And if i remember my world history Great Briton was the country who did the most appeasing
And if i remember my world history Great Briton was the country who did the most appeasing
Probably, but they had their justifications at the time. Sure, in hindsight, appeasing Hitler was probably the greatest mistake of the 20th century, but at the time, most of Europe actually respected what Hitler had done in Germany and didn't realize what a madman he was.
What Hitler did that befuddled the rest of the world was:
He actually told the truth in public, and lied in private when other leaders would question him. No one had ever thought of this sort of tactic before really.
Take care all.
Actually, the Japanese army is one of the most trained armies in the world, with some of the best techonology and personnel. Do not underestimate the Japanese when it comes to war - they have a past rich in that.actually my point on all this is the fact the japanese arent ready for war. every other country trains their soildgers in combat, interrogation and how to survive it....in assasination and everything else.....but the japanese, due to their past, train their sooildgers in how to erct buildings and put out fires...barely any combat training at all and no actual experiance....i feel sorry for them. i dont have a love for the japanese because of their large violations against animal rights...but their current military is simply unprepared and untraind. they are great and exceptional at aid work and rescuing..but war. even their own people know this. if it were any other country...they could tuff it out....but sending the japanese soildgers is like sending kids, they are smart, but unexperianced and untrained...poor buggers
Last edited by War Angel; 04-24-2004 at 08:10 PM.
When fighting monsters, be wary not to become one yourself... when gazing into the abyss, bear in mind that the abyss also gazes into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
The rightful owner of this Ciddie can kiss my arse! :P
sorry War, but all my points came from teh japanese themselves...the soildgers, the public and their government. i dont doubt that their weaponry is topnotch, but their soildgers by their own admition have been improperly trained due to teh stigma of the past that over shadows them. it's not my fault if thats their own oppinion of themselves.
samurai werent much better either for that matter, that was a whole messed up situation.
your right guys, britian did indeedtry working thinks out with the nazis and come to a peaceful solution as every government should, but it was hitler who came to us first and asked for our hand in freindship to rule earth togeather. that was when churchill told him to sod off and WE began to fight not only for england but for europe against an awsome enemy with cutting edge technology.....unlike the USA who recently let loose on a poeple with barely any weaponry and plenty of stones. Britain shamefully helped too, despite teh overwhelming reluctance of it's people.
The world can end in a blood smeared second, but as warriors we live within those seconds.
Peacefull solution? The Brits just looked the other way as someone whom they told that they could only have so many boats no planes and just so many soldiers mounted their forces beyond their limits. They were too cowardly to back up their words with force and look where it got us. They pissed them off in the first place by humilliating them then they couldnt even back up what they said before! The US knew it was a bad idea to piss them off but the Brits ignored us! NOW your saying OUR rulers are stupid!?
EDIT: Happy Soul Ice?
Last edited by TasteyPies; 04-26-2004 at 12:54 AM.
why are you blaming Snowman?Peacefull solution? you just looked the other way as someone whom you told that they could only have so many boats no planes and just so many soldiers mounted their forces beyond their limits. You were too cowardly to back up your words with force and look where it got us. You pissed them off in the first place by humilliating them then you couldnt even back up what you said before! The US knew it was a bad idea to piss them off but you ignored us! NOW your saying OUR rulers are stupid!
I guess Kalashnikovs, Rocket-Propelled Grenades, and Mortars are considered stones, right?Originally Posted by Snowman
I know I'm getting in on a debate a little late but this is interesting.The entire situation boils down to this- are the needs of many above the needs of few or vice-versa. If the japanese pull out, than the 3 men live and the Japs cant help Iraq gain freedom anymore. If the 3 men are killed, than thats -3 for Japan and hopefully a shot at helpin the Iraqis.
I'd have to take into consideration what Snowman said however, that the Japs may not be ready for war. The fact is, they just got a military privelidge back. In WW2 They lost the right to have a military. How prepared they are is questionable, so pulling out may not be a bad idea after all.
I'd have to agree too, with Talus in his previous statement. The US didnt foolishly attack Iraq. They had a legit. reason. If the Iraqis didnt fight back with "stones", than the death rate would stop and peace might come about.
Case and point: Although the Japanese dont want 3 men to die, it might be neccecary in order to continue in the Iraqi Peace Program with the US.
"They had a legit. reason."
Did they though? Surely, the USA had reasons, but they've all been proven to be far from legit. I'm not debating as to whether or not going in their to help the people was right, or that Saddam shouldn't have been removed, but our "reasons" for going in were far from legit.
Take care all.
The decision of the Japanese is probably cultural as well as practical. The Japanese believed that death in battle was the most honorable way to go, as well as death in service of one's lord and country. The terrorist tactics which would probably work well on America (our citizens would be up in arms if the government allowed an American hostage to be killed despite our "we do not negotiate with terrorists" creed) because the Japanese, due to their culture, would be more likely to accept such a thing and honor the sacrifice of their armies, though it may not sit well with the younger members of the population.
You forgot the T-62s, 72s, and 80s, the SCUD missiles, and the chemical\biological warheads.I guess Kalashnikovs, Rocket-Propelled Grenades, and Mortars are considered stones, right?
When fighting monsters, be wary not to become one yourself... when gazing into the abyss, bear in mind that the abyss also gazes into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
The rightful owner of this Ciddie can kiss my arse! :P
You mean Iraq resistance groups have chemical and biological warheads? Woah. And I don't know what "80s" is, but it makes me thing about a Boy George-shooting cannon.
Maybe if another country invaded your country, bombed your houses, killed your family and ruined your life, you would not have too many reasons against fighting back with "stones". Anyone who was not expecting resistance to show up in form of terrorism is preety naive. And this war was supposed to be "against terrorism", but I can't see a decrease in terrorism....If the Iraqis didnt fight back with "stones", than the death rate would stop and peace might come about.
actually Pies, the reg's that stipulated no military were formed by europe and the UK, not soly britain. and hitler built that military over years, training children to ride gliders so that they could later become pilots. like teh rest of nighbouring eurupe we were delayed by hitlers greatest skill - propoganda which also fooled the usa. but when they began making a move it was the british who held them off with teh assictance of underground european forces....the yanks couldnt put down their dicks untill it was all over.
no Talus, that would be the small ordiance that both america and the UK sold to them. if iraque had half the weaponry that america and Blair propaganderd they had the war would have been alot harder considering that there was almost NO protection against bilogical weaponry provided for UK military untill AFTER the war. the filters were even missing offa our tanks.
Vince.....the whole premise was WMD, which there was NONE of. if they now claim it was simply because of a evil dictator...theres planety of them around which bush takes no interest in..zimbabwe for example.
then again bush is now trying to cover up the actual amount of US casualties, we should have been out of there long ago.
i wonder if the fact that american soildgers over there pass jokes about the food being crap to the extent that a burgerking has flown over there, the fact many refuse to pick up teh local direlect and the extra point that many soildgers have pleaded that they are mentally unfit to fight there and the militarys response was to give them drugs like dope......i wonder if america is now oppressing iraque, or would that come from bush's need to convert them to christianity.
The world can end in a blood smeared second, but as warriors we live within those seconds.
I don't see a single fact among that. To me, you're just spouting a bunch of unbased crap in a vain attempt to make a point. It usually helps if your "facts" are true before you try to argue.
ARGUMENT FROM GUITAR MASTERY
(1) Eric Clapton is God.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
Explain.
What the hell are you talking about?
Posting Permissions
