|
hawowanlawow posted:nah, I'd say destroying Persia and burning Baghdad was probably worse don't worry we did that too
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 17:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 16:07 |
|
|
i say swears online posted:don't worry we did that too I was about to say...
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 17:45
|
|
|
we haven't destroyed Persia yet
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 17:46
|
|
|
hawowanlawow posted:we haven't destroyed Persia yet We're trying pretty hard.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 17:49
|
|
|
hawowanlawow posted:we haven't destroyed Persia yet John Bolton will see his ambition fulfilled. And also all the saber rattle types who need a great enemy to justify their existence/career. jokes fucked around with this message at 17:53 on Dec 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 17:51
|
|
|
We haven't yet forced the population of a giant city to lie down and then place boards upon those people and ride horses on them to death. Every Great Historical General would've already killed billions of people if we gave them the keys to the US military, I don't find such comparisons to historical figures operating under wildly different moral and ethical paradigms to be terribly useful for anything besides moralizing and self-righteousness. Our bad stuff stands on its own, we don't need to judge our actions relative to the Hitler standard or Napoleon standard or Ramses II standard.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 17:57
|
|
|
"The Spartans were chuds" who gives a poo poo, they've been dead for 2500 years and the people who think they are emulating them aren't, they're emulating some idea of Spartans that has no relationship to either the actual people or why they did what they did (because it was the 4th century BC and everyone was a racist piece of poo poo from then up until probably like 1925?, when the first person without cancelable opinions was born)
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:00
|
|
|
I WISH our political and military leadership was similar to ramses II
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:01
|
|
|
You need to stop worrying about the Sea Peoples, they probably weren't an invading force anyway, just large groups of displaced migrants.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:02
|
|
|
imagining ancient world leaders as trump now "you know the red sea was my own personal vietnam"
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:03
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/travisbubenik/status/1338886166599372802 Owned, the virus. Now to open back up more for 2 weeks until we have to close down again. But then we'll open again! But then we'll close down again. This is a good plan. Also how many people live in that region, 100?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:13
|
|
|
it's a lil top-heavy, everyone lives in the northernmost fifty miles. 400k?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:16
|
|
zoux posted:https://twitter.com/travisbubenik/status/1338886166599372802 thats midland/odessa/mystery flesh pit
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:19
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:mickey mouse is responsible for more cultural genocide than genghis khan if your culture can't stand up to mickey mouse whose fault is that really
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:21
|
|
|
Midland is a weird place. It's a lot of oil people, but the really really rich oil people, like owners and investors, also live there which makes no sense.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:24
|
|
|
the actual rich people of midland live in dallas
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:31
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:the actual rich people of midland live in dallas Not all of them, when I was dealing with oil people for work a lot of the owners would need to fly to Dallas and scheduling meetings was annoying because they'd fly in "for the day" and show up in Dallas at noon and need to fly out by 3. Their lawyers definitely live in Dallas. Being in Midland fuckin' sucks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:35
|
|
|
I think I'd move to Midland for $50k/year, same as chicago
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:40
|
|
|
You would be as a king on such a sum in that mid-land.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:40
|
|
|
I assume rent is as high as austin which would quadruple my take home pay. austin at 18k is hard
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:45
|
|
|
jokes posted:Who’s saying anything about exceptionalism? By sheer tonnage the US military is unassailable by sea because of absolutely horrific military spending that will probably never abate. It’s an indictment of the US government and it’s the governmental equivalent of that tweet where they’re like “help me budget” but 90% of their budget is candles. Texas LOVES this kinda poo poo because we soak up a ton of military spending, especially space junk. Just to be clear what you said : quote:No country in the entire world, and arguably the entire world working together, could defeat the United States in total war. Breaks down to: 1. No country in the entire world could defeat the United States in total war. 2. arguably(positively inclined to believe) the ENTIRE world working together could not not defeat the United States in total war. Those statements seemed to come from a place of "Amercians don't worry about war other countries worry about war". I could see how you may have had a different intention but I maintain that what your statement breaks down to is still pretty silly given our already recorded military failures.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:47
|
|
|
tl;dr - US got big boom boom so no worry about war.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:48
|
|
|
If we had fought Vietnam or Iraq like we did Nazi Germany, they wouldn't be military failures, just unimaginable atrocities. The US doesn't have a total war military failure.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:55
|
|
|
If someone wants to take on the current US in a war of conquest, the first question is what that victory would even look like and what the planet would look like in the aftermath.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 18:58
|
|
|
zoux posted:If we had fought Vietnam or Iraq like we did Nazi Germany, they wouldn't be military failures, just unimaginable atrocities. The US doesn't have a total war military failure. Admittedly I wasn't exactly sure how much credence to give the "total war" part of that statement. We had the option to fight Vietnam and Iraq like we did Nazi Germany, no one was going to stop us at the outset it seemed, but we didn't. There is probably a reason for that. Additionally I am not sure what "total war" would even look like now a days. There are a lot more elements at play within nations than there were in WWI and WWII times. Ultimately I think it is a bit silly to think that we have the most weapons or biggest army = never have to worry about war. I am not really invested on convincing someone of this I just thought it was remarkable so I remarked.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 19:04
|
|
|
If we exterminated everyone in north vietnam the USSR would have had the moral imperative to nuke us all
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 19:09
|
|
|
Macarthur wanted to nuke China in the Korean war lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 19:11
|
|
|
I don't think it's good that the US could crush any other nation militarily if we wished just like I don't think it's good that Mike Trout has a career OPS of exactly 1.000. But facts is facts. .582 lifetime slugging, jesus christ
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 19:13
|
|
|
syntaxrigger posted:Admittedly I wasn't exactly sure how much credence to give the "total war" part of that statement. We had the option to fight Vietnam and Iraq like we did Nazi Germany, no one was going to stop us at the outset it seemed, but we didn't. There is probably a reason for that. Additionally I am not sure what "total war" would even look like now a days. There are a lot more elements at play within nations than there were in WWI and WWII times. Yeah, the big problem is that the concept of total war no longer exists ever since we entered a world with the possibility of mutually assured destruction. Which is mostly a good thing. It would be better if we hadn't managed to fall back into a world of major powers engaging in neo-colonial and proxy wars, but you take what you can get. i say swears online posted:If we exterminated everyone in north vietnam the USSR would have had the moral imperative to nuke us all Nah, they would have made a bunch of speeches at the UN and probably been able to pull away some of our weaker alliances, but if Regan didn't nuke the USSR over Afghanistan, Brezhnev wouldn't have nuked the US over Vietnam. More than that, they wouldn't have even cared enough to do that (since a fully-US-controlled Vietnam would help counterbalance China, whom the USSR was seeing as a threat around that time). As more Americans have learned more about the atrocities in our history, and as more people have opened up to the ideas of socialism and communism, there's been a big tendency to wipe away a lot of the terribleness of the USSR. But at no point in that entity's existence did it ever have anything approaching the moral high ground.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 19:26
|
|
|
Americans haven’t been able to claim ignorance of out atrocities for a while now. In a lot of ways, we’re informed of how terrible we’ve been more than people in other counties. Our problem is we’re just as likely to support those terrible things as we are to be powerless to stop them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 19:35
|
|
|
dude more often than not I have to fill people in on who we fought in ww2 and what decade it was in
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 19:38
|
|
|
It was *looks at card* The Moops
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 19:40
|
|
|
hawowanlawow posted:dude more often than not I have to fill people in on who we fought in ww2 and what decade it was in “The bad guys” and “the bad years” ? Followed immediately by the good years, and the wonder years starring jokes fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Dec 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 19:40
|
|
|
Watermelon Daiquiri posted:vietnam beat the us Not that it really matters now, but there's a big difference between "that nation defeated the US" and "the US was unable to achieve specific goals under its self-imposed limitations" It's like a bobybuilder trying to get a toddler to wear pants. Yeah the toddler might keep those pants off but you wouldn't exactly say the toddler defeated the bodybuilder in combat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 20:08
|
|
|
Texas Politics: where we discuss whether or not the US lost the Vietnam war
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 20:19
|
|
|
Manager Hoyden posted:Not that it really matters now, but there's a big difference between "that nation defeated the US" and "the US was unable to achieve specific goals under its self-imposed limitations" I type "America is the toddler, actually" as I smugly slam the 'post' key, sure of my assertion that the US is, actually, not the unassailable evil empire monolithic hegemon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 20:22
|
|
|
I think it’s fair to say that the US can blow stuff up better than any other country. While that is important, winning a war often takes more than that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 20:29
|
|
|
Anyway, if Texas seceded and the US had a mind to, and even if somehow Texas successfully seized all materiel with in its borders, they would burn us to the ground worse than Sherman ever dreamed
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 20:30
|
|
|
I think the point stands that Texas couldn't take the US on in a theoretical war of secession, especially if the war was escalated a bunch. Of course, the biggest problem that Texas would face is that they'd only manage to work a small fraction of the population into enough of a frothing rage to earnestly support secession and fight for it, and there would be a bunch of people not into it and just collaborating with the US forces and maybe even fighting the Texan government, just like how the CSA was incredibly unpopular and suffered a lot of defections from people who didn't give a poo poo for secession. zoux posted:Anyway, if Texas seceded and the US had a mind to, and even if somehow Texas successfully seized all materiel with in its borders, they would burn us to the ground worse than Sherman ever dreamed Sherman's march to the sea is wildly exaggerated anyways. SlothfulCobra fucked around with this message at 20:40 on Dec 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 20:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 16:07 |
|
|
Personally I would move to Montana.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 20:39
|
|