Ideal Social Engineering Settings

[Commy]

But let's be fair to Europe...

Europe did have some very important battles, including those of Vienna and Tours.

In both battles, against all odds, the Europeans drove back the fanatical muslim armies, and I do give credit for that.

And, last time I checked, I didn't see American soldiers sitting in trenches getting high of nerve gas from the Germans, and I rightly commend the French for that, too...

Europe has had some great military leaders, probably the best of all time, even if they were fascists. It was, after all, the little emperor Napolean that first gave European citizens freedoms and rights...

I don't want to dis Europe. Europe is great. Forget about the US, Europe is a great place. Maybe its better than the US, maybe it's worse, but it's still better than the rest of the world. I just don't appreciate people dissing America for no reason.

It's all cool to dis the feds and George Bush every once in a while, even us Americans do that, but America has come a long way, has pioneered freedom and democracy, and rightly deserves credit for that...

[binTravkin]

You know very little and understand very little.

One advice:
if you're good in numbers, compare the numbers of German army on the East front and West front on D-Day. I think you will find the difference to be around 2:1 depending on source.

You can also compare US/UK army in D-Day and USSR army on the East front.
Ratio is around 4:1 depending on source.

Numbers doesn't lie buddy. And numbers matter.

[Commy]

Numbers, you say? So how much math do you know?

You claim the ratio of UK soldiers to US soldiers is 4 to 1.

Then if there were 100,000 soldiers, 20,000 would be American. MATHEMATICALLY speaking, that is a significant number. Not a majority, but significant, significant enough to mean the difference between complete defeat and immediate victory.

I bet those 80,000 UK soldiers would really appreciate the extra support, even if it is only one fourth of their own number.

And might I remind you, it was American intiative to plan D-Day. True, European leaders did help, but I didn't see Eisenhower fighting for the Royal Air Force.

[Commy]

And about the Royal Airforce, wasn't it American pilots that joined it? Quite a few, I believe...

And wasn't it America that provided the destroyers to Churchill to defeat the U-boats...

I'm sorry, you can try and argue that germany would have lost without America, and you'd probably be right. But the Americans ended the war quickly, and probably saved thousands, perhaps millions of lives...

And I didn't see Churchill doing to much to fight the Japenese either...so maybe perth got bombed just like pearl harbor, atleast the Americans did something about it...in fact, they gave away boats to the British and fought the Japenese navy at the same time...and won...

And anyway, the arguement is who has seen more war, America or Europe.

So for comparison...

While American Indians were smoking weed...
Europeans were fighting over who was the son of some mother that had 6 husbands...

While Americans were standing in lunch lines...
Nazis were making meth...

While Americans struggled to land space shuttles...
Europeans struggled to launch them...

So for all intensive purposes, I think we're even...

[binTravkin]

Blah!

4:1 means US+UK had 2 million troops in France
USSR had 8million at the East front

NOW you recognise?

German numbers were like 4million on the East and 1.5 million in France + Norway!

AND US Fleet was significantly bigger and better than UK one, so dont talk UK had any chanc to defeat Japanese as US did.

Go read some history and then come talk,k?

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Ellestar

Why USA finally participated in WW2, you ask?

We got sneak attacked by the Japanese and Germany declared war on us. The reason for this is that we put an oil embargo on Japan and were fighting an undeclared naval war against the Germans since 1940. As I recall the Soviet Union fought in WW2 after they got sneak attacked by the Germans. Previous to that they had befriended the Germans in order to sneak attack Poland, the Baltic Republics, Finland etc. Later they declared war on the Japanese and took the lands they lost in 1905, and murdered anyone who tried to stand in their way in Eastern Europe. If I were to weigh the morals of the United States and the Soviet Union by their behavior in WW2 the I would have to say that the U.S. was by far the more moral actor. The Soviets only gain sympathy because of the extraordinary brutality of the Nazis.

[binTravkin]

We got sneak attacked by the Japanese and Germany declared war on us. The reason for this is that we put an oil embargo on Japan and were fighting an undeclared naval war against the Germans since 1940. As I recall the Soviet Union fought in WW2 after they got sneak attacked by the Germans. Previous to that they had befriended the Germans in order to sneak attack Poland, the Baltic Republics, Finland etc. Later they declared war on the Japanese and took the lands they lost in 1905, and murdered anyone who tried to stand in their way in Eastern Europe. If I were to weigh the morals of the United States and the Soviet Union by their behavior in WW2 the I would have to say that the U.S. was by far the more moral actor. The Soviets only gain sympathy because of the extraordinary brutality of the Nazis.

1.Soviets were extraordinarily brutal to anyone, not only Nazis.

2.The talk was bout who made more effort not moral, it's clear that a government of a really powerful nation is very rarely taking moral and ethics in count - they just pretend to be doing so and it's called propaganda.
In WW2 numbers decided the most and if you count them, I think the picture is clear..

[girlfight_club]

Originally posted by Commy
And anyway, the arguement is who has seen more war, America or Europe.

Well... to be fair, the US homeland went virtually unscathed throughout the 20th Century, while Europe was devastated twice over. The ability to project power comes from having a reliable, undestroyed, industrial base.

As any SMAC player knows.

It's been revealed that Japan wasn't completely foolhardy in its attack on Hawaii-- they had a tight plan to take war to the continental US. Apparently they were in the process of building hundreds of jets in underground factories-- right up to the end of the war. They simply had their fuel supplies cut, and they never flew. They also had produced early helicopters and one truly advanced concept: the submarine carrier.

This stuff was not known much in the US until recently. All part of the illusion of invincibility that comes from being distant to those you oppress...


GFC

[binTravkin]

Well... to be fair, the US homeland went virtually unscathed throughout the 20th Century, while Europe was devastated twice over.

Period.
Sadly many people still think it's not that if not vice versa..

This stuff was not known much in the US until recently. All part of the illusion of invincibility that comes from being distant to those you oppress...

And from this you can conclude how much you still dont know or even - will never know about Europe and other parts of the world..
Just sit tight in your nice heaven and have no opinion of what's going on, except for that of your government..
Don't you think it's kinda Matrix?

[livid imp]

Originally posted by binTravkin
German numbers were like 4million on the East and 1.5 million in France + Norway!

Technically, by the numbers, the USA had the harder fight then. USSR had a 2:1 advantage over the Germans, vs. the USA's 1.3:1


btw BT, you are going way too far on this anti-American kick. You are trying to rewrite history here. Fact is that the US was instrumental in winning both WW1 and WW2. Now grant it, we did come into a fight that was already half-over, but that doesn't diminish the sacrifices that millions of Americans made. You can put down the US all you want, but the bottom line is that Americans died so that Europeans could be free. I think we should get a little credit for that.

Yea the US is a selfish superpower, so what. Show me one industrialized nation that isn't. The US isn't perfect, far from it. At least 51% of the country has their heads up there a$$. I am so embarrassed politically with the US right now, I don't keep the flag over my avatar. But even with that in mind, this is still my home, and I love it. So much like a child behaving badly, you don't abandon it, you try to correct its behavior. I'd say 80% of those with dubious political views are basically good people that truly don't understand the views they defend. Unfortunately the other 20% are evil f@#kers are the ones that control much of America's politics and infrastructure. That 20% will always be there, but the other 80% can be reformed over time.

And claiming that man was never on the moon is the "lunatic fringe". (get it LUNAtic...harhar)
We have rocks from those missions. Are you telling me that the dozens of independent Geologists which have studied these moon rocks are all part of a grand conspiracy? We have sent probes all over the solar system, why would it be so difficult to send men a mere three days away to the moon? It takes more technology to reach the lowest depths of a ocean trench.

I have always seen you as more level-headed and intellectual than this BT. Take a rest and think about what you are saying.

[binTravkin]

I have always seen you as more level-headed and intellectual than this BT. Take a rest and think about what you are saying.

You know, there is always a freedom of thought and I dont think that Im less intellectual just because I think that stars on moon shine significantly brighter that on those pics on moon.
And you know what made me think so?
Mostly the arguments of NASA. Some of them are not made for intelligent people, but for those "80%" you mention. And reading them I became quite suspicious about the reality.
The last point was when one of the top astronomers in Latvia - the President Of Latvian Astronomy Association and quite widely known person at least between European astronomers (due to his effort in search for "ecoplanets") G. Vilks showed in a lecture a few examples how can people detect fake astronomy themselves. He by point admitted that he personally doesn't believe US was on moon and as many peope became very frustrated with such news he also explained why.
His explanations were simple and understandable and he also gave some formulas to prove them.
One of them was bout luminosity of moon and it's impact on the picture.
It covered 3 common questioned things - the lack of stars, sudden brightness of some objects and strange shadow angles.
What I remember was I was sitting with open mouth hearing all this because I thougt it couldn't be so..
Im not any specialist to argue with formulas and other proofs, I simply dont know or barely know them, but not a single argument has proved the opposite from what I heard there..

About faking transmissions - rather easy, just send a probe on the same route which accepts incoming transmissions from Earth and then transfers them back to Earth - so people think theyre coming from a spaceship..

It's not so hard technically and Im not the first person who suggested this explanation, some guys from PhysMaths (Institute of Physics&Mathematics of Latvian University).

And rocks can be gathered by automated modules, not only humans.

I understand it's rather hard when your nation gets attacked this way, but I've noticed that most people there even dont bother to check the info and think about other arguments - they just shoot their "US the best, you Europe suck" arguments without answering to other and if they do, sometimes there are answers like "Answer why you dont see stars on Moon pictures are CLOUDS" - see Commys post.

I've saw that picture saying "Arguing over internet is like running in Olympics for retarded", but I never fully believed it.
Now I do.

Many people just dont understand the word "discuss".
They think it's when you blame someone for blaming something, not think about what he's saying and providing something reasonable in exchange.

BTW - have you heard how they confiscted all cameras and other recording devices around Pentagon after the 9-11 attack.
And that picture of missile parts - have you seen that?

Also - noone has yet answered to me how is that possible that the best defended and armed nation in the world can not notice someone with only AK-47 and B-747 in his arsenal flying overheads..

I once heard US is on the way on practically making Planetary Defense Pods..
Seems kinda funny after 9-11


My intent was to make people think more, not to make people think Im testing their patriotism.
I think to blindly defend something is foolish, but many dont even see it that they're doing it blindly (without any brain moving)..

[binTravkin]

BTW you just said the same I was saying about matrix ("80%")

[Commy]

First off, I have never ever, seen someone just come out and dis europe, never, unless AFTER America is dissed...

While Americans may claim America is better than Europe, I don't see any off them saying they hate Europe, no, all they do is defend their country by simply saying it's better than...big difference, mister history and mathematical buff you appears to be the all knowing...

I'm going to put this as simply as I can...

You have two choices, bintravikin...

Either you wish America never participated in European affairs...gave save you...

Or you give credit to all the work america has done to save your f***ing european a**...never mind the fact it was America's choice...

[GeoModder]

't Is not that simple, Commy. Europe is not a single entity as the US can be pointed at. And Latvia has never seen any 'influence' from US side as well. Too close to Russia for that.

[Commy]

In 10 years, that might be different, but it is, in reality, very simple. America could either be like China and remain neutral in international conflicts, or it can choose sides...as shown by history, the side of the Allies against Germany...and I see that to be very simple...either you are at war, or you're not...