Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

A brief history of the only successful nation building exercises in US History

1235»

Comments

  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 105,808 Founders Club
    We're BACK in the USSR
  • YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 35,415 Founders Club

    We're BACK in the USSR

    You can't have it both ways. Either you have to love the Beatles or you're banned from quoting Lennon - McCartney songs.

  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    dflea said:

    salemcoog said:

    Sledog said:

    We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

    Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.
    Disagree.

    We can't even train sailors how to avoid a floating skyscraper. While the USSR engages in real training like in how to efficiently kill people. Our forces play grabass during gender sensitivity training.
    The USSR?

    CCCP.

    photo bild123_zpspc4k4dnk.jpg
  • KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,885

    salemcoog said:

    Sledog said:

    We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

    Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.
    Disagree.

    We can't even train sailors how to avoid a floating skyscraper. While the USSR Russian Empire engages in real training like in how to efficiently kill people. Our forces play grabass during gender sensitivity training.
    Fixed.

    Our Navy ships have been crashing into shit for hundreds of years; this is no big deal. While it's true Russia has some kick ass artillery and SAM systems and what not, we still by far have the most lethal fighting force in the world.
    Well.... As Afghanistan and Vietnam have proven, once you take away our technologies ability to beat someone, we aren't anything fucking special. And I call BS on all these Navy boats going out of the way to hit something, just being another day in the life. At best, it's fucktarded sailors that can't steer the boat. At worst it's outside forces controlling our assets to destroy themselves.

    Sound familiar?
  • PurpleThrobberPurpleThrobber Member Posts: 44,170 Standard Supporter
    edited August 2017

    2001400ex said:

    dflea said:

    salemcoog said:

    Sledog said:

    We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

    Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.
    Disagree.

    We can't even train sailors how to avoid a floating skyscraper. While the USSR engages in real training like in how to efficiently kill people. Our forces play grabass during gender sensitivity training.
    The USSR?

    CCCP.

    photo bild123_zpspc4k4dnk.jpg
    Those guys suck; they couldn't even make it to the gold medal round against Finland.
    image

    трахните Финляндию

    trakhnite Finlyandiyu

    Fuck Finland
  • YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 35,415 Founders Club
    edited August 2017
    salemcoog said:

    salemcoog said:

    Sledog said:

    We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

    Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.
    Disagree.

    We can't even train sailors how to avoid a floating skyscraper. While the USSR Russian Empire engages in real training like in how to efficiently kill people. Our forces play grabass during gender sensitivity training.
    Fixed.

    Our Navy ships have been crashing into shit for hundreds of years; this is no big deal. While it's true Russia has some kick ass artillery and SAM systems and what not, we still by far have the most lethal fighting force in the world.
    Well.... As Afghanistan and Vietnam have proven, once you take away our technologies ability to beat someone, we aren't anything fucking special. And I call BS on all these Navy boats going out of the way to hit something, just being another day in the life. At best, it's fucktarded sailors that can't steer the boat. At worst it's outside forces controlling our assets to destroy themselves.

    Sound familiar?
    Yes, absolutely Vietnam and Afghanistan demonstrated the limit of our technology to win those kinds of wars. But if we'd been willing to lay waste to Vietnam with our superior fire power in the way we did to Japan (say minus the nukes) + getting a lot more of our grunts killed, they would have likely capitulated as well. However, this was never politically feasible, nor moral- i.e., they hadn't waged aggressive war against us.

    Here's a list of the collisions over the years. Is there some sort of theory going around about our navigation systems having been compromised by a hostile power?
    http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a27021/ship-collisions-us-navy-history/

  • KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,885
    edited August 2017

    salemcoog said:

    salemcoog said:

    Sledog said:

    We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

    Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.
    Disagree.

    We can't even train sailors how to avoid a floating skyscraper. While the USSR Russian Empire engages in real training like in how to efficiently kill people. Our forces play grabass during gender sensitivity training.
    Fixed.

    Our Navy ships have been crashing into shit for hundreds of years; this is no big deal. While it's true Russia has some kick ass artillery and SAM systems and what not, we still by far have the most lethal fighting force in the world.
    Well.... As Afghanistan and Vietnam have proven, once you take away our technologies ability to beat someone, we aren't anything fucking special. And I call BS on all these Navy boats going out of the way to hit something, just being another day in the life. At best, it's fucktarded sailors that can't steer the boat. At worst it's outside forces controlling our assets to destroy themselves.

    Sound familiar?
    Yes, absolutely Vietnam and Afghanistan demonstrated the limit of our technology to win those kinds of wars. But if we'd been willing to lay waste to Vietnam with our superior fire power in the way we did to Japan (say minus the nukes) + getting a lot more of our grunts killed, they would have likely capitulated as well. However, this was never politically feasible, nor moral- i.e., they hadn't waged aggressive war against us.

    Here's a list of the collisions over the years. Is there some sort of theory going around about our navigation systems having been compromised by a hostile power?
    http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a27021/ship-collisions-us-navy-history/

    Your article list like 5 collisions in the last 70 years. There have been 4 big ones in the last 2 years. CBS reported the morning after that there was strong speculation that the ships nav unit had been hacked.

    I doubt anyone on the outside would ever know if it was hacked as I doubt that the Navy would admit to that even if true. So if we were to lay odds... it probably wasn't hacked. But one has to wonder why this is happening so often given the superior tech on board to avoid such things.

  • CirrhosisDawgCirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390

    salemcoog said:

    salemcoog said:

    Sledog said:

    We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

    Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.
    Disagree.

    We can't even train sailors how to avoid a floating skyscraper. While the USSR Russian Empire engages in real training like in how to efficiently kill people. Our forces play grabass during gender sensitivity training.
    Fixed.

    Our Navy ships have been crashing into shit for hundreds of years; this is no big deal. While it's true Russia has some kick ass artillery and SAM systems and what not, we still by far have the most lethal fighting force in the world.
    Well.... As Afghanistan and Vietnam have proven, once you take away our technologies ability to beat someone, we aren't anything fucking special. And I call BS on all these Navy boats going out of the way to hit something, just being another day in the life. At best, it's fucktarded sailors that can't steer the boat. At worst it's outside forces controlling our assets to destroy themselves.

    Sound familiar?
    Yes, absolutely Vietnam and Afghanistan demonstrated the limit of our technology to win those kinds of wars. But if we'd been willing to lay waste to Vietnam with our superior fire power in the way we did to Japan (say minus the nukes) they would have likely capitulated as well. However, this was never politically feasible, nor moral- i.e., they hadn't waged aggressive war against us.

    Here's a list of the collisions over the years. Is there some sort of theory going around about our navigation systems having been compromised by a hostile power?
    http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a27021/ship-collisions-us-navy-history/

    No, the only "theory" going around is coming from an imbecile like @salemcoog. You'd be surprised to know he owns a 1987 ford bronco.
  • KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,885

    salemcoog said:

    salemcoog said:

    Sledog said:

    We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

    Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.
    Disagree.

    We can't even train sailors how to avoid a floating skyscraper. While the USSR Russian Empire engages in real training like in how to efficiently kill people. Our forces play grabass during gender sensitivity training.
    Fixed.

    Our Navy ships have been crashing into shit for hundreds of years; this is no big deal. While it's true Russia has some kick ass artillery and SAM systems and what not, we still by far have the most lethal fighting force in the world.
    Well.... As Afghanistan and Vietnam have proven, once you take away our technologies ability to beat someone, we aren't anything fucking special. And I call BS on all these Navy boats going out of the way to hit something, just being another day in the life. At best, it's fucktarded sailors that can't steer the boat. At worst it's outside forces controlling our assets to destroy themselves.

    Sound familiar?
    Yes, absolutely Vietnam and Afghanistan demonstrated the limit of our technology to win those kinds of wars. But if we'd been willing to lay waste to Vietnam with our superior fire power in the way we did to Japan (say minus the nukes) they would have likely capitulated as well. However, this was never politically feasible, nor moral- i.e., they hadn't waged aggressive war against us.

    Here's a list of the collisions over the years. Is there some sort of theory going around about our navigation systems having been compromised by a hostile power?
    http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a27021/ship-collisions-us-navy-history/

    No, the only "theory" going around is coming from an imbecile like @salemcoog. You'd be surprised to know he owns a 1987 ford bronco.
    And I own would little space that occupies the void between your ears. You may want to have the barber college trim those next time you're wheeled in there. Lookin pretty shaggy.
  • CirrhosisDawgCirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390
    salemcoog said:

    salemcoog said:

    salemcoog said:

    Sledog said:

    We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

    Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.
    Disagree.

    We can't even train sailors how to avoid a floating skyscraper. While the USSR Russian Empire engages in real training like in how to efficiently kill people. Our forces play grabass during gender sensitivity training.
    Fixed.

    Our Navy ships have been crashing into shit for hundreds of years; this is no big deal. While it's true Russia has some kick ass artillery and SAM systems and what not, we still by far have the most lethal fighting force in the world.
    Well.... As Afghanistan and Vietnam have proven, once you take away our technologies ability to beat someone, we aren't anything fucking special. And I call BS on all these Navy boats going out of the way to hit something, just being another day in the life. At best, it's fucktarded sailors that can't steer the boat. At worst it's outside forces controlling our assets to destroy themselves.

    Sound familiar?
    Yes, absolutely Vietnam and Afghanistan demonstrated the limit of our technology to win those kinds of wars. But if we'd been willing to lay waste to Vietnam with our superior fire power in the way we did to Japan (say minus the nukes) they would have likely capitulated as well. However, this was never politically feasible, nor moral- i.e., they hadn't waged aggressive war against us.

    Here's a list of the collisions over the years. Is there some sort of theory going around about our navigation systems having been compromised by a hostile power?
    http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a27021/ship-collisions-us-navy-history/

    No, the only "theory" going around is coming from an imbecile like @salemcoog. You'd be surprised to know he owns a 1987 ford bronco.
    And I own would little space that occupies the void between your ears. You may want to have the barber college trim those next time you're wheeled in there. Lookin pretty shaggy.
    Your meltdowns are funny. And so very predictable. Continue on about the navy conspiracy...
  • KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,885

    salemcoog said:

    salemcoog said:

    salemcoog said:

    Sledog said:

    We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

    Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.
    Disagree.

    We can't even train sailors how to avoid a floating skyscraper. While the USSR Russian Empire engages in real training like in how to efficiently kill people. Our forces play grabass during gender sensitivity training.
    Fixed.

    Our Navy ships have been crashing into shit for hundreds of years; this is no big deal. While it's true Russia has some kick ass artillery and SAM systems and what not, we still by far have the most lethal fighting force in the world.
    Well.... As Afghanistan and Vietnam have proven, once you take away our technologies ability to beat someone, we aren't anything fucking special. And I call BS on all these Navy boats going out of the way to hit something, just being another day in the life. At best, it's fucktarded sailors that can't steer the boat. At worst it's outside forces controlling our assets to destroy themselves.

    Sound familiar?
    Yes, absolutely Vietnam and Afghanistan demonstrated the limit of our technology to win those kinds of wars. But if we'd been willing to lay waste to Vietnam with our superior fire power in the way we did to Japan (say minus the nukes) they would have likely capitulated as well. However, this was never politically feasible, nor moral- i.e., they hadn't waged aggressive war against us.

    Here's a list of the collisions over the years. Is there some sort of theory going around about our navigation systems having been compromised by a hostile power?
    http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a27021/ship-collisions-us-navy-history/

    No, the only "theory" going around is coming from an imbecile like @salemcoog. You'd be surprised to know he owns a 1987 ford bronco.
    And I own would little space that occupies the void between your ears. You may want to have the barber college trim those next time you're wheeled in there. Lookin pretty shaggy.
    Your meltdowns are funny. And so very predictable. Continue on about the navy conspiracy...
    Meltdown. Nah you're the king of those. You can consider yourself free to continue to lurk in the shadows of your own filth while the adults speak.
  • CirrhosisDawgCirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390
    salemcoog said:

    salemcoog said:

    salemcoog said:

    salemcoog said:

    Sledog said:

    We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

    Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.
    Disagree.

    We can't even train sailors how to avoid a floating skyscraper. While the USSR Russian Empire engages in real training like in how to efficiently kill people. Our forces play grabass during gender sensitivity training.
    Fixed.

    Our Navy ships have been crashing into shit for hundreds of years; this is no big deal. While it's true Russia has some kick ass artillery and SAM systems and what not, we still by far have the most lethal fighting force in the world.
    Well.... As Afghanistan and Vietnam have proven, once you take away our technologies ability to beat someone, we aren't anything fucking special. And I call BS on all these Navy boats going out of the way to hit something, just being another day in the life. At best, it's fucktarded sailors that can't steer the boat. At worst it's outside forces controlling our assets to destroy themselves.

    Sound familiar?
    Yes, absolutely Vietnam and Afghanistan demonstrated the limit of our technology to win those kinds of wars. But if we'd been willing to lay waste to Vietnam with our superior fire power in the way we did to Japan (say minus the nukes) they would have likely capitulated as well. However, this was never politically feasible, nor moral- i.e., they hadn't waged aggressive war against us.

    Here's a list of the collisions over the years. Is there some sort of theory going around about our navigation systems having been compromised by a hostile power?
    http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a27021/ship-collisions-us-navy-history/

    No, the only "theory" going around is coming from an imbecile like @salemcoog. You'd be surprised to know he owns a 1987 ford bronco.
    And I own would little space that occupies the void between your ears. You may want to have the barber college trim those next time you're wheeled in there. Lookin pretty shaggy.
    Your meltdowns are funny. And so very predictable. Continue on about the navy conspiracy...
    Meltdown. Nah you're the king of those. You can consider yourself free to continue to lurk in the shadows of your own filth while the adults speak.
    You're hysterical.
  • oregonblitzkriegoregonblitzkrieg Member Posts: 15,288

    The Euphrates and the Tigris are the cradle of civilization

    The cradle of civilization and look what they have become. The population that infests that area now are primitive, enraged primates incapable of living in peace with themselves, their neighbors and the world at large. They subjugate women because they are pussies who can't handle another viewpoint. They kill gays because they are closeted fags incapable of dealing with their homoerotic feelings. They can't handle criticism of their religion because they know that it's true. They know, deep down, that Islam is nothing but shit.
  • CirrhosisDawgCirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390
    edited August 2017

    The Euphrates and the Tigris are the cradle of civilization

    The cradle of civilization and look what they have become. The population that infests that area now are primitive, enraged primates incapable of living in peace with themselves, their neighbors and the world at large. They subjugate women because they are pussies who can't handle another viewpoint. They kill gays because they are closeted fags incapable of dealing with their homoerotic feelings. They can't handle criticism of their religion because they know that it's true. They know, deep down, that Islam is nothing but shit.
    You're here to have an adult conversation with @salemcoog ? Right?
  • oregonblitzkriegoregonblitzkrieg Member Posts: 15,288

    The Euphrates and the Tigris are the cradle of civilization

    The cradle of civilization and look what they have become. The population that infests that area now are primitive, enraged primates incapable of living in peace with themselves, their neighbors and the world at large. They subjugate women because they are pussies who can't handle another viewpoint. They kill gays because they are closeted fags incapable of dealing with their homoerotic feelings. They can't handle criticism of their religion because they know that it's true. They know, deep down, that Islam is nothing but shit.
    Boobs specifically asked for no racist crap.
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 33,850 Standard Supporter

    Sledog said:

    We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

    Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.
    No we went soft. We tried to win "hearts and minds". Total BS. We didn't want to anger the Chinese etc. If you are not fighting to win as quickly and decisively as possible you're fucking it all up! This theory of "limited" is from the leftists. Kinder gentler war doesn't exist. If they did this in WWII we would have lost or taken one hell of a lot longer to win at a far greater cost.

    It's not the military that's soft it's our government and society.
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,731
    salemcoog said:

    Sledog said:

    We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

    Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.
    Disagree.

    We can't even train sailors how to avoid a floating skyscraper. While the USSR engages in real training like in how to efficiently kill people. Our forces play grabass during gender sensitivity training.
    STOP LIVING IN THE PAST!!!
  • ThomasFremontThomasFremont Member Posts: 13,325
    Sledog said:

    Sledog said:

    We only successfully nation build when we have killed them until they don't want to be killed anymore. Bombed the place flat and then dictated the unconditional terms. Has our country become so soft we can't wage a proper war anymore?

    Simple: We haven't fought an existential threat type of war against a elite opponent in 7 plus decades. Everything since has been war for more abstract reasons with limited aims, and (necessary) political considerations. Doesn't have anything to do with being soft. The war plan for the USSR wouldn't have been soft and limited.
    No we went soft. We tried to win "hearts and minds". Total BS. We didn't want to anger the Chinese etc. If you are not fighting to win as quickly and decisively as possible you're fucking it all up! This theory of "limited" is from the leftists. Kinder gentler war doesn't exist. If they did this in WWII we would have lost or taken one hell of a lot longer to win at a far greater cost.

    It's not the military that's soft it's our government and society.
    It's almost like WWII was a whole different level than pretty much any war. Ever.
Sign In or Register to comment.