bobevenson wrote:We helped England before the war and after the war, but don't bother saying thank you. You and Bill make a fine team.
'We'? Did your family fight in this war? 'You' didn't 'help' us boob, you made loans that we've repaid with interest. You didn't 'help' us boob you followed your national interest in the Pacific but since Jap attacked 'you' and they were allied with Germany 'you' had to fight the Nazi, otherwise you'd still be over there trading with them.
Still, having said that I have and do pay my respects to the doughboys who died in that war, have or do you?
Wars should be fought with soldiers who are hired to do a job, and who can say, "Take this job and shove it!" at a moment's notice. Of course, only a prophet like me understands this.
bobevenson wrote:Wars should be fought with soldiers who are hired to do a job, and who can say, "Take this job and shove it!" at a moment's notice. Of course, only a prophet like me understands this.
Yeah, well we all know American soldiers have been running away from the enemy at the drop of a hat for 200 years - nothing new there.
bobevenson wrote:Wars should be fought with soldiers who are hired to do a job, and who can say, "Take this job and shove it!" at a moment's notice. Of course, only a prophet like me understands this.
Yeah, well we all know American soldiers have been running away from the enemy at the drop of a hat for 200 years - nothing new there.
First you say we're killing everybody, and then you say we're running away. Make up your mind, fool! By the way, I don't think King George was too happy about his redcoats running away from Americans who had enough of his taxation without representation.
bobevenson wrote:Wars should be fought with soldiers who are hired to do a job, and who can say, "Take this job and shove it!" at a moment's notice. Of course, only a prophet like me understands this.
Yeah, well we all know American soldiers have been running away from the enemy at the drop of a hat for 200 years - nothing new there.
First you say we're killing everybody, and then you say we're running away. Make up your mind, fool! By the way, I don't think King George was too happy about his redcoats running away from Americans who had enough of his taxation without representation.
Living in the past again?
As for killing "everybody", I have said no such thing. But the point I made is clear enough even for a fool like you.
You are oaky dropping agent Orange, or long distance bombing, but when it comes to a bit of face to face you couldn't even beat a medieval SE Asia country fighting on bicycles with 50 year old rifles.
As for Afghanistan you've been there more years than both World Wars put together and you are no more advanced than when you started. When you run in a year or two, the Taliban will be back within a 12 month.
bobevenson wrote:Wars should be fought with soldiers who are hired to do a job, and who can say, "Take this job and shove it!" at a moment's notice. Of course, only a prophet like me understands this.
They are called mercenaries and their use has been long understood.
bobevenson wrote:Wars should be fought with soldiers who are hired to do a job, and who can say, "Take this job and shove it!" at a moment's notice. Of course, only a prophet like me understands this.
They are called mercenaries and their use has been long understood.
Quit talking like the fool you are. Name me a single country that exclusively uses mercenaries. God, you're stupid!
You'd have to explain why your forces pretty much never go 'mano a mano' then? Instead they use drones and overwhelming technological force to settle the matter. Not that I think this wrong when it comes to combat but just find your armchair machismo laughable. Talk about unearned reflected 'glory'.
Arising_uk wrote: You'd have to explain why your forces pretty much never go 'mano a mano' then? Instead they use drones and overwhelming technological force to settle the matter. Not that I think this wrong when it comes to combat but just find your armchair machismo laughable. Talk about unearned reflected 'glory'.
You begin and end a post with smilies. I think I'll let it go at that.
bobevenson wrote:Quit talking like the fool you are. Name me a single country that exclusively uses mercenaries. God, you're stupid!
Where did I say anything about single use of mercs? The only soldiers who can say take this job and shove it are called mercenaries all others would be shot.
Are you talking about conscripts? If so that is interesting as the US Army still works and trains upon that model whereas the British Army is a professional one and mano-a-mano pretty much wins all friendly international war-games at that level.
Still, it is interesting that in the last few conflicts that the US has been involved in they have privatised a large chunk of the functions that used to be the purview of the military. Maybe thats why the various 'peaces' have been such a fucking disaster.
bobevenson wrote:You begin and end a post with smilies. I think I'll let it go at that.
Sometimes there's just nothing else that expresses the thought so well.
Notice how you find any reason to avoid the point or engage in it. Seek help.
Who the hell are you kidding? You've never asked a question or answered a question as far as I can see. People who use smilies have a problem with words. Either that or they're related to Bill. Whoa, is is possible that you're related to Bill, too?
bobevenson wrote:Quit talking like the fool you are. Name me a single country that exclusively uses mercenaries. God, you're stupid!
Where did I say anything about single use of mercs? The only soldiers who can say take this job and shove it are called mercenaries all others would be shot.
Are you talking about conscripts? If so that is interesting as the US Army still works and trains upon that model whereas the British Army is a professional one and mano-a-mano pretty much wins all friendly international war-games at that level.
Still, it is interesting that in the last few conflicts that the US has been involved in they have privatised a large chunk of the functions that used to be the purview of the military. Maybe thats why the various 'peaces' have been such a fucking disaster.
Hey, smilie, I guess what I said just went over your vacant air-head. If soldiers worked for the government under the same conditions that other people work for the government, there would be no wars. The government couldn't afford soldiers who are able to say, "Take this job and shove it!" Why do I always have to draw a fucking picture for you, like Ouzo that you still can't understand???
Its because your pictures are imbecilic. But maybe I misunderstand you as over here any soldier can buy themselves out of their contract, in fact the training is pretty much designed to weed out those who are unsuitable for a professional army. Are you saying the US soldier can't leave? They are conscripts?
You'd have to explain why your forces pretty much never go 'mano a mano' then? Instead they use drones and overwhelming technological force to settle the matter. Not that I think this wrong when it comes to combat but just find your armchair machismo laughable. Talk about unearned reflected 'glory'.