Isreal (4 Viewers)

[Horus]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37TEehlVEd0&list=LL&index=1

 

[Rutledge]

We all agree with that
But the results are different
Korea a draw
Vietnam a loss
Gulf War One. a huge victory
War on terror a bit mixed

Sure. Bill Murray essentially talked about this in Stripes: “We’re ten one and one.”

Against an in-bedded / at home enemy in a far, far away land, waging war is very challenging. When both combatants are on foreign soil, the fight is a bit more equal, so to speak.

Wars we’ve lost or tied, it’s more about lack of will than ability. Americans rightfully abhor when their sons and bothers are used as cannon fodder in defense of a people who don’t really want us there.

In WW2 Russia defeated Nazi Germany while in the process losing 25 million killed. The US saw 400,000 killed across both zones. So who had the superior armed forces?

The Chinese military isn’t battle tested. It brought out its first aircraft carrier about 5 years ago. We’ve been operating them for almost 100 years. (Japan kicked their butt in WW2.) Though admittedly, China has lately developed an expertise at bullying much smaller Asian countries. And taking advantage of very poor countries in Africa. PS: Their good ally North Korea is a pathetic joke.

Iran couldn’t defeat Iraq in a head to head war that lasted 10 years. What did it take us? About 10 weeks to utterly destroy their military? If Iran tries to go nuclear on the US or Israel, we will vaporize the entire country. Goodbye “mighty” Shias…lol

Last and perhaps least, it’s now obvious Russia doesn’t have the wherewithal to take us on militarily. I mean their pilots can stick their tongues at US pilots, and fly close to our drones, but beyond that…We have apparently been kicking their *** in the Syrian “proxy war” for some time. I’d bet Russia could not sustain an overseas force of any size for more than 3-6 months. They are a third world country with a bloated ego.

So nah, I’m not at all worried about the US and its “war record” over the last 70 years. When and if we want to win a real war, and effectively “vanquish” any foe that dares take us head on, there is no question of the outcome.

Oops! I forget about Somalia. I guess we tied or lost that one, too, huh? Gosh those Somalis are a fierce bunch. We’d best beware….

 

[Rutledge]

Sure. Bill Murray essentially talked about this in Stripes: “We’re ten one and one.”

Against an in-bedded / at home enemy in a far, far away land, waging war is very challenging. When both combatants are on foreign soil, the fight is a bit more equal, so to speak.

Wars we’ve lost or tied, it’s more about lack of will than ability. Americans rightfully abhor when their sons and bothers are used as cannon fodder in defense of a people who don’t really want us there.

In WW2 Russia defeated Nazi Germany while in the process losing 25 million killed. The US saw 400,000 killed across both zones. So who had the superior armed forces?

The Chinese military isn’t battle tested. It brought out its first aircraft carrier about 5 years ago. We’ve been operating them for almost 100 years. (Japan kicked their butt in WW2.) Though admittedly, China has lately developed an expertise at bullying much smaller Asian countries. And taking advantage of very poor countries in Africa. PS: Their good ally North Korea is a pathetic joke.

Iran couldn’t defeat Iraq in a head to head war that lasted 10 years. What did it take us? About 10 weeks to utterly destroy their military? If Iran tries to go nuclear on the US or Israel, we will vaporize the entire country. Goodbye “mighty” Shias…lol

Last and perhaps least, it’s now obvious Russia doesn’t have the wherewithal to take us on militarily. I mean their pilots can stick their tongues at US pilots, and fly close to our drones, but beyond that…We have apparently been kicking their *** in the Syrian “proxy war” for some time. I’d bet Russia could not sustain an overseas force of any size for more than 3-6 months. They are a third world country with a bloated ego.

So nah, I’m not at all worried about the US and its “war record” over the last 70 years. When and if we want to win a real war, and effectively “vanquish” any foe that dares take us head on, there is no question of the outcome.

Oops! I forget about Somalia. I guess we tied or lost that one, too, huh? Gosh those Somalis are a fierce bunch. We’d best beware….

Embedded

 

[damian]

Sure. Bill Murray essentially talked about this in Stripes: “We’re ten one and one.”

Against an in-bedded / at home enemy in a far, far away land, waging war is very challenging. When both combatants are on foreign soil, the fight is a bit more equal, so to speak.

Wars we’ve lost or tied, it’s more about lack of will than ability. Americans rightfully abhor when their sons and bothers are used as cannon fodder in defense of a people who don’t really want us there.

In WW2 Russia defeated Nazi Germany while in the process losing 25 million killed. The US saw 400,000 killed across both zones. So who had the superior armed forces?

The Chinese military isn’t battle tested. It brought out its first aircraft carrier about 5 years ago. We’ve been operating them for almost 100 years. (Japan kicked their butt in WW2.) Though admittedly, China has lately developed an expertise at bullying much smaller Asian countries. And taking advantage of very poor countries in Africa. PS: Their good ally North Korea is a pathetic joke.

Iran couldn’t defeat Iraq in a head to head war that lasted 10 years. What did it take us? About 10 weeks to utterly destroy their military? If Iran tries to go nuclear on the US or Israel, we will vaporize the entire country. Goodbye “mighty” Shias…lol

Last and perhaps least, it’s now obvious Russia doesn’t have the wherewithal to take us on militarily. I mean their pilots can stick their tongues at US pilots, and fly close to our drones, but beyond that…We have apparently been kicking their *** in the Syrian “proxy war” for some time. I’d bet Russia could not sustain an overseas force of any size for more than 3-6 months. They are a third world country with a bloated ego.

So nah, I’m not at all worried about the US and its “war record” over the last 70 years. When and if we want to win a real war, and effectively “vanquish” any foe that dares take us head on, there is no question of the outcome.

Oops! I forget about Somalia. I guess we tied or lost that one, too, huh? Gosh those Somalis are a fierce bunch. We’d best beware….

Well then we agree
We all need America and the west.
We do.
That is why everyone who hates it so much desperately tries to go and live there.
None of those countries you mention are high up on anyone's choice of destination.

 

[Combat]

The American military has never been the issue. The US spends more than any other country by large margins which is why our schools and cities are in ruin while those of the places we defend are a Utopia. The issue has always been the dishonesty of our politicians who make the decisions and the lies told to support those decisions. Twenty years in places like Afghanistan and Iraq where the military and politicians told lie after lie about the situation. No one held accountable. Same deal in Vietnam. False premises to support endless war (e.g. weapons of mass destruction, domino theory of Communism, lies about progress being made in Afghanistan etc). The US has been at war or in proxy wars almost 80 years now with no end in sight. No other country picks up the tab for these wars. The politicians in Europe must fall on the ground laughing that the US still pays to defend them 80 years after the end of WWII.

 

[Rutledge]

Well then we agree
We all need America and the west.
We do.
That is why everyone who hates it so much desperately tries to go and live there.
None of those countries you mention are high up on anyone's choice of destination.

Eh? Of course. More than need. Must have.

The countries I mentioned are the primary ones people see as US challengers. When in actuality they aren’t. Militarily or otherwise.

The Chinese provocateur (that I apparently ran off) was trying to make the case that America no longer has the might, or will, to defend itself against adversarial entities/nations “on the rise”, based on our recent track record. Laughable.

 

[damian]

Eh? Of course. More than need. Must have.

The countries I mentioned are the primary ones people see as US challengers. When in actuality they aren’t. Militarily or otherwise.

The Chinese provocateur (that I apparently ran off) was trying to make the case that America no longer has the might, or will, to defend itself against adversarial entities/nations “on the rise”, based on our recent track record. Laughable.

Cheers to that
Over and out.

 

[OzDigger]

To the extent vanquish means to “subdue completely” I only see the US having done that to the Native Americans.

Although American by birth and nationality I proudly served in another nation’s military for five years, where I saw Europe, Africa and Asia, so I have a little different perspective than most here. I will leave this thread now to all of you who believe and support the common notions in the west of world history and turn my attention back to the toy soldiers.

C’est la vie!

Ok, was it the Russian or Chinese army you served in {sm4}

 

[tdubel]

I will take George Patton's advance in WW2 any day, any time, our only GD mistake was not letting him march to Moscow! And not letting MacArthur take SE Asia when he wanted to. One thing we did (which saved my Grandfather's life, a veteran of the Philippines in WW2) was drop 2 bombs and completely dismantle and destroy the Empire of Japan. I would call all of this FAIRLY FREAKING SPECTACULAR. We also did a smart thing and helped the Japanese rebuild, maybe not "spectacular' but pretty darn smart.

Put that in your proverbial pipe and start puffin.

TD

 

[Desertkiwi]

You can say your piece and that is why I liked your post, but stop with the missing the point, I didn't, I just outrightly disagree and believe in something entirely different than you do, that is not pointless and I am a little tired of the holier than thou bit. I am frankly saying I disagree and that is the way it is. I didn't miss any points yours included, I just believe in the eradication of terrorist and I also believe Israel's response here is justified. I have sympathy for innocents, but unfortunately, Palestine has fostered terrorists forever and ever, does anyone remember the PLO or Arafat? Hello, he was a terrorist, plain and simple. Hamas who are the LEADERS in Palestine are terrorist, there is no other fact but that. Whether I agree with Israel's domestic politics or not, I do agree that now is the time to take out the trash so to speak.

Point.
TD

I had no intention of contributing further to this thread, however the ‘holier than thou’ comment got me thinking. For the record I don’t align myself to any particular faith or religion, however respect those that do.

I still don’t think you understand my view-point, but that’s probably more my fault than yours. I’m not a wizard with words, more action than words.

To clarify, my stance is probably more aligned to yours than you think. Hamas and their kind are an evil entity that needs to be purged from this earth. Personally I think Israel are dammed if they do and dammed if they don’t. My concern is the carnage and resulting loss of life to both sides that will ultimately result, not to mention the potential escalation of conflict within the region as things play out. That’s said Israel has no choice but to dig out Hamas, however as we all know urban warfare is brutal and costly.

My comments about being disgusted etc, relate to some of the comments within this thread and the racial overtones, particularly the anti-Arab remakes by some and the generalisation that all Palestinians are terrorists.

While I concede the reaction to the Hamas attacks invoke a great deal of emotion and anger and rightly so, such statements are unhelpful are inappropriate and display ignorance on so many levels.

While Israel roots out Hamas with the support of the US, the backlash mounts across the globe.

I often wonder has human kind really progressed much further than the stone-age....

 

[JL01]

I will take George Patton's advance in WW2 any day, any time, our only GD mistake was not letting him march to Moscow! And not letting MacArthur take SE Asia when he wanted to. One thing we did (which saved my Grandfather's life, a veteran of the Philippines in WW2) was drop 2 bombs and completely dismantle and destroy the Empire of Japan. I would call all of this FAIRLY FREAKING SPECTACULAR. We also did a smart thing and helped the Japanese rebuild, maybe not "spectacular' but pretty darn smart.

Put that in your proverbial pipe and start puffin.

TD

Again, not knocking individual US soldiers and marines but by the time the US landed in Europe the Red Army was well on its way to Berlin after suffering millions of casualties of the kind the US has never had to even contemplate. The Battle of Kursk, the largest tank battle in history, and far beyond anything the US was ever involved in tank-wise, had already ended the summer before D-Day. Not to mention that German and Russian tank technology and tactics at that battle was superior to anything the US had to offer at any point in WW II.

US Marine and Army operations in the Pacific were brutal and still spoken of in militaries around the world. That was a tough slog for all involved although not on the same scale as the European theater numbers wise.

 

[Julie]

Careful here guys.
I have no issues Deleting and Closing this one.

Julie

 

[tdubel]

I will take George Patton's advance in WW2 any day, any time, our only GD mistake was not letting him march to Moscow! And not letting MacArthur take SE Asia when he wanted to. One thing we did (which saved my Grandfather's life, a veteran of the Philippines in WW2) was drop 2 bombs and completely dismantle and destroy the Empire of Japan. I would call all of this FAIRLY FREAKING SPECTACULAR. We also did a smart thing and helped the Japanese rebuild, maybe not "spectacular' but pretty darn smart.

Put that in your proverbial pipe and start puffin.

TD

Quoting myself because I stand by these facts. The USA calls it the greatest generation for a reason.

 

[tdubel]

I had no intention of contributing further to this thread, however the ‘holier than thou’ comment got me thinking. For the record I don’t align myself to any particular faith or religion, however respect those that do.

I still don’t think you understand my view-point, but that’s probably more my fault than yours. I’m not a wizard with words, more action than words.

To clarify, my stance is probably more aligned to yours than you think. Hamas and their kind are an evil entity that needs to be purged from this earth. Personally I think Israel are dammed if they do and dammed if they don’t. My concern is the carnage and resulting loss of life to both sides that will ultimately result, not to mention the potential escalation of conflict within the region as things play out. That’s said Israel has no choice but to dig out Hamas, however as we all know urban warfare is brutal and costly.

My comments about being disgusted etc, relate to some of the comments within this thread and the racial overtones, particularly the anti-Arab remakes by some and the generalisation that all Palestinians are terrorists.

While I concede the reaction to the Hamas attacks invoke a great deal of emotion and anger and rightly so, such statements are unhelpful are inappropriate and display ignorance on so many levels.

While Israel roots out Hamas with the support of the US, the backlash mounts across the globe.

I often wonder has human kind really progressed much further than the stone-age....

always will be backlash when any major event occurs, in this case the good outweighs the bad. Probably some things or instincts will always be Stone Age in some respect. I believe that the word terrorist has been shaped by some to create a racial undertone. It is not, it is still the appropriate word to use. It is not biased, just factual. Hamas are terrorists, yet their own pr machine is constantly trying to play victim.
2 more cents
td

 

[Horus]

Worth listening to :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uegYeT5Kms4

 

[Combat]

Have to say that I was amazed, if not altogether surprised, to listen to the various college presidents who testified before Congress yesterday. Among other things, they said that advocating for genocide of Jews on their campus did not violate their policies on bullying or harassment. Think about that one. These people are highly intelligent. Some made reference to the First Amendment, but of course the First Amendment doesn't even apply to these private universities. I'm all for free speech but even the First Amendment doesn't permit threats of violence and mass murder. I can't imagine that if a threat of bodily harm was made against any individual student, that the university would suggest this was permissible free speech on their campus. No such threat against a minority student would ever be tolerated. Nor should it. And we know that certain conservative individuals have been precluded from speaking at these very same campuses. Apparently, no such free speech right applies to them even when they are not advocating any form of violence.

So what is going on here? My answer - which reflects only my opinion - is that certain political elements view the world strictly in terms of the oppressed and the oppressors. If you fall into the former category, then no rules of conduct apply because historical mistreatment justifies any conduct including threats, violence, riots, and even murder. This is a view shared not just by some members of the oppressed class itself but the academic intellectual community. It is a very frightening concept that the ends justify any means in these circumstances and that the laws and common sense provide no deterrent to this type of conduct. Not just in the opinion of lunatics, but the presidents of our most prestigious universities.

 

[marco55]

These people are sick. I thought they were going to revoke the visas of these people raising havoc all over place.These scum are even trying to ruin our Christmas traditions. Ship them back where they belong. Lets see how brave they are against people who don't take their crap.Our government lets them run wild and does nothing. I guess their too busy chasing American terrorists like parents,pro life and catholics.What cowarldly scum they are.How many attacks on American military is it now, 80 maybe, I've lost count.
Mark

 

[Combat]

These people are sick. I thought they were going to revoke the visas of these people raising havoc all over place.These scum are even trying to ruin our Christmas traditions. Ship them back where they belong. Lets see how brave they are against people who don't take their crap.Our government lets them run wild and does nothing. I guess their too busy chasing American terrorists like parents,pro life and catholics.What cowarldly scum they are.How many attacks on American military is it now, 80 maybe, I've lost count.
Mark

Unfortunately, much of this rhetoric is coming from our own academic community infecting students. Mostly white, liberal, wealthy, and college educated people who have convinced themselves that the US is a country that has oppressed certain classes of people and that these oppressed people now have a right to riot, threaten, and commit acts of violence due to real or imagined historical grievances (none of which anyone alive today suffered from). Of course they can advocate such nonsense because it has no direct impact on their own privileged lifestyles. If it wasn't such a serious situation it would be humorous that the most privileged in our society are advocating for their own destruction while having cocktails on Martha's Vineyard.

 

[tdubel]

Have to say that I was amazed, if not altogether surprised, to listen to the various college presidents who testified before Congress yesterday. Among other things, they said that advocating for genocide of Jews on their campus did not violate their policies on bullying or harassment. Think about that one. These people are highly intelligent. Some made reference to the First Amendment, but of course the First Amendment doesn't even apply to these private universities. I'm all for free speech but even the First Amendment doesn't permit threats of violence and mass murder. I can't imagine that if a threat of bodily harm was made against any individual student, that the university would suggest this was permissible free speech on their campus. No such threat against a minority student would ever be tolerated. Nor should it. And we know that certain conservative individuals have been precluded from speaking at these very same campuses. Apparently, no such free speech right applies to them even when they are not advocating any form of violence.

So what is going on here? My answer - which reflects only my opinion - is that certain political elements view the world strictly in terms of the oppressed and the oppressors. If you fall into the former category, then no rules of conduct apply because historical mistreatment justifies any conduct including threats, violence, riots, and even murder. This is a view shared not just by some members of the oppressed class itself but the academic intellectual community. It is a very frightening concept that the ends justify any means in these circumstances and that the laws and common sense provide no deterrent to this type of conduct. Not just in the opinion of lunatics, but the presidents of our most prestigious universities.

Doug,

Great post and I couldn't agree more. It is just nuts.
Tom

 

[Desertkiwi]

Have to say that I was amazed, if not altogether surprised, to listen to the various college presidents who testified before Congress yesterday. Among other things, they said that advocating for genocide of Jews on their campus did not violate their policies on bullying or harassment. Think about that one. These people are highly intelligent. Some made reference to the First Amendment, but of course the First Amendment doesn't even apply to these private universities. I'm all for free speech but even the First Amendment doesn't permit threats of violence and mass murder. I can't imagine that if a threat of bodily harm was made against any individual student, that the university would suggest this was permissible free speech on their campus. No such threat against a minority student would ever be tolerated. Nor should it. And we know that certain conservative individuals have been precluded from speaking at these very same campuses. Apparently, no such free speech right applies to them even when they are not advocating any form of violence.

So what is going on here? My answer - which reflects only my opinion - is that certain political elements view the world strictly in terms of the oppressed and the oppressors. If you fall into the former category, then no rules of conduct apply because historical mistreatment justifies any conduct including threats, violence, riots, and even murder. This is a view shared not just by some members of the oppressed class itself but the academic intellectual community. It is a very frightening concept that the ends justify any means in these circumstances and that the laws and common sense provide no deterrent to this type of conduct. Not just in the opinion of lunatics, but the presidents of our most prestigious universities.

.......And to think this is our future generation and the ones that will supposedly be running things when we're all older & retired and attempting to enjoy the fruits of a lifetime of hard graft.....