US presidential elections and the wider world

Reliant121 · Post by **Reliant121** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 7:46 pm

indeed

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:23 pm

Deepcrush wrote:I was talking about a 'minor' mistake were a union ship mistook a spainish merchant for a rebel frigate since they look so much alike (THEY LOOK NOTHING ALIKE YOU STUPID BLUE BACK!) it would be understandable to misplace a shot or two (OVER 100 CANNON SHOT POURED INTO THE SIZE OF A STEAMBOAT YOU F** INBRED!). Such things happen in war. Even if you are meant to shoot at a flag with crossed stars and you instead shoot at one with a taco on it. Again the ability of Americans to aim is proven proper.

Ah, my apologies.

sunnyside wrote:We're getting better! Lately we're only hitting British and Canadian forces.

*cough*chineseembassy*cough*

However painting the flag on in addition would probably be a good idea since one flag looks very much like another when it isn't wide open. Also it could be hard to see from air.

Recognition from the air is done by laying enormous day-glow organge covers over armoured vehicles. In one incident in the Second Gulf War, an A-10 pilot saw these, but managed to convice himself that they were missile launchers.

One British soldier was killed in the subsequent attack. In an incident from the First Gulf War an Abrams put a shell right through the middle of a similar side-mounted panel. Fortunately in that case everyone survived.

As an aside, the modern US armed forces as a rule don't have too much of a problem with blue-on-blues - they happen, but that's the case with all armies. The problem is with their close air support, particularly A-10s. They give the disinct impression that they get their vehicle recognition guides from Chrismas crackers.

Post by **Mikey** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:25 pm

In that respect and in all others, Warthog pilots are a breed apart - an enigmatic breed, at that.

Deepcrush · Post by **Deepcrush** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:28 pm

*cough*chineseembassy*cough*

Oh please, we meant to do that one. They had it coming!

Deepcrush · Post by **Deepcrush** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:30 pm

They give the disinct impression that they get their vehicle recognition guides from Chrismas crackers.

*closes his mouth and hides his animal crackers box* 8)

Post by **Mikey** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 11:38 pm

Umm, Deep? In England, I think Christmas crackers refer to noisemaker-packages that have small gifts or toys inside.

Monroe · Post by **Monroe** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 7:28 am

Animal Crackers are tasty creatures, many endangered, baked and put into a box for our enjoyment.

DEATH TO THE ANIMAL CRACKERS!

Granitehewer · Post by **Granitehewer** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:16 am

Monroe wrote: The Soviet Union was the key to defeating Nazism in Europe. America was the key to beating Imperial Japan.

Thanks for the potted history there,it is widely argued in peer-reviewed journals, that if it weren't for the lend-lease supplying the former soviet union, with 23 out of every 25 locomotives (1,984 out of 2077), 19,000 aircraft (15.3% of total soviet inventory), and 64.6% of the soviet truck force, not to mention the raw materials and (7,058) AFV's amounting to 11.6billion dollars including 2.76 million tons of petroleum based products,806,000tons of non-ferrous metals, 106,896,000 tons of processed and unprocessed cotton, 16million pairs of boots, 4,479,000tons of food, that the soviet union would have been reduced to defensive operations and eventually collapsed.
So yes, the soviets were a significant force for defeating the nazis, but only with western aid.
So as my point earlier, stating that no one hegemony, country or geopolitical empire, is responsible for the victory, remains.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:54 pm

Granitehewer wrote:So yes, the soviets were a significant force for defeating the nazis, but only with western aid.
So as my point earlier, stating that no one hegemony, country or geopolitical empire, is responsible for the victory, remains.

Very true. The best summary of the defeat of Gemany I've ever heard was probably Stalin's: "Great Britain provided the time, America provided the money, and Soviet Russia provided the blood."

Post by **Mikey** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:10 pm

Hmmph. The only Soviet blood Stalin should have been worried about was the quantity which he spilled himself.

Post by **Mikey** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:22 pm

PS - check this out, it's hysterical:

http://blip.tv/file/520347

Reliant121 · Post by **Reliant121** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:26 pm

that is very funny if a bit strange

sunnyside · Post by **sunnyside** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 11:49 pm

I thought of this thread when I went over to bbc.com and saw more stories about American politics on the front of the news page than on cnn.com.

There must be interest over there or bbc wouldn't put multiple stories up.

Do people over there really follow and care about how the elections come out, or is it just curiosity or somesuch?

Also Ann Coulter has apperantly gone nuts in a new way for her. Previously she was just rabidly partisan. Now she seems to have completly flipped.
Coulterhttp://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/01/coulter-wants-clinton-over-mccain/

Or I suppose she could have been joking, but I have a bad feeling she wasn't.

Post by **Mikey** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 11:51 pm

gone nuts in a new way for her.

Very well put - it would be incorrect to imply that she wasn't nuts before.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:48 pm

I'm almost worried about the answer I'll get, but who is Ann Coulter?