Nute Gunray Posted March 3, 2002 Share Posted March 3, 2002 i'm surprised this thread has lasted so long without someone pointing out that strategy is misspelled in the title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Odin Posted March 3, 2002 Share Posted March 3, 2002 Originally posted by Jem The main diiference between the Canadian and US military is that the US are policing and Canada is peace keeping. As for Bush being a srew up, I remember very well that some of you guys thought the same and complained when he got elected. You know Jem the common Streotype of Canada is that you are all extremely stupid and iggnorant, I'm almost sure that isn't true, but again.... Ever think why it is that the US is "policing the world" because if we weren't then there would be chaos, before you go and say anything more about the US ask yourself this. Who then help brits when apeasing Hitler failed? Who was that lead the fight in Somolia to get food to the starving, in Bosnia and Kosovo to end Ethinic Cleansing? Who keep the soviets from running all over Europe? Who help Europe rebuild after WWII? Answer to all of that is the US. what really pisses me off is when all you foriengers complain about America, with no idea how much we have done for you. America is always looked at to solve all the worlds problems, and then you ***** about how we do it. (this is not torwards anyone person in paticular) Deac, think about why those nonmilitary advancements have been made. It was when humans could die, that we advance, war makes humans die as such causes much advancement to lessen this and make war shorter. Astroids hitting the earth would be massive death so we are trying to develop ways to protect against it. War doesn't cause advancement but the death of humans does. Also at least in the USA we only use English and not french, come Canada cant' decide on one language you wonder why they dont' have participate in many wars because they can't make up their minds. People were worried about Bush when elected they are now very happy with his leadership. Jackal : Those four ships were tugboats weren't they, and saying Canada has ships but no one to man them isn't a very good defense. It is like saying I have a tank but no gas, or bullets.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitro Posted March 3, 2002 Share Posted March 3, 2002 Funny how you never mentioned the fact that we kicked your ass when you tried to invade... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Odin Posted March 3, 2002 Share Posted March 3, 2002 The british prevented the invasion not you canadians. I like how went from talking about the brits to the canadains Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander 598 Posted March 3, 2002 Share Posted March 3, 2002 Speaking of other Countries and war... Anyone remember when the Royal Marines stepped of the plane over in Afghanistan? They were...OVERLY prepared. To me they looked like idiots! I'm sure i'm not the only one who thinks that either. Steppin off the plane fully armed... HA! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitro Posted March 3, 2002 Share Posted March 3, 2002 Originally posted by Commander 598 They were...OVERLY prepared. To me they looked like idiots! In combat, there's no such thing as being too prepared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jem Posted March 3, 2002 Share Posted March 3, 2002 Originally posted by Nute Gunray Then why are you posting on a forum originally intended to be used for the discussion of an <b>American</b> PC game based on an <b>American</b> movie unless you're one of these feeble minded people too? I didn't express myself correctly, I should have said "American bad influence" instead of "bad american influence". Formulated this way it means that not every influence are bad, such as the good movies Hollywood brings us ... but I don't think leisure goes with the idea of influence...maybe...I dunno. Originally posted by Admiral You know Jem the common Streotype of Canada is that you are all extremely stupid and iggnorant, I'm almost sure that isn't true, but again.... Everyone thinks of a negative stereotype concerning other countries. I remember thinking that the french were all gay and obssessed with sex... this one is a bit true Anyways most people think everbody is the same in their country. The way I descibed, or theJackal described the Americans is how I think most of them tend to be ("tend" is an important word here). Maybe it has something to do with pride, I dunno. Not all of them are like that but a lot are. Originally posted by Admiral (1)Who then help brits when apeasing Hitler failed? (2)Who was that lead the fight in Somolia to get food to the starving, in Bosnia and Kosovo to end Ethinic Cleansing? (3)Who keep the soviets from running all over Europe? (4)Who help Europe rebuild after WWII? Answer to all of that is the US Yes it was the US, but why? Short answers, step by step: 1/ US closed their eyes on WWII until they got attacked, and since their new ennemies were also the ennemies of the allies...well you get the point. 2/The US leading (I'm not even sure they led, except for Somalia, I'm just trusting you on ths one) doesn't mean they did everything alone. Other countries were concerned. And the US, including other countries, didn't always help those in need: like in Ruwanda. Ruwanda was the biggest Ethinic Cleansing after WWII, the exterminations were even faster than those led by the nazies... 3/Well you do know that the Soviets did a really good job from keeping the nazies from running all over Europe, pushing them away until they reached Berlin. 4/This was mainly done for economical reasons. The US new the debts that Europe would have towards them would bring in the $$ and would make their country highly important for europe making those countries dependent over the US. Of course there was also common sense, you can't leave a whole continent in ruins... BTW did that help also concern USSR who suffered the most war victims? I'd like to point out something: I've always said that no one can criticize a country if he doesn't visit the country to know it and it's people. It's kinda like if a movie critic would criticise a movie he didnt see, nonsense! I'm lucky to have known <u>at least</u> two countries of each continent. So when I'm talking about a country I usually know what I'm saying. Voila. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nute Gunray Posted March 3, 2002 Share Posted March 3, 2002 Jem, just shut up. You're losing because even your WHY AMERICA SUCKS arguments are starting to contradict yourself. 1/ US closed their eyes on WWII until they got attacked, and since their new ennemies were also the ennemies of the allies...well you get the point. TEH AMERICA IS POLICING HTE EARTH AND THAT IS HTE BAD OH NO THEY FAILED TO DO THIS OH NO THEY SUCK. You said America fails to be awesome because we like (actually hate) stupid police actions but then the times we didn't get involved because it was none of our business we ****ed up...? So everything we do, regardless if it's America's business or not is the wrong thing? 2/The US leading (I'm not even sure they led, except for Somalia, I'm just trusting you on ths one) doesn't mean they did everything alone. Other countries were concerned. And the US, including other countries, didn't always help those in need: like in Ruwanda. Ruwanda was the biggest Ethinic Cleansing after WWII, the exterminations were even faster than those led by the nazies... Yes, the US LEAD EVERYTHING AFTER 1942 with the exception of the things the Soviets led. That's what "being a superpower" is all about. <i>No one</i> ever called Britian, France, and especially Canada a superpower. That term was reserved for the US and the Soviet Union (btw, the two most powerful nations ever in the history of everything all because of obscenely powerful militaries). I love how the EU fawns over China and North Korea while the US loathes them. Why do we loathe this countries so? <b>MASS ETHNIC KILLINGS</b>. Wow, the US decides not to get involved in something a few times (because, you know, how we're the world cop and all and it's our duty (although you also say it's not our duty and should mind our own business)) and we then hate the countries that committed genocide we're being mean and simplistic (WHAT! AXIS OF EVIL! WHAT IS THESE SIMPLISTIC TERMS! NO COUNTRY CAN JUST BE "EVIL!") 3/Well you do know that the Soviets did a really good job from keeping the nazies from running all over Europe, pushing them away until they reached Berlin. Way to oversimplify an entire war. The Russians were BEAT. That's a FACT. Europe tries to say THE RUSSIANS COULD HAVE DONE IT WITHOUT THE US. Too bad the <b>entirely of the US military supplies (ie the Lend Lease Act) was sent to Russia and not the other Allies</b>. The Russians were OUT of the war. The Nazi incompetence and round the clock American bombing kept the Nazis from producing equipment in the numbers they needed to take down the Russians. Remember how the Russians were DESPERATE for the second front...it wasn't just so it would look neat on a map to have arrows pointing at Germany from both sides. The British, ANZAC, French, and Polish couldn't start a second front on their own and the Russians knew they didn't have a chance unless someone stepped in. Enter America. We supplied the men and the equipment in the numbers needed to seriously prevent German production from being great enough to threaten the Russians further. After the war, the various world politicians KNEW the US was the reason the Nazis were defeated. Why else would they follow whatever hairbrained scheme we came up with and make us captain of "Team NATO?" 4/This was mainly done for economical reasons. The US new the debts that Europe would have towards them would bring in the $$ and would make their country highly important for europe making those countries dependent over the US. Of course there was also common sense, you can't leave a whole continent in ruins... BTW did that help also concern USSR who suffered the most war victims? OH NO! AN ALTERIOR MOTIVE. Too bad this was <b>everyone on every side in the entire war</b> that was doing that. Firstly, the US didn't wake up on December 8th 1941 and think "**** we have to go to war and make everyone dependent on American steel so we can make a giant mountain of money." It was "Holy living **** we got attacked. Who else would like to attack us and what is the fastest course to beat the **** out of them before they hit us?" And stop making up history. The Soviets did lose a monstrous amount of people, but they came out in better shape than anyone else that actually got attacked directly in the war. The Soviets recovered on their own, without any American assistance because they were "SHUT UP AMERICA THIS IS OUR COUNTRY YOU STAY THE HELL OUT." They rebuilt themselves and in a matter of years were Superpower #2. The Soviets were well on their way to their pre-war level of existance before the British we even off of food rationing. THAT is a fact. The BRITISH actually suffered worse than anyone else. I'd like to point out something: I've always said that no one can criticize a country if he doesn't visit the country to know it and it's people. It's kinda like if a movie critic would criticise a movie he didnt see, nonsense! I'm lucky to have known <u>at least</u> two countries of each continent. So when I'm talking about a country I usually know what I'm saying. Uh, I may have never been to MARS but I'm pretty sure I can criticize it for it's lack of an atmosphere capable of sustaining higher life forms. Just because you've been there or not been there doesn't mean ****. You apparently will make up contradictory statements that both prove and disprove yourself right so who knows what's going on. I've been to KENTUCKY quite a few times and i STILL don't know anything useful about Kentucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander 598 Posted March 3, 2002 Share Posted March 3, 2002 Originally posted by Nitro In combat, there's no such thing as being too prepared. Unless the majority of the people in the area are not prepared(at leats not for a .5 second reaction)(They always have a rifle close at hand) and you are stepping off a plane surrounded by a couple hundred troops who mostly are either sleeping,smoking,sleeping,or just standing around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr. Cracken Posted March 4, 2002 Share Posted March 4, 2002 I agree with Nute, the Russians wre pretty much begging, crying, pleading for a second front, so the Nazi would have to divert forces, spliting the army in two. (half on the west, half on the East) This would give the Russians the time to re-enforce, and push the Eastern front towards Berlin. We provided that, and that's why the War was won. If the US decided to ignore Europe, and go after the Japs first, the War probably would have been lost, and we'd all be speaking German right about now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander 598 Posted March 4, 2002 Share Posted March 4, 2002 The Russian's had firepower. They just didn't have much of it. When they signed a pact with Hitler they moved their best units towards the east in case of a Japanese invasion. I recall a German Officer with a group of Panzers. His account stated that the Russian T34s were greater even than their Tiger tanks. I even believe that he said something about their shots bouncing off the T34s slanted armor. I would now like to recall an attempted assault by the Germans against the Russians. Germany had hundreds of Panzer and Tiger units moving against Russia. The Russians had a much higher elevation than the German invasion force so they used mass artillery placed around the ridges to wipe out the Germans. One German soldier's account said that they were walking into a wall of fire. The Russians had special soldiers down with the invasion force placed in trenches to take out the German soldiers and tanks. They also had alot of minefields placed perfectly. In the end only a few Tiger tanks broke through but they were later surrounded by T34s and destroyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jem Posted March 4, 2002 Share Posted March 4, 2002 Originally posted by Nute Gunray Jem, just shut up. You're losing because even your WHY AMERICA SUCKS arguments are starting to contradict yourself. whoa, temper temper, calm down, go fetch yourself something sedative...you need it real bad. NEVER have I said that I was doing an AMERICAN SUCKS argument. I'm not one of'em dumb "Anti-other country" idiots. I never adopt the "Anti" attitud, I'm just the "don't care" kinda guy. I started this because I wanted to have a good argument (hey anyone see that "Good argument" thingy from Monty Python? SO funny.) I did mention my answers would be short and when I say short that means no details so even a 5 year old would have no difficulty contradicting what I wrote. They are short because all of this isn't important to me (not important doesn't mean I don't give a damn...I wouldn't be posting anything if it were so...) Contrary to you, I don't waste my time posting huge essays about stuff I won't care about within the next 48 hours. Anyways I've read a lot of arguments with s**tloads of cr*p in my life but I think yours is number one, despite the fact that somethings are very true. My reaction to what you said? Careless. People like you have an obssession in having the last word in everything, no matter what, I'd be wasting my time correcting or arguing against some stuff you said because I know it would result in yet an other,long, zealot post. And besides Nute, I wasn't even talking to you, I was addressing myself to Admiral so you should be the one shutting up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taarkin Posted March 4, 2002 Share Posted March 4, 2002 Those panzers were a ***** to maintain. During certain parts of the winter, there were a total of around THIRTY panzers operational on the ENTIRE EASTERN FRONT on any given day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jem Posted March 4, 2002 Share Posted March 4, 2002 Originally posted by Cmdr. Cracken the Nazi would have to divert forces, spliting the army in two. (half on the west, half on the East) This would give the Russians the time to re-enforce, and push the Eastern front towards Berlin. The Main reason why the Soviets got rid of the Nazis was that there was this Nord/South Split. Hilter sucked in military strategy, he had planned to invade Moscow before winter came and everything was going well, they were going to reach Moscow on time, until Hitler decided to split the invading army so he could also get to Stalingrad. This was a major mistake. Because of this the army didn't reach it's targets before winter and they weren't equipped with winter clothing, dying because of the cold and forced to abandon several vehicules...Afterwords Hiltler once again changed the course of his invading force so that those who were suppose to invade Stalingrad would join back the forces heading to Moscow. This was a mistake in a mistake. Anyways the assault that was suppose to finish before winter lasted several winters and caused their defeat. this was a very brief explanation because I can barely remember how everything went exactly: I'm not fanatical anout miltary history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nute Gunray Posted March 4, 2002 Share Posted March 4, 2002 I'm not one of'em dumb "Anti-other country" idiots. I never adopt the "Anti" attitud, I'm just the "don't care" kinda guy. You're anti-American cloaked. If you're PRO one thing (Canada, for some odd reason) then you're ANTI another. Simple. even a 5 year old would have no difficulty contradicting what I wrote Maybe too simple. You kept contradicting yourself. Contrary to you, I don't waste my time posting huge essays about stuff I won't care about within the next 48 hours. These aren't 'huge' by any stretch. I could go on for about 30 pages about why I hate the UN. In fact, in high school I wrote a 1200+ word essay about that very subject and only stopped because I didn't have any more paper. People like you have an obssession in having the last word in everything, no matter what, I'd be wasting my time correcting or arguing against some stuff you said because I know it would result in yet an other,long, zealot post. There's nothing to correct. My facts are accurate. I win. yes, I have an obsession getting the last word. It's called "getting the last word so that I prove I'm better than the other guy." It's fun and the American way. GO AMERICA. And besides Nute, I wasn't even talking to you, I was addressing myself to Admiral so you should be the one shutting up. You never said "TO ADMIRAL." You launched off about America in WWII. Being American and knowing about WWII, I set things straight according to how reality perceived them. I shall always get the final word, even if no one wants to hear it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tek Gunner Posted March 4, 2002 Share Posted March 4, 2002 I DECLARE AMERICA THE WINNER!! (PS this thread has degraded to one big bowl of STUPID. THANKS A LOT, JEM) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.