If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(IBN Live (India))   China's peaceful rise now includes deployment of Su-27 fighters and an all-weather airbase in Tibet at 16,000 feet, just in case they feel like visiting India   (ibnlive.in.com) divider line 57
    More: Interesting, Tibet, Indians, peaceful rise, mainland China, Earth observation satellite, direct response, aerial refueling, CNN-IBN  
•       •       •

1150 clicks; posted to Politics » on 21 May 2013 at 9:24 AM (47 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



57 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-21 09:27:06 AM
Building up your military isn't peaceful now? Don't tell that to America. We will drone strike your entire family out of existence.
 
2013-05-21 09:27:28 AM
How dare any country but the United States have a military! We must build 17 more aircraft carriers to respond to this outrageous challenge to our hegemony.
 
2013-05-21 09:29:52 AM
We need to get into another land war in Asia.
 
2013-05-21 09:31:31 AM
America's "peaceful rise" is in my undershorts.

Got nothin'.
 
2013-05-21 09:33:26 AM

thurstonxhowell: Building up your military isn't peaceful now? Don't tell that to America. We will drone strike your entire family out of existence.


To be fair, without our extended Naval and Air power superiority policing the waterways and skyways of the world the global trade could come screeching to a halt as other powers moved in.

We are unfortunately, the worlds traffic cops
 
2013-05-21 09:34:40 AM
C'mon guys, stop biatching. Pull up your bootstraps and lets have some fun by making it 75+ wars the U.S. is involved in.
 
2013-05-21 09:38:15 AM
www.balettie.com
 
2013-05-21 09:41:43 AM
You know, i wonder what it would be like to watch an asia-wide war between China and everyone else on that continent (which may or may not involve other nations outside Asia) in this age of connectivity and 24 hour news.

And then i remember that both India and China have nukes, and i stop wondering.
 
2013-05-21 09:43:14 AM
Supposedly those Su-27s suck, in that China paid for new ones, but the Russians sold them refurbished used ones.
 
2013-05-21 09:44:40 AM

QuakerDude: C'mon guys, stop biatching. Pull up your bootstraps and lets have some fun by making it 75+ wars the U.S. is involved in.


That's a scary large number. Lets all be afraid
 
2013-05-21 09:48:40 AM

ha-ha-guy: Supposedly those Su-27s suck, in that China paid for new ones, but the Russians sold them refurbished used ones.


Even if that's true, does India have anything capable of matching those fighters?
 
2013-05-21 09:48:57 AM

thurstonxhowell: Building up your military isn't peaceful now? Don't tell that to America. We will drone strike your entire family out of existence.


Done in one. Everybody out. Don't forget your wigs and keys.
 
2013-05-21 09:49:53 AM

QuakerDude: C'mon guys, stop biatching. Pull up your bootstraps and lets have some fun by making it 75+ wars the U.S. is involved in.


Pure bullsh*t. Obama brought us like, change... and stuff.
 
2013-05-21 09:52:06 AM

Smoking GNU: ha-ha-guy: Supposedly those Su-27s suck, in that China paid for new ones, but the Russians sold them refurbished used ones.

Even if that's true, does India have anything capable of matching those fighters?


They will just ramp all of their trains up at Chinese aircraft. In defense, China will paint their jets like cows.

/and of course, we will go in after a winner is apparent, help with the victory, and then take credit for it for the next 70 years
 
2013-05-21 09:52:39 AM

Lost Thought 00: QuakerDude: C'mon guys, stop biatching. Pull up your bootstraps and lets have some fun by making it 75+ wars the U.S. is involved in.

That's a scary large number. Lets all be afraid


Do I have to be afraid now or can I finish breakfast first?
 
2013-05-21 09:53:49 AM

Smoking GNU: ha-ha-guy: Supposedly those Su-27s suck, in that China paid for new ones, but the Russians sold them refurbished used ones.

Even if that's true, does India have anything capable of matching those fighters?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_Indian_military_aircraft

They have 170 Su-30MKI
 
2013-05-21 09:56:51 AM

Smoking GNU: ha-ha-guy: Supposedly those Su-27s suck, in that China paid for new ones, but the Russians sold them refurbished used ones.

Even if that's true, does India have anything capable of matching those fighters?


India has Su-30 Flankers and Mig-29s.  The big problem with India is their logistics chain is the most dysfunctional mess of home grown, NATO, and Russian equipment I've ever seen (they have three different main battle tanks and all kinds of APCs).  I think that would hurt them more than anything else in a war.  Their Navy was godawful for awhile in that various carrier escorts couldn't share data on threats due to differences in hardware.  The Navy has gotten better, but it still isn't great.  China at least has a fairly unified logistics chain.
 
2013-05-21 09:58:59 AM
You see, Pakistan will go to war with India. China will ally with Pakistan and Iran. China will renew its invasion of India and disputed territories.

Then of course Big Dumb America will have to take up the white man's burden since the UK wants us to fight its oil wars for it. Just like the Pacific in WWII. Just like in Iraq.

So we'll start a draft pretty soon. And women will be drafted for combat this time.

My advice to you is to get yourself adopted by a US Senator. Or by some rich old white male industrialist. Old money never fights; it profits.
 
2013-05-21 10:01:41 AM

TheShavingofOccam123: Then of course Big Dumb America will have to take up the white man's burden since the UK wants us to fight its oil wars for it. Just like the Pacific in WWII.


The hell?
 
2013-05-21 10:16:14 AM
That would be like if the United States had Air Force bases near the Canadian border or something.

www.nicap.org
 
2013-05-21 10:21:45 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: TheShavingofOccam123: Then of course Big Dumb America will have to take up the white man's burden since the UK wants us to fight its oil wars for it. Just like the Pacific in WWII.

The hell?


The British and the Dutch did not have the resources to defend their oil interests in Asia. The US embargoed oil to Japan (80% of Japanese oil imports came via the US). The Japanese seized the Dutch oil fields.

I often think back to those terrible battles the Dutch fought on Iwo Jima, Saipan, Midway and all those other places in Asia. And the valiant defense of Singapore by the Brits who built a fortress (yes, in that modern warfare day). A fortress, mind you, that had no defense on its rear.  No tanks, outdated planes and the Brits just KNEW that the jungle was impassable. The Japanese passed through on bicycles. The Brits lasted 7 whole days and surrendered the largest number of personnel in British military history.

/yes, I know, the Philippines and MacArthur
 
2013-05-21 10:27:10 AM

TheShavingofOccam123: Philip Francis Queeg: TheShavingofOccam123: Then of course Big Dumb America will have to take up the white man's burden since the UK wants us to fight its oil wars for it. Just like the Pacific in WWII.

The hell?

The British and the Dutch did not have the resources to defend their oil interests in Asia. The US embargoed oil to Japan (80% of Japanese oil imports came via the US). The Japanese seized the Dutch oil fields.

I often think back to those terrible battles the Dutch fought on Iwo Jima, Saipan, Midway and all those other places in Asia. And the valiant defense of Singapore by the Brits who built a fortress (yes, in that modern warfare day). A fortress, mind you, that had no defense on its rear.  No tanks, outdated planes and the Brits just KNEW that the jungle was impassable. The Japanese passed through on bicycles. The Brits lasted 7 whole days and surrendered the largest number of personnel in British military history.

/yes, I know, the Philippines and MacArthur


The US embargoed oil to Japan because of the war of aggression in China and their move into French Indochina. None of which had to do with UK oil interests. The UK had very little, if any, Oil interest in the Pacific region

As to your snark about the Dutch (who incidentally are an entirely different nation than the UK) I suggest that you read a bit about the actions of the ABDA forces in the early months of the war.
 
2013-05-21 10:32:07 AM

TheShavingofOccam123: Philip Francis Queeg: TheShavingofOccam123: Then of course Big Dumb America will have to take up the white man's burden since the UK wants us to fight its oil wars for it. Just like the Pacific in WWII.

The hell?

The British and the Dutch did not have the resources to defend their oil interests in Asia. The US embargoed oil to Japan (80% of Japanese oil imports came via the US). The Japanese seized the Dutch oil fields.

I often think back to those terrible battles the Dutch fought on Iwo Jima, Saipan, Midway and all those other places in Asia. And the valiant defense of Singapore by the Brits who built a fortress (yes, in that modern warfare day). A fortress, mind you, that had no defense on its rear.  No tanks, outdated planes and the Brits just KNEW that the jungle was impassable. The Japanese passed through on bicycles. The Brits lasted 7 whole days and surrendered the largest number of personnel in British military history.

/yes, I know, the Philippines and MacArthur


Way to ignore the Chinese and Japanese interactions. Which ranged from humanitarian issues to the fact that Japan was trying to get its hands on Chinese Customs Revenue (which was collected by foreigners after the Qing fell), which was how China paid for its foreign debt.  America was pissed because Japanese actions in Manchuria destabilized Chinese trade and increased the risk that China would default on the debt it owed us.  Containment of Japan was pursued for numerous reasons that benefited America, not the Dutch and British.  If we were eager to be British pawns, we'd have come into the European theater early, as opposed to remained isolated in relation to Europe and only focusing on our colonial and economic interests in the Pacific.

/China still technically owes us for unpaid pre-WWII bonds still
//The CCP points out they didn't sign for the loan, so they aren't bound by it, but we're welcome to go collect from the KMT in Taiwan if we want
 
2013-05-21 10:44:25 AM

GameSprocket: That would be like if the United States had Air Force bases near the Canadian border or something.

[www.nicap.org image 850x519]


Pft.
Half of those are nothing but ICBM bases.  I doubt you could target a Minuteman III on Winnipeg.

/don't forget that NORAD has plenty of Canuckistani officers.
 
2013-05-21 10:44:47 AM

GameSprocket: That would be like if the United States had Air Force bases near the Canadian border or something.

[www.nicap.org image 850x519]


If the border wasn't demarcated, we fought a war w/ them in the last 50 years, we occasionally exchange gun fire w/ the mounties and kept playing chicken to see who could move their output the farthest forward; then yes its totally the same thing.

China is being a rather aggressive lately w/ their neighbors over boarder disputes, that's why this is actually important.
 
2013-05-21 10:57:19 AM

ShadowKamui: GameSprocket: That would be like if the United States had Air Force bases near the Canadian border or something.

[www.nicap.org image 850x519]

If the border wasn't demarcated, we fought a war w/ them in the last 50 years, we occasionally exchange gun fire w/ the mounties and kept playing chicken to see who could move their output the farthest forward; then yes its totally the same thing.

China is being a rather aggressive lately w/ their neighbors over boarder disputes, that's why this is actually important.


China invaded India (that statement might depend on whom you ask) in 1962. China declared a unilateral cease-fire that same year. They'll wait till Pakistan and India heat up then start things up again. Which is pretty much what has already happened very recently.

The Indians provided 2.5 million VOLUNTEERS to fight in WWII. People talk about the Soviets winning WWII but CBI would have been a serious defeat that led to even more serious defeats throughout Asia and into Europe without the 2.5 million volunteer force from India.

I'm sure we'll get right on with returning the favor.
 
2013-05-21 11:54:16 AM
"Twoeth by sea"... By sea, I mean the Straits of Malacca..
 
2013-05-21 12:04:31 PM

GameSprocket: That would be like if the United States had Air Force bases near the Canadian border or something.

[www.nicap.org image 850x519]


Now set the map to 1964 or '65. Three SAC bomber bases in Northern Michigan and Atlas missiles at Plattsburgh. More bombers at Loring, etc. etc.


Philip Francis Queeg: TheShavingofOccam123: Philip Francis Queeg: TheShavingofOccam123: Then of course Big Dumb America will have to take up the white man's burden since the UK wants us to fight its oil wars for it. Just like the Pacific in WWII.

The hell?

The British and the Dutch did not have the resources to defend their oil interests in Asia. The US embargoed oil to Japan (80% of Japanese oil imports came via the US). The Japanese seized the Dutch oil fields.

I often think back to those terrible battles the Dutch fought on Iwo Jima, Saipan, Midway and all those other places in Asia. And the valiant defense of Singapore by the Brits who built a fortress (yes, in that modern warfare day). A fortress, mind you, that had no defense on its rear.  No tanks, outdated planes and the Brits just KNEW that the jungle was impassable. The Japanese passed through on bicycles. The Brits lasted 7 whole days and surrendered the largest number of personnel in British military history.

/yes, I know, the Philippines and MacArthur

The US embargoed oil to Japan because of the war of aggression in China and their move into French Indochina. None of which had to do with UK oil interests. The UK had very little, if any, Oil interest in the Pacific region

As to your snark about the Dutch (who incidentally are an entirely different nation than the UK) I suggest that you read a bit about the actions of the ABDA forces in the early months of the war.


You might want to ask yourself where Royal Dutch Shell is headquartered. Then look up Burmah Oil, and tell us again how the Brits had no oil interests in the southwest Pacific whatsoever.
 
2013-05-21 12:08:38 PM
How the hell does a plane take off at 16,000 ft? Hell, even landing you'd likely be above your VF speed.
 
2013-05-21 12:20:17 PM

IdBeCrazyIf: thurstonxhowell: Building up your military isn't peaceful now? Don't tell that to America. We will drone strike your entire family out of existence.

To be fair, without our extended Naval and Air power superiority policing the waterways and skyways of the world the global trade could come screeching to a halt as other powers moved in.

We are unfortunately, the worlds traffic cops


Screeching halt? no.

Businesses arming their vessels and/or more countries stepping in to fill the void we leave? Absolutely.

We are subsidizing our businesses, and those of the rest of the world for sure. But trade isn't going to stop because we stop playing world police.
 
2013-05-21 01:05:47 PM

Smackledorfer: We are subsidizing our businesses, and those of the rest of the world for sure. But trade isn't going to stop because we stop playing world police.


Well one things for damn sure, we couldn't buy 4 dollar shirts made professional by a 6 year old in some shiat back water country
 
2013-05-21 01:08:06 PM

T-Servo: How the hell does a plane take off at 16,000 ft? Hell, even landing you'd likely be above your VF speed.


You roll it downhill? .
 
2013-05-21 01:36:44 PM

thurstonxhowell: Building up your military isn't peaceful now? Don't tell that to America. We will drone strike your entire family out of existence.


I'm surprised we're not selling T-shirts in Pakistan. We could have one with a picture of an al-Qaeda fighter on the right, a picture of a drone on the left, and caption it "Alien vs. Predator." It'd sell like hotcakes! Pakistan civilians could wrap the remains of their kids in them.
 
2013-05-21 01:50:49 PM
And now I know why everyone looked so nervous in Nepal last I was there.
 
2013-05-21 01:59:13 PM
Look at it from China's point of view. China is basically surrounded by  past and potential future enemies and/or rogue states of which many have nuclear capabilities, while also within their borders there are separatist movements (Uyghur, Tibetan).

They have a large border with Russia (nuclear), several middle eastern states which are a hotbed for terrorism supporting China's muslim separatists, India (nuclear), Taiwan, North Korea (nuclear) and several countries allied to the US and/or host to US bases (Japan, South Korea, Philippines, Kyrgyz etc).

All they have to do to win a conflict with India btw, is build a few dams in Tibet and cut off India's major water sources.
 
2013-05-21 02:00:28 PM

maxheck: And now I know why everyone looked so nervous in Nepal last I was there.


OK, you've been to Nepal. We get it.
 
2013-05-21 02:04:03 PM
juddcc:

maxheck: And now I know why everyone looked so nervous in Nepal last I was there.

OK, you've been to Nepal. We get it.


And if India is your target, Tibet about the worst place to start from.
 
2013-05-21 02:20:58 PM
China and India are not going to war anytime soon.  This is just muscle flexing on both sides.  However, both countries are going to have major population problems in the next 20 years.  Maybe it not such a bad idea for them to have a pop control event.
 
2013-05-21 03:03:48 PM

LibertyHiller: You might want to ask yourself where Royal Dutch Shell is headquartered.


The Hague.
 
2013-05-21 03:50:05 PM
The Royal Dutch Shell Group was created in February 1907 through the merger of two rival companies - Royal Dutch Petroleum Company (Dutch legal name : N.V. Koninklijke Nederlandsche Petroleum Maatschappij) and the "Shell" Transport and Trading Company Ltd of the United Kingdom...The terms of the merger gave 60% ownership of the new Group to the Dutch arm and 40% to the British.

My whole point in mentioning America's defending British and Dutch interests in Asia when they were supposedly incapable of doing so themselves was to point out much the same thing will happen in India if China goes to war with India when Pakistan goes to war with India (which is what happened when  there were military clashes between Pakistan and India).

The UK will not expend lives and fortunes defending their holdings in India. America will. And we will probably borrow the money to pay for that war, if it comes, from the Brits.
 
2013-05-21 04:05:30 PM
We better be on China side in this conflict. Cute girls and better long term stability both economically and culturally.

Fark india . Back stabbing is national sport with that country.

Also India is more of a federation of states and tribes just waiting to attack each other as it will descend into African state of flashwars.


" *Prosperity is the wings of the butterfly that will bring forth chaos."

//* read it on back of jasmine rice box .


encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com

OR
encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
 
2013-05-21 04:09:52 PM

Dr.Mxyzptlk.: We better be on China side in this conflict. Cute girls and better long term stability both economically and culturally.

Fark india . Back stabbing is national sport with that country.

Also India is more of a federation of states and tribes just waiting to attack each other as it will descend into African state of flashwars.


" *Prosperity is the wings of the butterfly that will bring forth chaos."

//* read it on back of jasmine rice box .

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 275x183]

OR
[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 278x181]


Your comparison is unfair and jarring. Here...

4.bp.blogspot.com

Now go and apologize to India.
 
2013-05-21 04:11:18 PM

TheShavingofOccam123: The Royal Dutch Shell Group was created in February 1907 through the merger of two rival companies - Royal Dutch Petroleum Company (Dutch legal name : N.V. Koninklijke Nederlandsche Petroleum Maatschappij) and the "Shell" Transport and Trading Company Ltd of the United Kingdom...The terms of the merger gave 60% ownership of the new Group to the Dutch arm and 40% to the British.

My whole point in mentioning America's defending British and Dutch interests in Asia when they were supposedly incapable of doing so themselves was to point out much the same thing will happen in India if China goes to war with India when Pakistan goes to war with India (which is what happened when  there were military clashes between Pakistan and India).

The UK will not expend lives and fortunes defending their holdings in India. America will. And we will probably borrow the money to pay for that war, if it comes, from the Brits.


No, actually you simply mentioned British interests to start.

Since you seem really determined to press this point of view. let's examine your error more closely shall we?

You seem to believe that the US actions against Japan were largely motivated by the desire to protect British (and amended to include Dutch when I corrected you). If that were the case, the absolute worst possible action the US could have taken was to embargo oil products sales to Japan. The embargo had the effect of encouraging Japan to attack the Dutch East Indies, and areas required to protect transport of oil from the region, such as the Philippines and  Malaysia. The Japanese would have far preferred to keep those troops and resources in their primary theater, China, rather than extending their lines and enlarging the war, but they felt compelled to secure a source of oil once they could no longer count on imports from the United States. The embargo is actually proof that the US cared almost nothing for the security of the dutch oil fields. We were motivated by factors which we felt were far more important.

Secondly. let me demolish your really rather bizarre notions that the British and Dutch sacrificed nothing.

Let's take the Dutch first. You seem unaware that in 1941 the Netherlands were militarily occupied by Nazi Germany. As a result there was no possibility of sending additional forces from the mother country. The local forces they remained in the region fought quite hard until conquered, and some well beyond that. As I previously noted you really should familiarize yourself with the ABDA command.

As for the British, approximately 80,000 British troops were captured in the fall of Singapore alone. Those 80,000 troops were committed at the same time that Britain was fighting for it's survival in Europe. Those troops underwent horrific conditions in captivity. Less than half survived the war.

Perhaps before you sneer at the unwillingness of the British and Dutch to die in large enough numbers to please you, you should consider the years they fought, protecting many US interests, while we sat on our asses and did nothing. Whether motivated by some bizarre nationalist animosity, or simple ignorance, you position does not bear even the slightest scrutiny.
 
2013-05-21 04:22:09 PM

TheShavingofOccam123: Dr.Mxyzptlk.: We better be on China side in this conflict. Cute girls and better long term stability both economically and culturally.

Fark india . Back stabbing is national sport with that country.

Also India is more of a federation of states and tribes just waiting to attack each other as it will descend into African state of flashwars.


" *Prosperity is the wings of the butterfly that will bring forth chaos."

//* read it on back of jasmine rice box .

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 275x183]

OR
[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 278x181]

Your comparison is unfair and jarring. Here...

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 293x306]

Now go and apologize to India.


So sorry but I am wrong caste and bride burning is not my thing.
//See muslim don't have monopoly on torturing women .
Still not boobs. Most the Indian women I see are nothing like that and always seem a little off kilter ?

encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com
 
2013-05-21 04:23:04 PM
Both sides could lose 500 million people and still be the most populous countries on Earth (I think?).
I'm not worried.
 
2013-05-21 05:24:28 PM
Although ABDACOM was only in existence for a few weeks, and it presided over one defeat after another...

The battle of the Netherlands lasted from 10 May 1940 until the main Dutch forces surrendered on the 14th. Dutch troops in the province of until May 17.


The reason why the battle only lasted one week was Netherlands wanted to remain neutral, just like it had during WWI.  The Dutch were the best at one thing--turning in Jews. They had one of the highest percentage of any Nazi occupied nation of their Jewish population turned over to the Nazis.

The fighting in the Battle of Singapore lasted from 8-15 February 1942.

The quality of those British soldiers lost at Singapore? Undertrained, underequipped and totally unprepared for facing some of the most experienced  Japanese military units. And as I mentioned the 10's of thousands of British military shrinks in comparison to the volunteer force of 2.5 million Indians who fought on the side of the Allies.

Do I think there were brave soldiers and sailors fighting before and after Americans got involved? Yes I do. I never said there weren't. And the soldiers were owed a huge apology by  governments who left them out there to hang because they wanted to remain neutral or didn't want to pay the price to hold an empire together. Do I think America took up the white man's capitalist burden tossed on us by the Dutch who wanted to remain neutral again and the British who wanted their empire as long as others--such as 2.5 million Indian VOLUNTEERS--fought for it? Sure I do.

And if the China-India war blows up again, the Brits and the Dutch won't be sending multiple carrier task forces to defend their economic interests and holdings in that part of the world. Big dumb America will be doing that for them. Again.
 
2013-05-21 05:37:21 PM

TheShavingofOccam123: Although ABDACOM was only in existence for a few weeks, and it presided over one defeat after another...

The battle of the Netherlands lasted from 10 May 1940 until the main Dutch forces surrendered on the 14th. Dutch troops in the province of until May 17.

The reason why the battle only lasted one week was Netherlands wanted to remain neutral, just like it had during WWI.  The Dutch were the best at one thing--turning in Jews. They had one of the highest percentage of any Nazi occupied nation of their Jewish population turned over to the Nazis.

The fighting in the Battle of Singapore lasted from 8-15 February 1942.

The quality of those British soldiers lost at Singapore? Undertrained, underequipped and totally unprepared for facing some of the most experienced  Japanese military units. And as I mentioned the 10's of thousands of British military shrinks in comparison to the volunteer force of 2.5 million Indians who fought on the side of the Allies.

Do I think there were brave soldiers and sailors fighting before and after Americans got involved? Yes I do. I never said there weren't. And the soldiers were owed a huge apology by  governments who left them out there to hang because they wanted to remain neutral or didn't want to pay the price to hold an empire together. Do I think America took up the white man's capitalist burden tossed on us by the Dutch who wanted to remain neutral again and the British who wanted their empire as long as others--such as 2.5 million Indian VOLUNTEERS--fought for it? Sure I do.

And if the China-India war blows up again, the Brits and the Dutch won't be sending multiple carrier task forces to defend their economic interests and holdings in that part of the world. Big dumb America will be doing that for them. Again.


The reason that the battle lasted one week was that The Netherlands had a fraction of the forces Nazi Germany had. The resistance during that week was strong enough that the Germans choose to launch massive bombing raids on Rotterdam to break the Dutch resistance.

Let's talk about inexperienced, ill trained and ill equipped troops that were forced to surrender, shall we. 75,00 troops surrendered at Bataan because he the cowardly US wanted others to fight for them, just like the British you so despise, right? Do the US soldiers who went through the Bataan Death march arouse the same disgust in you as the British troops in Singapore? Do you discount their sacrifices as well?

Your hatred of the Dutch and British really is immune to facts and reality, isn't it.? Tell us, champ, which country showed more courage in 1940, the Dutch who fought to protect their homeland from the Nazis, or the Americans who sat by and did absolutely nothing at all? Which brave and heroic country let the British fight to protect their interests for two years while they sat on the sidelines counting their profits?
 
2013-05-21 06:53:34 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: Tell us, champ, which country showed more courage in 1940, the Dutch who fought to protect their homeland from the Nazis, or the Americans who sat by and did absolutely nothing at all?


Was there a time when the Dutch came to North America and saved American asses by defeating America's enemy?  No, no there wasn't, so STFU and say thank you.  It's easy to show courage and defend your homeland because the alternative is dying in a death camp and watching your family sent into slavery ... you don't have a choice.  Going across and ocean to defeat someone else's enemy: that's a choice that takes courage and generosity - skew it with you anti-American bias if you please, but you're wrong.  Frankly I don't know what the hell Shaving's problem with the brits is, and I don't share his sentiment, but if you're going to quantify courage in WW2, you best not be standing in a country that was home to Chamberlain.
 
2013-05-21 08:29:33 PM

spiderpaz: Philip Francis Queeg: Tell us, champ, which country showed more courage in 1940, the Dutch who fought to protect their homeland from the Nazis, or the Americans who sat by and did absolutely nothing at all?

Was there a time when the Dutch came to North America and saved American asses by defeating America's enemy?  No, no there wasn't, so STFU and say thank you.  It's easy to show courage and defend your homeland because the alternative is dying in a death camp and watching your family sent into slavery ... you don't have a choice.  Going across and ocean to defeat someone else's enemy: that's a choice that takes courage and generosity - skew it with you anti-American bias if you please, but you're wrong.  Frankly I don't know what the hell Shaving's problem with the brits is, and I don't share his sentiment, but if you're going to quantify courage in WW2, you best not be standing in a country that was home to Chamberlain.


ohsnap.jpg

Seriously.
 
2013-05-21 10:15:30 PM
I don't get why anyone really takes Occam seriously here.  He just posts oil based conspiracy theories and ignores any and all points about how America had a variety of interests in China that shaped our policy.  Instead he just spouts bullshiat about Royal Dutch Shell being the Illumanti of the 20th century, so he's either a crackpot or a troll.  Perhaps both.
 
Displayed 50 of 57 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report