| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Frezik
Basically Outdated Stereo Equiptment
   |
Posted - 2007.12.11 18:40:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: Kirjava
As for France? Hell, they lost over a hundred thousand young soldiers in the first month of WW2, why does it surprise you that a country BORDERING Germany would surrender it's 40 million population after such a slaughter?
Germany outclassed France and the French had enough balls to accept this and fight a gurilla resistance because they couldn't win a direct war.
1) The French screwed up by pouring their entire defense budget into a large, static defensive line that the Germans simply walked around.
2) That's not really the issue brought up. Both modern France and Germany ban the sale of many German WWII historical items. Stuff like this could never be sold in either country.
|
Frezik
Basically Outdated Stereo Equiptment
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 19:24:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Kirjava
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
Yes we have our faults but I challenge anyone to find a faultless country.
Tibet.
Name me a flaw.
Is not, technically, a country. Sort of.
|
Frezik
Basically Outdated Stereo Equiptment
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 19:40:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
Originally by: Kirjava
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
Yes we have our faults but I challenge anyone to find a faultless country.
Tibet.
Name me a flaw.
Tibet's current state
While the international laws describing what makes a "country" are rather vague (see also: Sealand), the most important factor is having other countries recognize you as such. Right or wrong, Tibet was invaded and lost. No matter how noble they might be, it's hard to take a government-in-exile seriously unless they have some major leverage with other nations.
|
Frezik
Basically Outdated Stereo Equiptment
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 22:06:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Jago Kain
I put it to the septics in here, that the reason for the Second Amendment no longer exists, but please don't let that discourage your countrymen from shooting each other at every available opportunity.
You Brits would like that, wouldn't you? Just when Americans put all their guns away, *bam*, the Queen comes in, personally leading the charge against the Continental Congress. Pretty soon, we're all drinking tea and eating bad sausages. We'll have drive by arguments, Jeremy Clarkson will replace Fox News with 24 hours of Ferrari engine pictures (which somehow manages to be more informative than the original channel), and "Football" gets replaced by "Football".
I won't fall for it. Resist! Resist!
|
Frezik
Basically Outdated Stereo Equiptment
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 23:28:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Jago Kain
As far as I am aware, the only thing that the Queen has ever led is the conga line on New Year's Eve at I-paid-for-that-with-my-taxes-and-now-you-want-more-cash-so-I-can-see-it-you-smug-rich-bastards Palace.
Sure, but I think we'd both like to see her try. I'll bring the beer.
Quote:
I also find the idea that Congress might actually become personally involved in any armed conflict, rather than conscripting large numbers of the uneducated and poor to die for them, as likely as the Pope getting a saturday job at a Dutch brothel.
They'll try getting conscription going, but the bill will be hung up in committee.
Quote:
You do have a point about Clarkson, but would Fox News be such a loss anyway?
Where else will I get constant coverage of a woman with an adam's apple?
|
Frezik
Basically Outdated Stereo Equiptment
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 23:59:00 -
[6]
Originally by: ReaperOfSly
I really want to point and laugh at America over this, but I can't. I can imagine exactly the same thing happening in the UK.
This is why I haven't tried moving to Europe. I see the whole Union going the exact same way, it's just taking a bit longer to get there.
|
| |
|