Russia or USA?

Just been pondering this question a lot and thought it would be very interesting to hear everybody's opinions. Basically the question is which country has the greatest military power?

I might as well share my opinion.

https://2img.net/r/ihimizer/img70/726/350pxworldmilitaryspendjf1.jpg
http://www.fpif.org/papers/globmil/pie-1.gif
http://www.ecclectica.ca/issues/2003/1/image007.jpg

Some interesting links I found that prove my point. USA has the greatest world involvement while also the highest spending on their military programs.

I do support Russia in the point of nuclear weaponry...
http://timeforchange.org/nuclear-energy-and-nuclear-weapons-per-country

However, USA and Russia both have so many nuclear weapons that if nuclear war broke out, they wouldn't even be able to fire 1/10 of their arsenal. Ever since the collapse of the Soviot Union, Russia's military has never come to par with Americas. I am not siding with America just because I am from there. The facts are all here. Russia also must hold a draft to get recruits while America does not. That does nmake a difference in the willingness to fight which can be the deciding factor in a battle. The United States also has the best military technology that far exceeds Russia's. Just my opinion. Would be interesting to hear agreements/disagreements so share those opinions!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_size_of_armed_forces
Another supporting link.

Russia,

Reason 1) Could pull a more successful Draft

Reason 2) Strong Navy (yep really)

Reason 3) Military Development

America,

Reason 1) Strong Standing Force, already "Militarized", kinda.

Reason 2) Advanced Tech, (Revealed, Russia might be more advanced and is just holding its Cards.

Reason 3) Strong Pull in U.N. (Not because its first H.Q. is in NY, Because its allied with most of the intrests in the U.N. anyway.

Reason 4) Allied countries everywhere, could easily go from place to place.

Schickles wrote:

Russia,

Reason 1) Could pull a more successful Draft

Reason 2) Strong Navy (yep really)

Reason 3) Military Development

America,

Reason 1) Strong Standing Force, already "Militarized", kinda.

Reason 2) Advanced Tech, (Revealed, Russia might be more advanced and is just holding its Cards.

Reason 3) Strong Pull in U.N. (Not because its first H.Q. is in NY, Because its allied with most of the intrests in the U.N. anyway.

Reason 4) Allied countries everywhere, could easily go from place to place.

thats right

A quote that's usually attributed to Albert Einstein says:

Quote :

I don't know what weapons will people use in World War III. But I'm pretty sure in World War IV it will be rocks and spears again.

I think that sums it up rather well.

Major Zeman wrote:

A quote that's usually attributed to Albert Einstein says:

Quote :

I don't know what weapons will people use in World War III. But I'm pretty sure in World War IV it will be rocks and spears again.

I think that sums it up rather well.

I have also heard that quote. No point in analysis seeing as how most people get it. Nuclear war will only break out if Russia and America engage in battle, though. No other country has the nuclear power of those two. I honestly think this is extremely unlikely seeing as how neither Russia or USA want the other as an enemy. Eventually this may change and that quote could come true.

The point that america has advanced tech would do my opinion to their side.. To be honest i don't like both country's, as it go with military power (ingame we call it admin abuse:P). Both lands have been, as we call it in the Netherlands with the Hands on the Button. but both country's know that when war will break out, the half of the world would be gone. that means they will destroy themselves...

Another point: I heard American soldiers were suprised by the way the dutch soldiers are organised. As you maybe heard my brother is in the army aswell, but i dont think the dutch army is that well organised, concluding that America's army is even less that would give me a bad sight of that army. *don't know how to explain it right, hope you will understand it*

My opinion: America has the best military power, but if they use it they will sign their own death.

Dr00pienl wrote:

The point that america has advanced tech would do my opinion to their side.. To be honest i don't like both country's, as it go with military power (ingame we call it admin abuse:P). Both lands have been, as we call it in the Netherlands with the Hands on the Button. but both country's know that when war will break out, the half of the world would be gone. that means they will destroy themselves...

Another point: I heard American soldiers were suprised by the way the dutch soldiers are organised. As you maybe heard my brother is in the army aswell, but i dont think the dutch army is that well organised, concluding that America's army is even less that would give me a bad sight of that army. *don't know how to explain it right, hope you will understand it*

My opinion: America has the best military power, but if they use it they will sign their own death.

I also think the same goes for Russia does it not?

The US by far has the best armed forces in the world. Being a former US Marine i attest to this first hand....Osok out.....

Best army always are organized partisans.
They won in Afghanistan (Russia and USA), they won in Iraq (USA), they won in Jugoslavia (WW2), ....
Why? Because they fight for their believes till they are dead.

{AR}Osok wrote:

The US by far has the best armed forces in the world. Being a former US Marine i attest to this first hand....Osok out.....

Semper Fi!

{AR}Osok wrote:

The US by far has the best armed forces in the world. Being a former US Marine i attest to this first hand....Osok out.....

So....


That means youve been in every single marine force in the world, to test this theory?

With no due respect Triassic, bite me, nobody has any damn respect anymore, the youth of the world now has gone to shit....and yes I'm talking about you.....if not for the bleeding heart gashes that make up this world, bitching and moaning about collateral damage and unacceptable deaths to civilians, the US would totally destroy any adversary.......

Welcome to the 21th century, Osok.

I believe when you stated that US would "totally destroy any adversary", you forgot to exclude the other 8 or so countries that own nuclear weaponry. Thus, the world for now is not ready for the Total U.S. Domination.

The other countries have their interests too, and this "bitching" you speak about is nothing else than means to perform political influence.

Nowadays, a political isolation can do much better job than an attempt at invasion. That's why all your army that would totally destroy any adversary is pretty much useless unless you can arrange it so that most important players on worlds political scene will tolerate it.

Welcome to the world where size or strength of a country's army no longer equals it's political influence.

Nevertheless, Triassic's last argument is imo nothing more than an empty phrase.

Generals gathered in their masses,
just like witches at black masses.
Evil minds that plot destruction,
sorcerers of death's construction.
In the fields the bodies burning,
as the war machine keeps turning.
Death and hatred to mankind,
poisoning their brainwashed minds.
Oh lord, yeah!

Politicians hide themselves away.
They only started the war.
Why should they go out to fight?
They leave that role to the poor, yeah.

Time will tell on their power minds,
making war just for fun.
Treating people just like pawns in chess,
wait till their judgment day comes, yeah.

Now in darkness world stops turning,
ashes where the bodies burning.
No more War Pigs have the power,
Hand of God has struck the hour.
Day of judgment, God is calling,
on their knees the war pigs crawling.
Begging mercies for their sins,
Satan, laughing, spreads his wings.
All right now!

-Black Sabath

{AR}Osok wrote:

With no due respect Triassic, bite me, nobody has any damn respect anymore, the youth of the world now has gone to shit....and yes I'm talking about you.....if not for the bleeding heart gashes that make up this world, bitching and moaning about collateral damage and unacceptable deaths to civilians, the US would totally destroy any adversary.......

Well, Osok. I didnt mean to offend you or anything. That was definitely not my intention at all. That statement was definitely not personal. I was challenging your statement, not your humanity or personality.
But its funny how you go wild when im only asking if that is a solid tested theory.
When you state something, you need to come up with proof. Thats how the system works. Now I never said I didnt respect what the guys in the military are doing. Hell, i think they need some pure guts to follow someone elses orders without being able to argue, unless they want a courtmarshall on their asses. I definitely have to argue about everything that someone tells me, so that I do definitely respect. Anyways that asside, I dont see the relevance between respect and the question on which this topic is based, which is who has the biggest force.
Challenging your statement has nothing to do with having respect. So do not attack my personality or whatever, by saying I dont have any respect, cause you have no idea who I am or what I am all about. When you do, you'll have my permission to do so.

Anyways, the question is: Which country has greater force, US or Russia? You say US and I'm perfectly cool with that. I'm just asking you to back up with some actual facts. Thats how a discussion works. Saying youve served in one doesnt mean you know the other. That is all i am saying.

---------------

Major Zeman wrote:

Nevertheless, Triassic's last argument is imo nothing more than an empty phrase.

Now MZ. About this whole empty phrase thing.
One thing needs to be very clear. No phrase is empty! There's always a context behind it.
Asside from that, I never really say empty stuff, that is when you dont count the lols and the crazy stuff I do once in a while. Theres always something behind the things I say. I like to challenge people on what they are saying. Which is exactly what I'm doing in Osok's case. So unless he joined the Russian army, what he is saying isnt really a correct statement.

Just in case you guys might think that im saying, that what you guys are saying, about the US army, isnt true. Not really what i'm saying. For all i care you could tell that youre an alien, and i still might be able to believe you. Its not really about your opinion or what I will or do believe. Its about what you suggest. You suggest something? Back it up with facts! Statistics, whatever you can come up with. Not some sort of opinion that everyone is supposed to believe blindfolded.

Wilk proved his case just fine. He came with statistics, numbers...facts. Although the wikipedia-page could be argued if its a solid source to build your argument on, but nevertheless he did come with some info on the matter. All im asking is for Osok to do the same when he states something. Thats what my whole phrase is about.

Clearly there is some tension building between this case. While every army has their slackers, they also have the heroes and the courageous. With the comment on world domination...that's a debate maybe for a later date. My guess it will never happen, but back to the point. Both of what Triassic and Osok said was true. I think even if neither of you know it right now, your both right. Osok pointing out the courageous and the brave who will risk anything to help their country. While Triassic pointed out another type of soldier. Perhaps one who won't assist his fallen comrade or obey an order to put his life in danger. (Why that type of person will join the war I'll never know but there are some in both Russia and USA.) I suppose Russia more because of the draft. You both proved a point while perhaps not knowing it. The way of saying it might have been a bit unethical for both sides...but point addressed.

Well, I wasnt really talking about the soldiers or whatever. I was just pointing out that that if Osok states something, he needs to come with some solid evidence. Just claiming to have seen one point of view doesnt qualify someone to say that they know whats on the other side.

I dont know who has the bigger force. I was reading and checking out your argument and wanted to know on what his statement was based on.

Cause if we break his statement down it would be this:

Conclusion: "The US by far has the best armed forces in the world."
Reason: "Being a former marine i attest to this in first hand."

Not something to be called valid reasoning. Shooting down these kind of statements would only require the question I previously asked. I wouldnt even have to know anything about the subject, if people came to me with stuff like that.

Instead I get a whole speech about respect, like i stepped on one of his toes or something, while it was nothing to get personal about. It had nothing to do with respect what so ever.

The basic rule of a debate: "State it, Proove it!"

Triassic i simply think the point to be made is think before you speak, Nowadays, almost every American is, or knows a American Soldier and is damn proud of em' Like Lance Corporal Nick West my brother so it'd be hard to call into question their strength and not step on some toes and piss off someone like Osok a retired(?) Marine. (eh, One shot one Kill?)

Oh and yeah, it was a pretty disrespectful statement made regardless of the actual intent.

Some facts are is

That Every American Marine faces difficult training including a Rough 54 hour field training exercise called a crucible And they are given 3 field Rations and a total of 8 hours of sleep. (In less they get firewatch ) this challenges everything hey learned, and if the don't pass, they don't get their Eagle and Anchor.

Marine Officers Have extremely high promotion Standards weeding out the unfit.

Specialized Roles for every soldier (MOS) allowing for organization and specialization of every Soldier. (For Ex. my brother is a Radio Technician, sits in the Humvee on Convoy's, and Patrol's and relays information)

Top of the line Tech always bring the best o the fight.

and Marines have a unmatchable Fierceness on the field in my opinion that's hard to match.

And thats where youre wrong. And trust me I do think before I say something.

Dont get me wrong, I get the whole "Proud to be a marine"-thing and I'm proud to say that in the Netherlands we also have people that feel this strong about what they're doing. But you have to keep in mind that this is a debate. When having a debate, personal feelings and opinions are irrelevant.

In a debate the argument only consists of statement followed by relevant facts.

I noticed you have some interesting facts. Now those are the kind of facts Osok wouldve had to come with. Only problem with these facts are that a training has nothing to do with being the greater force. Unless you could come up with the numbers for Russia. For all I know the Russians might do the same thing. I could bring in the whole Dutch-army thing. Wouldnt really help the discussion along. Why? Cause it has nothing to do with the whole subject.

So pride, training, respect or whatever has nothing to do with it. I would say the same thing to any other person. American, Russian, Dutch or whatever that person is. I understand the things a soldier has to go through, I can only imagian, but that statement has nothing to do with the subject itself. It does not answer the question wilk asked. Atleast not the way its supposed to.

His statement would only be valid, if he could say he joined the Russian forces and experienced that first hand as well.

You need to know that i'm not chalenging Osoks or any soldier's experiences, im chalenging the statement. Thats something entirely different.

Evidence... Nothing against the U.K., but they were being leveled every day. The U.K. had quite the fighting prowess and were very valuable in fighting the opposing forces, but had the U.S. and Canada not launched their invasions into Northern Europe, the U.K. would be complete rubble, Hitler would've turned the majority of his army to Russia, and Russia might have survived, but probably not facing the very powerful German military, which at the time Russia was losing ground against around half of the German forces, but then halting their advance at a point.

And to defend Osok a bit, he never said Total World Domination as you all following seem to have taken from him, he just said that the U.S. could destroy any adversary, but not everybody at the same time. If he wanted to say "American Domination! Democracy shall be forced upon you all!", he would have. He said "any adversary", singular, and learning how our government works, I can assure you that the U.S. would never be so bold as to launch an assualt on every nation in the world.

Osok, I have a deep respect for those who serve in the military and keep our homes safe. Thanks very much.

Thank you Merc., and Schick., and Tri I apologize to you for my jump off there...I can get a little pyscho, a little too quick sometimes...Zeman wasn't referring to nukes, that's a no win situation for anyone.....Osok out,,PS. I broke my right pinky toe in 2 places monday night so I have been a little testy this week....

Merc and Osok, let me apologize for not being clear enough and try to rephrase my second paragraph:

When Osok said US would totally destroy any adversary, he didn't think of 8 or so countries that have nukes. Therefore, his statement is not completely true, Us couldn't safely go and destroy any adversary - there are some countries they cannot dare to attack nowadays. And these "some" countries have enough power for US to have to be careful about their opinion. As long as you can't go for the Total World Dominance, you have to mind 'bitching' of other countries.

Triassic, let me tell you a story.

A few years back, I found myself in an argument with someone about the purpose of head rests in car. I tried to explain them that the main purpose of it is to prevent you from breaking your neck if someone crashes into you from behind. The person however insisted on that if someone crashes into you from back, your head will go forward not backward from your body position.

No matter how much I explained the basic rules of mechanics, the person's final argument was: Do you have masters degree from physics? No? Then I don't believe what you say about physical laws!


Now, I understand the point you were trying to make towards Osok. But there's a subtle difference between "why do you believe your experience in US army is a proof strong enough that it's better then Russian" and "have you been in every single marine force in the world?". For once, the later asks for such level of personal first hand experience that noone can have and therefore can be used to beat about any argument provided, effectively killing the discussion.

There's a problem with your "State it, Proove it!", and it's in the "prove it!" part. As soon as you leave the idealistic mathematical world, there's about no single statement you can completely prove. You can almost always beat the opposing party of the discussion by categorically refusing to trust their information sources.

And that's the kind of impression your post to Osok made on me.

It is obvious that a battle between Russia and the USA could not be won. Neither side would allow to be taken over and the world would experience a nuclear holocaust. As far as the greatest military power, I think the evidence is in the link below:

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

The amount of money is ridiculous and we (as taxpayers) have to pay for it. We have assumed the role of world policeman and we won't be relinquishing it anytime soon.

{AR}2M!nutesHate wrote:

The amount of money is ridiculous and we (as taxpayers) have to pay for it. We have assumed the role of world policeman and we won't be relinquishing it anytime soon.

But hey when the economy crashes at least we'll have the North American Union to fall back on.

I wouldn't be surprised if it's being done on purpose, just so that can happen.

They want to unify and centralize everything.

Kind of off topic.

didnt belgium own 1 nuclear missile? 8-)

{AR}2M!nutesHate wrote:

It is obvious that a battle between Russia and the USA could not be won. Neither side would allow to be taken over and the world would experience a nuclear holocaust. As far as the greatest military power, I think the evidence is in the link below:

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

The amount of money is ridiculous and we (as taxpayers) have to pay for it. We have assumed the role of world policeman and we won't be relinquishing it anytime soon.

belgium doesnt even have an army to spend money xD
we got like 30000 men total? air force, ground forces and all xD

Major Zeman wrote:

No matter how much I explained the basic rules of mechanics, the person's final argument was: Do you have masters degree from physics? No? Then I don't believe what you say about physical laws!


Now, I understand the point you were trying to make towards Osok. But there's a subtle difference between "why do you believe your experience in US army is a proof strong enough that it's better then Russian" and "have you been in every single marine force in the world?". For once, the later asks for such level of personal first hand experience that noone can have and therefore can be used to beat about any argument provided, effectively killing the discussion.

There's a problem with your "State it, Proove it!", and it's in the "prove it!" part. As soon as you leave the idealistic mathematical world, there's about no single statement you can completely prove. You can almost always beat the opposing party of the discussion by categorically refusing to trust their information sources.

And that's the kind of impression your post to Osok made on me.

You're right. In the perfect mathematical world, there is no single statement that can be completely proven. But since were not in a perfect mathematical world, does not mean we cant atleast ask for a decent comperation of the two sides.

The "State it, Proove it!" phrase only means that you need to have some kind of source behind your statement that is proven to be reliable. Proven to be reliable is something that could be debated about seperately, but it has to be evidence sufficient to establish that as truth, or to produce belief in its truthfulness.

First hand experience does fit the description of producing believe in its truth. For someone to have experienced one side does suggest that the person has had a good view of either one side. That person person has actually been there. But the thing about first hand experience means that you need to be able to say, that you've seen both sides. Otherwise you wont be able to make a decent comparison of the two. You can only speak for that one side. The other would be out of range, cause you havent seen it to say the grass is less green, or even more green. Eventhough you might be a little subjective to either one of the sides, youve seen both of them to establish a comparison.

If you'd ask a Russian soldier the same thing, he would say exactly the same thing Osok did. He could come up with a whole story about his trainingexercises, just the way Schick did, and that would probably be a great story, but it lacks on being able to compare it with anything. Me, as being the independent person, would not know what to believe, cause they would sound exactly the same to me. I would have to base my findings on who sounds more believable, or which one seems to be less likely to have happened therefor it being less believable.

Theres a difference between your story and what is happening here. In your story its a classic action-reaction case. There's no need to be on the other side. There is no other side in your case. When a car bumps another car. BOOM, this and that happeneds. It can only go one way. You could easily bring in results of studies of people who do have a degree in phisics or mathematics or what ever kind of degree you need. Explaining the effects on a car hitting another car on your neck. In this case we are trying to make a comparisson between 2 sides. Laying down evidence like you couldve done in your story, is the same thing that would have to happen here.

A comparison can only be made if you know the facts on both sides. Osok's argument only displays one side of the story, but lacks on the other. Because of that it is impossible to assume that his argument is correct. If it only had one side, like your story did, the would be no need to question his statement.

I'm not asking for a perfect source of information. Theres never been the perfect source, and I doubt there will ever be any, but that does not mean that I cant ask for some findings that are based on having seen boths sides of the story, or atleast knowing the numbers and present the probablity. And that is exactly what Wilk did in his first post. Compare by presenting the numbers he found of each side.

Im not saying that what Osok is saying is not true. I'm saying its more likely to be believable if he had experienced both sides. He doesnt even need to join every single army force in the world, only the two that are involved in Wilks question: US and Russia.

I do agree with you on that. The way you have put it, however, sounded to me like you denying any value to Osok's point of view altogether.

And by the way you got it wrong in the first part, what I said was that only in mathematical world there can be things you can prove completely. Most of the mathematical systems have statements that can be proved. It's the real world that seems to lack them most of the time.

...and yes, there even is a proven statement in mathematics saying that in any non-trivial logical system there exist statements that cannot be proven true nor false :S

I read every post in this topic, and consulted my lawyer. He said that legally it would be safer if I didn't post any opinion in this flame-war So, I'm not gonna

Major Zeman wrote:

I do agree with you on that. The way you have put it, however, sounded to me like you denying any value to Osok's point of view altogether.

And by the way you got it wrong in the first part, what I said was that only in mathematical world there can be things you can prove completely. Most of the mathematical systems have statements that can be proved. It's the real world that seems to lack them most of the time.

...and yes, there even is a proven statement in mathematics saying that in any non-trivial logical system there exist statements that cannot be proven true nor false :S

Hmm...Though there are things math cant prove though, except to prove some things cant be proven

Anyways! I wasnt saying that Osoks I was denying the value of his point of view! I didnt even state my opinion for you to assume I was. I only pointed out that he would need both sides of the story for him to have a great argument.

A first-hand point of view is more powerful then any facts i can find on the computer. I see your point but even one-sided shows extra strengths to that side.

wilk101 wrote:

A first-hand point of view is more powerful then any facts i can find on the computer. I see your point but even one-sided shows extra strengths to that side.

That i get. An experience is not something you can easily argue about, but you would still have to experience both sides to draw any conclusions. One sided doesnt show anything though, esspecially when trying to compare it with something else.

your all kinda right
but i choose for USA, just because they look cooler in movies

Rofl Babekiller.

Am sorry for getting snappy myself but when you said so.. as if my brother risking his life is only so... i got a little pissy.

But true it is that you cant draw a definite conclusion from Osok's statement, that was a mere addition to the previously stated facts.

Also to clear up a smaller point when you said any troop would say their training is hard, you were right, but i just showed something that shows that all Marines need to have a certain drive, a certain toughness and physical ability to tackle something like the Crucible (Which isn't training, but a final exam).

Hm... I agree with some things that are said... some things are happy, some sad. Some boil the insides of me, but it seems to me that we are just trying to boost our egos and let our frustrations (which are led by fear) out.
As for the original question: history will be the judge of it...
WHAT are we talking here anyways? Let me show how silly it all looks:
Mr. Peterson can beat up ma'am Hack, BUT ma'am has a strong husband... but Mr. Peterson has lots of friends, BUT they all work from five to ten, so if ma'am Hack would... if it happens, then at least we could have a debate: what could have been done differently (more ground for analysis because at least it happened and no one can deny that fact). We cannot be certain otherwise, so chill everyone. Most probably, Brazil, China and India will kick our butts first.
PS Marines are the best? BAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Our navy divers in Canada undergo the exact same training. They even banned the use of the "green substance" not long ago. No offence intended .
Now the offence:
Quoting: "So...."
With no due respect Osok, bite me. Why would I respect you? Out of all those people I can dedicate my respect to, why would it be you? WTF did you do to make the world such a good and beautiful place? So you served in U.S. MARINE CORPS. Then what? It gives you an automatic subscription to respect? Or maybe you were enlightened with absolute knowledge of "right" and "wrong"? Who the F do you think you are? God?
Don’t like the “shit” youth. Well, I don’t think that “shit” youth ever asked for you approval, respect or love. Don’t like it? Make kids of your own, just don’t breed idiots…
2min, don't start the whole lesson on how one day I will be old and some “punk” will say something similar to what I wrote... I remember - once is enough. Talk to me about it when I am old, we will have a good laugh.
Schickles, yeah, I sense that we are not going to be friends after my following statement (don't you regret of welcoming me on these forums? *Iizshocked!* ):
What your brother is risking his life for is not just USLESS, but completely I-D-I-O-T-I-C. He is not saving anyone and not even defending anyone. Ok, he is brave and strong… ugm… ”That’s why I say: ‘Hey man, nice shot!’ ” Well Neil Armstrong was on the moon and world’s tallest man alive is Leonid Stadnyk (do read his life story). Did you ever hear about Gottfried Leibniz? Do whatever you want with your life, just don't go and tell me that you did it and then ask for respect and admiration. Your conviction are yours only, and I couldn’t care less... voila, new debate - have fun boys. No, I am not sorry for being snappy... I might reconsider, but not sorry at all... nope still not sorry... maybe because it is all inconsequential.
Uhm… yeah, that was one good rant. Hate me, ban me, threaten me, criticize me… I would just probably piss in your drink if I could. Like I said, be realistic: I couldn’t care less… oh yeah, now I am going to end with such a statement as: “FREE SPEECH MOTHAF*CKERS!” ; “Whatever, peace out!”
*whistles*
Rob Zombie - Dragula
Type of edit: orthographic and visual, add an avatar here and there... make it prettier.

Roman_Pope wrote:

Hm... I agree with some things that are said... some things are happy, some sad. Some boil the insides of me, but it seems to me that we are just trying to boost our egos and let our frustrations (which are led by fear) out.
As for the original question: history will be the judge of it...
WHAT are we talking here anyways? Let me show how silly it all looks:
Mr. Peterson can beat up ma'am Hack, BUT ma'am has a strong husband... but Mr. Peterson has lots of friends, BUT they all work from five to ten, so if ma'am Hack would... if it happens, then at least we could have a debate: what could have been done differently (more ground for analysis because at least it happened and no one can deny that fact). We cannot be certain otherwise, so chill everyone. Most probably, Brazil, China and India will kick our butts first.
PS Marines are the best? BAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Our navy divers in Canada undergo the exact same training. They even banned the use of the "green substance" not long ago. No offence intended .
Now the offence:
Quoting: "So...."
With no due respect Osok, bite me. Why would I respect you? Out of all those people I can dedicate my respect to, why would it be you? WTF did you do to make the world such a good and beautiful place? So you served in U.S. MARINE CORPS. Then what? It gives you an automatic subscription to respect? Or maybe you were enlightened with absolute knowledge of "right" and "wrong"? Who the F do you think you are? God?
Don’t like the “shit” youth. Well, I don’t think that “shit” youth ever asked for you approval, respect or love. Don’t like it? Make kids of your own, just don’t breed idiots…
2min, don't start the whole lesson on how one day I will be old and some “punk” will say something similar to what I wrote... I remember - once is enough. Talk to me about it when I am old, we will have a good laugh.
Schickles, yeah, I sense that we are not going to be friends after my following statement:
What your brother is risking his life for is not just USLESS, but completely I-D-I-O-T-I-C. He is not saving anyone and not even defending anyone. Ok, he is brave and strong… ugm… ”That’s why I say: ‘Hey man, nice shot!’ ” Well Neil Armstrong was on the moon and world’s tallest man alive is Leonid Stadnyk (do read his life story). Did you ever hear about Gottfried Leibniz? Do whatever you want with your life, just don't go and tell me that you did it and then ask for respect and admiration. Your conviction are yours only, and I couldn’t care less... voila, new debate - have fun boys. No, I am not sorry for being snappy... I might reconsider
Uhm… yeah, that was one good rant. Hate me, ban me, threaten me, criticize me… I would just probably piss in your drink if I could. Like I said, be realistic: I couldn’t care less… oh yeah, now I am going to end with such a statement as: “FREE SPEACH MOTHAF*CKERS!”; “Whatever, peace out!”
*whistles*
Rob Zombie - Dragula

You really do have that free speech thing down don't you?

No, you are completely right on this point.
It should be written: "FREEDOM OF BEING AN IDIOT!"

Now I'm confused.

-

Roman_Pope wrote:

Schickles, yeah, I sense that we are not going to be friends after my following statement (don't you regret of welcoming me on these forums? *Iizshocked!* ):
What your brother is risking his life for is not just USLESS, but completely I-D-I-O-T-I-C. He is not saving anyone and not even defending anyone.

Nah, i wouldnt regret it =]

Am a lil pissed you called my brother a idiot for doing a good service for his country. (mind you not his leaders agenda's because believe it or not he signed up to service his country not because he wanted to kill "terri-ticks" (crappy word-symbol for Bush, you bet ) but he felt he owed it to his country and his fellow people). Aherm, but i disagree whole-heartily with your obvious lack of respect for Service men and women. Also very few go out to join their Country's Military's for your respect but after risking their lives for your freedoms i just think they deserve it is all. And yes, maybe in the current middle-eastern conflict your freedoms aren't as endangered as such a war as WWII but you get my drift.

And yes you have your freedom of Speech which is fine, but just remember FOS is rare in most country's , so dont take its defenders for granted =].

also he is defending the peoples of Afghanistan from terrorist in that country. No then explain to me why in a letter he wrote to me, why a group of children thanked him during his patrols... lemme guess propaganda brainwash!

{AR}Osok wrote:

Who the hell do you think you are? Roman:you whacked out philosophical piece of shit, Its punks like you that have screwed this world all to hell, I bet your a member of P.E.T.A.. And I have breed and raised my own kids and they are quite intelligent, and my oldest daughter(12) could probably kick your ass. I know she put a round in you at 300 yards. What service have you provided for your country? I have never liked you or any of your bullshit posts, so f**k off, If you would like to get into me any further, pm me and I will provide all the contact info. you need to find me...John Frye out.........

A round at 300 yards? With what? Probably couldn't take the kick back from anything serious, and something really small would be hard to aim at that range. Can you give us a more realistic number?

Totally realistic, AR-10T .308 is my long range, and yes she has shot it, taking all the recoil from the prone position. I bought her her first rifle when she turned 5. However, the one she would engage at 300 with would be her .243. My favorite is my .50 Beowulf by Alexander Arms, awesome piece. I think she would enjoy putting him in an arm bar and breaking his elbow more though...we have been really getting to the Combat Hapkido we have started training in....

Roman_Pope wrote:

2min, don't start the whole lesson on how one day I will be old and some “punk” will say something similar to what I wrote... I remember - once is enough. Talk to me about it when I am old, we will have a good laugh.

To the kids coming up in the schools, you already are old. I said that to you because you were intentionally being rude and insulting to Leafs who really did nothing to you. I'm sorry if life isn't working out the way you wanted it to or if you are confused about who you are, but do not come in here attacking people out of the blue. Take a walk, read a book, or perhaps some military service may do you good so you could understand where those who have served are coming from.

What you posted above is way out of line and uncalled for. This isn't the first time for you and I think you have a questionable history as far as AR goes. I hope you isolate your behavior to the internet and do not treat loved ones or anyone else this way. It's a wonder why you "have no place to call home."

Well said 2M!n.

i hate when people make post's like these. In my own opinion, who really cares who has a stronger military or who could beat who? "Arguing over the internet is like winning the special olympics, who really cares?" The USA is falling apart, our economy is terrible because of Bush and his ridiculous war over oil. I would never fight for a government that has strayed so far away from what it was intend to do in the first place. That being said I would never fight for Russia either. The only war I would have ever wanted to enlist in the army ( any army that was opposed to what hitler was doing at the time) would have been WWII and that is only because What Hitler and the Nazi's did was terrible.

The thing is I kinda argee with what Roman was saying.
Isn't this a family friendly Clan? If so Osok needs to chill out and watch what he is saying on here. Like everyone else here Osok, you were a little punk once too.

I respect the service men who come out and make something of themselves, who respect people and don't act like complete Psychos.

Good point Edge. I missed the Osok post. I think everyone needs to just calm down. I think this topic is on the edge (get it? ) of being locked.

{AR}Edge wrote:

i hate when people make post's like these. In my own opinion, who really cares who has a stronger military or who could beat who? "Arguing over the internet is like winning the special olympics, who really cares?" The USA is falling apart, our economy is terrible because of Bush and his ridiculous war over oil. I would never fight for a government that has strayed so far away from what it was intend to do in the first place. That being said I would never fight for Russia either. The only war I would have ever wanted to enlist in the army ( any army that was opposed to what hitler was doing at the time) would have been WWII and that is only because What Hitler and the Nazi's did was terrible.

The thing is I kinda argee with what Roman was saying.
Isn't this a family friendly Clan? If so Osok needs to chill out and watch what he is saying on here. Like everyone else here Osok, you were a little punk once too.

I respect the service men who come out and make something of themselves, who respect people and don't act like complete Psychos.

point taken, I'm done

Well, this has been real and it's been fun but it hasn't been real fun.

*Locking this one up and throwing away the key*