ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
Obviously, whether you agree with our policy or not, we are the one attacking a foreign country. We are invading a foreign land, sometimes with good cause (as in WWII).
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
What's the last war we were in where we weren't an invading force? The Civil War? Like Patters said, an invasion can be justified (the best defense is a good offense), but an invasion is an invasion.
What's the last war we were in where we weren't an invading force? The Civil War? Like Patters said, an invasion can be justified (the best defense is a good offense), but an invasion is an invasion.
Going to the defense of a nation is not an invasion. We didn't invade in Vietnam, Korea, WW II, WWI, etc...
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him." Leo Tolstoy, 1897
NOUN: 1. The act of invading, especially the entrance of an armed force into a territory to conquer. 2. A large-scale onset of something injurious or harmful, such as a disease. 3. An intrusion or encroachment.
NOUN: 1. The act of invading, especially the entrance of an armed force into a territory to conquer. 2. A large-scale onset of something injurious or harmful, such as a disease. 3. An intrusion or encroachment.
Sorry Harry & NEM, but I have to use caps.
IF YOU ARE GOING TO THE DEFENSE OF A NATION YOU ARE NOT INVADING AS YOUR INTENTION IS NOT TO CONQUER. THIS IS EXACTLY WHY I DID NOT LIKE THIS WAR, THIS TIME WE WERE INVADING.
That's my caps post for the year.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him." Leo Tolstoy, 1897
Going to the defense of a nation is not an invasion. We didn't invade in Vietnam, Korea, WW II, WWI, etc...
What kind of definition of invasion is that? An invasion is just a mass incursion into enemy territory, nothing more. If we're fighting on our soil or allied soil, that's no an invasion. If we're fighting on enemy soil, it is.
IF YOU ARE GOING TO THE DEFENSE OF A NATION YOU ARE NOT INVADING AS YOUR INTENTION IS NOT TO CONQUER. THIS IS EXACTLY WHY I DID NOT LIKE THIS WAR, THIS TIME WE WERE INVADING.
If you're going to the defense of a nation, and you stay on THAT nation's soil, it would not be an invasion. But if you then INVADE another country on your ally's behalf, that's in invasion.
Say England and France get into a war. If we go over to England and defend their territory, that's not an invasion. If we go into France to help England, that is.
Location: TEXAS, home of the world famous TEXAS RANGERS
Posts: 5,681
Re: Lets Face It
Quote:
Originally Posted by Real World
Are you going to equate the technology of the Vietnam war to that of today? During the battle of Kashan we dropped 5 tons of ordinance for every NVA soldier in the field. No JDams, satelite tracking, predators, night vision, etc... Furthermore, do you have any idea of how many enemy dead there were in vietnam as opposed to our own? There were over 1 million NVA dead during the war.
The war was fought all throughout Vietnam so of course they're going to have more casualties and also the Vietnamese were fighting each other (sounds familiar) . But who ultimately won that war? The communists did. IF we invaded China for whatever reason and had a conventional war with them they'd win, simple as. The only way I'd see us giving them a good fight is if they attacked us before the invasion (Pearl Harbor) so that 99% of our population were pissed off and ready to fight. Still, homefield advantage in warfare is huge especially in a country with a population of 2 billion.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
The war was fought all throughout Vietnam so of course they're going to have more casualties and also the Vietnamese were fighting each other (sounds familiar) . But who ultimately won that war? The communists did. IF we invaded China for whatever reason and had a conventional war with them they'd win, simple as. The only way I'd see us giving them a good fight is if they attacked us before the invasion (Pearl Harbor) so that 99% of our population were pissed off and ready to fight. Still, homefield advantage in warfare is huge especially in a country with a population of 2 billion.
They had more casualties because they had a much sh1ttier military.
As for us versus China, we'd win 150 times out of 100. The Chinese have numbers, not quality. We'd dominate the air, and in modern warfaire, air supremacy is crucial. Our armor, artillery, technology, fire power, etc. is all superior. The only advantage the Chinese have is numerical. Numbers with inferior weaponry is a loosing proposition. To cite Vietnam to reinforce your position is flawed. Vietnam was a highly political affair for one, and also, the advance in techonolgy from then is substantial.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him." Leo Tolstoy, 1897
Re: Lets Face It
Linear Mode
