US invasion of China.

Discussion in 'Warfare / Military' started by antileftwinger, Jan 20, 2012.

  1. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I am laughing because all to often, "rare" is a joke for "overpriced".

    "For sale: RARE VHS copy of "Battlefield: Earth".

    Yea, rare because it stank and nobody wanted it, not because it is particularly valuable.

    False. We have had electronics for a century before they started to use "Rare Earths". And you are concerning yourself with the quantity, and not the actual elements themselves.

    First off, most are not use in "electronics", but components. Take Gadolinium for example, that one you inferred which is mostly used for making magnets. That is not actually used in the "electronics" itself, but in the headphones. And China is the #1 in production, with the US, Brazil, Sri Lanka, India and Australia close behind.

    So what? How many are "vital"?

    Well, damned few. Thulium is one, and China is trying to corner the market in Thulium production. But this matters little, since the US was once a major producer of this REE (used in making x-ray machines), and has in excess of 10,000 tons in strategic reserves.

    Most of the REEs are simply replacements for other elements, because there are now more of them available. If they vanished, companies would simply go back to using what they replaced again.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare-earth_magnet

    The major use is as I said, in magnets. REE magnets are stronger and last longer then others, but they can be made from a great many other elements, including iron. As I said, noting that can't be replaced with other elements even if Rare Earths are no longer available (which they will be, since China is not the only producer).

    But all of this is besides the point. If there was a trade war, China would be a lot worse off then the rest of the world, because nothing they make is irreplaceable. They can't even make an iPhone by themselves.

    That is because the CPU, is manufactured by Samsung in Texas. CPUs is where China is seriously lacking. As they are bragging about finally breaking the 40nm barrier, Intel and IBM are making chips in the 14nm range. That puts them roughly on par with a Pentium processor from 6 years ago (the current generation of "Ivy Bridge" 22nm CPUs is still way beyond their capability).

    So without critical supplies from other countries, they can't even make a smart phone or computer.
     
  2. KGB agent

    KGB agent Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    3,032
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Since 120 000 tons were sold last year that is not our case.


    [​IMG]

    I also love tube computers. They are stunning. :smile: Leave these pesky supercomputing stuff to the Chinese, they don't have any taste to good things. Only MiG-25, only hardcore. :smile:

    Now that is pointless discussion. You might as well claim you car is not "vital" and go for work on foot,razor is not "vital", our ancestors were burning hair with fire, your central heating is not "vital" too. You can just make a hole in the roof and make a fire from your furniture.

    Using superior technology gives civilisational advantage. And rare earths allows to generally increase things' performance, with it being a magnet or a nuclear reactor or whatever.
    Weak argument. The opposite side might use it as well.
    Moreover, as i previously said, would it make you happier if you'll live for 5 dollars a day and the Chinese guy living for 3?
    And you can't even make a rocket engine by yourself. So what?
    Which is a remarkable achievement, taking into account what they were 30 years ago.
    They can. It is just not going to have as good perfomance.
     
  3. SFJEFF

    SFJEFF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    30,682
    Likes Received:
    256
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Think this through.

    First of all- you appear to have missed the news- the United States is on the verge of becoming completely energy independent.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/23/opinion/global/when-america-stops-importing-energy.html

    The only reason we will be importing oil is because imported oil is cheaper. We are about to become a net exporter of natural gas. We have chosen to stop using coal because natural gas is cheaper and cleaner.

    Who would sell us any oil we needed- well Canada for one, and so would Mexico. Neither country is going to hesitate to supply Uncle Sam.

    And you also seem to have missed this:


    High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d33b5104-84a1-11e2-aaf1-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz2buRvAhrs


    China has overtaken the US as the world’s largest net importer of oil, in a generational shift that will shake up the geopolitics of natural resources....
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d33b5104-84a1-11e2-aaf1-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2buRsMv4t

    Now if such a war happened, the only source of oil available to China would be Russia- and what would China pay them with- if the dollar is worthless? And is there an oil pipeline from Russia to China- better be a big one- because that would be the only way it would get there.

    Seriously- you don't know anything about our economy do you? We are the largest exporter of food in the world- far from being virtual- it is the one 'good' that all humans need. We are the second largest exporter in the world, and our largest export is machinery.

    And geography favors us- our top two trading partners are next door- China only comes in third. The United States would have a free hand to continue trading with every country in the world except the Western Pacific region bordering China- so no Vietnam, Taiwan, Japan, SK- but all of Europe, South America, the Middle East, SE Asia, India.

    Mushroom is right. Any such action would be potentially catastrophic economically world wide. China and the United States would both suffer- and both know it. But the U.S. is in far better shape to recover from such an event- and in 10 or 20 years might actually come out of it stronger- China will have been eliminated as a world wide economic competitor, U.S. manufacturing will have been heavily reinvested, U.S. workers would be put to work.

    On the other hand- maybe that would be the motivation for Europe- or possibly even Russia to step up into the chaos and become the worlds top economy.
     
  4. KGB agent

    KGB agent Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    3,032
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Yeah, it seems i missed yet another one "tehgreatestnationonearth!!!11" BS.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_imports

    #1 USA 10,270,000 bbl/day

    Does it matters? No.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_exports
    Oh yeah?
    Mexico oil export
    1,511,000 bbl/day
    Canada oil export
    1,929,000 bbl/day
    Three (3) times less than you need.
    I am curious who told you they "won't hesitate".
    You think they would sell a really valuable thing for....pieces of paper?
    Or you are planning military takeover? See Kuwait 1991.
    And, by the way, what about Europe? You already dragged them into your virtual "blocade".
    EU need some additional 8,613,000 bbl/day.


    What about actual goods? Or that is too easy? :smile:
    We might also try (surprise over here) yuan and rouble.
    Yeah.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Siberia–Pacific_Ocean_oil_pipeline
    We can also do it with oil tankers.


    So far the only thing I can see is that borned capitlists know (*)(*)(*)(*) about how capitalism works.
    But you are not the only producer, right? I mean, you think that would work out with chinese industry, but....not with your agriculture?
    Wrong. Again. You are the third world's largest exporter. Right after China and Germany. And the world's biggest importer.
    Last time I checked I was talking about economy overal, not about international trade. It seems you need to sort this out.



    P.S.
    Returning back to discussion with Mushroom.
    I've found a graph for industrial production and total possible industrial output.
    [​IMG]
    Lower one is for an actual production and higher one is an maximum possible.

    2007=100%
     
  5. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Wow, you have provided me a graph with no context, that I can't even read. Very nice.

    There are a great many pieces that you keep missing, over and over again. So I am just going to say it simply and see if it sinks in.

    The US still has among the largest oil reserves in the world. If we choose to, we could still be a major oil exporter. The same way we could still be major exporters of a great many things, from rare earths to gold. And there are several reasons why we are not.

    For one, imports are still often cheaper then producing it domestically. I remember in the 1980's when several oil companies went bankrupt. This is because the price of oil was so low that they actually lost money trying to pump, refine, distribute, and sell it. Then you have a lot of environmental concerns, which is also a major reason.

    One thing about the US is that it generally learns form it's environmental mistakes. After major oil spills off California, pretty much all new off-shore drilling there was outlawed, even though there is still a lot of oil there, and easy to get to. California also still has huge deposits of gold, but the 20 years of hydraulic strip mining used in California did such ecological damage that it's use was banned and there are really no good ways to extract it without destroying the area. A decade later dredge mining was tried in Idaho, which also did extensive damage to the environment. The Salmon never really returned to the Boise River, and for dozens of miles the valley floor of that river is nothing but rocks, the soil having been dredged and washed away over a century ago.

    However, at this time we actually have companies that are trying new techniques to extract gold in those areas without all the damage.

    Meanwhile, I look at China, and realize that they will be paying in the future. Much as Russia is still paying for the damage done to their country by the Soviet Union. Heck, look to the Aral Sea to see what I mean.

    [​IMG]

    One thing you gotta love about Communism, it really does not give a (*)(*)(*)(*) about the environment. Most Capitalists realize that taking care of the environment is simply "good business", especially when it comes to renewable resources (logging companies plant many more acres of trees then they harvest). However, to Communism the environment is simply one more thing to be raped and plundered for "the people", so pretty much anything goes.

    And when it is all said and done, the US will still have huge mineral resources, while China has destroyed her country in a mad rush to get it out fast and cheap. And when the ME starts to run low of oil (like Mexico has long ago), we will still have among the largest reserves in the world.

    Oh, and since you seem to have missed it, US consumption of oil has been decreasing for over a decade, at the same time we are increasing other sources.

    [​IMG]

    A lot of us really do care about such things. I for one until a few months ago used public transit (ferry boat) to get to work. But when my shift changed, I started to drive to and from work. But my truck stays at home, I use my motorcycle. 40 MPG, and a lot cheaper to operate. And if somebody thinks that it is all because I love to ride so much, they obviously have never tried to commute through San Francisco on a daily basis, or know what the weather is like.
     
  6. SFJEFF

    SFJEFF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    30,682
    Likes Received:
    256
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Oh no! You confronted me with Wikipedia! And the date of that information.....according to the map on the Wikipedia article that information appears to have come from 2006.

    And ignored my link from this year

    China has overtaken the US as the world’s largest net importer of oil, in a generational shift that will shake up the geopolitics of natural resources....
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d33b5104-8...#axzz2buRsMv4t

    Or perhaps CNN is correct- and China will not overtake the U.S. as the largest importer of oil until October...
    http://money.cnn.com/2013/08/13/news/economy/china-oil-imports/index.html

    The Paris-based International Energy Agency has forecast that the U.S. could become energy independent by 2030, and the world's biggest producer seven years from now.

    Related: U.S. oil boom causing energy upheaval

    The U.S. oil boom is boosting the nation's level of reserves, reshaping global oil trade flows and driving up demand and salaries for experienced engineers.

    And while China's breathtaking pace of economic expansion has slowed, its demand for oil to fuel a massive manufacturing sector is set to continue growing at a much faster pace than it can ramp up its own production.




    Okay point by point- Canada and Mexico are easy because- like Russia and China- there is a land border that can't be blockaded. However unlike Russia and China there is a huge infrastructure in place for trade between the United States and Canada and Mexico.

    Those are just the easiest ones- and yes they would supply the United States no matter what- they would accept payment in either cash or some form of guarantees. Why? Because the only thing worse than being the poorer cousin next door is if the your cousin falls on bad times. It would be in their self interest.

    Why would Saudi Arabia sell the U.S. oil? For the same reason- but in this case self interest of the monarchy.

    The oil producing countries would have to sell their oil to someone- China would be out- except for Russia, Japan and South Korea would be out- because of the war zone- but oil tankers could come to the East Coast of the U.S. without any problems.

    And Europe would be no worse than it is now- none of its oil imports would be impacted by a blockade. And with China, Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea out of the oil market, there would probably be a glut of oil.


    I see you have the pipelines. Actual goods would probably be the currency- since the yuan would collapse with the dollar.

    How far is it by rail from Shanghai to Moscow again?

    The pipeline would be China's life line- oil tankers not so much


    I can well imagine that is all you can see. How obscured your vision is is not my problem.

    Of course we are not the only producer- but we have more than enough for ourselves- there would be no food shortage in America.

    http://www.china.org.cn/china/2013-07/08/content_29355145.htm

    Apparently China is almost self sufficient in food but is a large food importer. Looking at the numbers their food production is better than I thought- and if they were able to get enough oil, they would probably be okay.

    Wrong again- we are the second largest as of 2012- if you have more current figures let me know
    http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?t=10&v=85
    1 China 1,904
    2 United States 1,497
    3 Germany 1,408
    4 Japan 788
    5 France 587.1
    6 Korea, South 556.5
    7 Netherlands 551.8
    8 Italy 523.9
    9 Russia 520.9
    10 United Kingdom 479.7

    I know what I am talking about- I was talking about exports.

    Geography favors the U.S. in this type of confrontation- we could stop shipments entirely out of the West Coast and still be supplied through the East Coast, Canada and Mexico. China, if the Pacific is closed to them would be limited to shipments from Russia, Vietnam, North Korea, and its Western neighbors- and China's supply chain infrastructure is all predicated on moving cargo from all over China to the Pacific coast.

    There is no real way to prove who is right or wrong- clearly I think you are wrong- but as I have said before- the cost of such a confrontation would likely devastate the world economy in the short run, and I think there is no chance of it happening.

    Like I keep saying- China has a completely different strategy that is working pretty well- any type of military confrontation would just ruin their economic strategy.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Oh no! You confronted me with Wikipedia! And the date of that information.....according to the map on the Wikipedia article that information appears to have come from 2006.

    And ignored my link from this year

    China has overtaken the US as the world’s largest net importer of oil, in a generational shift that will shake up the geopolitics of natural resources....
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d33b5104-8...#axzz2buRsMv4t

    Or perhaps CNN is correct- and China will not overtake the U.S. as the largest importer of oil until October...
    http://money.cnn.com/2013/08/13/news/economy/china-oil-imports/index.html

    The Paris-based International Energy Agency has forecast that the U.S. could become energy independent by 2030, and the world's biggest producer seven years from now.

    Related: U.S. oil boom causing energy upheaval

    The U.S. oil boom is boosting the nation's level of reserves, reshaping global oil trade flows and driving up demand and salaries for experienced engineers.

    And while China's breathtaking pace of economic expansion has slowed, its demand for oil to fuel a massive manufacturing sector is set to continue growing at a much faster pace than it can ramp up its own production.




    Okay point by point- Canada and Mexico are easy because- like Russia and China- there is a land border that can't be blockaded. However unlike Russia and China there is a huge infrastructure in place for trade between the United States and Canada and Mexico.

    Those are just the easiest ones- and yes they would supply the United States no matter what- they would accept payment in either cash or some form of guarantees. Why? Because the only thing worse than being the poorer cousin next door is if the your cousin falls on bad times. It would be in their self interest.

    Why would Saudi Arabia sell the U.S. oil? For the same reason- but in this case self interest of the monarchy.

    The oil producing countries would have to sell their oil to someone- China would be out- except for Russia, Japan and South Korea would be out- because of the war zone- but oil tankers could come to the East Coast of the U.S. without any problems.

    And Europe would be no worse than it is now- none of its oil imports would be impacted by a blockade. And with China, Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea out of the oil market, there would probably be a glut of oil.


    I see you have the pipelines. Actual goods would probably be the currency- since the yuan would collapse with the dollar.

    How far is it by rail from Shanghai to Moscow again?

    The pipeline would be China's life line- oil tankers not so much


    I can well imagine that is all you can see. How obscured your vision is is not my problem.

    Of course we are not the only producer- but we have more than enough for ourselves- there would be no food shortage in America.

    http://www.china.org.cn/china/2013-07/08/content_29355145.htm

    Apparently China is almost self sufficient in food but is a large food importer. Looking at the numbers their food production is better than I thought- and if they were able to get enough oil, they would probably be okay.

    Wrong again- we are the second largest as of 2012- if you have more current figures let me know
    http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?t=10&v=85
    1 China 1,904
    2 United States 1,497
    3 Germany 1,408
    4 Japan 788
    5 France 587.1
    6 Korea, South 556.5
    7 Netherlands 551.8
    8 Italy 523.9
    9 Russia 520.9
    10 United Kingdom 479.7

    I know what I am talking about- I was talking about exports.

    Geography favors the U.S. in this type of confrontation- we could stop shipments entirely out of the West Coast and still be supplied through the East Coast, Canada and Mexico. China, if the Pacific is closed to them would be limited to shipments from Russia, Vietnam, North Korea, and its Western neighbors- and China's supply chain infrastructure is all predicated on moving cargo from all over China to the Pacific coast.

    There is no real way to prove who is right or wrong- clearly I think you are wrong- but as I have said before- the cost of such a confrontation would likely devastate the world economy in the short run, and I think there is no chance of it happening.

    Like I keep saying- China has a completely different strategy that is working pretty well- any type of military confrontation would just ruin their economic strategy.
     
  7. KGB agent

    KGB agent Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    3,032
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    48
    This is a graph of relative size of industrial capabilities, compared to real output in 2007. You can see Y axis is for percentages, while X axis is for the year. Anything else you would like me to specify?

    Taken from here:
    http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Экономика_США
    Who cares? It is obvious, that it can't be done only with a simple wish. You need time,investments ans skilled workers for that. You will lack all of these in the case of trade war.
    Seems to be the reason, why you so much about "shale gas and oil will make us major expoter!!11". You are concerned with ecology.
    [​IMG]
    You know, it doesn't look like Western Europe is hurry for pumping chemicals into the grownd. Who knows, maybe in 100 years, when subterrain waters will reach the surface, you'll have two-headed and 5-armed kids living among you. Too bad neither of us will see if it actually would happen.


    Aral sea is not in Russia.
    Using "mistake" world over here is arguable. Using Amu Darya and Syr Darya waters allowed to significantly improve agriculture, and, most importantly, production of cotton. These things are among the few, which allows poor middleasian holes to live these days. But that is 100% offtopic, despite I appriciate your attempt to distract me from the discussion of your possible future in the case of trade war with China.

    And when it is all said and done, the US will still have huge mineral resources, while China has destroyed her country in a mad rush to get it out fast and cheap. And when the ME starts to run low of oil (like Mexico has long ago), we will still have among the largest reserves in the world.
    Tell me about it, when you'll reach surplus. By 2009 you were the biggest importer.
     
  8. s002wjh

    s002wjh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    4,210
    Likes Received:
    641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    i never said US wont recover, but its decade not in a year or two. also if you hire a US employee vs a chinese employee to make say Iphone, the US employee will need trainning because we haven't done anything in this area for Long time. then there is issue of supply chain, apple has tons other manufacture that make components for their stuff, this is true for all products. so in order to replace china, it will be a decade job. main-while, there will be inflation, demand through the roof.

    take a example of ammunition, we mostly make our ammo, but after last year sandyhook, demand been so high that the ammo price increase by 400%, and manufacture try to rush to make more ammo, even now the ammo price is still 100% more than normal price. and thats with most our ammo made in US before and well stocked. imagine everything is like that, and we don't even has those manufacture in US anymore.
     
  9. KGB agent

    KGB agent Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    3,032
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Damned graphoman! Avoid hypertrophied posts ,please. It is boring to write a response for them.

    2009
    Of couse I did. I am not registred nor subscribed for FT. I can't read it.
    Moreover, how is that relevant? I was talking about impact on your economy, not Chinese one.
    Oh yeah, "predictions" for the next year tend to fail miserably too often, yet you are bringing the one for 2030? Good luck with that.
    Again, how is that relevant? We are talking about nowadays, not your wet dreems for forseeable future.

    I would like to see a proof for this particular statement, but you may avoid searching for it. As I said, we were discussing your economy.




    That is some of the weakist arguments i've ever seen. Their selfinterest=buying non-worthy paper? Because in the other way you'll be in serious troble? Huh. Doesn't work in real life. If you neibour will be fired you'll start to pay him to avoid him turning into a drunk?
    You know, that oil is not flowing from the ground by itself? You need something to actually pay for it, otherwise, they will start to create demand inside.
    Strange. You see, China is is one of the great military powers. And a nuclear one. You suppose you'll just roll your aircraft carriers into the yellow sea, and they are done? :roflol:
    They might might back, you know. Or use submarines to create some pain in the ass for your little "no problem" plan.
    Military blocade without massive fight taking place is not realistic from the start.
    Oh yeah? You sure about it, bro? I mean some countries might support China and direct all their resources to China, for one.
    It is nice to see, that you've decided to kill your best friends' economies too. You are damn sure they won't hesitate too, right?

    Hmmm...why doest it matter?
    I guess about 10000 km.

    Oh yeah? Why? What would you do? Sinking a ship under a Russian/Iranian/[insert nation's name] flag is a declaration of the war.


    Your vision is full of butthurt. Butthurt of not being almighty.



    Okay. Point taken.
    Again: military blocade is a dumb idea. Threatening nuclear power existance might be deadly dangerous.
    There is. Go on, attemt to block China. We'll see what happen.
    And yes, that would destroy or seriously harm world's economy. International trade would be completely (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up.

    I am not arguing.
     
  10. SFJEFF

    SFJEFF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    30,682
    Likes Received:
    256
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Funniest quote of all of yours.

    LOL
     
  11. highlander

    highlander Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,104
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Aye..... Right enough, the Americans are doing it to Americans with depleted uranium..... Suppose you might think that a saving grace????

    Highlander
     
  12. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    [​IMG]

    Yes, DU is so deadly, we use it for printer ink, news print, dishes and dentures.
     
  13. highlander

    highlander Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,104
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ooh..... That's right, some idiot told you it's safe..... But you are a free man, you are allowed to think for your self.
    But then again, your American and in the forces, habits are hard to break, but you are allowed, well should be, but I'll not hold my breath.
    My commiserations
    Highlander
     
  14. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh no, you are right. It is so highly toxic that even thinking of the name can kill you.

    That is why it is used in so many products, from ink to golf clubs.

    How about stop drinking the Kool-Aid, and telling scare stories, eh?

    http://depletedcranium.com/depleted-uranium-its-all-around-you/
     
  15. william walker

    william walker New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2012
    Messages:
    1,289
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No it's Irn Bru no Scottish nationalist would be caught drinking anything else.
     
  16. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I would not know myself, I am a Glenfiddich drinker myself.
     
  17. highlander

    highlander Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,104
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    My friend, I even need to educate you even discussing malts...... !

    When asked to give your life for your country, many men will give freely all they hold dear, but when your country asks you to commit genocide only a fool would follow orders, and even stay knowing the crimes that's being committed in ones name.
    Torture chambers, assassination squads, death squads, mercenary armies, aye America does it all.

    Regards
    Highlander
     
  18. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Now I remember why I stopped replying to you in the past, if you are not talking racism you are talking mindless propaganda.

    And I like my choice of single malts just fine, thank you very much. Like a great many things, much of it is personal preference. And having had over 40 different brands, Glenfiddich is still my personal choice.

    Some like Pepsi, some like Coke, still others prefer Royal Crown. Just because I prefer something you apparently do not like, does not mean I have no taste, just that it is different from yours. I will give you credit though, at least you did not suggest I poison it with something like cola like so many people have tried over the years. :clapping:
     
  19. highlander

    highlander Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,104
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Mmmmm....... I repeat for you as you're memory seems non existent.
    Drone attacks in Yemen, to protect American soldiers, ooh that's right, there isn't any.
    Just Arab families, women and children, future terrorists.
    Attacking Iraq, WMD, ooh that's right, they were nonexistent as well.

    Torture chambers, death squads, Abu Craib, Iraqi dead, 1million plus, and all based on lies and deceit.

    But once upon a time, Americans were free, your in a prison of you're own making, you only deceive yourself.
    Ooooh and not forgetting uss liberty, 147americans murdered by AIPAC, and you can't even talk about it.




    Regards
    Highlander
     
  20. william walker

    william walker New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2012
    Messages:
    1,289
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Are you a scottish nationalist?

    I wonder what would happen in the US stopped using UAV's? Would troops have to be sent in to do the same job or jet?

    Mushroom has already proved that Iraq had WMD's, that's all the Americans said. It was Mr Blair that said they could attack the UK in 30 minutes.

    Iraqi dead 1 million plus based on Iran and Al Queda having a nice little civil war in Iraq. If you want to see real torture that makes you get sick look at some photos of what Saddam's forces did in Kuwait.

    I mean people lose sight of what the Iraq war was all about, getting rid of Saddam. Are you really saying that was a bad thing?
     
  21. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Actually, I did not prove it. The ironic thing is that Jullian Assange and Bradley Manning are the ones that released Top Secret documents, among them were documents proving the existence of WMDs. Then Iraq themselves turned over to the UN quite a bit more when they signed the Anti-Chemical weapons treaty.

    But I have to laugh when people jump around saying how wonderful Mr. Assange and Manning are, how they should be free to do whatever they want, then ignore their released documents about chemical weapons in Iraq.

    "Oh yes, everything they released was 100% accurate and true except for that."
     
  22. highlander

    highlander Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,104
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm a nationalist and a humanist.

    Mushroom proved ...What?
    That's of the first order.
    Pray tell, why should you invade other peaceful nations to steal there assets?
    They are entitled to protect there own from thieving hands.
    Regards
    Highlander
     
  23. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    http://cns.miis.edu/stories/100304_iraq_cw_legacy.htm

    Kinda hard to continue claim there were "No Chemical Weapons", when Iraq turns over 2 bunkers of them, is it not?
     
  24. highlander

    highlander Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,104
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What a load of Tom tit.

    I notice there is no mention of Rumsfeld or Cheney supplying those same chemical weapons.

    I notice that there is no mention os sad dam getting rid of these same American weapons with out being told to do so. It was only at a latter time there were cries for this to be done, but how could he prove something that had already been destroyed.

    You like to cherry pick your facts, perhaps you might educate and question the facts handed to you by your AIPAC media.

    Regards
    Highlander
     
  25. highlander

    highlander Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,104
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You might look at the deformed children being born in Iraq, gaza, even American troops who were active in your genocide war zones, depleted uranium is an analogy to American foreign policies, pure poison.

    Even today your America sponsored mercenaries in Syria are murdering men women and children. Al quada, an America owned America sponsored death squads.

    Look at the lies and deceit, even Colin Powell is ashamed of his actions, your owned, your goy, you deserve everything that comes your way in any of the nation states your military have tortured murdered raped and pillaged. On the orders of your owners AIPAC.

    Highlander
     

Share This Page