NationStates Jolt Archive

We in Europe are constantly bemoaning the existance of the detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, well, how about we do something?

Something like a rescue attempt.

Okay, here's the plan, either the UK, France or the Netherlands send an aircraft carrier or two on a routine mission to the Falklands, Guyana, or the Antilles respectively. Then, unexpectedly, in the pitchblack of night a squadron of fighter jets split off and take out the defencive capabilities of Guantanamo, hot on their tales are a few Chinooks, we drop some rope ladders into the pens and have some loadspeakers announce in Arabic that this is a rescue.

The Chinooks fly off to rendez-vous with the motherfleet, and then, bam, back across the Atlantic where we can bring these people to civilisation and hold them fair trials.

-

Okay? So is this doable? Should it be done, or is it a dishonourable act done against existing treaty? Would we get away with it? Or would the American military be alert and flexible enough to swiftly pwn us?

Discuss.

1. Violation of treaty.
2. We can see any military movement.
3. Unless you plan on using nuclear weapons, you would be pwned.
4. Doesn't help for future relations.
5. Europeans don't have a credible ability to project major force on a global scale.
6. Europeans hate fighting wars.

You can't exactly just drop rope ladders down into the base. It is a prison, with walls and ceilings and locked cell doors. The open-air pens were only temporary, if you might remember. You would have to put commandos into the area to bust the place open, and that really wouldn't work.

1. Thats Illigal
2. The USA will notice if its not a usual patrol, how often do the French send an aircfrat carrier to Guyana?
3. Even the combined fleets of the 3 European countries you listed would get destroyed by the American one.
4. Guantanamo bay is not jsut a prision, it is a military base, full of soldiers
5. Theres an airstrip there, they may have fighters, but I dont know about that


So you prbly can take the prision and all that. And maybe even make it back across the Atlantic. But within a matter of weeks you'll have the largest carrier fleet since WWII bearing down on Europe, ready to beat the offending countries into pulp.

1. Violation of treaty.
2. We can see any military movement.
3. Unless you plan on using nuclear weapons, you would be pwned.
4. Doesn't help for future relations.
5. Europeans don't have a credible ability to project major force on a global scale.
6. Europeans hate fighting wars.

1. Yes, granted.
2. As I said, we would have a cover story, we would actually be in the Carribean before anything out of the ordinary occured.
3. If it came to that.
4. No it does not.
5. Blatant lie. Europeans can project across the Atlantic, to state otherwise is just being arrogant.
6. A stereotype. Besides, I was not advocating a European nation (or coalition of nations) declaring War, this a simple righting of a wrong. The ball is in America's court as to whether they want to attack us for something the majority of their population views as indefencible anyway.

5. Blatant lie. Europeans can project across the Atlantic, to state otherwise is just being arrogant.

Not for any sustained operation. There are effectively no long range aircraft for combat purposes owned by the EU which would have any capability against US forces. The EU navies are, with the exception of the UK, largely short range forces with a limited time at sea. Their aircraft carriers are using largely outdated aircraft compared to US carrier aircraft.

Guantanamo is also within range of US land based aircraft, which would pwn anything that the EU could field.

Additionally, the area is a playground for US attack submarines out of Kings Bay.

While it might be remotely possible to rescue some of the prisoners (think of trying to break people out of a Supermax prison, because that's what was built there now), by the time you get them to your ships, none of the ships are ever going to make it home. None.

It would be quite interesting. If they, somehow, miraculously pulled it off and gotr away with most of the prisoners, I wonder how America would react?

My prediction is that would precipitate divide the country, between those who are disgusted with whats happening in Guantanamo and the militarists. Simply put, it would have quite interesting consequences.

1. Yes, granted.
2. As I said, we would have a cover story, we would actually be in the Carribean before anything out of the ordinary occured.
3. If it came to that.
4. No it does not.
5. Blatant lie. Europeans can project across the Atlantic, to state otherwise is just being arrogant.
6. A stereotype. Besides, I was not advocating a European nation (or coalition of nations) declaring War, this a simple righting of a wrong. The ball is in America's court as to whether they want to attack us for something the majority of their population views as indefencible anyway.
1. Of course
2. Wehn do the Europeans deploy carriers to the Caribean?
3. The Europeans have quite a few nukes, especially France, biggest after USA and Russia
4. true
5. True
6. And also true, Europeans are excellent fighters

And its not righting a wrong, you're invading someones territory and taking away their prisioners. If you're so concerned about rightiousness, why descend to their level?

It would be quite interesting. If they, somehow, miraculously pulled it off and gotr away with most of the prisoners, I wonder how America would react?

My prediction is that would precipitate divide the country, between those who are disgusted with whats happening in Guantanamo and the militarists. Simply put, it would have quite interesting consequences.
its simple really

You get invaded, well then, go attack whoever invaded you

We in Europe are constantly bemoaning the existance of the detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, well, how about we do something?

Something like a rescue attempt.

Okay, here's the plan, either the UK, France or the Netherlands send an aircraft carrier or two on a routine mission to the Falklands, Guyana, or the Antilles respectively. Then, unexpectedly, in the pitchblack of night a squadron of fighter jets split off and take out the defencive capabilities of Guantanamo, hot on their tales are a few Chinooks, we drop some rope ladders into the pens and have some loadspeakers announce in Arabic that this is a rescue.

The Chinooks fly off to rendez-vous with the motherfleet, and then, bam, back across the Atlantic where we can bring these people to civilisation and hold them fair trials.

-

Okay? So is this doable? Should it be done, or is it a dishonourable act done against existing treaty? Would we get away with it? Or would the American military be alert and flexible enough to swiftly pwn us?

Discuss.


You're advocating one of the members of the EU to attack a US military base? Real smart, initiating an act of war. As others have said, even IF you were able to get to the prisoners and get them loaded into the helicopters, your helicopters may not have a ship to land on when they return.

You're advocating one of the members of the EU to attack a US military base? Real smart, initiating an act of war. As others have said, even IF you were able to get to the prisoners and get them loaded into the helicopters, your helicopters may not have a ship to land on when they return.
they may have the ship, MAYBE even get across the atlantic, but if they do so, the largest carrier fleet since WWII shall descend on whoever attacked them

We in Europe are constantly bemoaning the existance of the detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, well, how about we do something?

Something like a rescue attempt.

Okay, here's the plan, either the UK, France or the Netherlands send an aircraft carrier or two on a routine mission to the Falklands, Guyana, or the Antilles respectively. Then, unexpectedly, in the pitchblack of night a squadron of fighter jets split off and take out the defencive capabilities of Guantanamo, hot on their tales are a few Chinooks, we drop some rope ladders into the pens and have some loadspeakers announce in Arabic that this is a rescue.

The Chinooks fly off to rendez-vous with the motherfleet, and then, bam, back across the Atlantic where we can bring these people to civilisation and hold them fair trials.

-

Okay? So is this doable? Should it be done, or is it a dishonourable act done against existing treaty? Would we get away with it? Or would the American military be alert and flexible enough to swiftly pwn us?

Discuss.
Yeah, rescue them then repatriate the terrorists (and I do believe that the majority of the people in Guantanamo are terrorists) in your own countries. That should lead to some interesting news headlines in the comming years. Can't wait to hear about terrorists holding every visitor to the Louvre hostage and beheading them, then blowing the whole place up when the police try to rescue the remaining hostages.

I think Siap is on the lines that I was trying to raise. We all reluctantly acknowledge that the USA is the military behemoth and could conquer any foe. My real question is would either side let this become Total War, and would it be morally acceptable for Americans if their government acted in this way.

Guantanamo is not normal US territory, indeed, that is why the prison is based there. Guantanamo itself was forced from Cuba during Bay of Pigs, and so to protest its reinvasion would be a smidgen hypocritical.

Also, I was under the impression that there is usually a European naval presence in the Carribean, although I admit that is an asumption. It makes sense to me though, as the three nations I have mentioned have dependent terretories there and furthermore many Carribean Commonwealth members rely purely on the Royal Navy for defence (so perhaps, if we engineered a fake Islamist coup on one of the smaller islands, that would be significant excuse to be present).

Attacking a military base=suicide note.

Guantanamo is not normal US territory, indeed, that is why the prison is based there. Guantanamo itself was forced from Cuba during Bay of Pigs, and so to protest its reinvasion would be a smidgen hypocritical.
Gitmo is a military base. Kings bay subs would pwn your fleets and we'd have the best excuse ever for getting rid of the prisoners quickly and cheaply.

I think Siap is on the lines that I was trying to raise. We all reluctantly acknowledge that the USA is the military behemoth and could conquer any foe. My real question is would either side let this become Total War, and would it be morally acceptable for Americans if their government acted in this way.

Guantanamo is not normal US territory, indeed, that is why the prison is based there. Guantanamo itself was forced from Cuba during Bay of Pigs, and so to protest its reinvasion would be a smidgen hypocritical.

Also, I was under the impression that there is usually a European naval presence in the Carribean, although I admit that is an asumption. It makes sense to me though, as the three nations I have mentioned have dependent terretories there and furthermore many Carribean Commonwealth members rely purely on the Royal Navy for defence (so perhaps, if we engineered a fake Islamist coup on one of the smaller islands, that would be significant excuse to be present).


Alright, here's a few things for you to mull over. First off, a US military base (any military base) is considered soverign US territory. Second off, I don't know that the average American citizen would appreciate anyone (especially from the EU) killing US soldiers, regardless of their view of Guantanamo and the government. And yes, you would have to kill (at least some of) the soldiers at the base to get to the prisoners.

I didn't even know that any of the European nations had aircraft carriers. The last one I recall are/were the British "through-deck cruisers."

its simple really

You get invaded, well then, go attack whoever invaded you

I one sentence you have justified the resistance/insurgence in Iraq - I didn't think I'd ever hear an American do that:)

We in Europe are constantly bemoaning the existance of the detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, well, how about we do something?

Something like a rescue attempt.

Okay, here's the plan, either the UK, France or the Netherlands send an aircraft carrier or two on a routine mission to the Falklands, Guyana, or the Antilles respectively. Then, unexpectedly, in the pitchblack of night a squadron of fighter jets split off and take out the defencive capabilities of Guantanamo, hot on their tales are a few Chinooks, we drop some rope ladders into the pens and have some loadspeakers announce in Arabic that this is a rescue.

The Chinooks fly off to rendez-vous with the motherfleet, and then, bam, back across the Atlantic where we can bring these people to civilisation and hold them fair trials.

-

Okay? So is this doable? Should it be done, or is it a dishonourable act done against existing treaty? Would we get away with it? Or would the American military be alert and flexible enough to swiftly pwn us?

Discuss.


What aircraft carriers ...?????????????

at any rate you have a little thing called kosovo and your own bunch of genocidal mass grave filling terrorist warmongers , in your own back yard and you did NOTHING ...bunch of talking loud , but saying NOTHING , group of jack ass's...how many years did the graves get filled ? the rapes murders and ethnic cleansing ...YOU DID NOTHING ..you watched..and DID NOTHING .

Now cry about a few hundred poor misguided terrorist assholes ...go fix your own shit and get back at me ..

How long was Milosovic on " trial " before he finaly died ?

Sure ...What of the rest of them ?

Talk to me about Gtmo....ask me about Sarajevo .

You watched while millions were killed raped and stuck in mass graves...

I misunderstood something from the last page: what does the American majority view as "indefencible?"

A small European nation chillin' across the Atlantic to attempt to invade one of the most tightly guarded and well defended bases of the world's current military hegemon.

Two words: Good luck

And so I ask you...you describe Europe as "civilization" as if America is some desolate wasteland if barbarism.

Hop out of your dream world awhile and look around. Tell me what part of "civilized" Europe has sat afraid and let leaders on your own continent slaughter their own people.

Do you really believe that it's just a coincidence that the three largest sources of foreign direct investment in Hussein's Iraq (France, Germany and Belgium) just happened to be the three biggest sources of European resistance to the war?

And one last thing, if we're going to talk about human rights. When was the last time the American government freely censored its own people just because it was afraid of its past? I have little sympathy for Holocaust deniers, but they don't deserve prision and blacklisting just because they believe the absurd.

I love Europe, I study European politics, and I see the majority of Europe as a set of beautiful Western nations who understand the power of liberty. If you don't like Gitmo, that's more than fine, but don't act like Europe is some haven of everything good and beautiful and the United States is a piece of evil trash.

And don't kid yourselves. I love America, but I'm no blind flag-waving militarist...but the idea that any European nation could successfully attack an American military base, particularly one so close to home, is laughable at best.

If there hypothetically was an attack on Guantanamo then Cuba would use probably get involved to reclaim what is rightfully there land. the US lease at Guantanamo ran out in 2000 ( i think ) and they are now there illegally.

remember that nobody thought that Castro could Out Batista and thay were proved wrong - yes Cuba is poor, largely due to US sanctions, but they are fiesty!!!!!!!!!!!

I one sentence you have justified the resistance/insurgence in Iraq - I didn't think I'd ever hear an American do that:)
I'm not American in the sense that I'm a citizen of the USA

and I dont support either side in the Iraq war, it was wrong of the USA to invade, but Sadamm and the resistance arent exactly saints either

What aircraft carriers ...?????????????

The European ones

England has 2
France has 1
Italy has 1
Spain has 1
Russia has 1




at any rate you have a little thing called kosovo and your own bunch of genocidal mass grave filling terrorist warmongers , in your own back yard and you did NOTHING ...bunch of talking loud , but saying NOTHING , group of jack ass's...how many years did the graves get filled ? the rapes murders and ethnic cleansing ...YOU DID NOTHING ..you watched..and DID NOTHING .

Now cry about a few hundred poor misguided terrorist assholes ...go fix your own shit and get back at me ..

How long was Milosovic on " trial " before he finaly died ?

Sure ...What of the rest of them ?

Talk to me about Gtmo....ask me about Sarajevo .

You watched while millions were killed raped and stuck in mass graves...
The USA dint do anything either (well, until NATO got in, and that was with the Europeans)

Nah, the Cubans should just raise the rent to something like $1M/year. It's primo real estate, with a nice beach and everything.

Nah, the Cubans should just raise the rent to something like $1M/year. It's primo real estate, with a nice beach and everything.
The Cubans dont take any money from the USA, because to them its illigally occupied

Apologies. I didn't realize it was the job of the Americans to drag you kicking and screaming to take care of mass slaughter in your own neighborhood.

If there was the same kind of situation in Costa Rica, do you really think the Americans would need prodding from or wait for military assistance from the Europeans before stopping the slaughter? I think not.

Then they should start. They could use the money, as could we all. Either that, or shut off the water.

Maybe, just maybe, that's because the United States is thousands of miles from Kosovo, as opposed to something more like a stone's throw for her European neighbors. I imagine the US would have hoped that somebody here would have done something about it sooner. Turns out they were disappointed, and Kosovo paid the price.

they may have the ship, MAYBE even get across the atlantic, but if they do so, the largest carrier fleet since WWII shall descend on whoever attacked them

Also not a single ship of the EU force would make it back, a few US 688 class fast attack subs would sink them one bu one untill there are none left.

Also not a single ship of the EU force would make it back, a few US 688 class fast attack subs would sink them one bu one untill there are none left.
and this is assuming that the Europeans have no knowlede of anti-submarine warfare, and will just let the USA subs pick em off

What would happen if say some of those prisoners were terrorists bent on killing civilians and they escaped. I don't think that would go over to well with anyone.
It would suck to see Western powers fight and ony accomplishing helping terrorists kill people.

We in Europe are constantly bemoaning the existance of the detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, well, how about we do something?

Something like a rescue attempt.

Okay, here's the plan, either the UK, France or the Netherlands send an aircraft carrier or two on a routine mission to the Falklands, Guyana, or the Antilles respectively. Then, unexpectedly, in the pitchblack of night a squadron of fighter jets split off and take out the defencive capabilities of Guantanamo, hot on their tales are a few Chinooks, we drop some rope ladders into the pens and have some loadspeakers announce in Arabic that this is a rescue.

The Chinooks fly off to rendez-vous with the motherfleet, and then, bam, back across the Atlantic where we can bring these people to civilisation and hold them fair trials.

-

Okay? So is this doable? Should it be done, or is it a dishonourable act done against existing treaty? Would we get away with it? Or would the American military be alert and flexible enough to swiftly pwn us?

Discuss.

Way to declare war on the United States. :rolleyes:

We would pwn you beyond all pwning, it would be far funnier than the Falklands war.

The Cubans dont take any money from the USA, because to them its illigally occupied

Actually it is not GITMO is illegally occupied; there is a treaty that leases the station to the US for get this $1 US dollar a year, for as long as the US wants it. I have been to GITMO many times, not much there, a fence with a mine field dividing the station from Cuba manned by the Marines in towers a Navy exchange some barracks and housing for personal stationed there, the docks and an air station and supply warehouses. But it is still US territory.

You're advocating one of the members of the EU to attack a US military base? Real smart, initiating an act of war. As others have said, even IF you were able to get to the prisoners and get them loaded into the helicopters, your helicopters may not have a ship to land on when they return.

or helicopters at all. They'll be destroyed as well.

Actually it is not GITMO is illegally occupied; there is a treaty that leases the station to the US for get this $1 US dollar a year, for as long as the US wants it. I have been to GITMO many times, not much there, a fence with a mine field dividing the station from Cuba manned by the Marines in towers a Navy exchange some barracks and housing for personal stationed there, the docks and an air station and supply warehouses. But it is still US territory.
I said TO THEM, the Cubans see it as illigally occupied, because the goverment dosent recognise them

We would pwn you beyond all pwning, it would be far funnier than the Falklands war.
If the forces are proportionate to 1982, as are the event that would happen. Both fleets qould take quite a pounding, and there would be heavy casualties on both sides. Its not funny btw

and this is assuming that the Europeans have no knowlede of anti-submarine warfare, and will just let the USA subs pick em off

The 688 is the fastest and best state of the art attack sub in the world (look it up in Jane’s fighting ships) and are almost undetectable, the USSR tried very hard to find and track 688s and had no luck, and this class of sub is virtually invisible under water, the can launch missiles from over 500 miles away, the MK 48 and 52 us torp can move at over 50+ knots and travel over 20 miles and once a MK 48/52 is fired it dose mot miss. The EU fleet would have no chance against 1 or 2 688s.

If the forces are proportionate to 1982, as are the event that would happen. Both fleets qould take quite a pounding, and there would be heavy casualties on both sides. Its not funny btw

Yea it is, especially now this thread proves the intelligence of Europe as an entierity.

I think Siap is on the lines that I was trying to raise. We all reluctantly acknowledge that the USA is the military behemoth and could conquer any foe. My real question is would either side let this become Total War, and would it be morally acceptable for Americans if their government acted in this way.

I see you do not know history. We maybe divided but if we are attacked, we will unit and you do not want to see the consequences of that. *points to Japan and Afghanistan as prime examples*

Guantanamo is not normal US territory, indeed, that is why the prison is based there. Guantanamo itself was forced from Cuba during Bay of Pigs, and so to protest its reinvasion would be a smidgen hypocritical.

Incorrect Greyenivol. It is still US territory and it is recognized as US territory. Why do you think Cuba hasn't done anything to get it back? Because it is US territory and any invasion of it, would be seen as an invasion of the US itself and thus, W-A-R.

Also, I was under the impression that there is usually a European naval presence in the Carribean, although I admit that is an asumption. It makes sense to me though, as the three nations I have mentioned have dependent terretories there and furthermore many Carribean Commonwealth members rely purely on the Royal Navy for defence (so perhaps, if we engineered a fake Islamist coup on one of the smaller islands, that would be significant excuse to be present).

Provided you stick to that objective and don't attack us...be my guest. I would love to see you pull something like that off.

I said TO THEM, the Cubans see it as illigally occupied, because the goverment dosent recognise them

Yes you did, and I saw that, but the world court as well as all experts on international treaties agrees with the US and state Cuba has no legs to stand on, until the US does not want it any more.

The 688 is the fastest and best state of the art attack sub in the world (look it up in Jane’s fighting ships) and are almost undetectable, the USSR tried very hard to find and track 688s and had no luck, and this class of sub is virtually invisible under water, the can launch missiles from over 500 miles away, the MK 48 and 52 us torp can move at over 50+ knots and travel over 20 miles and once a MK 48/52 is fired it dose mot miss. The EU fleet would have no chance against 1 or 2 688s.
All this may be true however, if the Europeans did develope a way to track and destroy 688 subs then they probably wouldnt make it public knowledge.

If there hypothetically was an attack on Guantanamo then Cuba would use probably get involved to reclaim what is rightfully there land. the US lease at Guantanamo ran out in 2000 ( i think ) and they are now there illegally.

You might want to double check that.

This is so funny it borders on the insane. GITMO is a Marine Corps base, not just a little jail tucked into a corner of Cuba. Other than the DMZ in Korea, it is the most heavily fortified American base outside of the Iraq/Afganistan war theaters. Not only does the Kings Bay sub fleet play there, but it is 60 miles (that's about 100km or so) from mainland Forida, where there are more military bases than I can count. And the US Atlantic fleet is larger and has more carriers than all the European nations mentioned combined.

Even if certain NATO allies were to commit an act of war against the United States, it would fail miserably.

This is so funny it borders on the insane. GITMO is a Marine Corps base, not just a little jail tucked into a corner of Cuba. Other than the DMZ in Korea, it is the most heavily fortified American base outside of the Iraq/Afganistan war theaters. Not only does the Kings Bay sub fleet play there, but it is 60 miles (that's about 100km or so) from mainland Forida, where there are more military bases than I can count. And the US Atlantic fleet is larger and has more carriers than all the European nations mentioned combined.

Even if certain NATO allies were to commit an act of war against the United States, it would fail miserably.
The U.S.A. is part of N.A.T.O.

Even if certain NATO allies were to commit an act of war against the United States, it would fail miserably.
and other NATO allies have to join in with the USA because its been attacked

[QUOTE=Franberry]The European ones

England has 2
France has 1
Italy has 1
Spain has 1
Russia has 1


US Carriers (CVN) 12 most nuke powered that can move over 50 knots over water, carries 90+ fighter and attack aircraft, with state of the art communications and radar and EW and ECW equipment, they also have torp launchers and cruse missiles and with early warning air craft cam see and opposing force coming from over 2500 miles away, kind of gives them a lot of time to plan there moves.

I said TO THEM, the Cubans see it as illigally occupied, because the goverment dosent recognise them

Then why are they continueing to collect rent from it if it is illegally occupied? They do recognize it as US territory Franberry. To say differently is ignorance.

[QUOTE=Franberry]The European ones

England has 2
France has 1
Italy has 1
Spain has 1
Russia has 1


US Carriers (CVN) 12 most nuke powered that can move over 50 knots over water, carries 90+ fighter and attack aircraft, with state of the art communications and radar and EW and ECW equipment, they also have torp launchers and cruse missiles and with early warning air craft cam see and opposing force coming from over 2500 miles away, kind of gives them a lot of time to plan there moves.
yeah, the USA is widley supperior, but all the other guy asked was if the Europeans had carriers, and most of those are VTOL ones, which cant carry much

Then why are they continueing to collect rent from it if it is illegally occupied? They do recognize it as US territory Franberry. To say differently is ignorance.
they dont collect rent, I belive they did so once, but never after that

The U.S.A. is part of N.A.T.O.

Duh. That's why I implied that it would be rediculous for our NATO allies to attack us.

in 1901 under the terms of the Platt Ammendment, the US 'Ordered' Cuba to sell or lease land for a Naval Station. The land was leased under a 99 year agreement for 2000 gold coins a year - this works out at less than 1 cent per square metre of land.

In 1934 the Treaty of Reciprocity, repealed the 1901 agreement but did not change the terms.

as the USA does not accept the government of Castro, little will change. Funny how they supported Batista who murdered and tourtured many more people - primarily becaue there was a lot of US companies involved in the sugar cane industry - The Hurshey factory andt rainline springs to mind.

Any how, this is a bit off topic so will stop

Then why are they continueing to collect rent from it if it is illegally occupied? They do recognize it as US territory Franberry. To say differently is ignorance.


They dont cassh the cheques - all they want is there land back

They dont cassh the cheques - all they want is there land back

Then let them come and take it. I'm sure Castro wouldn't mind being unseated from power because that is what would happen if Castro tried anything.

The European ones

England has 2
France has 1
Italy has 1
Spain has 1
Russia has 1


You really think Russia would help the EU?

The European ones

England has 2
France has 1
Italy has 1
Spain has 1
Russia has 1



America has 12. :D

You really think Russia would help the EU?
no, but they asked abotu European carriers, and part of Russia is in Europe, so I said that

I also dont think that any other nation would back up whoever attacked the USA

Aside from the pretty real probability that any sort of attack on the US would fail fairly miserably, what do you think the political consequences would be?

Would the US attack Europe over a small incident like that and risk global war? Would the UK side with the US or the EU?

I think the idea of war between western countries is interesting. I wonder if anyone still knows how to do it, the last bunch of wars have always been big fat rich countries against people armed with sticks. Or Ak47s, hehe.

Okay, here's the plan, either the UK, France or the Netherlands send an aircraft carrier or two on a routine mission to the Falklands, Guyana, or the Antilles respectively.

The two UK Invincible class aircraft carriers carry 8 BAE Sea Harriers, with a combat radius of 1000 km, putting a launch from any sites you specify out of the question. The single French aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle carries Mirage 2000s and Dassault Rafales, which could hit Gitmo from off Guyana. However, stationing it in the area without notification would be noticed. And the Netherlands has no aircraft carriers.

Then, unexpectedly, in the pitchblack of night a squadron of fighter jets split off and take out the defencive capabilities of Guantanamo,

This assumes that one of the 3 above ships a) can approach close enough for a launch without arrousing suspicion, b) can launch said mision undetected, and c) can successfully suppress the air defenses.

hot on their tales are a few Chinooks,

The UK doesn't fly them off the Invincible class and France doesn't fly them at all.

I'm going to stop here because I'm getting bored of poking holes in this silly plan...

Suffice it to say that no, your plan won't work, but yes it would be a major mistake on the part of the states you wish to involve in this sillyness.

and other NATO allies have to join in with the USA because its been attacked
Or they could spit on NATO and go up against the US because they know they'd be doing the right thing on this one.

Or they could spit on NATO and go up against the US because they know they'd be doing the right thing on this one.

can one say treaty violation? Also under the terms of NATO, if the US is attacked, the nations of NATO are obligated to support the US just like we are obligated to assist the other NATO countries if they are attacked.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5102528.stm

They'll arrive and find two Marines smoking and watching TV.

Or they could spit on NATO and go up against the US because they know they'd be doing the right thing on this one.
yeah, what?

Why would they go against the USA? death wish?
Canada has no option but to go neutral or with the USA on this one.
And if the other european nations are suicidal, then okay

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5102528.stm

They'll arrive and find two Marines smoking and watching TV.

Till it happens (if it happens) it is still US territory.

You are forgetting that most European Countries, are somewhat allies of the US, even if just on paper, they are smart enough to realize that even a combined force of France, and the UK would not be larger than the US military, and the UK would never participate, seeing as they are close allies with the US, and if the UK doesnt participate, then there would not be much of a Navy to fight with, granted France and other nations have small Navys, some with a few Carriers, they are nothing compared to the United States, To put it simply, they would not dare to even try, and if they did, their ships would get blown to shit, and the small force of Commandos would be dessimated by the Hundreds, if not thousands of US Marines, who are at the base. Plus there would be a massive retaliation by the US, and the other countries militaries would be blown to shit.

We in Europe are constantly bemoaning the existance of the detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, well, how about we do something?

Something like a rescue attempt.

Okay, here's the plan, either the UK, France or the Netherlands send an aircraft carrier or two on a routine mission to the Falklands, Guyana, or the Antilles respectively. Then, unexpectedly, in the pitchblack of night a squadron of fighter jets split off and take out the defencive capabilities of Guantanamo, hot on their tales are a few Chinooks, we drop some rope ladders into the pens and have some loadspeakers announce in Arabic that this is a rescue.

The Chinooks fly off to rendez-vous with the motherfleet, and then, bam, back across the Atlantic where we can bring these people to civilisation and hold them fair trials.

-

Okay? So is this doable? Should it be done, or is it a dishonourable act done against existing treaty? Would we get away with it? Or would the American military be alert and flexible enough to swiftly pwn us?

Discuss.

Do not underestimate the Americans.
Take for example the average American woman: She weighs three times more than you do, she can assemble a rocket launcher in under 2.5 seconds, she is too dumb to feel pain and would rip you to shreds for blocking the tv without a second thought.

You want to mess with that?

http://edbatista.typepad.com/edbatista/images/2005/02/Dr%20Evil.jpg

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight...

The European ones

England has 2
France has 1
Italy has 1
Spain has 1
Russia has 1




The USA dint do anything either (well, until NATO got in, and that was with the Europeans)

And how many of these are full size CVA/CVN or at least fleet carriers? V/STOL and Helicopter carriers aren't in the same league as our CVNs.

The US navy is larger in combat strength than the combined navaal forces of the whole world .

Dates 9/1/00 11/16/01
Battleships - -
Carriers 12 12
Cruisers 27 27
Destroyers 54 54
Frigates 35 35
Submarines 56 54
SSBNs 18 18
Mine Warfare 27 27
Patrol 13 13
Amphibious 39 39
Auxiliary 60 58
Surface Warships 116 116
Total Active 341 337
Events


http://www.militaryfactory.com/countries_comparison.asp

The US military can compare to the entire continent of europe and still go invade NK and Iran and the same time .


Again go clean up your own back yard in serbia ..Kosovo..Bosnia etc...then when you grow some balls get back to us about the terrorist in GTMO .


"ONE " US carrier group with attatched attack subs and Aegis cruisers would destroy the entire naval strength of Europe..in maybe 72 hours or so .

The subs might survive a bit if they hide .

And how many of these are full size CVA/CVN or at least fleet carriers? V/STOL and Helicopter carriers aren't in the same league as our CVNs.

Only the Charles de Gaulle is a conventional CATOBAR carrier, and it ca only carry 40 Aircraft, less than half of a Nimitz class complement.

And just for visual comparison...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Fleet_5_nations.jpg

Guess which ones are the American CVs.

Only the Charles de Gaulle is a conventional CATOBAR carrier, and it ca only carry 40 Aircraft, less than half of a Nimitz class complement.

And just for visual comparison...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Fleet_5_nations.jpg

Guess which ones are the American CVs.
The little destroyer-like things

The European ones

England has 2
France has 1
Italy has 1
Spain has 1
Russia has 1




The USA dint do anything either (well, until NATO got in, and that was with the Europeans)

Last I looked the US was not part of Europe.....

Also the OP wants the same Europeans without the balls to police Europe to INVADE a US base over the fate of a few hundred terrorist ..


again grow some hair and take care of your own problems in Europe ..like prosecuting serbs involved in genocide and Bosnians and the rest of your own mass murdering bastards..and stop breaking our balls over a few hundred terrorist we captured and are holding in prison....a fate MUCH better than being tortured raped and shot then buried in a field while all of Europe watched and stuck their thumbs up their ass .

Rescue a bunch of terrorists....BRILLIANT! Why not make america try them in the hague instead?

Rescue a bunch of terrorists....BRILLIANT! Why not make america try them in the hague instead?

Good luck with that...

Rescue a bunch of terrorists....BRILLIANT! Why not make america try them in the hague instead?




Then they would all commit suicide like Milosivik while their trials went on for twenty years . Great Idea I am all for it .

First you complain that they are being held without being charged or tried for years and then when people talk about trying them you laugh and claim it won't work? :rolleyes:

What do you think we should do with them? Give them a candy bar and set them free?

Rescue a bunch of terrorists....BRILLIANT! Why not make america try them in the hague instead?

Well, if we were to get America to try people in the Hague, Henry Kissinger would have to go first, in case he dies before they get around to him. Plus theres the lads from the Reagan years....They'd probably be out no quicker by the time all those had been processed.

I am surprised that a thread this pointless would last this long.....but back on topic. The European fleet would have to organize themselves, plan an attack and get there ships into possision without U.S. intelligence or the media noticing (pretty much impossible). Next they would have to get troops on the Island and aircraft overhead while under fire from the U.S. Marines and the U.S. Navy (highly unlikely). Evacuate all the prisoners into aircrafts or boats and get them back to the ships (given that the ships last that long). Then go home while being harrased by the U.S. Navy and the U.S.A.F. (simply laughable).

I am surprised that a thread this pointless would last this long.....but back on topic. The European fleet would have to organize themselves, plan an attack and get there ships into possision without U.S. intelligence or the media noticing (pretty much impossible). Next they would have to get troops on the Island and aircraft overhead while under fire from the U.S. Marines and the U.S. Navy (highly unlikely). Evacuate all the prisoners into aircrafts or boats and get them back to the ships (given that the ships last that long). Then go home while being harrased by the U.S. Navy and the U.S.A.F. (simply laughable).


I agree it is not likely, I also think it would start World War 3 and lead to america invading the EU....If you see it as a whole, if not all nations involved in the attack on Gitmo or atleast where the boats were landing.

Rescue a bunch of terrorists....BRILLIANT! Why not make america try them in the hague instead?

America can't go near the Hague, it's like garlic with vampires.

What aircraft carriers ...?????????????

at any rate you have a little thing called kosovo and your own bunch of genocidal mass grave filling terrorist warmongers , in your own back yard and you did NOTHING ...bunch of talking loud , but saying NOTHING , group of jack ass's...how many years did the graves get filled ? the rapes murders and ethnic cleansing ...YOU DID NOTHING ..you watched..and DID NOTHING .

Now cry about a few hundred poor misguided terrorist assholes ...go fix your own shit and get back at me ..

How long was Milosovic on " trial " before he finaly died ?

Sure ...What of the rest of them ?

Talk to me about Gtmo....ask me about Sarajevo .

You watched while millions were killed raped and stuck in mass graves...

Give your chin a wipe, you're spouting shite. Millions killed, raped, and then stuck in mass graves. Wow you really do get all your info from Fox don't you.
2,108 dead.
Then NATO bombed the shit out of the place and murdered thousands.
Get your facts straight you blubbering emo.

Give your chin a wipe, you're spouting shite. Millions killed, raped, and then stuck in mass graves. Wow you really do get all your info from Fox don't you.
2,108 dead.
Then NATO bombed the shit out of the place and murdered thousands.
Get your facts straight you blubbering emo.

Actually it was CNN that bombarded us with 24 hour coverage of the horrors of Kosovo, but don't let that interfere with your rhetoric.

Besides, the NATO (Canadian and UK troops mainly) that were there don't share your flippant attitude about the situation there. But what do they know?

Yea it is, especially now this thread proves the intelligence of Europe as an entierity.

How the f%$k do you work that out?

There's no question that the American populace would be something like 90% behind retaliation. We argue about the ethics of gitmo, but words like "betrayel" and "American soldiers killed" get to us, especially when added together.

There's no question that the American populace would be something like 90% behind retaliation. We argue about the ethics of gitmo, but words like "betrayel" and "American soldiers killed" get to us, especially when added together.
It would be a fun little exercise to make the combined navies of Europe cease to exist.

It would be a fun little exercise to make the combined navies of Europe cease to exist.

Yup.

Dude you'd get your asses kicked, broiled, and handed to you on a silver platter.

We'd see it coming a million miles away. Literally. And by the time you got there it would be just the guards left...no more detainees :p

This thread has been nominated for stupidest thread of the day.

Gitmo is a military base. Kings bay subs would pwn your fleets and we'd have the best excuse ever for getting rid of the prisoners quickly and cheaply.
Get rid of them? When you're military's having so much fun trying out new toys on them?

I can see it now...


In today's news, a French force attacked the USMC base and prison at Guantanamo Bay. Several French helicopters attempted to 'rescue' prisoners there, but were unsucessful and were promptly taken out by US surface-to-air missiles. However, several landing craft made it ashore, killing several marines in the process. Shortly thereafter, all French troops were slaughtered by machinegun fire. Apparently, a US airstrike sunk the fleet they came with... In other news, the US government has announced plans to pull out of the Middle East, and invade Europe.

US = 1. France = 0.


Update: France has surrended after the US fired several thermonuclear weapons at their capital of Paris. Mr. [insert name here], what is your opinion? "France, j00 got pwned!" Incredible. Ladies and gentlemen, that was Mr. [insert name here], speaking to us from Washington, D.C...

But it is still US territory.It is Cuban Territory.. Illegally occupied by the US imperial Forces (US Army).

The imperial forces do it.. because they can, migth is rigth.. etc..etc

Silly idea. NATO doesn't allow for that sort of thing. In either direction.

And Holland doesn't have aircraft carriers. But they do have some neat frigates.

Only the Charles de Gaulle is a conventional CATOBAR carrier, and it ca only carry 40 Aircraft, less than half of a Nimitz class complement.

And just for visual comparison...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Fleet_5_nations.jpg

Guess which ones are the American CVs.

The two on the flank?

It is Cuban Territory.. Illegally occupied by the US imperial Forces (US Army).

The imperial forces do it.. because they can, migth is rigth.. etc..etc
The US considers it their rightful territory, and thats what matters in this case.

It would be a fun little exercise to make the combined navies of Europe cease to exist.

A little exercise? We wouldn't break a sweat :d

The two on the flank?me thinks
3 US carriers and a French one.

It is Cuban Territory.. Illegally occupied by the US imperial Forces (US Army).

The imperial forces do it.. because they can, migth is rigth.. etc..etc

International Law disagrees with you.

(migth is rigth) and thats what matters in this case.like I said.

International Law disagrees with you.The way you interpret the Law.. The Iraq war was legal.. enuff said.

It is Cuban Territory.. Illegally occupied by the US imperial Forces (US Army).

The imperial forces do it.. because they can, migth is rigth.. etc..etc

US army. 2nd greatest fighting force next to the USMC, which is first.

Guantanamo is ours, period, legally and militarily. If it wasn't Cuba would be raising a stink over it daily.

The way you interpret the Law.. The Iraq war was legal.. enuff said.

International law disagrees with you.

The two on the flank?

Man this is why I love my country so much. Whenever we do something, it's always so big. Just like the burgers. Mmmmm big burgers. Not euro pussy burgers.

Guantanamo is ours, period, legally and militarily.not Legally.

and that is my point.

me thinks
3 US carriers and a French one.

Actually, 2 US Carriers, 1 British Invincible Class (HMS Ocean), and the Charles De Gaulle.

The way you interpret the Law.. The Iraq war was legal.. enuff said.

And it is.

If it wasn't...big deal. Who wants to stop us?

International law disagrees with you.The way you interpret the Law.. the US/Israel would destroy the Iranian Nuke facilities.. and you would say It is Legal.

We in Europe are constantly bemoaning the existance of the detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, well, how about we do something?

Something like a rescue attempt.

Okay, here's the plan, either the UK, France or the Netherlands send an aircraft carrier or two on a routine mission to the Falklands, Guyana, or the Antilles respectively. Then, unexpectedly, in the pitchblack of night a squadron of fighter jets split off and take out the defencive capabilities of Guantanamo, hot on their tales are a few Chinooks, we drop some rope ladders into the pens and have some loadspeakers announce in Arabic that this is a rescue.

The Chinooks fly off to rendez-vous with the motherfleet, and then, bam, back across the Atlantic where we can bring these people to civilisation and hold them fair trials.

-

Okay? So is this doable? Should it be done, or is it a dishonourable act done against existing treaty? Would we get away with it? Or would the American military be alert and flexible enough to swiftly pwn us?

Discuss.



american military could take down the entire operation with pea shooters before you got half the supplies over. In the mean time....americans dont want gitmo open any more than europeans. if you had watched the news you would have seen the tape of bush saying that he wasnts to close the prison as soon as possible. but the stupid supreme ct. is too caught up in anna nicole smith to care about detainees.

Get rid of them? When you're military's having so much fun trying out new toys on them?

You mean like the automatic door locks?

Yep.

The way you interpret the Law.. The Iraq war was legal.. enuff said.And it is.

If it wasn't...big deal. Who wants to stop us?No other Country can stop US..

The Insurgents are trying(with their lives.. literally), but it is a long shot.

It is Cuban Territory.. Illegally occupied by the US imperial Forces (US Army).

The imperial forces do it.. because they can, migth is rigth.. etc..etc


you are completely wrong...it is not illegally occupied. that land has been american territory for over 100 years. it was ceded to the US after the victory in the spanish american war. it was legally attained and is legally held. it is like saying that California is an illegal state because we won it from mexico. or guam is illegal because we captured it after WWII. and there is a treaty which can only be broken when both sides agree to cede the territory back to the cuban gov't. so cuba also agrees that that IS america's own territory, recognized by the cuban government.

No other Country can stop US..

The Insurgents are trying(with their lives.. literally), but it is a long shot.Oh I Forgot.. the Vietnamese peasants did stop US.. but the price they had to pay is bloody unbearable.

.. so cuba also agrees that that IS america's own territory, recognized by the cuban government.HAHAHAHA.. you are pathetic

No other Country can stop US..

The Insurgents are trying(with their lives.. literally), but it is a long shot.

They seriously suck at this jihad business. Really.

And they are paying for it dearly. If they had any shred of intelligence they'd realize that if everyone played nice the US would leave faster, then they'd go and behead everyone. They must want us to stay, clearly.

..they (insurgents) are paying for it dearly. If they had any shred of intelligence they'd realize that if everyone played nice the US would leave faster...Yes they are paying with their lives.. and their families lives (their wives, their children)..

To be honest, I dont think I would have what it takes to be one of them..

If I was Iraqi/Vietnamese I would probably surrender my Country to the Foreign Army.. Like you. I am not a hero.

Yes they are paying with their lives.. and their families lives (their wives, their children)..

To be honest, I dont think I would have what it takes to be one of them..

If I was Iraqi/Vietnamese I would probably surrender my Country to the Foreign Army.. Like you. I am not a hero.

It probably would work out better for them.

Go underground, stay out of sight, and start building up resources and an infrastructure. Once the Americans leave, then you launch a revolution.

At least, thats what I would do...

You are forgetting that most European Countries, are somewhat allies of the US, even if just on paper, they are smart enough to realize that even a combined force of France, and the UK would not be larger than the US military, and the UK would never participate, seeing as they are close allies with the US, and if the UK doesnt participate, then there would not be much of a Navy to fight with, granted France and other nations have small Navys, some with a few Carriers, they are nothing compared to the United States, To put it simply, they would not dare to even try, and if they did, their ships would get blown to shit, and the small force of Commandos would be dessimated by the Hundreds, if not thousands of US Marines, who are at the base. Plus there would be a massive retaliation by the US, and the other countries militaries would be blown to shit.

Yes they are paying with their lives.. and their families lives (their wives, their children)..

To be honest, I dont think I would have what it takes to be one of them..

If I was Iraqi/Vietnamese I would probably surrender my Country to the Foreign Army.. Like you. I am not a hero.

I guess taking home work when your a terrorist doesn't pay. Probably best to not involve your family in anything.

We try not to nail any innocent people, but these things do happen. We missed a chance to get mullah omar back in the first days of afghanistan. Why? He was surrounder by 40 or so innocent people. Sorry, but he's worth it. It was a clear shot also...and there was a predator w/ a hellfire over there.

Yes they are paying with their lives.. and their families lives (their wives, their children)..

To be honest, I dont think I would have what it takes to be one of them..

If I was Iraqi/Vietnamese I would probably surrender my Country to the Foreign Army.. Like you. I am not a hero.

If someone invaded my country to upseat a dictator I'd help them, depending on their motives.

If someone came over here-IE ANYONE wearing a blue helmet I would be pissed. And would fight to push them out, no matter WHO was president. Even the beast. <---(HILLARY, NOT the 666 Beast)

If someone invaded my country to upseat a dictator I'd help them, depending on their motives.

If someone came over here-IE ANYONE wearing a blue helmet I would be pissed. And would fight to push them out, no matter WHO was president. Even the beast. If someone invaded your country to upseat a beastial president (or dictator) you'd help them, depending on.. the color of their helmets ???. :confused:

It is Cuban Territory.. Illegally occupied by the US imperial Forces (US Army).

The imperial forces do it.. because they can, migth is rigth.. etc..etc

Once again it is not Cuban land, it is US land, legaly and by treaty the Cuban government even admits as much. Also get your facts correct GITMO is run by the US Navy.:rolleyes:

Once again it is not Cuban land, it is US land, Its is Cuban Land ilegally occupied by the US army (when I say army, I mean the US military)

If someone invaded your country to upseat a beastial president (or dictator) you'd help them, depending on.. the color of their helmets ???. :confused:

I don't want UN guys in my country for any purpose. Oh, and the UN are pretty much the only ones that use blue helmets, thus Blue helmets are a synonym for UN peace keepers.

I could deal with an Ally helping the US out in a time of great duress....but not the UN. They've got a pathetic track record.

I could deal with an Ally helping the US out in a time of great duress....but not the UN. They've got a pathetic track record.
People like you don't deserve to be rescued, no matter the circumstance.

Its is Cuban Land ilegally occupied by the US army (when I say army, I mean the US military)

Touche. It's ours, fair and square.


Guantánamo Bay Naval Base at the southeastern end of Cuba (19°54′N 75°9′W) has been used by the United States Navy for more than a century. The United States controls the land on both sides of the southern part of Guantánamo Bay (Bahía de Guantánamo in Spanish) under a lease set up in the wake of the 1898 Spanish-American War. The Cuban government denounces the lease on grounds that article 52 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties voids treaties procured by force or its threatened use. (However, article 4 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties explicitly states that it is not retroactive, applying "only to treaties which are concluded by States after the entry into force of the present Convention."[1] Thus the Vienna Convention cannot apply to the 1898 lease agreement.)

People like you don't deserve to be rescued, no matter the circumstance.

Me personally or the US?

There are plenty of countries who would aid the US should it get knee deep in crap with a foreign invasion. Look at who's in Iraq slugging it out with us.

It's ours, fair and square.The US army installed a US citizen (Tomás Estrada) as Cuban President.. then the US army asked this puppet to sign a perpetual lease.

If you call that "Fair and Balanced".. then they got a job waiting for you at FOX. ;)

Suggestion: Hold that thought and implement it on the American mainland if the Christian Right pull off the Constitutional Convention they're pushing for and redraw the Constitution according to the Dominionist agenda.

Under that scenario there'd be hundreds of thousands if not millions of people in very real danger of a brutal ending to their lives, as opposed to a few hundred erstwhile Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives complaining about being examined by female doctors.

you know what? this is POINTLESS. American forces would kick ass, and if this ever happened, in less than 3 days the path to every european country would be wide open. and the very idea of europeans wanting to rescue terriorsts is appalling. and you can bet the american people would want revenge. pearl harbor anybody?

So is this doable?

No

Should it be done

No

or is it a dishonourable act done against existing treaty?

Yep

Would we get away with it?

No

Or would the American military be alert and flexible enough to swiftly pwn us?

Not only would the mission force be annihilated, but we'd probably conduct airstrikes on the naval and air bases of any nation that participated in the operation.

We wouldn't bother with an actual invasion or anything...but a good pimp-slapping would certainly be in order.

Discuss.

Nothing left TO discuss, as far as I can tell.

The US army installed a US citizen (Tomás Estrada) as Cuban President.. then the US army asked this puppet to sign a perpetual lease.

If you call that "Fair and Balanced".. then they got a job waiting for you at FOX. ;)

Guess they should have fought harder instead of losing then. And as winner we can do whatever we please...and yes, it is legal, still.

And installing someone we know is better than installing someone we don't. It's not like we were putting in someone's horse as president.

Gitmo is ours...forever. Or until we get tired of it and find a new place. I for one, would like to see a Gitmo in....Antartica or closer to the ME.

Suggestion: Hold that thought and implement it on the American mainland if the Christian Right pull off the Constitutional Convention they're pushing for and redraw the Constitution according to the Dominionist agenda.

Under that scenario there'd be hundreds of thousands if not millions of people in very real danger of a brutal ending to their lives, as opposed to a few hundred erstwhile Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives complaining about being examined by female doctors.

The Christian right as you call would never dare try and redraw the constitution, FYI.

And no, millions would not die.

And NO, Fred Phelps is never getting anywhere higher than his toiletseat.

And installing someone we know is better than installing someone we don't. It's not like we were putting in someone's horse as president.How about NOT installing a puppet?, How about letting their people decide what to do?

Let me introduce you to: "Freedom" and "Democracy".. maybe new concepts to you.. buy you should try them sometimes.

How about NOT installing a puppet?, What about letting their people decide what to do?

What about freedom and Democracy?
:confused: *tilts head as a dog does when faced with a compleatly foreign concept*

All i can say is listen to Colbert.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xopB7TCOlYU&search=formidable%20opponent

How about NOT installing a puppet?, How about letting their people decide what to do?

Let me introduce you to: "Freedom" and "Democracy".. maybe new concepts to you.. buy you should try them sometimes.

People like DM only quote freedom and democracy when they use it as an excuse to go abroad and invade people.

The Christian right as you call would never dare try and redraw the constitution, FYI.

no?

http://msnsport.skysports.com/worldcup/article.aspx?hlid=393319&CPID=4&clid=114&lid=&title=Pele:+Gerrard's+the+best (http://msnsport.skysports.com/worldcup/article.aspx?hlid=393319&CPID=4&clid=114&lid=&title=Pele:+Gerrard's+the+best)

We in Europe are constantly bemoaning the existance of the detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, well, how about we do something?

Something like a rescue attempt.

Okay, here's the plan, either the UK, France or the Netherlands send an aircraft carrier or two on a routine mission to the Falklands, Guyana, or the Antilles respectively. Then, unexpectedly, in the pitchblack of night a squadron of fighter jets split off and take out the defencive capabilities of Guantanamo, hot on their tales are a few Chinooks, we drop some rope ladders into the pens and have some loadspeakers announce in Arabic that this is a rescue.

The Chinooks fly off to rendez-vous with the motherfleet, and then, bam, back across the Atlantic where we can bring these people to civilisation and hold them fair trials.

-

Okay? So is this doable? Should it be done, or is it a dishonourable act done against existing treaty? Would we get away with it? Or would the American military be alert and flexible enough to swiftly pwn us?

Discuss.

Discussing the technical specs I think is frankly quite beside the point. The diplomatic considerations are more interesting.

This reminds me of some rather spurious ideas I saw posted in a forum much like this one by a few young US soldiers in the run up to the Iraq invasion. Then it was about "taking out" Saddam Hussein's famous WMD. Funny how helicopters capture the imagination...

But then, we've all seen this before, haven't we. Literally.

Because it's pure Hollywood.

It's the American Way!

It's also a fine parody of the potential consequences of the American Servicemen Protection Act, also known as the Hague Liberation Act, which really does stipulate that US personnel charged with war crimes could be "rescued" from the Nertherlands in this manner.

Wait a moment...?

You are forgetting that most European Countries, are somewhat allies of the US, even if just on paper, they are smart enough to realize that even a combined force of France, and the UK would not be larger than the US military, and the UK would never participate, seeing as they are close allies with the US, and if the UK doesnt participate, then there would not be much of a Navy to fight with, granted France and other nations have small Navys, some with a few Carriers, they are nothing compared to the United States, To put it simply, they would not dare to even try, and if they did, their ships would get blown to shit, and the small force of Commandos would be dessimated by the Hundreds, if not thousands of US Marines, who are at the base. Plus there would be a massive retaliation by the US, and the other countries militaries would be blown to shit.

no?

http://msnsport.skysports.com/worldcup/article.aspx?hlid=393319&CPID=4&clid=114&lid=&title=Pele:+Gerrard's+the+best (http://msnsport.skysports.com/worldcup/article.aspx?hlid=393319&CPID=4&clid=114&lid=&title=Pele:+Gerrard's+the+best)

Pele Gerrard must be like a world cup god. Other than that I have no clue.

People like DM only quote freedom and democracy when they use it as an excuse to go abroad and invade people.

This ain't 1898 baby.

no?

http://msnsport.skysports.com/worldcup/article.aspx?hlid=393319&CPID=4&clid=114&lid=&title=Pele:+Gerrard's+the+best (http://msnsport.skysports.com/worldcup/article.aspx?hlid=393319&CPID=4&clid=114&lid=&title=Pele:+Gerrard's+the+best)


As Eut would say: WTF, over?

wow whoever made this thread is retarted.
1. do u really thinkn the US is dumb enough to tihnk "hmm fighter jets over a military base nah there not gonna do anything"
2. u just started world war 3.
3.we have nukes.
4.we have nukes.
5. our army owns your army.
6. waist of time.

no?

[URL="htp://msnsport..LAURA.BOICH./YOU.URL.IS.FUCKED-UP]

actually, I do not mind that your URL is not working..

what is driving me nuts..is that you are fucking-up the page format.. :sniper:

actually, I do not mind that your URL is not working..

what is driving me nuts..is that you are fucking-up the page format.. :sniper:
Where can I find you... Cause you are annoying the living Shiite out of me and I want to punch you in the gut.

Okay, i'm looking at sattalite photos of guantanamo and i really don't think any attack like the one the OP outlined would have a chance in hell of success. I'm not sure but there is a very large hanger attached to the runway which may or may not contain fighter aircraft. What appears to be the prisoner facilities are all quite spread out and number at 15. So to assemble a force large enough to bring 450 prisoners from 15 sites spread out over about .5-1 mile would just be too big. So you would need a minimum of 23 large chinooks to bring in a force large enough to be able to go in carry out every prisoner and get themselves out also. You can't do that w/o being seen. That force size is for 10 men in each facility which is way too little and 90 men to take handle the gaurd force which would probabley be undermanned w/ the gaurd force being spread out. To actually deal with that large of a force and be able to free the prisoners and organize them onto an aircraft would take a great deal of time. A minimum of 2 hours but if i was commanding the assault i would be happy with 3 or 4 hours w/ 10 men at each facility. With 3 hours to react, we would be able to assemble a huge aerial response to desimate the raiding force and the carrier group that brought them there.

1. Violation of treaty.
2. We can see any military movement.
3. Unless you plan on using nuclear weapons, you would be pwned.
4. Doesn't help for future relations.
5. Europeans don't have a credible ability to project major force on a global scale.
6. Europeans hate fighting wars.Not to forget that Guantanamo is still officially Cuban territory and is leased to the US. We wouldn't want to jeopardize one of our main tourist resorts, now would we...

I could probably see the Jihadists and Russians helping out on the said invasion. In the US I could see a civil war errupting from an attack. I say go for it Europe! We haven't had mass civil carnage here for 140 years!

That idea is interesting, but stupid, the US would just send out a big Stealth bomber from Georgia loaded with tomahawk cruise missiles, the B-2 would get within 5 miles and drop, and if anyone escapes from that , there is the US's submarine forces, and It would create a state of war between the U.S. and the rest of the E.U. which would have catastrophic effects on everything.

Where can I find you... Cause you are annoying the living Shiite out of me and I want to punch you in the gut.just post your full adress (name/Street/City/phone).. I ll be there July the 10th.

just post your full adress (number/Street/City/state).. I ll be there the July the 10th.
*cough*flamewar *cough*

*cough*flamewar *cough*when?

It would be quite interesting. If they, somehow, miraculously pulled it off and gotr away with most of the prisoners, I wonder how America would react?

My prediction is that would precipitate divide the country, between those who are disgusted with whats happening in Guantanamo and the militarists. Simply put, it would have quite interesting consequences.

With the new, post-9/11 definition of the word "terrorism," the offending government would be henceforth considered "state-sponsored terrorists" and promptly wiped from the face of the earth like ants. Then my comrades in arms would be stuck in some Euro-hellhole trying not to get blown up by the locals until the American government unclenched its ass-cheeks long enough to let them come home.

6. Europeans hate fighting wars.

I guess that's why the US needs them in any coalition where the US invades another country.

Oh Lordy.

Is this the Hate America crowds' latest brain fart?

A multi-national coaliton to free the terrorists at Gitmo?

Maybe you could take some of them into your homes and let them stay there until the trial date?

I remember when they were pretending that the Canadian Mounties arrested Bush for being a War criminal.

Pathetic.

I guess that's why the US needs them in any coalition where the US invades another country.

Thats just so they have someone else to blame when things don´t go the way they planned....again.

I guess that's why the US needs them in any coalition where the US invades another country.

Only because if we don't they will whine about how they weren't invited.

Oh Lordy.

Is this the Hate America crowds' latest brain fart?

A multi-national coaliton to free the terrorists at Gitmo?

Maybe you could take some of them into your homes and let them stay there until the trial date?

I remember when they were pretending that the Canadian Mounties arrested Bush for being a War criminal.

Pathetic.

Don't you love lefties.

OP: But..but...the people at GITMO are GOOD PEOPLE! They are full of cinnamon and sunshine and happiness! The US picked them up for no reason to fill some bunks!

:rolleyes:

Well I think we can all agree at least that the stated plan for attack woould not only fail but cause more harm then good? Your talking about starting a World War for some 400 possible terror suspects, REAL smart.

i think that anyone who agrees w/ this "Invasion" is absolutly nuts... i mean really what are you going to do try to take it over and free the prisinors
1 where you gonna take them
2 what are you going to do when the US finds out it was u
3 how are you going to defend yourselves when the combined forces of every branch of the U.S military comes down on you?
4 you would fail anyway why even contemplate it
5 your government wants nothing to do with gitme it's americas problem not theirs

Oh I Forgot.. the Vietnamese peasants did stop US.. but the price they had to pay is bloody unbearable.
Correction, those Vietnamese peasants were actually Vietcong (defeated at the end of the war) and North Vietnam. Both were backed up by the Soviet Union and possibly China. Besides it beat only half the U.S. because the other half consisted of pot smoking hippies.

Correction, those Vietnamese peasants were actually Vietcong (defeated at the end of the war) and North Vietnam. Both were backed up by the Soviet Union and possibly China. Besides it beat only half the U.S. because the other half consisted of pot smoking hippies.

:(. Too true, the last part.


Well I think we can all agree at least that the stated plan for attack woould not only fail but cause more harm then good? Your talking about starting a World War for some 400 worthless filthy savage goat humping terror suspects, REAL smart.


Fixed it for you.

I wonder what a huge Naval battle between the U.S. Navy and all the European Navies combined would look like.
I would say that the U.S. would win.

Don't you love lefties.

OP: But..but...the people at GITMO are GOOD PEOPLE! They are full of cinnamon and sunshine and happiness! The US picked them up for no reason to fill some bunks!

:rolleyes:
You don't understand words, do you?

All i can say is listen to Colbert.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xopB7TCOlYU&search=formidable%20opponent
He usually gets the Final word.

<David Attenbourugh accent> It's not often you see so much quality american chest-thumping in one place... This must be how they behave in their natural habitat, the mcdonalds. </David Attenborough accent>

<David Attenbourugh accent> It's not often you see so much quality american chest-thumping in one place... This must be how they behave in their natural habitat, the mcdonalds. </David Attenborough accent>
You spelled his name wrong.

He usually gets the Final word.

HI larious

You spelled his name wrong.

Ssssh...Don't blow my cover...It was on purpose. It's camouflage to blend in.

Gitmo is a military base. Kings bay subs would pwn your fleets and we'd have the best excuse ever for getting rid of the prisoners quickly and cheaply.


you are aware your use of the ''word'' pwn discredits your argument and makes you look like a retard right?

Ssssh...Don't blow my cover...It was on purpose. It's camouflage to blend in.

Oh srry.

you are aware your use of the ''word'' pwn discredits your argument and makes you look like a retard right?

no it doesn't.. it is a widley used term so it doesn't discredit him at all PWNED

no it doesn't.. it is a widley used term so it doesn't discredit him at all PWNED
No, he's right. "PWNED" was unnecessary. Besides is'nt that gamer slang?

No, he's right. "PWNED" was unnecessary. Besides is'nt that gamer slang?

yeah yeah.. i just love the word

PWNED!!!!

yeah yeah.. i just love the word

PWNED!!!!
I should know because technically I'm a gamer.
XBOX Live PWNS

No, he's right. "PWNED" was unnecessary. Besides is'nt that gamer slang?

j00 r teh suk!!!11 It5 "PWN3d" buttsecks!!!1 roflol lolz!!!111

I should know because technically I'm a gamer.
XBOX Live PWNS

yeah i like CS it pwns....

I wonder what a huge Naval battle between the U.S. Navy and all the European Navies combined would look like.

Popped like a tick is the phrase that comes to mind when I think of the EU's navy trying something like this. They wouldn't stand a chance against the US navy.

you are aware your use of the ''word'' pwn discredits your argument and makes you look like a retard right?

So does the word "meh".

Popped like a tick is the phrase that comes to mind when I think of the EU's navy trying something like this. They wouldn't stand a chance against the US navy.
True, but remember it would be the European Fleet against the U.S. Navy's Atlantic Fleet, not the whole Navy.

The Yanks never noticed when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor! They got whacked. I'm sure the combined forces of Europe (even with the French and Italians) could mash up a few fat Yankee prison guards.

I doubt it would do the world economy any good...although I doubt the US would risk a full scale war with Europe, the Commonwealth and it's allies.

Hell, lets just invade the whole of America!

True, but remember it would be the European Fleet against the U.S. Navy's Atlantic Fleet, not the whole Navy.

Doesn't change my opinion on the outcome. Cuba is too close to the US for the European forces to prevail in such a battle.

you are aware your use of the ''word'' pwn discredits your argument and makes you look like a retard right?

I'm afraid as the OP i must take the blame for introducing that word into this thread.

However, in my defence, it is a widely used term with a unique meaning (i.e. to suffer a total and humiliating defeat) which no other single word in the English language correctly implies.

I'm actually thinking of campaigning to get it into the OED...

The Yanks never noticed when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor! They got whacked. I'm sure the combined forces of Europe (even with the French and Italians) could mash up a few fat Yankee prison guards.

I doubt it would do the world economy any good...although I doubt the US would risk a full scale war with Europe, the Commonwealth and it's allies.

Hell, lets just invade the whole of America!
Those fat yankee prison guards are actually heavily armed U.S. Marines and Navy Corpsmen. Japan bombed pearl harbor because of the U.S. thought the Japanese where inferior retards. The U.S. Navy would destroy any European Fleet(even with some French and Italians).

The Yanks never noticed when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor! They got whacked. I'm sure the combined forces of Europe (even with the French and Italians) could mash up a few fat Yankee prison guards.

I doubt it would do the world economy any good...although I doubt the US would risk a full scale war with Europe, the Commonwealth and it's allies.

Hell, lets just invade the whole of America!

Yes, the US did get caught with their pants down at Pearl Harbor. However, I do have to remind you that with technology being what it is today, that shouldn't happen again. Also, the soldiers at Guantanamo may be acting the part of prison guards, but they are fully trained soldiers nonetheless.

As far as your idea of invading the whole of the US, that's the stupidest idea I've ever heard. The invading forces would face an insurgency in the US that would make the insurgency in Iraq look like passive resistance.

So does the word "meh".


excuse me, but where in my sentence did i use that word?

All that would need to be done is drop a case of twinkies to distract the guards and drop a pack of toothpicks which the demonically violent prisoners could use to slaughter the guards in instants. Then they could make a big raft/net with the toothpicks and their prayer mats could be used as sails. Then let them float off and utterly destroy America.

1. Violation of treaty.
2. We can see any military movement.
3. Unless you plan on using nuclear weapons, you would be pwned.
4. Doesn't help for future relations.
5. Europeans don't have a credible ability to project major force on a global scale.
6. Europeans hate fighting wars.
1. Which treaty?
2. True, you got satellites!
3. Oh shutup DK, America isn't going to use nukes and everyone knows it.
4. This would be the biggest reason. It's not worth destroying the transatlantic relationship.
5. This isn't major force we're talking about.
6. This isn't a war we're talking about. And yes we hate fighting wars because we realise that war is shit, not being consumed by bloodlust and all.

So does the word "meh".
We established long ago that usage of the word "meh" clearly indicates a desire to exterminate all Jews. ;)

You are forgetting that most European Countries, are somewhat allies of the US, even if just on paper, they are smart enough to realize that even a combined force of France, and the UK would not be larger than the US military, and the UK would never participate, seeing as they are close allies with the US, and if the UK doesnt participate, then there would not be much of a Navy to fight with, granted France and other nations have small Navys, some with a few Carriers, they are nothing compared to the United States, To put it simply, they would not dare to even try, and if they did, their ships would get blown to shit, and the small force of Commandos would be dessimated by the Hundreds, if not thousands of US Marines, who are at the base. Plus there would be a massive retaliation by the US, and the other countries militaries would be blown to shit.:headbang: :headbang: :upyours:

So you prbly can take the prision and all that. And maybe even make it back across the Atlantic. But within a matter of weeks you'll have the largest carrier fleet since WWII bearing down on Europe, ready to beat the offending countries into pulp.
The US will never attack Europe (even in the supremely unrealistic scenario). They have too much to lose.

Ironically, that money goes to fund terrorism.

and if the UK doesnt participate, then there would not be much of a Navy to fight with, granted France and other nations have small Navys, some with a few Carriers, they are nothing compared to the United States
Considering France has the biggest warship in the world

The US will never attack Europe (even in the supremely unrealistic scenario). They have too much to lose.
Maybe we'd finally grow a brain and cut off relations though...

you are completely wrong...it is not illegally occupied. that land has been american territory for over 100 years. it was ceded to the US after the victory in the spanish american war. it was legally attained and is legally held. it is like saying that California is an illegal state because we won it from mexico. or guam is illegal because we captured it after WWII. and there is a treaty which can only be broken when both sides agree to cede the territory back to the cuban gov't. so cuba also agrees that that IS america's own territory, recognized by the cuban government.

Actually, Guam was an American possion before WWII!

The Yanks never noticed when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor! They got whacked. I'm sure the combined forces of Europe (even with the French and Italians) could mash up a few fat Yankee prison guards.

There were no Satellites or radar in 1941 (well radar was in its infancy).

I doubt it would do the world economy any good...although I doubt the US would risk a full scale war with Europe, the Commonwealth and it's allies.

And I doubt that the RN would risk getting annilihated by an American Carrier Group and Land Based Aircraft.

Hell, lets just invade the whole of America!

HAHA! Oh brother. We are to big and to heavily armed.

Those fat yankee prison guards are actually heavily armed U.S. Marines and Navy Corpsmen. Japan bombed pearl harbor because of the U.S. thought the Japanese where inferior retards. The U.S. Navy would destroy any European Fleet(even with some French and Italians).

Japan bombed pearl harbor because it was the Home of the PACIFIC FLEET! Not to mention, we thought they were going to hit somewhere closer to their home islands..say....the Philippines?

Considering France has the biggest warship in the world

And Japan had the biggest Battleship in the world. Look what happened to it.

The European ones

England has 2
France has 1
Italy has 1
Spain has 1
Russia has 1

the thing is that the carriers listed there (aside from the French one and i think the Russian one) are Light Carriers made to hold 20ish VTOL aircraft, and they would as i know it get chewed up by any non-VTOL US fighters currently in service. and the French and Russian carriers have what? 40-50 aircraft each?

And Japan had the biggest Battleship in the world. Look what happened to it.

biggest but not the best...which could be your point...the US Iowa was considered overall better and so could the biggest French Dreadnought of the time(cant remember the name)

Okay, i'm looking at sattalite photos of guantanamo and i really don't think any attack like the one the OP outlined would have a chance in hell of success. I'm not sure but there is a very large hanger attached to the runway which may or may not contain fighter aircraft. What appears to be the prisoner facilities are all quite spread out and number at 15. So to assemble a force large enough to bring 450 prisoners from 15 sites spread out over about .5-1 mile would just be too big. So you would need a minimum of 23 large chinooks to bring in a force large enough to be able to go in carry out every prisoner and get themselves out also. You can't do that w/o being seen. That force size is for 10 men in each facility which is way too little and 90 men to take handle the gaurd force which would probabley be undermanned w/ the gaurd force being spread out. To actually deal with that large of a force and be able to free the prisoners and organize them onto an aircraft would take a great deal of time. A minimum of 2 hours but if i was commanding the assault i would be happy with 3 or 4 hours w/ 10 men at each facility. With 3 hours to react, we would be able to assemble a huge aerial response to desimate the raiding force and the carrier group that brought them there.

Okay, i'm looking at sattalite photos of guantanamo and i really don't think any attack like the one the OP outlined would have a chance in hell of success. I'm not sure but there is a very large hanger attached to the runway which may or may not contain fighter aircraft. What appears to be the prisoner facilities are all quite spread out and number at 15. So to assemble a force large enough to bring 450 prisoners from 15 sites spread out over about .5-1 mile would just be too big. So you would need a minimum of 23 large chinooks to bring in a force large enough to be able to go in carry out every prisoner and get themselves out also. You can't do that w/o being seen. That force size is for 10 men in each facility which is way too little and 90 men to take handle the gaurd force which would probabley be undermanned w/ the gaurd force being spread out. To actually deal with that large of a force and be able to free the prisoners and organize them onto an aircraft would take a great deal of time. A minimum of 2 hours but if i was commanding the assault i would be happy with 3 or 4 hours w/ 10 men at each facility. With 3 hours to react, we would be able to assemble a huge aerial response to desimate the raiding force and the carrier group that brought them there.
where did you get the photos?

where did you get the photos?
maps.google.com
pretty easy


edit: if you want to look for it its a the mouth of the big bay in the southeast

the thing is that the carriers listed there (aside from the French one and i think the Russian one) are Light Carriers made to hold 20ish VTOL aircraft, and they would as i know it get chewed up by any non-VTOL US fighters currently in service. and the French and Russian carriers have what? 40-50 aircraft each?

Excepting the Charles De Gaulle and the Admiral Kuznetsov, the rest of the European Carriers are V/STOL, carrying about a dozen Harriers, which are not the best for Air-to-Air combat in the first place. According to Wikipedia, the Harrier cannot carry medium range missiles, and is limited to the ASRAAM or the Sidewinder. The Russian carrier only holds a dozen Su-33s.

The French carrier can hold 40 aircraft, including helicopters. While the Rafale fighters are very good, you cannot expect the dozen odd Rafales that would be carried to provide CAP for the entire fleet.

I'm sorry, but one USN CBG would completely destroy any European force, not to mention the fact that any force near Guantanamo Bay would be within range of Land Based Aircraft.

It would be quite interesting. If they, somehow, miraculously pulled it off and gotr away with most of the prisoners, I wonder how America would react?

My prediction is that would precipitate divide the country, between those who are disgusted with whats happening in Guantanamo and the militarists. Simply put, it would have quite interesting consequences.



i would find it quite interesting if the us just gave the euro's the prisoners,and said do what you will,wash our hands of them so to speak.

but also let you know,if one of the "innocent jihadists" so much as dares to look the wrong way at us...then he gets vaporized,and some type of repercussions would be adjudicated to the eu.

as far as i am concerned..you can have em..

no need to have your ships sunk and innocent people die...just take em...then their your problem.

just dont let em come over here is al i ask.

p.s.
i understand some of the prisoners were picked up on bogus allegations so someone could collect a bounty.
we have released some of them,and i personally think it is indecent to hold someone without charges of any type,or declare them pow's and afford them access to the red cross and everything the geneva convention affords.

however it is sticky,because since they are not uniformed combatants,they dont fall under the geneva convention,and..seeing as they could possibly be considered pow's..if one wants to overlook the definition of a combatant(uniformed member of another armed force)they do not have any right to a trial,or any possible way to know a release date...as with all wars in history,pow's were held until the end of hostilities,or a surrender or truce.

they do not qualify for either status.

and obviously the war is not over...now if osama said...we will not attack you anymore,then that would change things a bit.
and all the other deranged little men fighting this jihad against the west concurred,then i would feel they should be immediately released.

that, in an of itself, raises other questions...should we then bug them(implant thing and then release them?)
i myself despise any invasion of my privacy...euro's seem to not mind being filmed every waking hour in public...maybe that would be a solution...let us implant a tracking chip in you,and you can go!
kinda like the house arrest ankle thing they put on prisoners so they dont have to go to jail.

myself,i would prefer a cell and no known release date to a tracking device put in me...but i am just spitballing here.

i do think that after 3-4 years...they should know who was grabbed for no other reason then someone collecting a bounty,and i have no doubt there is innocent people languishing there..but what are we to do...just let em all go?

so if europe wants them...have em..but they best not show up here killing innocent people.

your idea of a stealth snatch is the stuff of fairy tails...the boys at guatanomo are wired tight...and we have some serious intercepting abilities near our coast...you dont want to mess with the us in it's own backyard...fools mission there.

All that would need to be done is drop a case of twinkies to distract the guards and drop a pack of toothpicks which the demonically violent prisoners could use to slaughter the guards in instants. Then they could make a big raft/net with the toothpicks and their prayer mats could be used as sails. Then let them float off and utterly destroy America.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...gasp...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA

That's the funniest thing I've read today. :D

Silly Europeans, Trix are for kids.

Give your chin a wipe, you're spouting shite. Millions killed, raped, and then stuck in mass graves. Wow you really do get all your info from Fox don't you.
2,108 dead.
Then NATO bombed the shit out of the place and murdered thousands.
Get your facts straight you blubbering emo.


My guess is you must have went to school in a developemental disabled class. The ethnic cleasing and mass murder and rapes that went on for years durring the Yugoslavian civil war...claimed 2,108 dead ...where in one town ?
You retarded buttmunch .

All the while Europe stood by and ate some popcorn ..and did nothing .
The same Europe you want to rescue terrorist...the same Europe that cant find its ass with both hands when it comes to not commiting acts of genocide against each other .


BTW this is casualties not raped murdered and displaced...only DEAD .

1992-96: Yugoslavia's civil war (260,000)
http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/massacre.html

THE CRISIS IN KOSOVO Operation Allied Force began on March 24, 1999 after more than a year of effort by the international community led by NATO to find a negotiated solution in Kosovo. In June 1998, NATO Defense Ministers decided to charge NATO planners with the responsibility to produce a range of options, both ground and air, for military action should the diplomatic process fail to yield the desired results. By the fall, an estimated 250,000 Kosovo Albanians had been driven from their homes and some 50,000 were threatened by approaching winter weather.2 The United Nations Security Council adopted resolution 1199 (UNSCR 1199) on September 23, highlighting the impending human catastrophe and demanding a cease-fire and the start of real political dialogue. A Contact Group meeting in London on October 8 gave U.S. envoy Richard Holbrooke a mandate to secure agreement to the requirements of UNSCR 1199 in a mission to Belgrade. Activation orders for air strikes were agreed on October 13 ; that same day Holbrooke reported to NATO that Slobodan Milosevic, the president of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY), had agreed to the deployment of an unarmed Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) verification mission to Kosovo and to the establishment of a NATO aerial verification mission. Yugoslavia also agreed to reduce the numbers of security forces personnel in Kosovo to pre-crisis levels. Despite initial stabilization, violence continued. Following a massacre in the village of Racak on January 15, 1999, NATO increased its state of readiness, issuing a "solemn warning" to Milosevic and the Kosovo Albanian leadership on January 28.3 This was followed by a second statement on January 30 that reaffirmed NATO’s original demands, and delegated to Secretary General Javier Solana authority to commence air strikes against targets on FRY territory. Parties to talks at Rambouillet in France, in February 1999, attempted to build agreement to protect the rights of all sides. After the first round of talks was suspended on February 23, a second round was convened on March 15. This second round was suspended on March 19 in the light of what NATO intelligence and OSCE observers saw as intensifying violence on the ground instigated by FRY security forces, and a build-up of FRY/Serbian forces in and around Kosovo. OSCE verifiers were withdrawn during the night of March 19-20, and Holbrooke flew to Belgrade on March 22 in a last-ditch effort to persuade Milosevic to back down and avoid a military confrontation. On March 23, following final consultations with allies, Javier Solana directed NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), Gen. Wesley Clark, to initiate a "phased" air operation.4

Notice this started in 1992...and didnt even begin to end UNTIL the US joined in . The US is still there and its 2006.....:rolleyes:

Why could the brave Europeans you want to rescue the terrorist by attacking GTMO ...walk a few miles EAST and deal with it themseves ?

http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/cahier/kosovo/hrw022000-en

The war in Bosnia and Herzegovina (also referred to as: Bosnian Conflict, Aggression on Bosnia and Herzegovina and Bosnian Civil War) was an armed conflict that took place between March 1992 and November 1995. The war involved several ethnically defined factions within Bosnia and Herzegovina, each of which claimed to represent one of the country's constitutive peoples: Republika Srpska (Bosnian Serbs), Herzeg-Bosnia (Bosnian Croats), the remnants of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (predominantly Bosniaks) and the lesser faction in Western Bosnia (Bosniaks or Muslims by nationality). These factions changed their objectives and allegiances several times at various stages of the war. (See: Parties Involved)

Since the war in Bosnia is a consequence of events in the wider region of former Yugoslavia, and due to the involvement of neighboring countries Croatia and Serbia and Montenegro, there is an ongoing debate about whether the conflict was a civil war or an aggression. Bosniaks typically claim that the war was an aggression from Serbia, while Serbs hold the view that it was a civil war involving only Bosnia's constituent nations. The involvement of NATO, during the 1995 Operation Deliberate Force against the positions of the Army of Republika Srpska make this war an internationalized conflict.

A trial is ongoing before the International Court of Justice, following a suit by Bosnia and Herzegovina against Serbia for genocide (see Bosnian genocide case at the International Court of Justice).

The war was brought to an end after the signing of the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina in Paris on 1995-12-14 [1]. The peace negotiations were held in Dayton, Ohio, and were finalized on November 21, 2005. The accords are known as the Dayton Agreement.

The most recent research places the number of victims at around around 100,000-110,000 killed (civilians and military)[2] [3] [4], and 1.8 million displaced.



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


so ask yourself after the Dayton accords..why the Euopeans did not immediately intervene when the mass murders BEGAN again ?


These same punks are going to go rescue a few hundred terrorist...when they cant clean up the terrorist and mass murders inh there own back yard ?


But maybe its because of retarded brainwashed morons like this fellow NilbuDcom...who claims ONLY a few thousand died from 1992 until 2006..
that things like genocide and ethnic cleansing still happen in Europe .

Total
96,175 Bosniaks 63,994 66.5%
Serbs 24,206 25.2%
Croats 7,338 7.6%
other 637 0.7%
Total civilians
38,645 Bosniaks 32,723 84.7%
Croats 1,899 4.9%
Serbs 3,555 9.2%
others 466 1.2%
Total soldiers
57,529 Bosniaks 31,270 54.4%
Serbs 20,649 35.9%
Croats 5,439 9.5%
others 171 0.3%
unconfirmed 4,000


for just Bosnia alone ..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_war#Casualties

Ethnic cleansing was a common phenomenon in the war. This typically entailed intimidation, forced expulsion and/or killing of the undesired ethnic group as well as the destruction or removal of the physical vestiges of the ethnic group, such as places of worship, cemeteries and cultural and historical buildings. Widescale rapes were also employed as a tactic in ethnic cleansing. Serbs were ethinically cleansed from most of Croatia during and after the Croatian War. The Bosnian Serbs expelled the Muslim population from northern and eastern Bosnia to create a 300 km corridor between Serb ethnic areas in the west of Bosnia and Serbia proper. Bosniaks and Bosnian Croats expelled each other and Serbs from the territories that they held. Villages were terrorised, looted and often razed to prevent their inhabitants from returning. By the war's end, all sides had used the tactic to meet their ends. Approximately half of Bosnia's 4,4 million inhabitants were displaced during the war (though not necessarily all of them by 'ethnic cleansing'), including Bosniaks, Serbs and Croats.[8]


One camp ALONE .

The Srebrenica massacre was proven as a case of genocide at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) where estimated 8,106 Bosniak males were systematically killed by Army forces of Republika Srpska


again ONLY Bosnia...

The Bosnian genocide case at the International Court of Justice (also known as Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro; first filed as Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Yugoslavia in 1993; de jure name Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide) is an ongoing landmark court case where for the first time in the 60-year history of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) one state, Bosnia and Herzegovina, is accusing another state, Serbia and Montenegro, of genocide.

The case before the ICJ, the UN's highest judicial body, which exclusively hears disputes between states, relates to alleged attempts to wipe out the primarily Bosniak population of Bosnia. The hearings at the court in The Hague, Netherlands, are set to run until May 9, 2006. A binding ruling is expected by the end of the 2006 or early 2007. If Bosnia wins, it could seek billions of dollars in compensation.

According to some reports, ruling in this case will have repercussions on the case Croatia v. Yugoslavia that is based on a similar indictment currently pending at the ICJ as well as other related cases that may be brought before this court in the future



And the biggest disgrace...

The siege of Sarajevo was the longest siege in the history of modern warfare. It lasted from April 5, 1992 to February 29, 1996. It was fought between the forces of the Bosnian government, who had declared independence from Yugoslavia, and the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA) and various Serbian paramilitaries, who sought to secede from the newly-independent Bosnia and Herzegovina. An estimated 12,000 people were killed and another 50,000 wounded during the siege. Reports indicate an average of approximately 329 shell impacts per day during the course of the siege, with a high of 3,777 shell impacts on July 22, 1993. The shellfire caused extensive damage to the city's structures, including civilian and cultural property

You Europeans WATCHED from 1992 until 1996 while this went on every day .

Now please someone explain how you are going to motivate such cowards to invade GTMO ?

Cry for the terrorist in GTMO ...but watch men women and children get butchered for years ...and do nothing ..but cry and moan ..and sit and WATCH .

While the braindead of you claim only 2000 ot so " casualties " .

I do not consider the UK as part of " Europe "...I wouldnt want to insult them that way .

Considering France has the biggest warship in the world


What ship would that be? According to the 2005 edition for Jane’s fighting ships the US Nimetz class Nuke Carrier is the biggest warship afloat

We in Europe are constantly bemoaning the existance of the detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, well, how about we do something?

Something like a rescue attempt.

Okay, here's the plan, either the UK, France or the Netherlands send an aircraft carrier or two on a routine mission to the Falklands, Guyana, or the Antilles respectively. Then, unexpectedly, in the pitchblack of night a squadron of fighter jets split off and take out the defencive capabilities of Guantanamo, hot on their tales are a few Chinooks, we drop some rope ladders into the pens and have some loadspeakers announce in Arabic that this is a rescue.

The Chinooks fly off to rendez-vous with the motherfleet, and then, bam, back across the Atlantic where we can bring these people to civilisation and hold them fair trials.

-

Okay? So is this doable? Should it be done, or is it a dishonourable act done against existing treaty? Would we get away with it? Or would the American military be alert and flexible enough to swiftly pwn us?

Discuss.

We need to rescue the innocent people in Guantanamo. Usians are responsible for the terror in the world today. I hate Usians.

The US navy is larger in combat strength than the combined navaal forces of the whole world .

Dates 9/1/00 11/16/01
Battleships - -
Carriers 12 12
Cruisers 27 27
Destroyers 54 54
Frigates 35 35
Submarines 56 54
SSBNs 18 18
Mine Warfare 27 27
Patrol 13 13
Amphibious 39 39
Auxiliary 60 58
Surface Warships 116 116
Total Active 341 337
Events


http://www.militaryfactory.com/countries_comparison.asp

The US military can compare to the entire continent of europe and still go invade NK and Iran and the same time .


Again go clean up your own back yard in serbia ..Kosovo..Bosnia etc...then when you grow some balls get back to us about the terrorist in GTMO .


"ONE " US carrier group with attatched attack subs and Aegis cruisers would destroy the entire naval strength of Europe..in maybe 72 hours or so .

The subs might survive a bit if they hide .

And that does not include the US Coast Guard (another naval military service) which is the 11th largest naval fleet in the world.

Guantanamo is not normal US territory, indeed, that is why the prison is based there. Guantanamo itself was forced from Cuba during Bay of Pigs, and so to protest its reinvasion would be a smidgen hypocritical.What the heck are you talking about Guantanamo Bay has been an American NAVAL base since 1903. As well, the U.S. does lease it from Cuba, but Cuba does not cash the checks. Also, the base is both a large naval, military, and air force base.

So When will the people of Europe ever take care of thier own before they beak balls for anyone else ?

I am still waiting...so when ?



When will you clean up yuor own mess.



I am PERSONANLY tired of having my family die for you idiots .

Why the hell is this thread still up?

Let this thing die in the gas chambers.

Why the hell is this thread still up?

Let this thing die in the gas chambers.
TSI, my lover, in the words of Harles, +1

TSI, my lover, in the words of Harles, +1
:eek:
HA ha ha...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Give it to Cuba!

TSI, my lover, in the words of Harles, +1

Oh my :eek:

We need to rescue the innocent people in Guantanamo. Usians are responsible for the terror in the world today. I hate Usians.

Awwww look at the little troll who wants to free those who want to do harm to civilians.

And that does not include the US Coast Guard (another naval military service) which is the 11th largest naval fleet in the world.

Only in a time of war and they are attached to the USN when that happens.

I am still waiting...so when ?



When will you clean up yuor own mess.



I am PERSONANLY tired of having my family die for you idiots .

Was that saving the MILLIONS of people dying from ingrown toenails?

I PERSONANLY wish a few more of your family had an education.

Doesn't it occur to you that what you think is history is actually just propaganda and badly written propaganda at that. Like your shameful emotive outburst over the MILLIONS dead in Kosovo which never happened. It doesn't occur to you to check any of the crap you want to believe in sooo much.

That's why Europeans get annoyed at you clowns so easily, you don't argue with facts, just press releases and adverts.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/1892_Pledge_of_Allegiance2.jpg

*snip*

We don't do that anymore. Thanks for the history pick though :D

they dont collect rent, I belive they did so once, but never after that

Castro cashed the first rent check which according to the US legitimizes the treaty that the previous regimes signed. He hasn't cash any since, but he stopped one check too late.

This is one from 1981
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9b/Lynching-of-michael-donald.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kkk)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kkk

This is from 1997
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f1/KKK_holocaust_a_zionist_hoax.jpg

Personally I'm a member of the ACLU. I'm doing my bit as a world citizen to help keep the government out of the private lives of citizens of the US and keep the crackers from killing all the ex-slaves.

*snip*

Umm....all the ex-slaves are already dead.

Segregation didn't end all that long ago. Rosa Parks only died a short while back.

Segregation didn't end all that long ago. Rosa Parks only died a short while back.

1) you said ex-slaves not segregation.

2) All the ex-slaves are dead. You cannot argue that fact.

I have a better, more feasible, plan:
We secretly send all the prisoners stamp addressed envelopes. Really big ones that they can hide in.
The addresses are made up ones.
The prisoners hide in the envelopes and are posted.
Then the US post office will eventually send them to the dead letter pile, where they can run free, living off whatever they find in all the other dead letters.





C'mon: Makes more sense than Europe invading now, doesn't it?

Only in a time of war and they are attached to the USN when that happens.

You are correct the Coast guard dose operate under Naval control but they still remain the Coast Guard during times of war, but I was pointing out that the US Coast Guard have a fleet of ships and patrol boats and small boats, that is the 11th largest in the world

Um... I take it the topic starter is from europe, and I also take it you guys dont talk about history in Europe cause I seem to remember two things known as the world wars. If it wasnt for the US you guys would all be speaaking German and goose stepping, so if you really think that attacking a US base is a good idea, have any nations who decide to attack us prepare, cause we dont take crap from anybody. Also, why would you even want to realease those prisoners. Terrorism is horrible and letting them go would only increase terrorist problems in your european nations too. Were taking out terrorists cause you europeans cant stand war especially the lazy french. So dont even talk about attacking the US cause every country on Earth knows that that is the stupidest idea anyone can have.

You are correct the Coast guard dose operate under Naval control but they still remain the Coast Guard during times of war, but I was pointing out that the US Coast Guard have a fleet of ships and patrol boats and small boats, that is the 11th largest in the world

True true. I just like to split hairs :D

snip
Ugh. Just stop.

Um... I take it the topic starter is from europe, and I also take it you guys dont talk about history in Europe cause I seem to remember two things known as the world wars. If it wasnt for the US you guys would all be speaaking German and goose stepping, so if you really think that attacking a US base is a good idea, have any nations who decide to attack us prepare, cause we dont take crap from anybody. Also, why would you even want to realease those prisoners. Terrorism is horrible and letting them go would only increase terrorist problems in your european nations too. Were taking out terrorists cause you europeans cant stand war especially the lazy french. So dont even talk about attacking the US cause every country on Earth knows that that is the stupidest idea anyone can have.

1) They would probably be speaking Russian and not German for the Russians would've defeated Germany anyway even without a 2nd front.

and

2) don't characterize all of Europe for not stomaching war. I can see their side of it for I also do not like war either. Anyone who likes war is insane. Period.

snip.
Wow. Whose puppet troll are you?

1) They would probably be speaking Russian and not German for the Russians would've defeated Germany anyway even without a 2nd front.

and

2) don't characterize all of Europe for not stomaching war. I can see their side of it for I also do not like war either. Anyone who likes war is insane. Period.

Good god, Corny, I'm actually agreeing with you.

Good god, Corny, I'm actually agreeing with you.

Well....God is good :D and thanks for agreeing :)

I have a better, more feasible, plan:
We secretly send all the prisoners stamp addressed envelopes. Really big ones that they can hide in.
The addresses are made up ones.
The prisoners hide in the envelopes and are posted.
Then the US post office will eventually send them to the dead letter pile, where they can run free, living off whatever they find in all the other dead letters.
C'mon: Makes more sense than Europe invading now, doesn't it?


How did you come up with that one. It's fiendish. What could be worse than Guantanamo bay? The US Postal Service. My God, it's dastardly. Surely that's cruel and unusual though. By the time the posties are finished going postal on them they'll be looking back with fondness at the Cuban shores.

Um... I take it the topic starter is from europe, and I also take it you guys dont talk about history in Europe cause I seem to remember two things known as the world wars. If it wasnt for the US you guys would all be speaaking German and goose stepping, so if you really think that attacking a US base is a good idea, have any nations who decide to attack us prepare, cause we dont take crap from anybody. Also, why would you even want to realease those prisoners. Terrorism is horrible and letting them go would only increase terrorist problems in your european nations too. Were taking out terrorists cause you europeans cant stand war especially the lazy french. So dont even talk about attacking the US cause every country on Earth knows that that is the stupidest idea anyone can have.

:D Yes, Americans are well known for their excellent knowledge of history.