| No. War only brings suffering to yourself and others around you. |
If you are a fan of (or simply interested in) Japanese films then please join the Cinema of Japan club! Thank you (: |
Shane777 said: Only under the command of this guy:  Or this guy: |
on 
| If I would die anyway, then yes. |
 |
| 'course not, you crazy |
| I thought of a better way to wage war. I would do cyber warfare and cyber espionage. It could save lives by making the battles more one-sided, though that would depend on if the front-line commanders feel like culling the enemy's army. |
Current FAL Ranking + Previous best::  [ |
| Having spent two years in the military myself, I can say that unless you have served yourself, you do not TRULY know what goes on overseas. True, you do see on television the unfortunate toll of civilian casualties as an unintended side effect of war but you don't see the humanitarian side. For every civilian killed, there are a handful living at least somewhat better lives than they were before. Just think: if 25000 civilians were killed in Afghanistan (that's just a random number I made up, but I'm sure it's higher than the actual number of civilian deaths) and Afghanistan has a current population of 35,320,445 (according to the World Bank), then less than 0.0005% of all civilians have become casualties in the conflict over there. Granted, any individual death is a tragedy in itself, but try to look at things in perspective and consider that sometimes, in a place like Afghanistan, you can't always tell friend from foe. Trust me: it ain't as easy as you might think; you'll never understand unless you've been there. I know you won't believe me because all you have to base your opinions on are what you see in the media, but I tell you from experience that this is fact. That aside, if ever the U.S. were to engage in a war of self defense (that is, we're being attacked by a large force, imminent nuclear strike from an enemy, etc.), then I wouldn't hesitate for an instant to defend the country because, let's just be realistic, if everyone adopts this attitude of "someone else will do it", then NO ONE will do it and we wouldn't be able to enjoy the freedoms we have now. BUT...that situation is extremely unlikely at this point in time, so I think I'll stick with anime over war, hands down! :) |
 |
| Under very rare circumstances, but it is going to be a no. Maybe if it wasn't so much like chess in which I feel like a pawn fighting not for glory and recognition or to protect mankind or the "free" world, but to further a select fews own pockets and beliefs. I did go to war when I was in a snow-fort..It was the great battle of the Ambercrombie. They flanked us but little did they know the fort was empty, falling right into the trap. We struck from above.... |
| "In the end the World really doesn't need a Superman. Just a Brave one" |
| Eh, unless I'm in a extremely unlikely situation, like a ace fighter pilot or some superhuman augmented special ops soldier, fighting a war would clearly be more stress than what it's worth. Except for if it is a war of defence against some terrible foe that would destroy my current way of living, but you'd have to go way beyond WWI and the entire modern era to find something like that. From my limited service I know I can handle the military just fine, that is, low output and low expectation forced conscription service, as long as I get my dose of whining. But running around in the middle of the cold and rainy night and firing at some other half asleep dudes you can hardly see isn't really fun, and I would assume, even less so in reality, since they'd be actually firing real bullets back at you. AndyRayy said: According to the highest estimates I see floating around, it's at about 33750 from 2001 to 2011. But you got a pretty close guess.Just think: if 25000 civilians were killed in Afghanistan (that's just a random number I made up, but I'm sure it's higher than the actual number of civilian deaths) |
| Never ever ever. |
LordSenate said: Hoppy said: No The military in the US is too diplomatic and soft and needs to go back to how our grandfathers fought. Needs total war. We can't go back to the way our grandfathers fought. Terrorists dont use conventional methods. Well I mean we can't go back until we get in another war that is conventional. But currently thats just not the way things are working. Somehow it's hard to believe that there are still people who don't know that 9/11 was an inside job and the "terrorists" were a group of weirdoes "hired" by U.S. to play the bad guys... T_LOWE said: takarabako said: I don't think that's true. In the US we produce a shit load of movies, video games, etc and we still have a large military. Anyways, I was just saying how I'm jealous of him because he gets to live in Japan.T_LOWE said: Yeah I would. I almost joined the Marines after I graduated high school, because I didn't really know what I wanted to do. I wanted to be in the infantry, but then I found out that there aren't many open spots in the infantry because so many people want to do it. Sometimes I wish I would have joined anyways, because one of my friends who is in the Marines is stationed in Japan. He always sends me pictures of video games and anime he's bought. Its awesome, because he doesn't have to spend his money on a whole lot of other things so he buys a lot of video games and anime. You do realize that Japanese people make so much games and anime, because they're military is at a minimum. If Japanese would concentrate on military like US, then they would have a lot of kamikaze and few if none anime/games. Well, that's the reason why US sucks, because we have too big concentration on military. Well, let me ask the same question in different words. Did U.S. change from a village/countryside style of living with no running water to the most technologically-advanced country in merely 50 years? If you still don't get it, I'm talking about economy, once Japan stopped giving money to army, they spend all their money on creating the best place to live. If you think that U.S. economy is great then why do we have a world-wide crisis caused by us? AndyRayy said: True, you do see on television the unfortunate toll of civilian casualties as an unintended side effect of war but you don't see the humanitarian side. For every civilian killed, there are a handful living at least somewhat better lives than they were before. Okay, you're a big problem, if you don't know why read my next comment. For here I'll say there's something wrong with your eyes if you see people living better, because their families and friends are dying. AndyRayy said: Just think: if 25000 civilians were killed in Afghanistan (that's just a random number I made up, but I'm sure it's higher than the actual number of civilian deaths) and Afghanistan has a current population of 35,320,445 (according to the World Bank), then less than 0.0005% of all civilians have become casualties in the conflict over there. Granted, any individual death is a tragedy in itself, but try to look at things in perspective and consider that sometimes, in a place like Afghanistan, you can't always tell friend from foe. Trust me: it ain't as easy as you might think; you'll never understand unless you've been there. As STALIN once said: "The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions is a statistic." I hope you'll never become a president, because then everyone are f***ed. The first step to a perfect dictator is to cover feelings with numbers. AndyRayy said: That aside, if ever the U.S. were to engage in a war of self defense (that is, we're being attacked by a large force, imminent nuclear strike from an enemy, etc.), then I wouldn't hesitate for an instant to defend the country because, let's just be realistic, if everyone adopts this attitude of "someone else will do it", then NO ONE will do it and we wouldn't be able to enjoy the freedoms we have now. If everyone will adapt the attitude of "someone else will do it then NO ONE will do it" and there will be minimum casualties and no conflict. Let's be realistic, the idiots in power who attack others (e.g. Napoleon) do so to gain power through gaining new territory and the newly gained territory along with its inhabitants usually gain the same rights as the old territory. The scary ones are not those who attack you but those who plan to annihilate you (like Hitler did with Jew), but those ones will not attack you, but they will "peacefully" destroy all the people of your nation/race/age/religion/etc and only the few lucky ones will survive. If you think that you're not going to be "peacefully" destroyed then let me tell you that your own government "peacefully" killed many innocent American soldiers like you by sending them to sure death in Vietnam not so long ago. Are you sure they're not planing to do the same by sending you to the Middle East? |
"Three things will last forever—faith, hope, and love—and the greatest of these is love." "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres." |
| To fight, kill, most probably get killed/severly injured on the behalf of the interests of the (global) elite under the pretense of ''serving my country''? Nope, nein, ne, niet, chigau. |
| Seven years of power, the corporation claw The rich control the government, the media, the law To make some kind of difference Then everyone must know: Eradicate the fascists, revolution will grow... |
| No. Killing people for your country is still murder, no matter what angle you look at it. |
takarabako said: Okay, I'm not even going to comment on the whole LOL 9/!! INSIDE JAWB DERRRRP, but this here is pretty bloody retarded.The scary ones are not those who attack you but those who plan to annihilate you (like Hitler did with Jew), but those ones will not attack you, but they will "peacefully" destroy all the people of your nation/race/age/religion/etc and only the few lucky ones will survive. If you think that you're not going to be "peacefully" destroyed then let me tell you that your own government "peacefully" killed many innocent American soldiers like you by sending them to sure death in Vietnam not so long ago. Are you sure they're not planing to do the same by sending you to the Middle East? Why the fuck would a government conspire to off their own soldiers? I mean, really? Have you any idea how much money they sink into the training and equipping of said soldiers? Sure, casualties are always expected in any war, but there is always a rationale behind it, however sketchy. In this case the fear of communism spreading further into Asia and eventually threatening America. I do agree on the spending of less money on warfare and more on welfare though. Just look at how vastly superior living overall conditions we've got in Norway compared to the US. Sure, that is mostly because we are supremely rich for our size, but spending a laughably tiny amount in the military also helps. Hell, a couple of years ago, our panzer battalion was closed down for a year because the budget couldn't afford proper tank exercises. Allecto said: Of course it's not. Murder is something you go to jail for. And you don't go to jail for killing enemies in a war. Ergo, that is not murder.No. Killing people for your country is still murder, no matter what angle you look at it. |
BamanSep 5, 2012 6:30 AM
| War is not something you joke around with. If you go to war, you lose a limb, die or survive and never get over that experience. I would rather not go, but that's not up to me, when war breakes out, you must go. |
| "Ouvis? Falai vós cortês! Vós, fidalgo, cuidareis que estais na vossa pousada? Dar-vos-ei tanta pancada com um remo que renegueis!" Auto da Barca do Inferno, Gil Vicente Ignorância gera violência, nela nunca procurei abrigo Cultivo a paz pela subsistência da existência deste universo onde resido. Se estás a um passo do abismo pensa bem, Não queiras para os outros o que não queres para ti também. Sala 101 - Dealema |
drinkbeer said: this topic is a bit flawed. OP should give a scenario. what about if your country is being invaded? would you go to war? >.< should I go change that? |
 |
drinkbeer said: Nope.what about if your country is being invaded? would you go to war? |
 |
Scud said: drinkbeer said: Nope.what about if your country is being invaded? would you go to war? What if you were immortal fighting aliens in a war? |
|
You's a conspiracy nut. Also, I recognize a quote from CoD in there. drinkbeer said: this topic is a bit flawed. OP should give a scenario. what about if your country is being invaded? would you go to war? My teacher once told me there are 5 houses next to each other. House A attacks house B because it's stronger and he just wants the house. House C comes along and tells House A to get out or they'll do something about it. House B is freaking out with these two other houses here arguing. House A tells House C that they will kill them first if they get in the way. Then house D is all "wtf, mind your own business House C". And House E, the fifth house, doesn't know what's going on. We can apply this to many real wars that have occured. Now I have 2 questions: Question 1 If you're House B, what do you do? a. Tell house C to back off and die, since you don't believe in war. b. Tell house C to back off because you don't want House D having a bad opinion of House C, and then fighting your own war. Ultimately dying. c. Thank House C and respect House D's decision. d. Thank House C and ask for House D to reconsider and help. Question 2 If you were house E, what would you do? a. Take sides with House C. b. Take sides with House D. c. Respect whatever decision House B takes in the previous question. It went something like this. Now you guys are answering this question only from House E's point of view. Try answering it from House B's point of view. |
XeroCleathsSep 5, 2012 2:20 PM
| Where is my move house option. |
|
| I go to war everyday. Playing COD. On my ps3. |
 "Ally to good, nightmare for you." |
Ixalion said: To fight, kill, most probably get killed/severly injured on the behalf of the interests of the (global) elite under the pretense of ''serving my country''? Nope, nein, ne, niet, chigau. "chigau" means "no" in a sense "no, you're wrong". In this situation you'd use "iya da" which means "no" in a sense "no, I'm opposed to it". Baman said: Murder is something you go to jail for. And you don't go to jail for killing enemies in a war. Ergo, that is not murder. You don't go to jail, if they don't catch you and if they don't have a definite proof on you. You also don't go to jail if someone pays money for you or if you have connections. If I push you off the 8th floor when no one's looking and later on said that "it was an accident" I won't go to jail, because you're dead meat that cannot tell the truth ;p XeroCleaths said: You's a conspiracy nut. Also, I recognize a quote from CoD in there. I accept the "conspiracy nut", afterall I "hope for the best, but prepare for the worst". But I've no idea who's CoD, so it'd help me if you could tell me who is that and also tell me which part of what I said sounded like a quote, because I always put someone else's quotes in quotation marks, but I don't remember quoting anyone called CoD. XeroCleaths said: My teacher once told me there are 5 houses next to each other. House A attacks house B because it's stronger and he just wants the house. House C comes along and tells House A to get out or they'll do something about it. House B is freaking out with these two other houses here arguing. House A tells House C that they will kill them first if they get in the way. Then house D is all "wtf, mind your own business House C". And House E, the fifth house, doesn't know what's going on. We can apply this to many real wars that have occured. Now I have 2 questions: Question 1 If you're House B, what do you do? a. Tell house C to back off and die, since you don't believe in war. b. Tell house C to back off because you don't want House D having a bad opinion of House C, and then fighting your own war. Ultimately dying. c. Thank House C and respect House D's decision. d. Thank House C and ask for House D to reconsider and help. Question 2 If you were house E, what would you do? a. Take sides with House C. b. Take sides with House D. c. Respect whatever decision House B takes in the previous question. It went something like this. Now you guys are answering this question only from House E's point of view. Try answering it from House B's point of view. Question 1: e. go kamikaze mode... yeah, yeah, I know I was so against murder, and here I go crazy, but it's not as crazy as you think. I detest murder because that is how strong ones bully weak ones, on the other hand self-sacrifice is how weak ones get back at strong ones. I adore those who sacrifice themselves for their courage and strong will. If a country would attack those who are dear to me, I wouldn't mind dying and killing tens of enemies to protect the loved ones. Question 2; d. take side with house A, betray, destroy from inside, save house B Is it really so difficult to do? |
takarabakoSep 5, 2012 3:24 PM
"Three things will last forever—faith, hope, and love—and the greatest of these is love." "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres." |
takarabako said: Ixalion said: To fight, kill, most probably get killed/severly injured on the behalf of the interests of the (global) elite under the pretense of ''serving my country''? Nope, nein, ne, niet, chigau. "chigau" means "no" in a sense "no, you're wrong". In this situation you'd use "iya da" which means "no" in a sense "no, I'm opposed to it". Baman said: Murder is something you go to jail for. And you don't go to jail for killing enemies in a war. Ergo, that is not murder. You don't go to jail, if they don't catch you and if they don't have a definite proof on you. You also don't go to jail if someone pays money for you or if you have connections. If I push you off the 8th floor when no one's looking and later on said that "it was an accident" I won't go to jail, because you're dead meat that cannot tell the truth ;p XeroCleaths said: You's a conspiracy nut. Also, I recognize a quote from CoD in there. I accept the "conspiracy nut", afterall I "hope for the best, but prepare for the worst". But I've no idea who's CoD, so it'd help me if you could tell me who is that and also tell me which part of what I said sounded like a quote, because I always put someone else's quotes in quotation marks, but I don't remember quoting anyone called CoD. XeroCleaths said: My teacher once told me there are 5 houses next to each other. House A attacks house B because it's stronger and he just wants the house. House C comes along and tells House A to get out or they'll do something about it. House B is freaking out with these two other houses here arguing. House A tells House C that they will kill them first if they get in the way. Then house D is all "wtf, mind your own business House C". And House E, the fifth house, doesn't know what's going on. We can apply this to many real wars that have occured. Now I have 2 questions: Question 1 If you're House B, what do you do? a. Tell house C to back off and die, since you don't believe in war. b. Tell house C to back off because you don't want House D having a bad opinion of House C, and then fighting your own war. Ultimately dying. c. Thank House C and respect House D's decision. d. Thank House C and ask for House D to reconsider and help. Question 2 If you were house E, what would you do? a. Take sides with House C. b. Take sides with House D. c. Respect whatever decision House B takes in the previous question. It went something like this. Now you guys are answering this question only from House E's point of view. Try answering it from House B's point of view. Question 1: e. go kamikaze mode... yeah, yeah, I know I was so against murder, and here I go crazy, but it's not as crazy as you think. I detest murder because that is how strong ones bully weak ones, on the other hand self-sacrifice is how weak ones get back at strong ones. I adore those who sacrifice themselves for their courage and strong will. If a country would attack those who are dear to me, I wouldn't mind dying and killing tens of enemies to protect the loved ones. Question 2; d. take side with house A, betray, destroy from inside, save house B Is it really so difficult to do? Well, at least you were honest. Right? Props for that. Also, CoD is Call of Duty. When you die, they give famous quotes from history. My favorite quotes were the ones from CoD: Classics. They have the quote you said: "The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic." - Joseph Stalin But my favorite quote of his is: "In the Soviet army it takes more courage to retreat than advance." -Joseph Stalin My personal favorite quote is: "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature, and has no chance of being free unless made or kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." -John Stuart Mill And I also love: "Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily." -Napoleon Bonaparte I personally think that you would like: "The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his." -General George S. Patton Whateves, I love the quotes and the CoD series in general :D |
takarabako said: You miss the point. Whether you receive your due penalty or not, the act of murder is punishable by law. Killing enemy combatants while legally operating as part of armed forces, be they standing national armies, legally recognized PMCs, UN forces, retroactively recognised militia and rebel groups, etc, is not.You don't go to jail, if they don't catch you and if they don't have a definite proof on you. You also don't go to jail if someone pays money for you or if you have connections. If I push you off the 8th floor when no one's looking and later on said that "it was an accident" I won't go to jail, because you're dead meat that cannot tell the truth ;p |
drinkbeer said: this topic is a bit flawed. OP should give a scenario. what about if your country is being invaded? would you go to war? Yes, I probably would. |
 |
| I've been to war.. It wasn't that bad really. A few bad events happened but over all I think it was a good experience. But I mean it was more of a peace keeping mission as opposed to being like a world war. If it was like a world war, I would have to say if I had a choice I wouldn't go. |
| sure, if i get to kill and kill and kills some more |
 |
| Naw. The requirements for the army are too easy. They should make it harder. 20 pushup requirement? That's funny |
| tfw no gf tfw i keep getting the banhammer on here tfw Koleare keeps banning me every other day tfw I'm misunderstood by le mod |
takarabako said: Somehow it's hard to believe that there are still people who don't know that 9/11 was an inside job and the "terrorists" were a group of weirdoes "hired" by U.S. to play the bad guys... The scary ones are not those who attack you but those who plan to annihilate you (like Hitler did with Jew), but those ones will not attack you, but they will "peacefully" destroy all the people of your nation/race/age/religion/etc and only the few lucky ones will survive. If you think that you're not going to be "peacefully" destroyed then let me tell you that your own government "peacefully" killed many innocent American soldiers like you by sending them to sure death in Vietnam not so long ago. Are you sure they're not planing to do the same by sending you to the Middle East? LOL. First up you're a conspiracy nut. Secondly, a sure death in Vietnam? Out of the 1 to 1.6 million troops in combat roles through the war only 58,156 died. So a 3.6% to 5.8% death rate is a "sure" death now? . And this isn't even including non-combative roles. |
| The Art of Eight |
icamehere said: Naw. The requirements for the army are too easy. They should make it harder. 20 pushup requirement? That's funny http://usmilitary.about.com/od/army/l/blfitm22to26.htm You have to score 180 points to pass the exam. This is for my age group. between 22 and 26. I'd have to be able to do 40 push-ups in 2 minutes, 50 sit-ups in 2 minutes and run 2 miles in under 16 minutes and 36 seconds. Don't worry about whether the requirements are to easy, worry about getting your ass handed to you if all you can muster is the minimum requirements. |
| No. Lemonaded said: ^ What this guy said.takarabako said: Don't worry. I plan on betraying humanity at the first chance I get.Lemonaded said: Only if aliens what? attacked? recruited you?Only if aliens If you're planning to fight against aliens, I'm so gonna kill you, because aliens are very peaceful and they have all that awesome technology to share with us. ^_^ |
 watching, waiting, commiserating |
| I don't believe you guys, you would betray mankind to xenos filth? Bah, Tau lovers. Mankind's manifest destiny is to rule the stars and scour them of mutants, warp spawn and xenos, God Emperor be willing. Now, pray with me; Adore the Immortal Emperor For He is our Protector Admire the Immortal Emperor For His Sacrifice to Mankind Hail the Immortal Emperor For He is the Lord and Master Worship the Immortal Emperor For without Him we are Nothing |
XeroCleaths said: I personally think that you would like: "The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his." -General George S. Patton Whateves, I love the quotes and the CoD series in general :D I never used CoD, but I enjoy reading the collection of famous quotes so i know quite a few, but the quote you choose just for me... is that sarcasm? I'm against war, because of people dying... on both sides, always. In other words it doesn't matter which side has casualties, I'm sorry for all those innocent people who are forced to fight each other for the sake of their stupid leaders. A good leader would never sacrifice so much. A good leader would always choose an option with least amount of sacrifices (none if possible). But because we have stupid people as leaders of countries, we have wars, because diplomacy requires the use of brain, and treaties require "loyalty" and "honesty" from people involved, and those two are greatly lacking among our leaders. Baman said: ... Killing enemy combatants while legally operating as part of armed forces, be they standing national armies, legally recognized PMCs, UN forces, retroactively recognised militia and rebel groups, etc, is not. DAFvCK????!!!! Honestly, where do you see "national armies, legally recognized PMCs, ..., retroactively recognized militia and rebel groups" killed ANYWHERE? The ones getting killed are mostly innocent civilians who did not even want to participate in the war. Besides, you know that UN forces are peaceful and they are send in-between two warring armies to protect citizens, and you'd attack them for the purpose or re-starting the war?!!!! |
"Three things will last forever—faith, hope, and love—and the greatest of these is love." "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres." |
takarabako said: Protip; read my post better next time.DAFvCK????!!!! Honestly, where do you see "national armies, legally recognized PMCs, ..., retroactively recognized militia and rebel groups" killed ANYWHERE? The ones getting killed are mostly innocent civilians who did not even want to participate in the war. Besides, you know that UN forces are peaceful and they are send in-between two warring armies to protect citizens, and you'd attack them for the purpose or re-starting the war?!!!! And no, it's just like I said, killing enemy combatants is entirely legal and thus not murder. Killing civilians is murder, but no one cares that much since it's usually just acceptable collateral damage and other fully expected accidents. Now, if a soldier is found to have gunned down civilians on purpose, I do certainly believe there'd be a court martial in the works. |
| There I fixed it. |
|
| I'd go to a Star War, but nothing less. |
mrmook9000 said: I'd go to a Star War, but nothing less. 'Cause real wars are to mainstream? |
| I'd fight for my people, it's better knowing you died defending your people rather than dying in a house, while watching your family get executed right before your eyes. I'd understand if this war was for the territorial conquest, but if you wouldn't man up and defend your people from foreign invasion, then you're a waste. You're basically allowing others to die for you while you cower away like a slug, hoping that another person would sacrifice themselves for your sake. BUT that's just my opinion. |
| Gorilla pride son |
XeroCleaths said: mrmook9000 said: I'd go to a Star War, but nothing less. 'Cause real wars are to mainstream? Uh ya, I liked them before they were cool |
| After seeing so many people wanting war, I so want WWIII to start right now. All the idiots will go and kill each other, while intelligent people will find a safe place to stay hidden until the retards finish killing each other. Then intelligent ones will come out and we'll all live in a peaceful world, where people talk and no one fights. And this is no joke. Check the history. Once a lot of "people" (read: war idiots) die, then there's a time of peace for those who survive the war. It is you, all those who talk about wanting to go to war that start wars. When someone says: "I'll go to war to protect my country" it's like saying "if my government tells me a lie that a certain country is a danger to my country, then I'll gladly go to there and kill many innocent civilians and many innocent soldiers, who just tried to protect those civilians." But, of course there is always "the reality" and "your reality", so you can just tell yourself that all those "enemy" (read: victim) soldiers are evil and all those innocent civilians are rebels and then you have no feeling what-so-ever for them. This can apply to any soldiers who went to war, and came back sane, because otherwise he'd blame himself so much he'd commit suicide or something. YES, that is exactly why those "who war to protect" are dangerous, because they are stupid enough to listen only to one side and they are never brave enough to oppose their own government when it's planning something bad, but usually they're even too stupid to realize it. That is why Hitler had so much support in his time, because of all those idiots who were willing to die "for the country" (read: for Hitler). |
"Three things will last forever—faith, hope, and love—and the greatest of these is love." "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres." |
takarabako said: After seeing so many people wanting war, I so want WWIII to start right now. All the idiots will go and kill each other, while intelligent people will find a safe place to stay hidden until the retards finish killing each other. Then intelligent ones will come out and we'll all live in a peaceful world, where people talk and no one fights. And this is no joke. Check the history. Once a lot of "people" (read: war idiots) die, then there's a time of peace for those who survive the war. It is you, all those who talk about wanting to go to war that start wars. When someone says: "I'll go to war to protect my country" it's like saying "if my government tells me a lie that a certain country is a danger to my country, then I'll gladly go to there and kill many innocent civilians and many innocent soldiers, who just tried to protect those civilians." But, of course there is always "the reality" and "your reality", so you can just tell yourself that all those "enemy" (read: victim) soldiers are evil and all those innocent civilians are rebels and then you have no feeling what-so-ever for them. This can apply to any soldiers who went to war, and came back sane, because otherwise he'd blame himself so much he'd commit suicide or something. YES, that is exactly why those "who war to protect" are dangerous, because they are stupid enough to listen only to one side and they are never brave enough to oppose their own government when it's planning something bad, but usually they're even too stupid to realize it. That is why Hitler had so much support in his time, because of all those idiots who were willing to die "for the country" (read: for Hitler). You have the world view of a 12 year old kid. And, wait, a few post ago, you said only innocents get killed in war and now suddenly soldiers are going to wipe themselves out while innocent people stay safe. Backtrack much??? And for shame calling Napoleon an idiot, the man was a military genius. takarabako said: DAFvCK????!!!! Honestly, where do you see "national armies, legally recognized PMCs, ..., retroactively recognized militia and rebel groups" killed ANYWHERE? The ones getting killed are mostly innocent civilians who did not even want to participate in the war. Besides, you know that UN forces are peaceful and they are send in-between two warring armies to protect citizens, and you'd attack them for the purpose or re-starting the war?!!!! |
| The Art of Eight |
dankickyou said: And for shame calling Napoleon an idiot, the man was a military genius. Napoleon wasn't warring as much as he tried to appeal to people all over Europe to unite them. He fought when attacked, and the countries that welcomed him he thought of with care and equality, so nope. He wasn't a "war idiot". And his main enemy wasn't other countries, but the aristocracy and kings of his own country.. Too bad no one told him that Russian winters are cold. |
"Three things will last forever—faith, hope, and love—and the greatest of these is love." "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres." |
XeroCleaths said: http://usmilitary.about.com/od/army/l/blfitm22to26.htm You have to score 180 points to pass the exam. This is for my age group. between 22 and 26. I'd have to be able to do 40 push-ups in 2 minutes, 50 sit-ups in 2 minutes and run 2 miles in under 16 minutes and 36 seconds. Don't worry about whether the requirements are to easy, worry about getting your ass handed to you if all you can muster is the minimum requirements. I don't really know/have any desire to know about the army, but I have to admit those are some pretty lax physical standards. I guess you don't really need to be in good shape though, depending on what you do? All I know is that your average non-overweight Joe could do all of those things. |
LoneWolf said: @Josh makes me sad to call myself Canadian. |
Post-Josh said: XeroCleaths said: http://usmilitary.about.com/od/army/l/blfitm22to26.htm You have to score 180 points to pass the exam. This is for my age group. between 22 and 26. I'd have to be able to do 40 push-ups in 2 minutes, 50 sit-ups in 2 minutes and run 2 miles in under 16 minutes and 36 seconds. Don't worry about whether the requirements are to easy, worry about getting your ass handed to you if all you can muster is the minimum requirements. I don't really know/have any desire to know about the army, but I have to admit those are some pretty lax physical standards. I guess you don't really need to be in good shape though, depending on what you do? All I know is that your average non-overweight Joe could do all of those things. If the standards are too high than not too many people would be able to join the military now, would they. Those are the minimum anyway, to get top scores you have to do something like 75 pushups, 80 situps, and run 2 miles under 13 minutes. |
| The Art of Eight |
| They don't need to be high, they just need to exist. But I guess yeah, if most people are well above it then it's whatever. The other strange thing is that they time pushups and situps. They aren't meant to be done as fast as possible and that just begs for improper form. |
LoneWolf said: @Josh makes me sad to call myself Canadian. |
takarabako said: After seeing so many people wanting war, I so want WWIII to start right now. All the idiots will go and kill each other, while intelligent people will find a safe place to stay hidden until the retards finish killing each other. Then intelligent ones will come out and we'll all live in a peaceful world, where people talk and no one fights. And this is no joke. Check the history. Once a lot of "people" (read: war idiots) die, then there's a time of peace for those who survive the war. It is you, all those who talk about wanting to go to war that start wars. When someone says: "I'll go to war to protect my country" it's like saying "if my government tells me a lie that a certain country is a danger to my country, then I'll gladly go to there and kill many innocent civilians and many innocent soldiers, who just tried to protect those civilians." But, of course there is always "the reality" and "your reality", so you can just tell yourself that all those "enemy" (read: victim) soldiers are evil and all those innocent civilians are rebels and then you have no feeling what-so-ever for them. This can apply to any soldiers who went to war, and came back sane, because otherwise he'd blame himself so much he'd commit suicide or something. YES, that is exactly why those "who war to protect" are dangerous, because they are stupid enough to listen only to one side and they are never brave enough to oppose their own government when it's planning something bad, but usually they're even too stupid to realize it. That is why Hitler had so much support in his time, because of all those idiots who were willing to die "for the country" (read: for Hitler). A few questions for ya. 1. What if the US never entered WWII? Would you rather they hadn't been involved? why? 2. If no one ever helped in Rwanda, what do you think the situation would have been now-a-days? Also, what if the US military would have intervened a lot sooner? Do you think it would have had a positive or negative reaction on the genocide? |
| I would happily defend my country against russians/islamalic countries if the sitsuation would require it. I feel confident that our culture is better than theirs and necessary to defend ours by any means. |
 |
Post-Josh said: They don't need to be high, they just need to exist. But I guess yeah, if most people are well above it then it's whatever. The other strange thing is that they time pushups and situps. They aren't meant to be done as fast as possible and that just begs for improper form. True, one would think that setting a 2 minute time limit for push-ups and sit-ups would lead to a lot of improper form (and it does in a lot of people), but for the majority, you can only perform the maximum IF you're practicing the correct form. Also, most graders will not count your reps if they think you're performing them incorrectly. It's really a test of endurance, because anyone can do 200 push-ups or sit-ups if they were given infinite time, after all. And also, those standards are simply for entering the military and are a more general overview. For more specialized jobs (Ranger, special forces, some infantry jobs, etc.), the standards are WAY higher (and involve other tests like ruck marches in excess of 30 miles, 10 miles swims (no exaggeration), and drown-proofing), which is why women are barred form doing them. |
|
More topics from this board
» Which manga in the above user's favorites would you read? ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )J4Effort - Jul 12, 2022 |
826 |
by JustMeowMeow
»»
3 minutes ago |
|
» Online tests ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )iHateAnimeBro - May 1, 2024 |
848 |
by IpreferEcchi
»»
11 minutes ago |
|
» The last person to post in this thread wins (Round 5) ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )-DxP- - Oct 10 |
1519 |
by pigdestroyer
»»
16 minutes ago |
|
» lowercase chat thread v.25 spicy nutty chocolate edition ( 1 2 3 )KayKimii - Oct 16 |
110 |
by 10H-Watches
»»
16 minutes ago |
|
» First Thing That Comes To Mind v27 ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )ScaryOwl - Oct 4 |
1360 |
by Panticakes
»»
29 minutes ago |