US compares Iranian threat to 9/11 , yeah fool me once

"The US is in no position to preach, as they are the ONLY nation to have used nuclear weapons in war."

To end a World War that killed 50 Million people! If anything that gives us more reason to preach as we are the only ones experienced in it

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

All wars can be ended with slaughtering civilian population. It's a question of how barbaric you are, not how skilled.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

There has been another thread that showed several articles demonstrating that it was not necessary to use nukes to end WW2, and that it in fact was a political tool.

And WW2 had basically ended already. There was just Japan left.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

America ALWAYS seems to be the problem, the EU should strike back, lol just out of interest do you think the EU would stand a chance in opposition to the US?

US vs EU, who would win???

 

Barbarians conquered Rome, no reason why they couldn't do it again.
EU would lose, the USA spends more on its' military budget than all the other countries put together.

 

Is that actually true?

Dont you think thats rather distrubing if it is?

I find it quite worrying!!

:m:

 

Of course.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._military_budget

 

Indonesia retains one of the largest standing armies in the world in terms of numbers. My guess is that they might outnumber the Americans by quite a bit - as would the armies of India, and North Korea. China goes without saying.

Yet North Korea and Indonesia don't even appear on that graph.

What purpose, then, does it serve? You could tell me that the USA spends far too much on its military. I could retort that the Indonesians pay their troops peanuts, or that the North Koreans do. Find a graph showing the proportion of gross income spent on the military, and you're a little closer to something useful. Find something which shows that, for example, Indonesia and North Korea (or China, or Russia) are more humane in attemtping to use their total budgets to strengthen the economic lot of their people. Then, you might have something useful.

Until then - that graph is useless. Unless you're trying to impress the anti-US posters. They'll point at it as proof of... something... without even thinking about it.
Like you did?

 

What use of a standing army if it's well... standing?
the USA would torpedo or rocket any transport that heads over the pond

In modern warfare sheer human numbers don't mean much

 

Speculating, Monkey. Not demonstrating.
With the usual "If I was in charge back then..." displays of those with all the speculation, theories, and "recently unearthed documents" at their command 50 years down the track. Documents taken as entirely factual and real by those who will call fake on documents supporting the opposite position without pausing to draw breath.

Um hmm.

 

That's right. Expenditure, training, and weaponry does. And there was me thinking you were arguing for the opposite side.

 

I'm not arguing for anything, just stating facts and my opinion.

 

it also showed that the japanese was willing to fight to the last man rather than surrender

it was fully expected that 1000 japanese and americans would be dieing every hour had america envaded japan

 

a large part of americas military budget goes to salaries
another large part goes to research
another aspect to consider is that americas military budget is spread out over a vast network of corporations
only a very small part is actually spent directly on a war

 

Harlequin is right.

I wonder how much money the US spends on R and D on new weapons for causing harm and pain.

Even so half a trillion dollars is massive would you not think. Perhaps the soldiers are all milionaires!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Better technology almost always turns out to be critical in winning a battle.
Research is very important. You appear to be saying that it doesn't really count as military spending, but of course it does.

the recent invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan are funded outside the Federal Budget (i.e. are paid for through supplementary spending bills) and are therefore external to the military budget figures listed above.

 

That's cute, Canada actually spends money on their military.