NationStates Jolt Archive

Nobody here plans to invade Iran. Only bomb the hell out of their reactors and military assets.
What would your country (whatever your Country is) do if another country Bombs your reactors?

...well thats exactly what the Iranians or the Koreans will do.

:rolleyes:

well you did invent a bombs i suppose we were going to follow you

so we did invent it! :D :p

dont argue with cornelieu he has words of infinate wisdom and is quit knowledgable
LOL is that sarcasm?

OceanDrive you could be right or you could be wrong. this thread is about that 5% of their media.. on another thread with a different subject you could find out there is more brainwash than that ;)
wich i dont necesarily think its bad. every great empire/kingdom/"germany" had a good propaganda of their masses.

forget nukes a minute, forget missile defence systems
just a moment and compare the standing military of china and japan , or anyother countries for that matter as even i can press a button labeld nuke

Mao was Brillant...

US media: 95% acurate...

the 5% percent Percent is when they portrait the adversaries(enemy and others)
.
the 5% is badly showing in the international Forums like this
The media dont' really report on our military strength relative to other nations very often. I don't get my information on our military strength from CNN or the newspaper. You don't know what you're talking about.

LOL is that sarcasm?

no it is not sarcasm
are you american?
if so i knew america had a lot of stuff but i did not know they had sarcasm yet

What would your country (whatever your Country is) do if another country Bombs your reactors?

...well thats exactly what the Iranians or the Koreans will do.
My country actually has the ability to do something about it. Plus you can't get an enemy warplane anywhere near my country's reactors if we were expecting trouble. Iran will bitch about it to the UN and probably send a few terrorists to try to attack us. NK will probably Bitch to the UN and rattle sabers a bit to try to save face.

Japan only recently and got it from the USA. I'll give you Israel though.

Yes a lot of countries have missil defense systems, however the US's isn't perfect, they have flaws. Who ever fires the first nuclear missles will be the only one left because they can bomb every threat (potential and known) first and the reaction will be late, unless the missle defense works or CIA (and others like them) knows before hand. Either way the odds are against the defenders.

no it is not sarcasm
are you american?
if so i knew america had a lot of stuff but i did not know they had sarcasm yet

HAHAHA!!! Oh we have sarcasm but it is a dry sort of sarcasm! :D

so we did invent it! :D :p

well yes as far as i know america invented the a-bmn, something tells me it wasnt spain

I read on a website which i am now desperatly trying to find, that over 70% Irans nuclear programme (reactor, labs etc) is in underground bunkers.
That would explain why Iran is so confident neither the US or Israel can destroy their nuclear programme. Anybody else have any information on this???

The media dont' really report on....from CNN or the newspaper. You don't know what you're talking about.I know exactly what i am talking about...

the question is :
DO YOU KNOW what i am talking about?

Yes a lot of countries have missil defense systems, however the US's isn't perfect, they have flaws. Who ever fires the first nuclear missles will be the only one left because they can bomb every threat (potential and known) first and the reaction will be late, unless the missle defense works or CIA (and others like them) knows before hand. Either way the odds are against the defenders.

Problem! The first person to fire a nuclear missile will have a retalitory strike before the missile detonates over its target.

Why? Satellites will detect a launch.

forget nukes a minute, forget missile defence systems
just a moment and compare the standing military of china and japan , or anyother countries for that matter as even i can press a button labeld nuke
China's conventional forces are a paper tiger compared to the US. They can't move their men off the mainland, and they can't maintain air superiority. They are fucked unless we try to invade immediately without using airpower to eliminate their troops, tanks and supplies.

:) :) HAHAHA!!! Oh we have sarcasm but it is a dry sort of sarcasm! :D

and heres me thinking america was comicaly crippeld allwell :)

I read on a website which i am now desperatly trying to find, that over 70% Irans nuclear programme (reactor, labs etc) is in underground bunkers.
That would explain why Iran is so confident neither the US or Israel can destroy their nuclear programme. Anybody else have any information on this???

*Breaks out the bunker buster bombs*

Wanna take a guess what we can do to thuse so called underground bunkers?

Yes a lot of countries have missil defense systems, however the US's isn't perfect, they have flaws. Who ever fires the first nuclear missles will be the only one left because they can bomb every threat (potential and known) first and the reaction will be late, unless the missle defense works or CIA (and others like them) knows before hand. Either way the odds are against the defenders.
Bullshit. Even without missile defense, we will know immediately when missiles are launched. We will have enough time to launch our own. You are very ignorant on military matters.

well yes as far as i know america invented the a-bmn, something tells me it wasnt spain

I was being sarcastic. I know full well that we invented the bomb and we even used it. Why do you think no one has used it since?

China's conventional forces are a paper tiger compared to the US. They can't move their men off the mainland, and they can't maintain air superiority. They are fucked unless we try to invade immediately without using airpower to eliminate their troops, tanks and supplies.

well if china move their army off the mailand whare do you expect it to go?
they have the same troop transport that the U.S and U.K do inless they are invading they dont have to get their army off the mainland really

My country actually has the ability to do something about it. Plus you can't get an enemy warplane anywhere near my country's reactors if we were expecting trouble. Iran will bitch about it to the UN and probably send a few terrorists to try to attack us. NK will probably Bitch to the UN and rattle sabers a bit to try to save face.
So if you were the President of NK you would not strike back?

I was being sarcastic. I know full well that we invented the bomb and we even used it. Why do you think no one has used it since?

i know sorry, its a saterday afternoon and i am bored

I know exactly what i am talking about...

the question is :
DO YOU KNOW what i am talking about?
I know what you are talking about and I know you are wrong.

So if you were the President of NK you would not strike back?

i dont think that N.K have sabres i think they use korean swords

well if china move their army off the mailand whare do you expect it to go?
they have the same troop transport that the U.S and U.K do inless they are invading they dont have to get their army off the mainland really
No, they don't. China doesn't have a strong enough navy to protect their troops in transit. If they tried to send troops to Japan or Taiwan they would only succeed in sending troops to the ocean's floor.

I know what you are talking about and I know you are wrong.You and several other have proven me righ...multiple times.

Your knowledge of the real world is very telling.

Drunk commies internet is also part of the media. and im sure u are taking your numbers from US sites...
anyway this is my last post on this thread as it gets nowhere.
Remember my 1st post? thats all i had to say about americans ;)

i dont think that N.K have sabres i think they use korean swords
oh...that answers the question :rolleyes:

So if you were the President of NK you would not strike back?
NK Can't strike back. How would they accomplish such a thing? After we hit their missile sites and reactors, what will they do? Send a carrier battle group to attack Alaska? No, they dont' have a real navy. Send long range bombers to hit LA? No, they wouldn't make it even half way without being shot down.

No, they don't. China doesn't have a strong enough navy to protect their troops in transit. If they tried to send troops to Japan or Taiwan they would only succeed in sending troops to the ocean's floor.

why would china ( a peicefull nation wish to invade anyone without un aproval)

and alot of troop transport is done by air these days

[Quote]Breaks out the bunker buster bombs[Quote]

That would work if you know where the bunkers are, for example you could bring out the bunker buster for Mr Bin Laden but you don't know where he is, Iran is a very very very big place, dropping random bunker busters won't work.

P.S. can someone tell me how to use quotes properly.
thanx

why would china ( a peicefull nation wish to invade anyone without un aproval)

and alot of troop transport is done by air these days
Even worse for the Chinese. Not only will they get shot down, but if by some miracle one plane gets through, where would it land?

oh...that answers the question :rolleyes:

well! they dont have sabres the sabre is europian in origin
the korean sword is similar to the chinese dao chung 9th century
anyway the koreans mostkly used naginata ( atype of spear/pole arm)

Even worse for the Chinese. Not only will they get shot down, but if by some miracle one plane gets through, where would it land?

im not talking ac 130s here i meen chinuks

[Quote]Breaks out the bunker buster bombs[Quote]

That would work if you know where the bunkers are, for example you could bring out the bunker buster for Mr Bin Laden but you don't know where he is, Iran is a very very very big place, dropping random bunker busters won't work.

P.S. can someone tell me how to use quotes properly.
thanx

klik quote in the corner

This is a total military porn thread. Everyone's just getting off about who'd nail who first. This is not a war that could ever happen today. The only person in the region stupid enough to start a war with any of his neighbours is Kim Jong Il of North Korea, which now claims to have nukes. If there is a problem in the region it will be with him, and I think that you'd find China wouldn't support him at all. They think he's a loon too.

China and Japan won't lauch a large-scale war over a few little islands. Think about it. Would you?

the best way to invade is carpet bombing then send in land forces qith tanks spear heading and troop drops behind enemy lines

and alot of troop transport is done by air these daysthe US owns Air and Sea.

The US survival in a war with China come down to their ability to magicaly avoid dozens of Nuk-lear war heads...

its like shooting a fly with a gun.

[Quote]Breaks out the bunker buster bombs[Quote]

That would work if you know where the bunkers are, for example you could bring out the bunker buster for Mr Bin Laden but you don't know where he is, Iran is a very very very big place, dropping random bunker busters won't work.

P.S. can someone tell me how to use quotes properly.
thanx
Finding a reactor and finding a man are two different things. Reactors emit a lot of heat, and can't be buried just anywhere. Satellites can detect buried bunkers with ground penetrating radar.

the US owns Air and Sea.

The US survival in a war with China come down to their ability to magicaly avoid dozens of Nuk-lear war heads...

its like shooting a fly with a gun.

like hell :mp5: :mad:

im not talking ac 130s here i meen chinuks
So it's somehow harder to shoot down helicopters? Please.

[QUOTE=New Marsala][Quote]Breaks out the bunker buster bombs
Finding a reactor and finding a man are two different things. Reactors emit a lot of heat, and can't be buried just anywhere. Satellites can detect buried bunkers with ground penetrating radar.

your right commie, the best way to find towl head is with covert opps

So it's somehow harder to shoot down helicopters? Please.

its easier for choppers to land and japans air defenses are geared towards missiles not actual aircraft

its like shooting a fly with a gun.
It's amazing at how good we're getting at shooting those flies. Aegis, and the newer version of Patriot work well. Tests on lasers and new missiles are coming along nicely as well.

its easier for choppers to land and japans air defenses are geared towards missiles not actual aircraft
Japan has good air defenses. It also has the US military bases on it's land. A Chinese invasion is doomed.

China has a total land border of 22,117 km

border countries: Afghanistan 76 km, Bhutan 470 km, Burma 2,185 km, India 3,380 km, Kazakhstan 1,533 km, North Korea 1,416 km, Kyrgyzstan 858 km, Laos 423 km, Mongolia 4,677 km, Nepal 1,236 km, Pakistan 523 km, Russia (northeast) 3,605 km, Russia (northwest) 40 km, Tajikistan 414 km, Vietnam 1,281 km
regional borders: Hong Kong 30 km, Macau 0.34 km

so it is understandable that it's navy is not it's main priority.

If it entered a war with an island such as Japan or Taiwan im sure it would develop a better more effective navy. :confused: surely that is obvious to everybody in this forum.

well! they dont have sabres the sabre is europian in origin
the korean sword is similar to the chinese dao chung 9th century
anyway the koreans mostkly used naginata ( atype of spear/pole arm)

Errrr no...

The naginata is not a spear, it's more like a helbard. You have a four- or five-feet-long shaft of wood. Mounted to that is a blade about the length of a wakizashi blade, but slightly broader and heavier. Unlike the yari (lance; the spear would be a nage-yari), which has a round shaft, the naginata shaft is oval, shaped more like a sword hilt, to enable the user to keep better control over the blade. It was a bitch against cavalry, but it was an even greater bitch once cavalry started to use it. Funnily this thing has been considered the weapon of a woman.


And I think Lochs and Fjords is the only one with reason in this thread anyway. A war China-Japan is more than just unlikely. Both, the Chinese and the Japanese government are too smart to just start shooting, unlike certain western governments.

But then again, civvies going on about military things is always funny to watch. It's entertaining.

It's amazing at how good we're getting at shooting those flies. Aegis, and the newer version of Patriot work well. Tests on lasers and new missiles are coming along nicely as well.

commie we both have beaf ith ocean drive lets shoot holes in his ideas first and then settle this like stallin and hitler later

China has a total land border of 22,117 km

border countries: Afghanistan 76 km, Bhutan 470 km, Burma 2,185 km, India 3,380 km, Kazakhstan 1,533 km, North Korea 1,416 km, Kyrgyzstan 858 km, Laos 423 km, Mongolia 4,677 km, Nepal 1,236 km, Pakistan 523 km, Russia (northeast) 3,605 km, Russia (northwest) 40 km, Tajikistan 414 km, Vietnam 1,281 km
regional borders: Hong Kong 30 km, Macau 0.34 km

so it is understandable that it's navy is not it's main priority.

If it entered a war with an island such as Japan or Taiwan im sure it would develop a better more effective navy. :confused: surely that is obvious to everybody in this forum.
Developing a navy doesn't happen overnight. If they start a major overhaul of PLAN, Japan, Taiwan, and the US would counter it.

Errrr no...

The naginata is not a spear, it's more like a helbard. You have a four- or five-feet-long shaft of wood. Mounted to that is a blade about the length of a wakizashi blade, but slightly broader and heavier. Unlike the yari (lance; the spear would be a nage-yari), which has a round shaft, the naginata shaft is oval, shaped more like a sword hilt, to enable the user to keep better control over the blade. It was a bitch against cavalry, but it was an even greater bitch once cavalry started to use it. Funnily this thing has been considered the weapon of a woman.


And I think Lochs and Fjords is the only one with reason in this thread anyway. A war China-Japan is more than just unlikely. Both, the Chinese and the Japanese government are too smart to just start shooting, unlike certain western governments.

But then again, civvies going on about military things is always funny to watch. It's entertaining.

sorry eastern weaponry not my feild
and i am no civilian

commie we both have beaf ith ocean drive lets shoot holes in his ideas first and then settle this like stallin and hitler later
It's not even worth it. He's just demonstrating his ignorance.

China has a total land border of 22,117 km

border countries: Afghanistan 76 km, Bhutan 470 km, Burma 2,185 km, India 3,380 km, Kazakhstan 1,533 km, North Korea 1,416 km, Kyrgyzstan 858 km, Laos 423 km, Mongolia 4,677 km, Nepal 1,236 km, Pakistan 523 km, Russia (northeast) 3,605 km, Russia (northwest) 40 km, Tajikistan 414 km, Vietnam 1,281 km
regional borders: Hong Kong 30 km, Macau 0.34 km

so it is understandable that it's navy is not it's main priority.

If it entered a war with an island such as Japan or Taiwan im sure it would develop a better more effective navy. :confused: surely that is obvious to everybody in this forum.

i wasnt talking about the navy anyway (your right ) its the srategic bombers which do the important stuff anyway, that and covert opps.

Mao was Brillant...

1930s and 1940s yes. But once he became "emperor" (in his own mind) he quite clearly was mad. How else would you explain utter and complete disaster thatr was the Great Leap Forward? Yes, you peasants can treble your output by planting your seeds two or three times closer together. (Who cares if it doesn't work that way! The party says it does.) And have all those "idle" pesants smelt steel in backyard furnaces - who cares if they just end up producing worthless "steel turds"!
OOps! Nope, Mao didn't create the worst ever famine in all of human history by this (30-40 million dead).

And he wasn't even happy with that. The Cultural Revolution absolutely and utterly destroyed the infrastructure of the PRC.

US media: 95% acurate...

the 5% is when they portrait the adversaries(enemy and others)

the 5% is badly showing in the international Forums like this

Find me an unbiased Chinese source that disputes the ill effects of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, and I'll condider the possibility that Mao wasn't mad. Otherwise you absolutely are deluding yourself.

It's not even worth it. He's just demonstrating his ignorance.

your right again my red natured freind

This is a total military porn thread. Everyone's just getting off about who'd nail who first. This is not a war that could ever happen today. The only person in the region stupid enough to start a war with any of his neighbours is Kim Jong Il of North Korea, which now claims to have nukes. If there is a problem in the region it will be with him, and I think that you'd find China wouldn't support him at all. They think he's a loon too.

China and Japan won't lauch a large-scale war over a few little islands. Think about it. Would you?

Shock, horror! Is that a reasonable voice agreeing with me, in this abysmal wilderness?

How can they counter the Chinese building up a navy if they are not in any war. China as a great power has the right to develop a navy.
The US do seem to think they can have stuff but other nations cant but they can't possibly stop the Chinese from making a navy.

commie we both have beaf ith oceandrive lets shoot holes in his ideas first and then settle this like stallin and hitler lateryou are stallin

God this is idiotic. Some of you really need to take a course in basic spelling and grammer. Writing coherently is not that difficult people. Take a moment after you've first written your post to look over it and correct any errors you can see, it makes for a better argument on your behalf and more pleasant reading for the viewer.

As to the subject, it is what we in the educated world like to call: bullshit. "But Europe would ally with China, or Russia would magically drag itself out of the hole it's currently in, USA WOULD PWN ALL!, France would do something..." Get over it. War with China is not an option. End of story. Nobody wants WW3, especially over some 100-plus year whinge-fest over a bunch of rocks in the ocean. Oh and all this "ooh, China would back the North is utter crap. The Chinese aren't stupid, hell they don't even like the NKs. If it came to it, I'd bet you a $10,000 jewel-encrusted toilet that China would stay out of it.

Even guys who like to jack-off over the latest tools used to murder people can agree on that. China is not loaded with crazy zealots willing to nuke this planet into oblivion. The only people who would do that are extremists, which the Chinese are not. (Islamofascists on the other hand, are.)

Oh, and as for the dipshit who said first off that Australia and New Zealand might ally with China, you're a fucking moron. We're a Western nation and one of the USA's most consistent allies these past hundred years. When nobody else wanted to go to Vietnam, who was there for you? That's right, the fucking Aussies. We have one of the strongest and most beneficial alliances on the entire planet, you think we're just going to turn our backs on that? Plus the public would kick the shit out of the Government if they tried to pull anything as blatantly retarded as that.

What ever happened to Moderation? I think there should be a new movement throughout the world, called "The Sensible Revolution". Enough of these far-left/far-right assholes, lets get a moderate in power who is willing to look at both sides of the issues with thought and intelligence, rather than just blindly following some shitty ideology.

Have a nice day.

How can they counter the Chinese building up a navy if they are not in any war. China as a great power has the right to develop a navy.
The US do seem to think they can have stuff but other nations cant but they can't possibly stop the Chinese from making a navy.
You counter it by building up your own navy and airforce and moving it into the region.

Of course a war with China won't happen. We're discussing hypothetical situations here, and having a good time with it. If you can't deal with it, leave this fucking thread.

well! they dont have sabres the sabre is europian in origin
the korean sword is similar to the chinese dao chung 9th century
anyway the koreans mostkly used naginata ( atype of spear/pole arm)

Points and laughs at the http://www.savingadvice.com/forums/images/smilies/confused/action-smiley-061.gif

http://www.savingadvice.com/forums/images/smilies/laughing/laughing-smiley-018.gif

God this is idiotic. Some of you really need to take a course in basic spelling and grammer. Writing coherently is not that difficult people. Take a moment after you've first written your post to look over it and correct any errors you can see, it makes for a better argument on your behalf and more pleasant reading for the viewer.

As to the subject, it is what we in the educated world like to call: bullshit. "But Europe would ally with China, or Russia would magically drag itself out of the hole it's currently in, USA WOULD PWN ALL!, France would do something..." Get over it. War with China is not an option. End of story. Nobody wants WW3, especially over some 100-plus year whinge-fest over a bunch of rocks in the ocean. Oh and all this "ooh, China would back the North is utter crap. The Chinese aren't stupid, hell they don't even like the NKs. If it came to it, I'd bet you a $10,000 jewel-encrusted toilet that China would stay out of it.

Even guys who like to jack-off over the latest tools used to murder people can agree on that. China is not loaded with crazy zealots willing to nuke this planet into oblivion. The only people who would do that are extremists, which the Chinese are not. (Islamofascists on the other hand, are.)

Oh, and as for the dipshit who said first off that Australia and New Zealand might ally with China, you're a fucking moron. We're a Western nation and one of the USA's most consistent allies these past hundred years. When nobody else wanted to go to Vietnam, who was there for you? That's right, the fucking Aussies. We have one of the strongest and most beneficial alliances on the entire planet, you think we're just going to turn our backs on that? Plus the public would kick the shit out of the Government if they tried to pull anything as blatantly retarded as that.

What ever happened to Moderation? I think there should be a new movement throughout the world, called "The Sensible Revolution". Enough of these far-left/far-right assholes, lets get a moderate in power who is willing to look at both sides of the issues with thought and intelligence, rather than just blindly following some shitty ideology.

Have a nice day.

Falhaar = http://www.savingadvice.com/forums/images/smilies/others/food-smiley-004.gif

God this is idiotic. Some of you really need to take a course in basic spelling and grammer. Writing coherently is not that difficult people. Take a moment after you've first written your post to look over it and correct any errors you can see, it makes for a better argument on your behalf and more pleasant reading for the viewer.

As to the subject, it is what we in the educated world like to call: bullshit. "But Europe would ally with China, or Russia would magically drag itself out of the hole it's currently in, USA WOULD PWN ALL!, France would do something..." Get over it. War with China is not an option. End of story. Nobody wants WW3, especially over some 100-plus year whinge-fest over a bunch of rocks in the ocean. Oh and all this "ooh, China would back the North is utter crap. The Chinese aren't stupid, hell they don't even like the NKs. If it came to it, I'd bet you a $10,000 jewel-encrusted toilet that China would stay out of it.

Even guys who like to jack-off over the latest tools used to murder people can agree on that. China is not loaded with crazy zealots willing to nuke this planet into oblivion. The only people who would do that are extremists, which the Chinese are not. (Islamofascists on the other hand, are.)

Oh, and as for the dipshit who said first off that Australia and New Zealand might ally with China, you're a fucking moron. We're a Western nation and one of the USA's most consistent allies these past hundred years. When nobody else wanted to go to Vietnam, who was there for you? That's right, the fucking Aussies. We have one of the strongest and most beneficial alliances on the entire planet, you think we're just going to turn our backs on that? Plus the public would kick the shit out of the Government if they tried to pull anything as blatantly retarded as that.

What ever happened to Moderation? I think there should be a new movement throughout the world, called "The Sensible Revolution". Enough of these far-left/far-right assholes, lets get a moderate in power who is willing to look at both sides of the issues with thought and intelligence, rather than just blindly following some shitty ideology.

Have a nice day.

i guess you are right but i have an age old never failing excuse, i am dyslexic

Oh, and as for the dipshit who said first off that Australia and New Zealand might ally with China, you're a fucking moron. We're a Western nation and one of the USA's most consistent allies these past hundred years. When nobody else wanted to go to Vietnam, who was there for you? That's right, the fucking Aussies. We have one of the strongest and most beneficial alliances on the entire planet, you think we're just going to turn our backs on that? Plus the public would kick the shit out of the Government if they tried to pull anything as blatantly retarded as that.

Hooyah brother! Amen, finally someone gets it. Obviously, you are from Australia. I'm glad to see that someone other than biased hypocritical 13-year-old posting on a forum. And as for the whole spelling/grammar thing, Americans don't really care that much about it. I wish we did, but we just don't. Don't misinterpret me, I always write with correct punctuation, grammar and spelling (or as much as I can), even in chat rooms.

As for the idiot that suggested that Australia and New Zealand would join the Chinese side...WHO DROPPED YOU ON YOUR HEAD WHEN YOU WERE A KID???!!! Who could possibly be that retarded. That's almost as insulting to the Aussies and New Zealanders as it would be to the Brits if you were to say that they would side with Iraq or Iran for oil. WHAT??!! Did you eat paint chips as a kid, or live under a powerline? Now granted that France, Germany and Russia tried to do that within the UN Security Counsel, the Brits, Aussies, and New Zealanders aren't stupid and they aren't pussies either. They're not afraid to get their hands dirty.

Did you know that the Aussies and the Brits are the countries that the U.S. Special Forces work with the most? "What about the Foreign Legion?" you might ask. Have you ever heard of the foreign legion doing anything? No. Take "Behind Enemy Lines" for example. Granted it was a movie, the French Foreign Legion left our guy because they were 'tired' of searching for him. That's an accurate picture to describe a country that would ally against the U.S., not the Aussies or New Zealanders. In fact, go to http://www.google.com and type in "French Military Victories" and hit the "I'm feeling lucky" button. When the next page comes up, and you start to laugh uncontrollably, click on the suggested search phrase link. It will take you to a page that will explain everything about the French. Oh, and one more thing, you will laugh. Why? Because it's funny.

But we're getting off the subject. The point is, gentlemen, don't insult a country that has been there almost since the beginning. Don't burn bridges you don't own. You are entitled to your opinion, but don't hate someone because you are ignorant. Hate them because you know what they have done and they have done you wrong, such as the French. Last thing, HOOYAH! If you know what that means, you know where I come from.

Of course a war with China won't happen. We're discussing hypothetical situations here, and having a good time with it. If you can't deal with it, leave this fucking thread.

if we only talked about hat could really happen life would be fuking boring, your right commie

what has every one got against the french the spanish are much worse
so are the jappanese, im not saying that france has no faults im just saying theres worse. those who hate france probably havent been

i guess you are right but i have an age old never failing excuse, i am dyslexic

And, for all apperances, pig ignorant to boot. (BTW in case you want to know why I seem to be picking on you, you might actually want to find out what a naginata is before you go around casually attributing it to the Koreans in front of people who've actually studied it's use. I have good Korean friends. But the naginata is my good Japanese friend.)


Oh, and well spoken, FireSpray!

what has every one got against the french the spanish are much worse
so are the jappanese, im not saying that france has no faults im just saying theres worse. those who hate france probably havent been

:headbang: You are stupid. If you could finish your post, we might be able to understand what you are saying. Who said anything about the Spanish? No one. Do you ever hear anyone saying, "Those stupid ass Spanish people!"? No! The Japanese people screwed up in WWII. Since then, they have learned from their mistakes. The French have not. Like I said in my last post, go to http://www.google.com and type in "French Military Victories" and hit the "I'm feeling lucky" button. Then click on the suggested search phrase link...and as we would say in America, "Extra, Extra!! Read all about it!!!"

By the way, I am not insulting the Japanese. Japanese people rock!

And, for all apperances, pig ignorant to boot. (BTW in case you want to know why I seem to be picking on you, you might actually want to find out what a naginata is before you go around casually attributing it to the Koreans in front of people who've actually studied it's use. I have good Korean friends. But the naginata is my good Japanese friend.)


Oh, and well spoken, FireSpray!

naginata? not korean?
are you on dope

naginata? not korean?
are you on dope
He's right. It was a weapon used in feudal Japan. Looks like a samurai sword stuck to the end of a broomstick. Considered a woman's weapon, I think.

:headbang: You are stupid. If you could finish your post, we might be able to understand what you are saying. Who said anything about the Spanish? No one. Do you ever hear anyone saying, "Those stupid ass Spanish people!"? No! The Japanese people screwed up in WWII. Since then, they have learned from their mistakes. The French have not. Like I said in my last post, go to http://www.google.com and type in "French Military Victories" and hit the "I'm feeling lucky" button. Then click on the suggested search phrase link...and as we would say in America, "Extra, Extra!! Read all about it!!!"

By the way, I am not insulting the Japanese. Japanese people rock!

when i made that post people were having a go at the french.
i am not predjudice i hate every body equally

He's right. It was a weapon used in feudal Japan. Looks like a samurai sword stuck to the end of a broomstick. Considered a woman's weapon, I think.

hang on il go check

naginata? not korean?
are you on dope

:headbang: Once again you have shown us your intelligence, my young friend. Go BACK to google and search for it. Ok? If you find Korean anywhere in there, I might just give you credit. Naginata was a seven-foot spear used by the Samarai women. It's also a martial arts form. Whoever told you that naginata was korean is on something a little stronger than dope...hmmm....like ACID because he/she is delusional.

:confused: Well, Back to the main point. china attacks japan, so korea, Taiwan, phillipines and or Vietnam. This is the list of countries that would follow the US into war. Due to treaties, obligation, etc. Most of Nato, I would like to leave the french out of this one. Maybe urge them to join chinas side... Australia, New Zealand, part of the Organization of American states. Probably pick up most of central america, carribean and some friendlys from south america and mexico. India may take the opportunity to settle some differences. Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan. most of the gulf states, possible Jordan, Egypt and Morroco. Now this list may not be important states. But the importance is the cutting off of resources to china war machine. Side likely to side with china. Well maybe Iran, N Korea, Cuba(Hopefully). and maybe some errant crack pot such as venezuela. Russia would not dare to join chinas side. Probably would sideline it until near the end to make another land grab on china. Chinas navy and airforce would be destroyed relatively quickly. There ground forces would be ground into hamburger by air. Remember that china has 1.3 billion people. The combined might of nations going against her is roughly 2-3 billion. Depending on who joins in. With technology against her and no rescources. The chinese lotus will wilt fast. Which brings me to a desperate nuclear attack. Which would bring a swift death to billions and a 100's of years of problems for earth. So with a unwinnable conclusion for China. Do they risk it? :confused:

:headbang: Once again you have shown us your intelligence, my young friend. Go BACK to google and search for it. Ok? If you find Korean anywhere in there, I might just give you credit. Naginata was a seven-foot spear used by the Samarai women. It's also a martial arts form. Whoever told you that naginata was korean is on something a little stronger than dope...hmmm....like ACID because he/she is delusional.

firstly i dont give a toss about eastern weaponry(not my feild)
secondly i got that from some encyclapedia or other
thirdly you underestimate me grately

naginata? not korean?
are you on dope

No. But I suspect you are.

Naginata, a Japanese martial art of both power and grace, is characterized by the grandeur of its sweeping movements. Naginata is for people of all ages interested in either competitive fighting, or in the physical beauty of choreographed, practiced movements, called kata.
http://www.naginata.org/

As I said, it is my good friend, having stuidied it here in Japan.

Drunk commies, it may be considered a woman's weapon, but my teacher was a man, and I dare you to tell him it's a "woman's weapon" when he's brandishing a proper "live" steel one in a kata. (Yes, he did it with me. No, I wasn't happy. Yes, I obviously survived.)

Of note, it originated as a weapon of the ashikaga

Naginata
Japanese characters of 'naginata' Japanese characters of 'naginata'
alternative words: Nagi nata, Japanese halberd, Halberd
keywords: martial art , weapon
related topics: Kamakura period , Edo period
related web sites: http://homepage1.nifty.com/sira/taiheiki/moriyosi.html , http://www.jttk.zaq.ne.jp/nihontou/toukenkobugu/yarinaginatalist.htm
explanation: Weapon composed of a long shaft and a curved blade of 1 or 2 feet length attached at the top. It had been a favorite weapon of Japanese infantrymen until Kamakura period especially Buddhist monk soldiers. It was then gradually replaced by spears and rifles. During Edo period, it was taught as a defensive weapon for samurai's women and continued to be taught as a woman's sport nowadays. Naginata means "mowing sword".



More history:
http://www.scnf.org/history.html
http://www.scnf.org/history2.html


(The grand britania, a brief lesson: DFWM when it comes to Japanese subjects. I pnw almost all.)

:confused: Well, Back to the main point. china attacks japan, so korea, Taiwan, phillipines and or Vietnam. This is the list of countries that would follow the US into war. Due to treaties, obligation, etc. Most of Nato, I would like to leave the french out of this one. Maybe urge them to join chinas side... Australia, New Zealand, part of the Organization of American states. Probably pick up most of central america, carribean and some friendlys from south america and mexico. India may take the opportunity to settle some differences. Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan. most of the gulf states, possible Jordan, Egypt and Morroco. Now this list may not be important states. But the importance is the cutting off of resources to china war machine. Side likely to side with china. Well maybe Iran, N Korea, Cuba(Hopefully). and maybe some errant crack pot such as venezuela. Russia would not dare to join chinas side. Probably would sideline it until near the end to make another land grab on china. Chinas navy and airforce would be destroyed relatively quickly. There ground forces would be ground into hamburger by air. Remember that china has 1.3 billion people. The combined might of nations going against her is roughly 2-3 billion. Depending on who joins in. With technology against her and no rescources. The chinese lotus will wilt fast. Which brings me to a desperate nuclear attack. Which would bring a swift death to billions and a 100's of years of problems for earth. So with a unwinnable conclusion for China. Do they risk it? :confused:

if china just sent people at japan (even if they were armed with broomstiks)
they would win
because theres 2.2 billion of them

if china just sent people at japan (even if they were armed with broomstiks)
they would win
because theres 2.2 billion of them
1 No they would drown in the sea.
2 There's only about 1.5 billion Chinamen.

(The grand britania, a brief lesson: DFWM when it comes to Japanese subjects. I pnw almost all.)

Would that include Karaoke?

well well well i stand corrected
naginata japanese
i am sorry i am no expert on eatern weaponry
i prefer western

1 No they would drown in the sea.
2 There's only about 1.5 billion Chinamen.

china men yes but in total 2.2 billion chinese people
in the bizar hypothetical situation of this war and it were me in chage of china
i would put them in fishing boats or whatever and send them off to japan
just prove a point

There's only about 1.5 billion Chinamen.

1.3 billion Chinese people actually. If it was only 1.5 million men, their population would obviously decrease without women, unless there was an economic immigrant influx.

no 2.2 billion
look it up :mp5:

Do they risk it?

Yes, this is the question. Do they risk the end of humanity as we know it in order to aquire land in the Pacific? Who knows? I guess we'll find out. Even if all of the countries Marrakech suggested would join us do not join us, our technology and air superiority would prevail in several weeks, maybe months. There is also another question here. Would the U.S. risk stretching the military even further? We have hundreds of thousands of men and women in Afghanistan and Iraq, plus we are looking to go after Iran next and North Korea is on the agenda. Should the U.S. get involved? I think not. The military does have a breaking point. Granted that no one knows what that is, but should we risk bringing the fall of the last super power on Earth to become the world's police? That is the question. I say the U.S. will play it cool :cool: until we have to join in (i.e. an attack on the U.S. or its interests).

o.k people i gotta go m
for those of you who hate me tough shit and for those who dont you probably dont give a toss
and yess i am doing this because i am bored

Would that include Karaoke?

Absolutely! Been doing the ol' "empty orchestra" for longer than a lot of these posters have been alive!

http://www.savingadvice.com/forums/images/smilies/grins-misc/party-smiley-048.gif

(I'd threaten to sing "Yestrerday" or "I Left My Heart in San Francisco", if I thought anyone would catch te joke therin....)

The grand britania - a bit of advice: stfu, go read up on the subject, then come back and try to talk about it. You're doing nothing more than making an arse of yourself at the moment.

1.3 billion Chinese people actually. If it was only 1.5 million men, their population would obviously decrease without women, unless there was an economic immigrant influx.
Everybody knows the Chinese reproduce asexually by budding.

no 2.2 billion
look it up :mp5:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/906114.stm

Oh look I did! And I'm right, and you are wrong on yet another thing.

Oh and by the way that emoticon was immature.

But immaturity is as immaturity does, I suppose.

Everybody knows the Chinese reproduce asexually by budding.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! That's the funniest thing I've seen in a while. Unfortunately, it's probably true.

no 2.2 billion
look it up :mp5:

1.298 billion
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html

1.286 billion
http://www.wallstreetview.com/population.html

1.25909 billion
http://www.china-window.com/china_briefing/China-Population/population.shtml

Where did you get your numbers?

Absolutely! Been doing the ol' "empty orchestra" for longer than a lot of these posters have been alive!


LOL nice one.


Everybody knows the Chinese reproduce asexually by budding.


My god....the Chinese are unstoppable....nothing can compete.

:headbang: :confused: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5:

Ignore the guy behind the wall...This is a summary of events over the past ten minutes. Obviously, we know who plays the confused person, and we know is in the firing squad. We win. :D

China depends on Russian oil, and the Russians present a 2-front challenge to China. I think it'd be a classically Putinesque move forRussia to intervene to accrue prestige and a fat postwar settlement.

LOL nice one.

And true. I sang my 1st karaoke in 1988, when karaoke was only 4 years old, and there were only 4 songs available in English in the average snack bar*. :D

I can sing those 4 in ways that would.... well lets just not go there!

(And that should suffice to scare away the kiddies...)




*
"Yesterday"
"I Left My Heart in San Francisco"
"My Way"
and "Country Roads"

China isn't crazy enough to start a war with Japan as this would incur TEH WRATH of the world. This would bring about World War III and quite possibly a nukefest. I mean really, folks, no country would be doing anything that would result in nuclear war unless they had masochistic tendencies.

If this all did actually happen...well, I think Marrakech II has the right idea.

And about half of you guys really need to lay off the crack.

Seriously.

What would more than likely happen is the US would maybe back Japan, but you have to realize we depend on China a lot now. Japan would never be able to win a war against China either, since their military is rather pathetic compared to the Chinese military, the mass of numbers in the Chinese military would just overun Japan. You have to remeber that the Chinese military is larger than ours in actice force, thats not even counting their reserves.

You people need to lay off the crack and go outside. Breathe in some fresh air, start dating, take a walk, go to a movie, and realize that there won't be a war over some unimportant little islands. The Japanese and Chinese govs aren't stupid enough to fight over some islands in the middle of nowhere. That would be bad for business...

I have always thought about this even when I was little but no one knows.

No, I think it is very overconfident to say that we could stabilize the country. It's huge, and has more than a billion people who wouldn't like being conquered. It would be another Vietnam. Technology will get you so far, but Japan, which during WWII was enormousely technologically superior to China, was having a tough time conquering the place even before they went to war with us. And that was when the Chinese were fighting each other, too. Toppling their government we could do, in fact, it wouldn't be too hard, however, maintaining security would be difficult at best. All the enemy would need would be guns and bullets, and they could just keep killing troops until the occupying countries got sick of the whole damn thing and left.
The problem with Vietnam was again a lack of political will and a lack of ruthless tactics. We were at times ruthless, but allowed politics to get in the way and pulled back from them. Mercy and morality have no place if we want to stabilize China. Of course, to do it, one would need the EU, SK, and Japan on our side.

The problem with Vietnam was again a lack of political will and a lack of ruthless tactics

Lack of ruthless tactics. Killing whole villiages on suspicsion of aiding the enemy is pretty ruthless as that includes men women boys girls baby and the elderly.
I tried to stay calm with some of the cocky Americans but basically you couldn't win north vietnam so what chance you you have against a significantly more powerful nation whos population is also the biggest in the world??? NONE!!!

War over a few islands, it is terrority - the reason for almost any war you choose to think of. So it may be unlikely but it will mean a lot to the nations involved.

Cyprus, an island, pretty insignificant led to war between Greece and Turkey.
Think off all the lives lost for islands in world war 2.

I think i have proved my point. :rolleyes:

Lack of ruthless tactics. Killing whole villiages on suspicsion of aiding the enemy is pretty ruthless as that includes men women boys girls baby and the elderly.
I tried to stay calm with some of the cocky Americans but basically you couldn't win north vietnam so what chance you you have against a significantly more powerful nation whos population is also the biggest in the world??? NONE!!!

War over a few islands, it is terrority - the reason for almost any war you choose to think of. So it may be unlikely but it will mean a lot to the nations involved.

Cyprus, an island, pretty insignificant led to war between Greece and Turkey.
Think off all the lives lost for islands in world war 2.

I think i have proved my point. :rolleyes:
No, you have displayed your ignorance about what happened in Vietnam. First of all, Americans destroying villages didn't happen often if it did at all. The NVA and VC did much more of that. If numerous villages were depopulated it would have been a very clear message to the remaining ones not to side with the VC. Secondly, the US could have stayed in Vietnam and continued to fight for a much longer time. The protests back home ended the war. Third, the North was getting weaker and weaker. As it was they needed Russian help to keep their army supplied. If we had continued using the B52s and kept up the pressure they would have been forced to surrender to the south.

Well it did happen as i have spoken to a women from Vietnam whos village was wiped out by as she said 'laughing Americans' because a man no longer in the village had given information about the local area to th VC.
Please do not call me ignorant for voicing my opinions.
Many times in history countries have relied on others for supplies.
The American lend lease programme to the soviet union is a prime example.
They would not have surrendered. The Americans would have had to killed every last enermy troop and supporter and that wasn't going to happen.

its easier for choppers to land and japans air defenses are geared towards missiles not actual aircraft

Choppers are slow moving but manueverable. However, they can be shot down alot easier and you can hear them coming and prepare a defense against them.

How can they counter the Chinese building up a navy if they are not in any war. China as a great power has the right to develop a navy.
The US do seem to think they can have stuff but other nations cant but they can't possibly stop the Chinese from making a navy.

Great! A Naval arms race not seen since WWI! China would lose it however.

firstly i dont give a toss about eastern weaponry(not my feild)
secondly i got that from some encyclapedia or other
thirdly you underestimate me grately

And yet, I've beaten you on many points! I guess I misoverestimated you! LOL

Lack of ruthless tactics. Killing whole villiages on suspicsion of aiding the enemy is pretty ruthless as that includes men women boys girls baby and the elderly.
I tried to stay calm with some of the cocky Americans but basically you couldn't win north vietnam so what chance you you have against a significantly more powerful nation whos population is also the biggest in the world??? NONE!!!

War over a few islands, it is terrority - the reason for almost any war you choose to think of. So it may be unlikely but it will mean a lot to the nations involved.

Cyprus, an island, pretty insignificant led to war between Greece and Turkey.
Think off all the lives lost for islands in world war 2.

I think i have proved my point. :rolleyes:
No, you haven't. The problem was that the ruthlessness was sporadic. We did some horrible things, but then protests at home destroyed the political will to fight and we stopped. The main reason we lost was that we did not allow our Special Forces to have more free reign, like we did in Afghanistan. Green Berets are the best in the world when it comes to building up native forces.

Whilst I agree in a straight war, with America at its full strength, it would probably win over China. But a straight war wouldn't be possibly, America would still be crippled by the 150,000 soldiers still in Iraq. More than that, it is suffering under the most crippling debt since the Great Depression and WWII. How do you suppose America will pay it off, even if a major war does begin? It can't increase the rate of production like it did during WWII, and even with the entire population of America employed, the debt would still be there.

Though America did become a powerhouse during WWII, it still suffered horrendous debt because of it, and it was saved because consumer demand suddenly increased to the rate of production. Now however, consumer demand is oustripping production three fold, and even if America increases its production to match demand and to build enough supplies for war, it'll be under an enormous burden.

China however, is under no real debt, and barely 10% of its citizens of experieneced the delights of consumer demand. What if that figure was somehwere near 60-70% and most of the production shifted into high-tech consumer and military projects? China would most certainly outstrip the US in terms of production.

So if you were the President of NK you would not strike back?
.... what will they do? ....the question is not
"what will they do?"

I repeat the Question...
lets say the US strikes your reactors...and you are the Korean commader-in-Chief, what would YOU do?

nothing?

The Japanese (or rather Gainax) did steal existentialism from socialists, but I can't say China is any better (ruining socialism).

So it's somehow harder to shoot down helicopters? Please.its easier for choppers to land and japans air defenses are geared towards missiles not actual aircraft

http://www.savingadvice.com/forums/images/smilies/cheeky/cheeky-smiley-024.gif

Helicopters are the most vulnerable aircraft on a battlefield. They are relatively slow moving, have minimal armor, and are fairly easy to detect. They are highly vulnerable to both AAA and SAMs.

As for the JSDF's air defenses, you are entierly incorrect.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/jasdf-orbat.htm
http://globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/type-87-aaa.htm
http://globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/type-93.htm
http://globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/aam-4.htm
http://globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/chu-sam.htm
http://globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/type-91-sam.htm
http://globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/type-81.htm

China however, is under no real debt, and barely 10% of its citizens of experieneced the delights of consumer demand. What if that figure was somehwere near 60-70% and most of the production shifted into high-tech consumer and military projects? China would most certainly outstrip the US in terms of production.

Lol. I'm quite curious how much China's money is going to US though. They have billions in bonds just to keep their money artificially low. Imagine if US just 'took' it all away and dont pay it back :D, and money is never a problem for the US.

Plus, somewhat 80-90% of the population of China live in rural area's. Statistically staggering, but thats around 100-200 million living in many different cities across China. 60-70%.. unlikely. China does boast however, that at will they can accumulate a hundred million soldiers if they need to. Although their economy might basketcase, but hey, it's a war dammit. Only Americans would start worrying that their grandchildren would still be paying for their debts. China would probably revert back to a communist nation and eat itself again.

And yet, I've beaten you on many points! I guess I misoverestimated you! LOL

?? how old are you ??
i am smarter than my national average age group.
i have already said you were smarter than me at this stuff( do you want that in writing)

Absolutely! Been doing the ol' "empty orchestra" for longer than a lot of these posters have been alive!

http://www.savingadvice.com/forums/images/smilies/grins-misc/party-smiley-048.gif

(I'd threaten to sing "Yestrerday" or "I Left My Heart in San Francisco", if I thought anyone would catch te joke therin....)

The grand britania - a bit of advice: stfu, go read up on the subject, then come back and try to talk about it. You're doing nothing more than making an arse of yourself at the moment.

perhaps your right but im having fun doing it

anyway back to the original topic ( NOT SLANDERING ME PLEASE )
japan recently recieved some new automatic rifles and they did not know how to use them.
if all i receive on these forums is mindless abuse i may as well not bother going on, if you dont want me i will go. because i dont want to anoy anyone really

Not totally true China is quickly devoloping nanotechnology which will make it the most powerful force on earth.

http://crnano.typepad.com/crnblog/2004/09/chinas_ambition.html

i agree with you. the carbon bomb is the most effective non fatal device. its the size of a match head and could easily take out a city. what does this mean if its planted into a military structure? it takes out the electrical circuits by sending ultra fine carbon wires through the system. catastrophe

Yes China, North Korea, and ..... It is time for another world war.

wow carbon bombs eh are you seriouse if so i hope there on ebay. i have a lot of revenge to give, mostly on narrow minded bigots obssesed with judging those they do not know
i am only joking about ebay of course
but i prefer the nutron bomb, rustic but still a good weapon

Being dyslexic is no excuse for poorly written (not least to to say poorly reasoned) posts. One of my best friends is dyslexic, but he works with his disability and checks his writing doubly hard, hence he always writes clearly and coherently.

Being dislexic is no excuse for poorly written (not least to to say poorly reasoned) posts. One of my best friends is dislexic, but he works with his disability and checks his writing doubly hard, hence he always writes clearly and coherently.

personally i do not want to waste time reading everything through while the post i was talking about is long gone out of date, also
which of my posts is poorly reasoned ? if you dont want me here just say so
i dont want anoy, i want to learn. fucking hypochrit

anyway back to the original topic ( NOT SLANDERING ME PLEASE )

No one's slandering you. Just telling you you're wrong. Repeatedly. Ad naseaum.

japan recently recieved some new automatic rifles and they did not know how to use them.

Like this. Complete BS. The only thing I find that is what you may be thinking of is this: Doubts remain over when GSDF can use weapons in Iraq (http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=1&id=287964), which covers the ROE of the Japanese forces in Iraq. BTW, the Type 89, the JSDF's issue rifle has been in service quite some time.

Stephistan, you do realize we WON the Korean war? We didn't pull out because despite what MacArthur thought, our goal was never to go to war againt China. It was to defend S.Korea. It was an issue of political will. And back then, the US, UK, and SK (Especially SK, their military was in shambles during the Korean War) did not enjoy the massive advantage of training and technology they do now. Compare simply the military budgets of respective nations.


im sorry but you didnt win the korean WAR as you might recall it was a police action which in other words meant you lost. i totally agree with you that they saved south korea but the losses that were inflicted on the US armies were immense and they were beaten back to the sea. i think it was recorded as the second largest sea evacuation since dunkirk. the only good thing that came out of korea was M.A.S.H.

personally i do not want to waste time reading everything through while the post i was talking about is long gone out of date, also
which of my posts is poorly reasoned ? if you dont want me here just say so
i dont want anoy, i want to learn. fucking hypochrit

You don't learn by spouting untruths as "facts". If you want to learn, ask. There are folks here who do know what they're talking about.

wow carbon bombs eh are you seriouse if so i hope there on ebay. i have a lot of revenge to give, mostly on narrow minded bigots obssesed with judging those they do not know
i am only joking about ebay of course
but i prefer the nutron bomb, rustic but still a good weapon


it is a non fatal weapon. combine this with an assault and your away

You don't learn by spouting untruths as "facts". If you want to learn, ask. There are folks here who do know what they're talking about.

which facts have are rong?? this is stuff i have heard it may not be true
i only say stuff is 100% right when i have full beleif it is and anyway why should it be me who is rong why not you? you could be rong, then again you could be right, i have hda it with this forum adios :(

And true. I sang my 1st karaoke in 1988, when karaoke was only 4 years old, and there were only 4 songs available in English in the average snack bar*. :D

I can sing those 4 in ways that would.... well lets just not go there!

(And that should suffice to scare away the kiddies...)




*
"Yesterday"
"I Left My Heart in San Francisco"
"My Way"
and "Country Roads"

lol....Scary ;)

China won't declare war on Japan....they fear Karaoke.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2358&ncid=2358&e=1&u=/csm/20050211/ts_csm/olandspat_1

Tensions between China and Japan are (still) rising. They are (even) higher now that Japan has just formally claimed an archipelligo in the pacific, just below Japan. These islands are to be gaurded by the Japanese coast gaurd.

China vs. Japan

Both would lose, but due to available man power and Japan being so small, China would win a short lived land based victory over Japan.
(Just an opinion based on pure man power.)

With what I know about Japan's reputation in the region, there is very little chance that Japan's neighbors will ever come to Japan's aid should China ever consider attacking Japan. It is also unlikely that the United States would be willing to defend Japan should China and Japan have any sort of conflict (political mainly).

1. This is taken from the Business section of the New York Times a while back. The Chinese government is the most powerful factor in maintaining the value of the dollar, should the Chinese government ever stop buying American dollars at the rate they are buying it now, the value of the American dollar would plummet and essentially severely damage anyone using American dollars as a medium of exchange. Should the Chinese government fall, so would the massive demand for American dollars the government generates, therefore leading to a massive exportation of goods at the cost of American consumers (yay for intro to economics).

2. Japan is and remains unrepentant about their role during World War II and if anything could unite China, North Korea, South Korea, Phillipines, all of the Pacific Rim... 60 years is too short of time to forget the atrocities that the Japanese has carried out against their neighbors. No one country in the Pacific Rim can provoke calls of nationalism as well as Japan can. Moreover, Russo-Chinese relationship has been a very warm one as of late, mainly as a counter-balance to the United States. Russia is very much so a player in this conflict.

3. China has nukes, Japan doesn't, China doesn't like Japan... North Korea prolly have nukes, Japan doesn't, North Korea doesn't like Japan... Russia has nukes, Japan doesn't, Russia and China are as close friends as Russia and the United State (if not better)... those are the main three countries that are more likely to align itself against Japan rather than with should the line be drawn on the sand.

4. Russia can be considered a wildcard and may use their own natural resources to provide incentives to come to the table. Nonetheless, the likelyhood of an armed conflict is slim, China IS clearly the regional superpower, in terms of economy and in terms of military. Any rational leader will know that a war involving a nuclear former superpower, a nuclear current superpower, and a nuclear potential superpower is suicidal.

5. Lastly, the United States has too much on its plate right now, North Korean nukes, Iranian nukes, shaky ties with European allies, Arab-Israeli Conflict, Iraqi Insurgency. Those lie on a higher priority than a conflict that is very unlikely to become an armed conflict. The United States will focus on areas where bullets are flying or a nuke is involved. A Chinese-Japanese conflict will be resolved most likely after several tense diplomatic exchanges with China flexing their military muscles.

Hoo, that was a lot... oh well, I think they are valid points as to why Japan is more likely to be alone in a conflict against China and the likelyhood that it probably won't involve full out armed conflict.

im sorry but you didnt win the korean WAR

Not true. The war is not over.

as you might recall it was a police action which in other words meant you lost.

Not. It was a "Police Action" because it was done under the UN.

President Truman appealed to the United Nations to take "police action" against the "unwarranted" attack. Hence, under the "name of the United Nations", the United States was able to send troops and forces.
http://www.koreanwar.com/

i totally agree with you that they saved south korea

True.

but the losses that were inflicted on the US armies were immense

Nope. Not even terribly high.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004615.html

and they were beaten back to the sea.

Sort of true, but misleading. ROK and US forces were pushed back to Pusan.
The Pusan Perimeter assumed by U.S. and ROK forces on 4 August involved a rectangular area about 100 miles from north to south and 50 miles from east to west.
http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/brochures/KW-Outbreak/outbreak.htm

i think it was recorded as the second largest sea evacuation since dunkirk.

Nope. The Pusan Perimeter was not evacuated. General Walker's I Corp brokeout after the Inch’on landing.

the only good thing that came out of korea was M.A.S.H.

How about the use of helicopters for medevac. That flowed over into civilian use for the same purpose.

which facts have are rong??
How about these for starters:
Naginata are Korean.
Helicopters can surplant transport aircraft.
The JASDF is capable of missile defense, but is not able to shoot down helicopters.
The SDF was recently issued a rifle they couldn't use.
People here are slandering you.

this is stuff i have heard it may not be true
i only say stuff is 100% right when i have full beleif it is

Belive what you want. But you should be able to back it up.

and anyway why should it be me who is rong why not you?

Evidence. In a difference of thoughts, if one party is able to provide reasonable and accurate evidence, and the other provides no evidence at all, the first position can be pressumed to be correct.

you could be rong, then again you could be right,

Look at the evidence I posted. If you can provide counter evidence, please do so.

i have hda it with this forum adios :(

Welcome to real life debate.

Not true. The war is not over.



Not. It was a "Police Action" because it was done under the UN.


http://www.koreanwar.com/



True.



Nope. Not even terribly high.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004615.html



Sort of true, but misleading. ROK and US forces were pushed back to Pusan.

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/brochures/KW-Outbreak/outbreak.htm



Nope. The Pusan Perimeter was not evacuated. General Walker's I Corp brokeout after the Inch’on landing.



How about the use of helicopters for medevac. That flowed over into civilian use for the same purpose.

if you had read my quote you would have realised that he said the they had won the war. secondly the casualties. 33,629 people were killed which is 20,000 less than americans killed in WW1 and 103,284 wounded which is half as many as WW1. so not too many casualties then. if you compare it to the death toll to vietnam then you need to take into account the the korean conflict lasted just over three years and vietnam 12 years. big difference. personally i think that one person dying for a reason such as this is too many. i am not taking the hippie view nor am i a pacifist i am saying that killing for land is wrong. if you think the casualties are not that great then your concept on killing is ranging more the the gun-hoe end of the spectrum.

?? how old are you ??
i am smarter than my national average age group.
i have already said you were smarter than me at this stuff( do you want that in writing)

I'm 22!

How old are you?

im sorry but you didnt win the korean WAR as you might recall it was a police action which in other words meant you lost. i totally agree with you that they saved south korea but the losses that were inflicted on the US armies were immense and they were beaten back to the sea. i think it was recorded as the second largest sea evacuation since dunkirk. the only good thing that came out of korea was M.A.S.H.

You sound like my History Professor. It was a police action yes but it was designed to keep North Korea out South Korea! We did that. Therefore, it was a victory in a sense. As for the sea evac, NEVER HAPPENED. We also driven the North Korean Army AND the Chinese Army that came later, OUT of Seol and back across the 38th Parallel.

which facts have are rong?? this is stuff i have heard it may not be true
i only say stuff is 100% right when i have full beleif it is and anyway why should it be me who is rong why not you? you could be rong, then again you could be right, i have hda it with this forum adios :(

awww!!

Don't leave! I like ya.

China vs. Japan

Both would lose, but due to available man power and Japan being so small, China would win a short lived land based victory over Japan.
(Just an opinion based on pure man power.)

What about Technology and the fact that the USA will come into the war?

You sound like my History Professor. It was a police action yes but it was designed to keep North Korea out South Korea! We did that. Therefore, it was a victory in a sense. As for the sea evac, yea that happened but yet we also driven the North Korean Army AND the Chinese Army that came later, OUT of Seol and back across the 38th Parallel.

the main reason for pushing the NKA and the chinese army back was for two reasons both joined. The winter took many casualties on both sides because they were ill equipped and also the chinese supply lines were too over streched because they advanced too quickly. if they came more slowly there may have been a chance that they would never have been pushed back or pushed back so far.

if you had read my quote you would have realised that he said the they had won the war. secondly the casualties. 33,629 people were killed which is 20,000 less than americans killed in WW1 and 103,284 wounded which is half as many as WW1. so not too many casualties then. if you compare it to the death toll to vietnam then you need to take into account the the korean conflict lasted just over three years and vietnam 12 years. big difference. personally i think that one person dying for a reason such as this is too many. i am not taking the hippie view nor am i a pacifist i am saying that killing for land is wrong. if you think the casualties are not that great then your concept on killing is ranging more the the gun-hoe end of the spectrum.

Here's another thought! WE LOST MORE IN WWII then we did in Vietnam and that went on for FOUR years! NOw what do you have to say?

the main reason for pushing the NKA and the chinese army back was for two reasons both joined. The winter took many casualties on both sides because they were ill equipped and also the chinese supply lines were too over streched because they advanced too quickly. if they came more slowly there may have been a chance that they would never have been pushed back or pushed back so far.

I see a big mushroom cloud! Do you honestly think we would've let the Korean Peninsula fall to the commies?

Here's another thought! WE LOST MORE IN WWII then we did in Vietnam and that went on for FOUR years! NOw what do you have to say?


quite simple. i believe the term "world war" has something to do with it considering that it did take place over most of europe northern africa and the pacific. think about it i mean how old are you to come out with stuff like this.

quite simple. i believe the term "world war" has something to do with it considering that it did take place over most of europe northern africa and the pacific. think about it i mean how old are you to come out with stuff like this.

We lost over 400,000 Soldiers in 4 years compared to what? 50,000+ in 10?

It might've been stretched out over 3 continentants but we still lost more forces in WWII than we did in Vietnam which was about 3x longer.

I see a big mushroom cloud! Do you honestly think we would've let the Korean Peninsula fall to the commies?

quite easily yes. they knew the land and outnumbered you.

quite easily yes. they knew the land and outnumbered you.

Nope! WE wouldn't let that happen. We will make sure that doesn't happen. How much of political affairs/military matters do you actually know?

We lost over 400,000 Soldiers in 4 years compared to what? 50,000+ in 10?

It might've been stretched out over 3 continentants but we still lost more forces in WWII than we did in Vietnam which was about 3x longer.

yes but you dont seem to realise the scale. vietnam war hence called for being in VIETNAM on country compared to several continents. i dont know why but i have a feeling i have to re-emhasise the point of it being a world war. the axis force was far greater than vietnam. plus axis were better equipped with planes boats and tanks. i didnt see and tiger mk. II in vietnam or panzer divisions and there certainly wasnt a pearl harbour equivalent in vietnam

as enjoyable as this was i have to go out i will read the reamarks later on. should be interesting.

Nope! WE wouldn't let that happen. We will make sure that doesn't happen. How much of political affairs/military matters do you actually know?

we are talking about the same thing right? you were surrounded outnubered and were hanging on for dear life. a couple more months and there would have been no marine core. plus the remark about commies. i thought anyone could have any political view as long as it didnt literally involve harming others?

as enjoyable as this was i have to go out i will read the reamarks later on. should be interesting.

yes but you dont seem to realise the scale. vietnam war hence called for being in VIETNAM on country compared to several continents. i dont know why but i have a feeling i have to re-emhasise the point of it being a world war. the axis force was far greater than vietnam. plus axis were better equipped with planes boats and tanks. i didnt see and tiger mk. II in vietnam or panzer divisions and there certainly wasnt a pearl harbour equivalent in vietnam

It doesn't matter. The point is we lost more troops in a short amount of time in WWII than we did in Korea or Nam! It doesn't matter if it was a world war. In case you haven't noticed, most of the major fighting the US did prior to 1944 (and I used that just for the purpose of Normandy though major battles took place before then involving US Troops) was in the PACIFIC against one nation, JAPAN! I could go on about sea casualties of certain battles but that is tediuos.

as enjoyable as this was i have to go out i will read the reamarks later on. should be interesting.

Your right, I look forward to argueing with you more.

we are talking about the same thing right? you were surrounded outnubered and were hanging on for dear life. a couple more months and there would have been no marine core. plus the remark about commies. i thought anyone could have any political view as long as it didnt literally involve harming others?

One minor problem. WE BROKE OUT! When we did, we hurled the Chinese and North Korean Army back across the 38th Parallel. Both Armies suffered far more casualties than we did. South Korea remains free to this day thanks to the US and allied forces.

as enjoyable as this was i have to go out i will read the reamarks later on. should be interesting.

Take care.

One minor problem. WE BROKE OUT! When we did, we hurled the Chinese and North Korean Army back across the 38th Parallel. Both Armies suffered far more casualties than we did. South Korea remains free to this day thanks to the US and allied forces.
.



I would not say hurled, more pinned. China and North Korea hurled the UN across or near to the 39th Parallel after Mcarthur got rather excited and preceded to go up to the border with China.

South Korea? Free? Last I heard, being in a trade union was illegal in S Korea?.

I would not say hurled, more pinned. China and North Korea hurled the UN across or near to the 39th Parallel after Mcarthur got rather excited and preceded to go up to the border with China.

South Korea? Free? Last I heard, being in a trade union was illegal in S Korea?.

Since when is not being in a Union a sign that a people aren't free?

Since when is not being in a Union a sign that a people aren't free?

Since when governments ban citizens from joining them and refuse them the right to being in unions.

Since when governments ban citizens from joining them and refuse them the right to being in unions.

Unions have a habit of disrupting government work. Looks at the ATC and at the military shut down!

Sorry, still don't see it.

Unions have a habit of disrupting government work. Looks at the ATC and at the military shut down!


The sign of a healthy democracy is seeing a government challenged from it's work. An unchallenged one by unions or organisations, is leaning towards totalitarianism.


Sorry, still don't see it.

Then you are blind to the obvious.

The sign of a healthy democracy is seeing a government challenged from it's work. An unchallenged one by unions or organisations, is leaning towards totalitarianism.



Then you are blind to the obvious.

No I'm not. I just don't base freedoms on wether or not someone can join a trade union or not.

No I'm not. I just don't base freedoms on wether or not someone can join a trade union or not.


If you don't think that being part of a union or other non government organisation is a citizen's natural right of freedom, I shall thank my lucky stars you don't rule a country.

If you don't think that being part of a union or other non government organisation is a citizen's natural right of freedom, I shall thank my lucky stars you don't rule a country.

I'm not going to stand in the way of it but I don't base freedom on that alone!

awww!!

Don't leave! I like ya.

i hope that is sarcasm
14 and a bit if your asking

How about these for starters:
Naginata are Korean.
Helicopters can surplant transport aircraft.
The JASDF is capable of missile defense, but is not able to shoot down helicopters.
The SDF was recently issued a rifle they couldn't use.
People here are slandering you.



Belive what you want. But you should be able to back it up.



Evidence. In a difference of thoughts, if one party is able to provide reasonable and accurate evidence, and the other provides no evidence at all, the first position can be pressumed to be correct.



Look at the evidence I posted. If you can provide counter evidence, please do so.



Welcome to real life debate.

i understand what your saying but this is not a real life debate, the likelyhood of a war between china and japan is small :gundge: ( why gunge? i do not know )

the slandering bit is true (your all against me. even mr gufalbo the magical unichorne who lives in my shoes) :D

i hope that is sarcasm
14 and a bit if your asking

What? That I asked you not to leave?

No it was the truth. I do like you.

i understand what your saying but this is not a real life debate, the likelyhood of a war between china and japan is small :gundge: ( why gunge? i do not know )

the slandering bit is true (your all against me. even mr gufalbo the magical unichorne who lives in my shoes) :D


We hope there is never a war between the two. It would become such a multi-national quagmire. The two countries do have a long,bloody history with each other. They may be overdue for some hostilities. I hope not.

What? That I asked you not to leave?

No it was the truth. I do like you.

seriouse? oh if so thats o.k i like you to (when your not intelectually kicking my arse)
as i said 14 soon 15 to your 22

We hope there is never a war between the two. It would become such a multi-national quagmire. The two countries do have a long,bloody history with each other. They may be overdue for some hostilities. I hope not.

indeed so. if the two were to plunge into conflict we can be sure that the carnage and suffering would be large, but as i said the likelyhood is small
japan and china have both come along way since their last conflict
p.s does anyone here know how much an american colonel gets paid? in u.s dollars

indeed so. if the two were to plunge into conflict we can be sure that the carnage and suffering would be large, but as i said the likelyhood is small
japan and china have both come along way since their last conflict
p.s does anyone here know how much an american colonel gets paid? in u.s dollars


sorry-I havent a clue.

seriouse? oh if so thats o.k i like you to (when your not intelectually kicking my arse)
as i said 14 soon 15 to your 22

Just hang in there :)

Remember to study all you can. Never stop learning. It is how we grow to be better humans.

You think the government of China is a bunch of Nutz. Well, they are very pratical when it comes down to most things.

China would not support North Korea in anything it does. Except opening up NK to investment or removing Kim from power. Modern China would not begin a war unless it was directly attacted. The risks would be to great for them.

I would not say hurled, more pinned. China and North Korea hurled the UN across or near to the 39th Parallel after Mcarthur got rather excited and preceded to go up to the border with China.

South Korea? Free? Last I heard, being in a trade union was illegal in S Korea?.
It is perfectly legal to join a union in South Korea. However the Korean unions are not as effective as American ones because Korean corporations and the government frequently employ scabs during strikes. There have also been violent clashes between strikers and police.

South Korea is definitely one of Asia's most democratic societies. There is freedom of speech, and the governments are elected by the people. Today they are one of the richest societies in the world... would you rather that the Korean peninsula be united in the 1950s under North Korean rule so that all Korean people would be suffering under the poverty caused by an incompetent madman like Kim Jong Il?

The sign of a healthy democracy is seeing a government challenged from it's work. An unchallenged one by unions or organisations, is leaning towards totalitarianism.

Labor strikes in South Korea are far bigger than anything you'd see here in the States. Hundreds of thousands of workers would show up to protest the government and corporations in Seoul. Labor in South Korea is definitely challenging the government, and will continue to make progress for workers rights.

You think the government of China is a bunch of Nutz. Well, they are very pratical when it comes down to most things.

China would not support North Korea in anything it does. Except opening up NK to investment or removing Kim from power. Modern China would not begin a war unless it was directly attacted. The risks would be to great for them.

I agree. I really don't think China would start a war. That wouldn't be very profitable at all for anyone. ^_^

im sorry but you didnt win the korean WAR as you might recall it was a police action which in other words meant you lost. i totally agree with you that they saved south korea but the losses that were inflicted on the US armies were immense and they were beaten back to the sea. i think it was recorded as the second largest sea evacuation since dunkirk. the only good thing that came out of korea was M.A.S.H.
That is just anti-American sour grapes. Who cares about the semantics of "war" vs. "police action"? I dislike many (if not most) of America's foolish actions around the world, but the Korean War was one thing we got right. Tragically many people of all nationalities lost their lives in the war. But no American or South Korean or anyone in the world would today wish that the madman Kim Jong Il rules over all of Korea. Many good things have come out of the saved Korea, including Samsung gadgets, a prosperous society, and a strong ally of the USA.

the main reason for pushing the NKA and the chinese army back was for two reasons both joined. The winter took many casualties on both sides because they were ill equipped and also the chinese supply lines were too over streched because they advanced too quickly. if they came more slowly there may have been a chance that they would never have been pushed back or pushed back so far.
Keep fantasizing. Perhaps in your anti-American alternate universe the People's Republic of China has taken over the world, but as for the here and now, no amount of desperate speculation can change the fact that South Korea was successfully defended against invasion and that today South Korea is a wealthy and stable nation.

indeed so. if the two were to plunge into conflict we can be sure that the carnage and suffering would be large, but as i said the likelyhood is small

Yea! Going to war is small but then, I"m sure nations all over the planet have runned or is running sinerios in which war starts over something trivial

japan and china have both come along way since their last conflict

So they have! Good thing too but the thing with Asians is that they never forget.

p.s does anyone here know how much an american colonel gets paid? in u.s dollars

If my dad made Colonel, I would be able to tell you.

Yea! Going to war is small but then, I"m sure nations all over the planet have runned or is running sinerios in which war starts over something trivial



So they have! Good thing too but the thing with Asians is that they never forget.



If my dad made Colonel, I would be able to tell you.

i ask because my uncle is a leutenant and his father in law is a Major ( your equivelent to leutenant colonel?) and they get paid loads.
what rank is your dad?
my dad was a captain until the late 80s
my grand dad was a leftenant his dad was the equivelant to leftenant in the navy.and i wonderd if american officers get different pay than british officers. il probably never get into the armed forces, i am increadebly un-healthy and weak (so theres the end of a proud tradition) :( , but i would love to get into sandhurst :)

i ask because my uncle is a leutenant and his father in law is a Major ( your equivelent to leutenant colonel?) and they get paid loads.

Define loads of money!

what rank is your dad?

Lieutenant Colonel

mine was a captain until the late 80s

nice

my grand dad was a leftenant his dad was the equivelant to leftenant in the navy. but il probably never get into the armed forces, i am increadebly un-healthy and weak :( , but i would love to get into sandhurst :)

Well I wish you luck :)

:) :) Define loads of money!



Lieutenant Colonel



nice



Well I wish you luck :)




Captain £1r0und 30,000 to 40,000


Major get paid £40,000 to 50,000


Lieutenant Colonel
around 60,000

Colonel £65,000 and rising

thanks i hope to bea millitary lawyer or in logistics ( if i get to be a lawyer il probably be a higher target for the enemy troops, if i ever get into or near fthe front line LoL :D

what do you do for a living may i ask? :)

Captain £1r0und 30,000 to 40,000


Major get paid £40,000 to 50,000


Lieutenant Colonel
around 60,000

Colonel £65,000 and rising

Ok cool! I have to do the Dollar equivelent but right now, an LC here makes around $90,000 a year I think!

thanks i hope to bea millitary lawyer or in logistics ( if i get to be a lawyer il probably be a higher target for the enemy troops, if i ever get into or near fthe front line LoL :D

LOL!!! Or a friend of the enemy. Someone has to defend enemy forces :p

Ok cool! I have to do the Dollar equivelent but right now, an LC here makes around $90,000 a year I think!



LOL!!! Or a friend of the enemy. Someone has to defend enemy forces :p

meaning? :D :confused:

meaning? :D :confused:

HAHA!!

Someone has to fight for the POWs don't you think?

HAHA!!

Someone has to fight for the POWs don't you think?

come along to the other forum T.N.A british special forces

HAHA!!

Someone has to fight for the POWs don't you think?

probably but i hope it is not me id prefer to be either advising or the prosecution

Yeah well don't forget China has by far the largest army in the world, twice as large as the US', and that's just the standing army. Imagine if China calls upon the draft... Let's hope the tensions, if they ever break out into war, stay localized and not expand to engulf the rest of the pacific.
Vast troop formations are easily broken up by modern technology.

i thnk this thread is dead> such a shame so many memories

ty

Vast troop formations are easily broken up by modern technology.

Yep and modern technology wins the wars. Not vast armies of the past.

Yeah well don't forget China has by far the largest army in the world, twice as large as the US', and that's just the standing army. Imagine if China calls upon the draft... Let's hope the tensions, if they ever break out into war, stay localized and not expand to engulf the rest of the pacific.
Most of China's military equipment is outdated. Their Air Force is crap and so is their Navy. They don't even have aircraft carriers.

Well, China is advancing rapidly. They've now sent a rocket carrying men into space.
Yeah, Something that the United States did over 40 years ago.

Yeah well don't forget China has by far the largest army in the world, twice as large as the US', and that's just the standing army. Imagine if China calls upon the draft... Let's hope the tensions, if they ever break out into war, stay localized and not expand to engulf the rest of the pacific.

yes and didnt iraq have a big ass army at one point (or am i that tired?)at least until we beat the $#@^ outa them :P

yes and didnt iraq have a big ass army at one point (or am i that tired?)at least until we beat the $#@^ outa them :P

3rd largest army in 1991 and yea we did kick the crap out of them because the Iraqi Army didn't want to fight. The Republican Guard did and they got hammered too.

It's just a small island... Anyways, China wouldn't start a war. It would surely be Japan's decision. I hope the Japs aren't trying to take over China again...

It's just a small island... Anyways, China wouldn't start a war. It would surely be Japan's decision. I hope the Japs aren't trying to take over China again...

The current Chinese government wouldn't risk its power in a war. Ironically, if Chinese government was democratic, the call for war on Japan would have been deafening. Still, if you asked common people in China wether China should declare war on Japan if they formally annexed the island, most would respond with a resounding yes.

Something spoken by Bill Clinton on N. Korea starting a war would describe their mentallity perfectly, "They[Japan] would cease to exist as a nation and society the very next day." Nuclear war is unthinkable, but for Chinese, they are willing to make an exception for Japan. Wouldn't you if your neighboring country attacked you every single time its stronger than you are?

i understand what your saying but this is not a real life debate,

What is it then? This conversation meets the definitions of debate: de·bate
v. de·bat·ed, de·bat·ing, de·bates
v. intr.

1. To consider something; deliberate.
2. To engage in argument by discussing opposing points.
3. To engage in a formal discussion or argument. See Synonyms at discuss.
4. Obsolete. To fight or quarrel.


v. tr.
1. To deliberate on; consider.
2. To dispute or argue about.
3. To discuss or argue (a question, for example) formally.
4. Obsolete. To fight or argue for or over.


n.
1. A discussion involving opposing points; an argument.
2. Deliberation; consideration: passed the motion with little debate.
3. A formal contest of argumentation in which two opposing teams defend and attack a given proposition.
4. Obsolete. Conflict; strife. (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=debate)


the likelyhood of a war between china and japan is small

Doesn't matter. People debate lots of unlikely things. It doesn't excuse lax arguments.

the slandering bit is true
Nope. Slander (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=slander) does not mean "out to get someone" (which, AFAIK no one here is anyway. Nor, does it pean pointing out where someone's arguments fail (which is what has been happening).

[QUOTE=The grand britania](your all against me. even mr gufalbo the magical unichorne who lives in my shoes) :D

:D Good! Keep your sense of humor. It's invaluable in life. And I'm glad to see you're sticking around.

:D What is it then? This conversation meets the definitions of debate: [/url]




Doesn't matter. People debate lots of unlikely things. It doesn't excuse lax arguments.

[QUOTE=The grand britania]the slandering bit is true
Nope. [url=http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=slander]Slander (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=debate) does not mean "out to get someone" (which, AFAIK no one here is anyway. Nor, does it pean pointing out where someone's arguments fail (which is what has been happening).
:D


:D Good! Keep your sense of humor. It's invaluable in life. And I'm glad to see you're sticking around.


like hell are you glad
your probably the guy who tried to assasinate me in 1823

we of the t.n.e do not forget when people poison our toothpaste

(since you have a veiw on everything please go to one of my threads and debate there. tooodles

slander definition – Slander is a defamatory statement expressed in a transitory medium such as verbal speech

slander definition – Slander is a defamatory statement expressed in a transitory medium such as verbal speech

Thank you Webster's Unabridged Dictionary!

Thank you Webster's Unabridged Dictionary!

says the childs oxford encyclapedia

says the childs oxford encyclapedia

Childs Oxford Encyclopedia? LOL! Good one :)

i don't want a war between China and japan that will delay the ps3 even further it was ment to be this chrismas but no next years chrismas thanks to the deleys from nivida oh oh wait what was we talking about again o thats right

Which is better Brown Bread Or White bread :D

My view on the matter is that when the Chinese lose a couple of hundred thousand men then the Democracy movement will topple the Communisth leardership and surrender. Anyone remember Tienamman Square just about everyone under the age of 30 wants Communism gone.

i don't want a war between China and japan that will delay the ps3 even further it was ment to be this chrismas but no next years chrismas thanks to the deleys from nivida oh oh wait what was we talking about again o thats right

Neither do I, but I think enjo kosai is as good a reason as any to have a war.

Incidently, if pædophilia is as common in Japan as I'm told, and if what I've heard about pædophilia having no cure is true, then what are the implications?

cina is no longer comunist
i have freinds who are chinese. china may be classed as comunist but the government is not really comunist

cina is no longer comunist
i have freinds who are chinese. china may be classed as comunist but the government is not really comunist

You mean that China has a mixed private capital / state capital / state social economy, but a totalitarian single party political system. The state social sector is receding.

There have been some competitive elections in local politics in some rural places.

And not everyone under 30 wants to get rid of the totalitarian government. Some people under 30 are the totalitarian government, and doing very well out of it.

China would definitely kick japan's ass in a war, and the power of japan is on the wane. It's going to take a long time though. The whole of british world influence is based on the empire that britain got rid of 40 or 50 years ago. The influence and the money are still around though.

You mean that China has a mixed private capital / state capital / state social economy, but a totalitarian single party political system. The state social sector is receding.

There have been some competitive elections in local politics in some rural places.

And not everyone under 30 wants to get rid of the totalitarian government. Some people under 30 are the totalitarian government, and doing very well out of it.

China would definitely kick japan's ass in a war, and the power of japan is on the wane. It's going to take a long time though. The whole of british world influence is based on the empire that britain got rid of 40 or 50 years ago. The influence and the money are still around though.

we did not get rid of it. we lost it. mainly due to left wing pen pushing arseholes who were afraid that looking out for your own countrie wasnt worth the time