" it certainly does have a ring of truth to it and it is catchy as well. thanks for sharing it.
I guess my confusion regarding our euro "allies" stems from not being able to understand and perhaps someone will attemp to please explain the following. To a great extent I exclude the English from the following and I apologize to the Eastern Europeans who have been historically abandoned by the U.S. and Western Europe, most of all the proud, noble, loyal. brave and kind Polish People. the rest of you Euros own them a debt of gratitude going back to the time of the hussars. How they were abandoned by both the English and Ourselves after the termination of hostilities in 1945 should be taught in the West and shall forever be a dark stain upon the character of the U.S.
SO someone, please explain how on the one hand it's perfectly ok for the American People to have poured hundreds of thousands of our finest young men into your idiotic conflicts. Almost singlehandedly defeat the opposition, then pour hundreds of millions of our dollars to rebuild you, only to be treated with the deep levels of contempt we are shown?
You (collectively) deserve neither respect or nor consideration nor friendship from us, afterall you do determine the conditions of our friendship by the way we are portrayed in your press and by the conportment of your people visiting here and the way we are generally treated when we visit you there. ESPECIALLY the french here and in france. Pick up any edition of Le Monde and if you are true American prepare to be outraged. go ahead, say it ain't so.
-
I want to know where in the hell the Iraqi oil is going? We have had control for a freaking year, paid Halliburton untold billions, and we are still paying 20 billions in reparations for Iraq. What is up with that?
Good point. Also, if the US went for the oil, what's up with prices at the pump? Is there some economic issue that I'm totally overlooking? Someone please educate me here.
-
Almost singlehandedly defeat the opposition...
Are you Tom Cruise in disguise?
Too funny.
-
the prices at the pump are right where they need to be and will in fact have to be increased. we need to build up our coffers in order to continue our war of aggression for oil.
-
Okay, will someone who actually knows care to educate me?
-
go on storch... i enjoy your comments alot, but my humor may not be to everyones liking. i thought this was jusat gonna turn into the usual bashing but you sir are something special :D
storch!!... storch!!... storch!!... storch!!... storch!!... storch!!... storch!!... storch!!... :aok
-
many of us don't think it's funny here. actually pathetic is a more apt description. You guys need to become more like us. Really. all your silly war mongering amongst yourselves and then being too impotent to extract yourselves from your own conflicts should quite frankly, be embarrassing to you. I'll refer you to one of my personally favored songs covering the topic of U.S./ Everyone else relations. Randy Newman (a Jew) the 1972 tune "Foreign Policy" That's how we should deal with europe. the perfect solution in a three minute song.:rofl
-
Storch, did you know the Saudi's and American oil corps traditionally raise the cost of oil per barrel during summer months?
Did you also know that given the cost of inflation, that today a gallon of gas is still cheaper than it was in 1980?
I agree, that while its (raising prices) similiar to selling plywood at double the cost prior to a hurricane, the U.S. oil corps have not been able to build new refineries since 1976, apparently at the cost of having their hands tied by the greens. There is a price to pay when our technology and ability to build is restricted.
-
Nilsen thank you, it's hard to portray wit to pinheads on a bb. besides for real, friendly and spirited debate we need beer, scotch, coffee, cognac, tobacco, confortable seats and a tropical ocean view. these can sometimes start at 2200 hrs. and suddenly it's 0600 and time to go to bed sunday morning.
-
You are welcome storch, and if we sometime get to wote you may actually win over Hortlund one of these days.... he does have a hefty headstart on you but you just might make it :aok
-
like i said it's right where it needs to be, and yes while it's true that due to increased summertime demand the prices are raised traditionally, this year it's different. they need to increase the prices to $2.50 a gallon for regular in Florida (currently $1.89) for two reasons the first i stated previously, the second, so that i may increase the prices of MY product exceedingly disproportunate to the rise in energy costs and possibly start a chaotic runaway upwardly spiraling inflationary trend. This will
1. line my pockets
2. allow me more discreationary time to waste here on these silly bbs
3. buy my wife that new fur she wanted (we live in Fl)
-
Originally posted by storch
like i said it's right where it needs to be, and yes while it's true that due to increased summertime demand the prices are raised traditionally, this year it's different. they need to increase the prices to $2.50 a gallon for regular in Florida (currently $1.89) for two reasons the first i stated previously, the second, so that i may increase the prices of MY product exceedingly disproportunate to the rise in energy costs and possibly start a chaotic runaway upwardly spiraling inflationary trend. This will
1. line my pockets
2. allow me more discreationary time to waste here on these silly bbs
3. buy my wife that new fur she wanted (we live in Fl)
My only trouble with "wishing" for higher prices by those who solely want it raised to punish those who use gas excessively (no, I'm not speaking of you) is that when the price of oil goes up, its NOT JUST GASOLINE prices that rise, EVERYTHING goes up in price, from plastics, to food and everything in between. Produce must be transported from the field to your dinner table, and trust me, that hike in the fuel prices will affect the consumer, not the provider. We end up paying more for consumer goods, more for food, more for air travel, etc. etc.
-
Originally posted by storch
Almost singlehandedly defeat the opposition,
In hollywood movies, yes.
In real life.... Damnit!! I have to remember Rip's signature !!
-
what hollywood??? fighting with the continental euros is like this.
Fight the battle (pacify the "allies") drag them kicking, screaming to the next objective. What was H. Norman Schwartzkopft's quote about not having the french along side of you in a war?
It was reported that when negotiations between England and Germany had broken down and a British official was told that the Italians would most likely be entering the conflict alongside Germany this cheeky Englishman (I believe it may have been Churchill) Stated, "Thank goodness, afterall we did have to have them on our side last time".
Maybe not a textbook definition of "singlehandedly" but nevertheless sufficient for me to us for these purposes.
Bonus question. Who placed the last 10 bullets into Mussolini's body?
-
Your medication is wearing off storch, time for the next load.
:aok
-
is it that obvious? *pats his pockets feeling for loose pills*
-
I should not have to remid you about these things storch. You should get some sort of alarm clock or 24/7 care by professionals :D
-
duly noted *promptly ignored*
-
You should not ignore these things storch, its for your own good. I only do it because i care mr.
-
oh no, a euromom eeeeeeek
-
Originally posted by VOR
Good point. Also, if the US went for the oil, what's up with prices at the pump? Is there some economic issue that I'm totally overlooking? Someone please educate me here.
mmm well the US dollar did take a 20% nose dive and oil is traded in US $ so it's cheaper for the rest of us but more expensive for you guys........which is kinda ironic.
-
its euroMILF to you storch...please get it right next time.
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
LOL, yeah like the former Soviets are a threat anymore... your country could not field forces for a week without going into dire straits over simple issues such as supply. Let alone think of what will happen with your lack of training and lack of maintenance... yeah, NATO is quaking in their boots over the Soviet Bear threat!
LMFAO
Looks like you are still so afraid of us that your administration has to wash their pants every time Putin says something on foreign politics.
If we are not a threat any more - then why does NATO need to patrol the airspace of Baltic republics, having attack planes on permanent alert 15 minutes of flight from Leningrad? Why do you build early-warning radar stations that controll most of the North-Western Russia airspace? I keep on asking this questions and noone answered then yet.
Maybe WE are not a threat to anyone. But YOU are. We stepped away from Imperial path, let all the Soviet Republics go and want to live in peace (just as we always wanted). And here come NATO "fighters for freedom and democracy" with their full military power and settle their "peacefull" bases pointed at our Northern Capital.
Originally posted by Bodhi
Yeah, that is going to happen.... who do you suppose will pay for it, and gee, who will run it? The Krauts are a great choice, but do you suppose Holland, Norway, Belgium, Poland are all going to throw their support behind that.... fat chance... to top it off, unless the Brits, Norway, and Belgium go in (not gonna happen) then it is a worthless force with no real bite... keep dreaming Boroda, I know it is hard for you to give up your commie mindset of annihilating the US, but you'd do better hoping to win the Commonwealth of Independant State Lottery....
:rofl
Commie mindset? Dreaming? What else, mr. McCarthy?
I just face the reality. Europe was your hostage for the 50 years of cold war, and I'll not be surprised that they got tired.
Can you tell me any sane reasons for your military presence (de facto - almost occupation) in Europe sice 1993, when last Russian troops left the lands that didn't belong to USSR?
-
Originally posted by Boroda
If we are not a threat any more - then why does NATO need to patrol the airspace of Baltic republics, having attack planes on permanent alert 15 minutes of flight from Leningrad?
Leningrad? Didn't you guys change that back to St. Petersburg?
-
At some point Boroda, the interrupted dance will need to be resumed. Truman should have released Patton and MacArthur upon the ussr. *sigh* wasted opportunities, there is the main reason why we should never elect a Dem. into power again, they get in the way of our National interests. It took far to long to win the cold war. The russians will need to be defeated militarily as well as economically, I'm afraid in time this will happen. it's bound to. The lessons should be clear enough. draw a parallel from Germany in WWI and then WWII. Look at Iraq in 1991 and again 10 years later. At some point, some other dictator with some screwy ideology will arise from that vast, mismanaged, corrupt wasteland and will need to be put down. Also, I think I see some WMDs being sold to rogue states.
-
Hehe. I love it when everyone keeps saying McCarthyism like it was a bad thing.
What I find even funnier is that McCarthy was right. :(
-
Yep Laser and Hoover was a good guy :aok
-
looney, over the top but nevertheless proven to be correct.
-
Originally posted by storch
At some point Boroda, the interrupted dance will need to be resumed. Truman should have released Patton and MacArthur upon the ussr. *sigh* wasted opportunities, there is the main reason why we should never elect a Dem. into power again, they get in the way of our National interests. It took far to long to win the cold war. The russians will need to be defeated militarily as well as economically, I'm afraid in time this will happen. it's bound to. The lessons should be clear enough. draw a parallel from Germany in WWI and then WWII. Look at Iraq in 1991 and again 10 years later. At some point, some other dictator with some screwy ideology will arise from that vast, mismanaged, corrupt wasteland and will need to be put down. Also, I think I see some WMDs being sold to rogue states.
Nice to hear someone wanting my home city being burnt down by hydrogen bombs :)
In Truman times you guys had no chance. You didn't have a single chance of winning a conventional war ever in 1945-91.
Unlike you - I am happy that Stalin didn't let his Marshalls to kick you "fighters for freedom and democracy" into the Atlantic as they suggested in 1945. It could be done in a matter of weeks. Noone wanted more blood. We have lost more then 20 million people winning WWII for your profits.
Believe me, some force will form to oppose your criminal agressive state in the nearest two decades. And I hope it will not be my country. We held the burden of opposing your power for 50 years, at the cost of millions of lives and finaly breaking our spine, but our cause was right. Look at your brave agressors getting out of global MAD stalemate...
We still have nuclear weapons and will answer to any agressor.
WMD being sold to rogue states? Isn't it a traditional American business? :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Looks like you are still so afraid of us that your administration has to wash their pants every time Putin says something on foreign politics.
Wash our trousers.... lol, you imbeciles only garner any attention because of the fact you sit on a bunch of warheads, do not neglect the fact that the only real way for you to deliver 99% of those, is by loading them onto an obsolete bomber design, (you can't afford to maintain hitech delivery systems) and HOPE that it makes it over to us. Get it straight Mr, your only card in international politics is that of selling off your hardware to nations that CAN afford to use it.
Originally posted by Boroda
If we are not a threat any more - then why does NATO need to patrol the airspace of Baltic republics, having attack planes on permanent alert 15 minutes of flight from Leningrad? Why do you build early-warning radar stations that controll most of the North-Western Russia airspace? I keep on asking this questions and noone answered then yet.
Chechnya seems to ring a bell whenever I think of why YOUR former republics ask us for protection. You see the bottom line here is simple. The Baltic Republics have been oppressed, tortured, raped, and murdered for so long by you, they do not trust the CIS. As a matter of fact, they HATE the CIS (Moscow). Maybe someday that will change, but I doubt it, your crimes run deep for those people, and they are likely to never forget.
Originally posted by Boroda
Maybe WE are not a threat to anyone. But YOU are. We stepped away from Imperial path, let all the Soviet Republics go and want to live in peace (just as we always wanted). And here come NATO "fighters for freedom and democracy" with their full military power and settle their "peacefull" bases pointed at our Northern Capital.
Again, NATO is there at the behest of the host nations. Simply because your government can not get over oppressing it's former states. Seemingly, you claim to have stepped away from the imperialistic path, but I think it is still alive and well, just living in a different guise. You see, for the last 10 years, you have been supplying Hussein with weapons for oil, thats your only real basis for disagreeing with the removal of Hussein from power, your oil supply got cut off. Lastly, how many times in history has your government been overthrown or shown major shifts in leaderships? Seems to me, that NATO best keep an eye on your arses just in case you decide to go out in a blaze of glory.
Originally posted by Boroda
Commie mindset? Dreaming? What else, mr. McCarthy?
McCarthy was right, his actions were wrong. Communism is a scourge that has poisoned your young adults and would be best wiped off the face of the planet.
Originally posted by Boroda
I just face the reality. Europe was your hostage for the 50 years of cold war, and I'll not be surprised that they got tired.
Hostage.... lmfao, lets see, was it not YOU, who were brutally putting down rebellions to your oppression over those 50 years? Was it not YOU, who was shooting East Berliners as they desperately sought to escape your oppression, was it not YOU who oppressed the local peoples attempts to govern themselves. Hostage, hell in the 60's and 70's the Soviet Union held the world hostage with their insatiable appitite for oppression and with the threat of Nuclear Holocaust.
Originally posted by Boroda
Can you tell me any sane reasons for your military presence (de facto - almost occupation) in Europe sice 1993, when last Russian troops left the lands that didn't belong to USSR?
Occupation, are you sure you comprehend the English language? I doubt it. Simply put for you, The US remains because as the largest member of NATO, we suplement a large portion of the military in place, that said, we also have a waiting list of nations (curiously almost all are former oppressees of the USSR) wanting to join NATO to ensure that your nation never rapes and pillages them again.
Boroda, I know it is hard for you with all your youthful brain washing, but the Soviet Union was an EVIL EMPIRE, which basically bullied the world as any terrorist nation has. The US, UK, and NATO, simply had the balls to stand up to your BS and helped end your reign of terror.
-
One does run into a remarkedbly unpleasant class of person in this place from time to time.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Storch, did you know the Saudi's and American oil corps traditionally raise the cost of oil per barrel during summer months?
That's why oil prices rise during the winter months then?
Did you also know that given the cost of inflation, that today a gallon of gas is still cheaper than it was in 1980?
In 1980 fuel was at an all time high and caused runaway inflation. We are seeing the beginning of that again, so thats a good thing?
I agree, that while its (raising prices) similiar to selling plywood at double the cost prior to a hurricane, the U.S. oil corps have not been able to build new refineries since 1976, apparently at the cost of having their hands tied by the greens. There is a price to pay when our technology and ability to build is restricted.
Yes, blame the environmentalists... it's OBVIOUSLY their fault! Oil company profits are at a record high. Refineries are being closed for "maintenence" on a schedule that causes shortages when they can be done in an order that would cause no interruption in supply.
Remember when the rise in gas prices was blamed on the record fine Exxon received after the "Valdez accident"? To this day Exxon has paid a total of $0. Not one red cent to repay the cleanup costs or their fine. C'mon Ripsnore, you can do better.
-
aye _Schadenfreude_
I dont mind folks with different opinions then mine but i could do without the folks throwing insults around towards countries and individuals. Growing numbers of those around here me thinks.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
aye _Schadenfreude_
I dont mind folks with different opinions then mine but i could do without the folks throwing insults around towards countries and individuals. Growing numbers of those around here me thinks.
Yeah, 2 wrongs don't make a right, but tell ya what, I don't see any of you discounting any of what I said, because, like all libs, you can't so instead you pick on the poster...
lastly, you two are hypocrits to say that in the first place as I have seen plenty of insults hurled out of your posts.
Truth must hurt.
-
Ok Bodhi
-
Originally posted by storch
what hollywood??? fighting with the continental euros is like this.
Fight the battle (pacify the "allies") drag them kicking, screaming to the next objective. What was H. Norman Schwartzkopft's quote about not having the french along side of you in a war?
It was reported that when negotiations between England and Germany had broken down and a British official was told that the Italians would most likely be entering the conflict alongside Germany this cheeky Englishman (I believe it may have been Churchill) Stated, "Thank goodness, afterall we did have to have them on our side last time".
Maybe not a textbook definition of "singlehandedly" but nevertheless sufficient for me to us for these purposes.
Bonus question. Who placed the last 10 bullets into Mussolini's body?
LOL
You are precious.
By who was reported the BS that you wrote?
IIRC Mussolini was the guy trying to calm down the situation, untill He saw the France collapsing and ordered the Army to attack to "have few dead body to throw on the treaty table" (sic).
What destiny would have deserved this kind of a..hole?
It's not my problem, since my country was on the other side of the fence, but your attitude is equal to defecating on the graves of the soldiers from all over the world, millions of them, for the major part from URSS and UK that fought and died alongside your own soldiers.
Anyway this attitude it's not new here, you are in good company.
-
Just ignore it Naso..... its only bate ;)
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Leningrad? Didn't you guys change that back to St. Petersburg?
Well, it was renamed, but I was born in Leningrad, and I am 100% sure that everyone who knows something about WWII history will understand where is this city.
In Russian SPb is written and pronounced as "Sankt Peterburg", and I hate this "nktp", I almost twist my tongue :(
I think the best name could be "Pertrograd", like it was renamed in 1914.
-
Let the flame continue! ;)
Originally posted by Bodhi
Wash our trousers.... lol, you imbeciles only garner any attention because of the fact you sit on a bunch of warheads, do not neglect the fact that the only real way for you to deliver 99% of those, is by loading them onto an obsolete bomber design, (you can't afford to maintain hitech delivery systems) and HOPE that it makes it over to us. Get it straight Mr, your only card in international politics is that of selling off your hardware to nations that CAN afford to use it.
Very funny, and shows a brilliant level of education.
First: using bombers as a delivery for nuclear weapos was an American concept, mostly because you were far behind us in missile technology for decades.
Second: US is the world's biggest weapon exporter. I especially love the fact that American portable SAMs appeared in Chechnya.
Originally posted by Bodhi
Chechnya seems to ring a bell whenever I think of why YOUR former republics ask us for protection. You see the bottom line here is simple. The Baltic Republics have been oppressed, tortured, raped, and murdered for so long by you, they do not trust the CIS. As a matter of fact, they HATE the CIS (Moscow). Maybe someday that will change, but I doubt it, your crimes run deep for those people, and they are likely to never forget.
Opressed? Murdered!? Raped?! LOL! We have built them all their industry, we took them from nearly stone age and then we are called "occupants" because Soviet power didn't let them slaughter Jews and other minorities.
Now Latvia and Estonia turned into tiny mean fascist states, where national minority opresses other inhabitants. And this regimes are now under NATO protection. Tell me who's your friend..
And about Chechnya: whay you "fighters for freedom and democracy" now do in Fallujah is much worse then our anti-terrorist operation. You deliberately target civilians, siege the city with it's population without letting unarmed people leave it.
Keep on supporting, hosting and breeding terrorists. Hypocrites.
Originally posted by Bodhi
Again, NATO is there at the behest of the host nations. Simply because your government can not get over oppressing it's former states. Seemingly, you claim to have stepped away from the imperialistic path, but I think it is still alive and well, just living in a different guise. You see, for the last 10 years, you have been supplying Hussein with weapons for oil, thats your only real basis for disagreeing with the removal of Hussein from power, your oil supply got cut off. Lastly, how many times in history has your government been overthrown or shown major shifts in leaderships? Seems to me, that NATO best keep an eye on your arses just in case you decide to go out in a blaze of glory.
Supplying Hussein with weapons for the past 10 years?! What did you smoke? Unlike the US - we respect international laws and treaties.
Opressing our former states?! Did I miss something? Did we bomb Kiev or Dushanbe already?
Originally posted by Bodhi
McCarthy was right, his actions were wrong. Communism is a scourge that has poisoned your young adults and would be best wiped off the face of the planet.
What do you, misfit, know about Communism? Have been told at school that Communists are evil? F#<% such schools. What you had in the US in late-40s-mid-50s was worse then what we had under "evil communists".
It's funny to talk to savages who want my country to be "wiped off the place of planet" and praise McCarthy. You are worse then happy idiotic brainwashed Comsomol member.
Originally posted by Bodhi
Hostage.... lmfao, lets see, was it not YOU, who were brutally putting down rebellions to your oppression over those 50 years? Was it not YOU, who was shooting East Berliners as they desperately sought to escape your oppression, was it not YOU who oppressed the local peoples attempts to govern themselves. Hostage, hell in the 60's and 70's the Soviet Union held the world hostage with their insatiable appitite for oppression and with the threat of Nuclear Holocaust.
Funny. It was USSR who threatened the world with nuclear weapons.
Just answer some questions:
1) What country used nuclear weapons against cities?
2) What country filled Europe with military force, while Europe lays behind the ocean from it?
3) Where this force was aimed?
4) What country had strategic bombers with hydrogen bombs on 24/7 combat patrol over Europe?
5) What country started at least 15 agressive wars in XX century?
Now please give me a list of agressive wars started bt USSR. The list will be too short, so, please add the list of the cities burned down to ashes by Soviet airforce.
Originally posted by Bodhi
Occupation, are you sure you comprehend the English language? I doubt it. Simply put for you, The US remains because as the largest member of NATO, we suplement a large portion of the military in place, that said, we also have a waiting list of nations (curiously almost all are former oppressees of the USSR) wanting to join NATO to ensure that your nation never rapes and pillages them again.
Yeah, rapes, pillages and eats them all, alive without salt. All to get hold of their toxic smoked fish. I don't think we need to feed them all again as we did for 50 years since 1940 and for centuries before that.
Originally posted by Bodhi
Boroda, I know it is hard for you with all your youthful brain washing, but the Soviet Union was an EVIL EMPIRE, which basically bullied the world as any terrorist nation has. The US, UK, and NATO, simply had the balls to stand up to your BS and helped end your reign of terror.
Soviet Union was a unique state that was able to oppose you, agressors, mercenaries and murderers for 50 years, against all odds, with no chance to win. At least we tried :(
It's funny. I studied in a specialized English-speaking school. We were taught to respect American democracy, your culture, your achevements in humanitarian field (getting rid of racial segregation in a matter of years), all despite of our official propaganda. And now I see all this things going down the drain only because you don't have a force to oppose your agressiveness and rush for profits at the cost of human lives.
I am 31 now, I have seen Soviet power in the end of it's most glorious times, and believe me, I can compare what we have now and what we had before. I have been to the US when I was in school. Can I ask you how old are you? You look just as a typical arrogant American from the pages of modern left press. Fortunately, I know that most of the Americans don't share your crazy point of view. I only want to know how you became what you are.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Leningrad? Didn't you guys change that back to St. Petersburg?
Yes, Leningrad. For me, I'm still calling Stalingrad and not Volgograd.