Thread: War Declared
View Single Post
  #34  
Old 03-26-2011, 03:42 AM
Lusankya's Avatar
Lusankya Offline
Deus ex Crucio
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,687
Default Re: War Declared

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaioo View Post
Vietnam. US ADMITTED defeat. They could NOT win against the Vietcong because anybody could of been a member, and there was territorial advantage on the side of the Vietcong.

Oh, and if the US is so high and mighty, why were they fighting in Iraq for SO many years, as well as Afghanistan? Seriously, so many soldiers yet what good are they doing. Also, if the US military is so good, why are most of British soldiers deaths from friendly fire from AMERICANS?

Now, take a look at the link below,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4OI0GUCI_A
The US left Vietnam ultimately for political reasons. Had the political will been there, the US could easily have funneled 10 times the military force into Vietnam.

The "wars" in Iraq and Afghanistan aren't wars at all, they're nation-building police actions. Compare it any real war, and the death figures are tiny, especially when you consider how much time it's been spread out over. Your attempt at an argument misses the point by a mile.

Quote:
Not to be 'that one guy', but Britain handed our asses to us on a silver platter back in 1812.
Well, I suppose that technically counts. Then again, the "US Army" as an organization didn't really exist back then, but either way it's pretty irrelevant as you have to go back 199 years to find a real strategic military defeat.

Quote:
We will never know who would win if we pit China and America against each other, but I honestly believe China would pull through if it weren't for the political repercussions.
No, America would win, period. Nukes aside (and maybe even including those depending on how much the Pentagon's been keeping from us about their missile defense systems), China would never even get a chance to attack the US at all. Their air force would never leave the ground, their navy would never leave the harbors. True, China could probably repel a US ground invasion through sheer force of numbers, but a few years later the Chinese industrial complex would be reduced to nothing but mangled steel and tiny pieces of concrete. Would the US be able to conquer China? Probably not, but when the US gets tired of bombing China back to the Stone Age, it'll be China's economy and people who are going to have to rebuild from flint and steel, not America's.

And that's really the crux of the issue. Whenever you find a war that the US "lost", which side is the one that's been defending the entire time? Which side is the one that has been hiding in caves and tunnels without access to decent food or water? Which side is the one that, at war's end, is going to have to rebuild their cities and replant their farms and pick up their lives and start over? Since 1812, the answer has always been whoever the US has been fighting. No matter how you slice it, whoever's gone up against the US since the Cold War only "wins" in the sense that they haven't had to completely submit to American demands and do whatever the hell we tell them to. If we really look at what it means to win a war, which ought to be "to come out better than the other guy", then the US hasn't lost a war since 1812.
__________________

Art Gallery
Dali: "I know what the picture should be ... We take a duck and put some dynamite in its derriere. When the duck explodes, I jump and you take the picture."
Halsman: "Don't forget that we are in America. We will be put in prison if we start exploding ducks."
Dali: "You're right. Let's take some cats and splash them with water."

Last edited by Lusankya; 03-26-2011 at 03:47 AM.
Reply With Quote