Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: USA's Global MilitaryDominance: Real Reason for Sanctions Against Iran


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: USA's Global MilitaryDominance: Real Reason for Sanctions Against Iran Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 7 [8]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: USA's Global MilitaryDominance: Real Reason for San... - 2/19/2010 3:03:21 PM   
xBullx


Posts: 4206
Joined: 10/8/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

Which nobody besides Patton fancied at the time...


Patton was the one who was famous for slapping arround a mental patient.


Tisk, tisk.... A Patton basher too. All his accomplishments and you have to highlight what you hope will serve as sufficient distraction.

Actually I must assume I would disagree with Hard Chargin' George Patton's strategy for the conquest of not Russia, but rather the Communist (USSR) agenda.

_____________________________

Live well,

Bull



I'm not an asshole; I'm simply resolute...

"A Republic, If You Can Keep It."

Caution: My humor is a bit skewed.

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 141
RE: USA's Global MilitaryDominance: Real Reason for San... - 2/19/2010 3:06:20 PM   
xBullx


Posts: 4206
Joined: 10/8/2005
Status: offline
-fast reply-

OK, I have to run take care of a few things, and I'm going to a fish fry, so if Thompson levies me with another time limit, I hope to be given a grace period....

_____________________________

Live well,

Bull



I'm not an asshole; I'm simply resolute...

"A Republic, If You Can Keep It."

Caution: My humor is a bit skewed.

(in reply to xBullx)
Profile   Post #: 142
RE: USA's Global MilitaryDominance: Real Reason for San... - 2/19/2010 3:08:53 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xBullx

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


Standing by your comment is one thing the question was and is how would you have accomplished the task of conquering the Russians?
Again anyone can thump their chest but how you gonna back up your bullshit?




Interesting how you seem to take everything at face value, at least if it supports your views. The Ahmadinejad interview, what we supposedly had within our weapons inventory and I assume more from there....

It really is not a question of what I believe the point is that you are disagreeing with something that you have never heard. Do you believe that that is an intelligent thing to do?



As I said, I stand by my initial comments.But I suppose just because you think you are right, surely I must be wrong.


I did not say you were wrong I asked how you would have done it?
You come on the boards like you are some military know it all and when asked a simple question you start dancing like a little girl at her first prom.
You said:

quote:

not attacking Russia at the end of WWII as black marks. But the conquest of land that was there to be had in my opinion is natural expansion.


Now just how would you have done that?


Concurrently, I never said I would have attacked the USSR, That was only your initial assumption, I offerred a possible method I thought was not employed.

Above please find your own words


My comment was as stated, that I viewed the lack of action as one of our historical black marks. The fact that we didn't confront Stalinism brought forth countless problems right up until today.

No your above remark states that attacking Russia would be for the gains in land not for your new found anti Stalin sentiments


(in reply to xBullx)
Profile   Post #: 143
RE: USA's Global MilitaryDominance: Real Reason for San... - 2/19/2010 3:14:08 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
I am judging him on his methods (past and present), actions and his company kept.

But you refuse to listen to what he says only what his enemies tell you he has said or done.
Do you really think that is the most rational route?

(in reply to xBullx)
Profile   Post #: 144
RE: USA's Global MilitaryDominance: Real Reason for San... - 2/19/2010 3:17:08 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
Tisk, tisk.... A Patton basher too. All his accomplishments and you have to highlight what you hope will serve as sufficient distraction

Besides running the vets out of DC at the point of a gun what else did "blood and guts" Patton actually do? What great decissive battles did he plan and execute?

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 145
RE: USA's Global MilitaryDominance: Real Reason for San... - 2/19/2010 3:20:15 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
OK, I have to run take care of a few things, and I'm going to a fish fry, so if Thompson levies me with another time limit, I hope to be given a grace period

You understand full well the meaning of the time limit. It was to show that you were less than truthful when you claimed to know what the president of Iran said.
Enjoy your fishfry we can solve the worlds problems another day.

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 146
RE: USA's Global MilitaryDominance: Real Reason for San... - 2/19/2010 3:38:19 PM   
xBullx


Posts: 4206
Joined: 10/8/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

not attacking Russia at the end of WWII as black marks. But the conquest of land that was there to be had in my opinion is natural expansion.


Now just how would you have done that?


Concurrently, I never said I would have attacked the USSR, That was only your initial assumption, I offerred a possible method I thought was not employed.

Above please find your own words


My comment was as stated, that I viewed the lack of action as one of our historical black marks. The fact that we didn't confront Stalinism brought forth countless problems right up until today.

No your above remark states that attacking Russia would be for the gains in land not for your new found anti Stalin sentiments




I hadn't got out the door just yet (headin' for the prom) and seen your post here.

I see now what may have caused a bit of a misunderstanding. When I typed the part about the conquest of land that was in reference to the American western expansion. I was making various references to that original post where you had a bunch of American conflicts listed. I suppose it is best to blame my gramatical deficiencies.

My bad, though you are welcome to dismiss my explanation, I now see why you were bent on making this a ground conflict based in response to me.

Even had we attacked the USSR, I would not have thought occupying or colonizing that wilderness a solid idea. 

The military know it all is a bit harsh though, and certainly since that is what it looks like you consider yourself to be.

Let's just agree to dislike one another and attack any comments the other makes for the rest of our existance....

Have a great night! Jarhead...

< Message edited by xBullx -- 2/19/2010 3:43:03 PM >


_____________________________

Live well,

Bull



I'm not an asshole; I'm simply resolute...

"A Republic, If You Can Keep It."

Caution: My humor is a bit skewed.

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 147
RE: USA's Global MilitaryDominance: Real Reason for San... - 2/19/2010 3:46:37 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xBullx

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

not attacking Russia at the end of WWII as black marks. But the conquest of land that was there to be had in my opinion is natural expansion.


Now just how would you have done that?


Concurrently, I never said I would have attacked the USSR, That was only your initial assumption, I offerred a possible method I thought was not employed.

Above please find your own words


My comment was as stated, that I viewed the lack of action as one of our historical black marks. The fact that we didn't confront Stalinism brought forth countless problems right up until today.

No your above remark states that attacking Russia would be for the gains in land not for your new found anti Stalin sentiments




I hadn't got out the door just yet (headin' for the prom) and seen your post here.

I see now what may have caused a bit of a misunderstanding. When I typed the part about the conquest of land that was in reference to the American western expansion. That original post  I suppose it is best to blame my gramatical deficiencies.

That makes much more sense than the way I took it...thanks for the clarification.

My bad, though you are welcome to dismiss my explanation, I now see why you were bent on making this a ground conflict based in response to me.

Even had we attacked the USSR, I would not have thought occupying or colonizing that wilderness a solid idea. 

It was what Hitler had planned

The military know it all is a bit harsh though, and certainly since that is what it looks like what you consider yourself to be.

I am not the one with all the chest thumping and rhetoric and the bullshit about the Iran rescue mission

Let's just agree to dislike one another and attack any comments the other makes for the rest of our existance....

So far you have not given me a reason to dislike you.

Have a great night! Jarhead...

Well maybe now you have


(in reply to xBullx)
Profile   Post #: 148
RE: USA's Global MilitaryDominance: Real Reason for San... - 2/19/2010 3:53:40 PM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xBullx
Actually I must assume I would disagree with Hard Chargin' George Patton's strategy for the conquest of not Russia, but rather the Communist (USSR) agenda.

Did he even have a strategy for conquering Russia in the first place? I thought he was just talking about keeping heading east after they'd taken Berlin.

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to xBullx)
Profile   Post #: 149
RE: USA's Global MilitaryDominance: Real Reason for San... - 2/19/2010 3:56:03 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead


quote:

ORIGINAL: xBullx
Actually I must assume I would disagree with Hard Chargin' George Patton's strategy for the conquest of not Russia, but rather the Communist (USSR) agenda.

Did he even have a strategy for conquering Russia in the first place? I thought he was just talking about keeping heading east after they'd taken Berlin.


Patton was a fucking moron.

(in reply to Moonhead)
Profile   Post #: 150
RE: USA's Global MilitaryDominance: Real Reason for San... - 2/19/2010 4:57:01 PM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead


quote:

ORIGINAL: xBullx
Actually I must assume I would disagree with Hard Chargin' George Patton's strategy for the conquest of not Russia, but rather the Communist (USSR) agenda.

Did he even have a strategy for conquering Russia in the first place? I thought he was just talking about keeping heading east after they'd taken Berlin.


Patton was a fucking moron.
And the hits just keep on coming.....

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 151
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 6 7 [8]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: USA's Global MilitaryDominance: Real Reason for Sanctions Against Iran Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 7 [8]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094