Conquer Club

Hologram wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

Hologram wrote:First Barbary War: The man who ruined everything in the war and destroyed all respect we may have earned in the middle east in this early conflict: Consul Tobias Lear.

Sold out a very successful naval and land campaign for a $60,000 peace and an exchange of prisoners. A rather high price considering that the US had assembled an incredibly large naval squadron in the Mediterranean and that William Eaton had successfully taken the capitol of Tripoli's largest province, Derne. There's also the point that the only thing that Arabs really respect is force, and since the US had payed for peace instead of putting Tripoli in its place, Tripoli, Tunis, Algiers, and Morocco all began preying on US merchantmen as soon as the squadron had left, almost as if the squadron had never been in the Mediterranean at all. If the US had used its force instead of paying for peace, we would have not only won that war, but we would have set the proper precedent for all foreign affairs in the middle east.

Who knows, maybe we wouldn't be in the current mess that we're in.

Hmm......

That, and remove Jimmy Carter from the White House during the Iranian Revolution.

Yeah. We should've just bitch-slapped those Iranians for doing what they did. But we didn't, and what do we have now? Oh yeah, crazy Iranians that almost have nukes. So much better.

good god lads, get your blinkers off!
World history is influenced by the powerful nations not the ones pissing around in the dust for the scraps!
have a look outside of what you think you remember and study what may actually have been important.

We can go back many more years but perhaps if we go only as far as 1953 and the US/British coup d'etat which overthrew the democratically elected Prime minister of Iran; Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh.

The CIA lead operation was in response to the.. did i mention 'democratically' elected government nationalizing the oil industry. The action which brought it into conflict with the worlds powers sought to benefit the the populace with some of their own natural resource. Most of the profits were syphoned-off to helped keep Britain afloat as a world power after the 1st world war.

After the coup a puppet dictator, the young Shah, ruled for more than 2 decades in an increasingly repressive and brutal regime; propped up by US arms and monetary assistance.

In 1979 the revolution ensued and brought to power a group of fanatic anti-Western, religious clerics whose government sponsored acts of terror against American targets, and that government also inspired fundamentalists in other countries including next door, Afghanistan, where the Taliban came to power and gave sanctuary to Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.

You should also look into the Iran Iraq war; read up on the play-ground of war which US and Soviet power-brokering, armed and funded a remote-control struggle where-by they could test weaponry and flex muscles without loss of their own nationals lives.

etc etc ... and now it is the nutters faults in Iran.. silly me!

jiminski wrote:

Hologram wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

Hologram wrote:First Barbary War: The man who ruined everything in the war and destroyed all respect we may have earned in the middle east in this early conflict: Consul Tobias Lear.

Sold out a very successful naval and land campaign for a $60,000 peace and an exchange of prisoners. A rather high price considering that the US had assembled an incredibly large naval squadron in the Mediterranean and that William Eaton had successfully taken the capitol of Tripoli's largest province, Derne. There's also the point that the only thing that Arabs really respect is force, and since the US had payed for peace instead of putting Tripoli in its place, Tripoli, Tunis, Algiers, and Morocco all began preying on US merchantmen as soon as the squadron had left, almost as if the squadron had never been in the Mediterranean at all. If the US had used its force instead of paying for peace, we would have not only won that war, but we would have set the proper precedent for all foreign affairs in the middle east.

Who knows, maybe we wouldn't be in the current mess that we're in.

Hmm......

That, and remove Jimmy Carter from the White House during the Iranian Revolution.

Yeah. We should've just bitch-slapped those Iranians for doing what they did. But we didn't, and what do we have now? Oh yeah, crazy Iranians that almost have nukes. So much better.

good god lads, get your blinkers off!
World history is influenced by the powerful nations not the ones pissing around in the dust for the scraps!
have a look outside of what you think you remember and study what may actually have been important.

We can go back many more years but perhaps if we go only as far as 1953 and the US/British coup d'etat which overthrew the democratically elected Prime minister of Iran; Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh.

The CIA lead operation was in response to the.. did i mention 'democratically' elected government nationalizing the oil industry. The action which brought it into conflict with the worlds powers sought to benefit the the populace with some of their own natural resource. Most of the profits were syphoned-off to helped keep Britain afloat as a world power after the 1st world war.

After the coup a puppet dictator, the young Shah, ruled for more than 2 decades in an increasingly repressive and brutal regime; propped up by US arms and monetary assistance.

In 1979 the revolution ensued and brought to power a group of fanatic anti-Western, religious clerics whose government sponsored acts of terror against American targets, and that government also inspired fundamentalists in other countries including next door, Afghanistan, where the Taliban came to power and gave sanctuary to Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.

You should also look into the Iran Iraq war; read up on the play-ground of war which US and Soviet power-brokering, armed and funded a remote-control struggle where-by they could test weaponry and flex muscles without loss of their own nationals lives.

etc etc ... and now it is the nutters faults in Iran.. silly me!

WWI

The CIA

There is a massive gap in your reasoning. Care to fill it in will logic fallacies such as the Strawman Argument and Red Herring? Or did you mean to say WWII?

In any event, you might have a point, but you made some errors that need to be addressed.

not at all mate.

go back and re-read.

Can I wipe out England in the 1th Century AD?

The CIA did not exist prior to the Truman Administration. WWI ended about 1918-1919. Massive gap, big enough to sail the Nimtz through.

And yes, I did re-read.

muy_thaiguy wrote:Can I wipe out England in the 1th Century AD?

Then what language would we be speaking right now?

1st Century AD.................

Probably Latin, maybe some currently dead germanic language like Gothic. If not that, who knows.............................I'd rather not think about it.

muy_thaiguy wrote:Can I wipe out England in the 1th Century AD?

hmmm not strictly a person ... so no. but i am still happy to hear why.


(all of the Backstreet boys are up to be wiped so perhaps you could have all of the English in the 1st century AD.. but it becomes rather a blunt and nationalistic tool based on wiping a whole Nation.. also think of the implications: America, Australia, Leo Sayer, Bob Hope, Laurel and Hardy .. you can have Charlie Chaplin, he was a wanker!)

Jenos Ridan wrote:The CIA did not exist prior to the Truman Administration. WWI ended about 1918-1919. Massive gap, big enough to sail the Nimtz through.

And yes, I did re-read.

you are reading too much into that single passage... i clearly say that the coup d'etat was in 1953 (CIA was formed in response to the the second world war, being founded in 1947.)

The fact that Iranian Oil kept the UK afloat after the 1st world was only to illustrate how long it had been keeping us going and how important it in fact was, the fact is we would not have been sustainable as a World power without this income.... surely you can cope with that?

muy_thaiguy wrote:Can I wipe out England in the 1th Century AD?

No, cos there wasn't an England then.

jonesthecurl wrote:

muy_thaiguy wrote:Can I wipe out England in the 1th Century AD?

No, cos there wasn't an England then.

I am tempted to say there has always been an England as i stand and fart Jerusalem!

but yes you have floundered in a fairly sizeable loop-hole MT!

jiminski wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:The CIA did not exist prior to the Truman Administration. WWI ended about 1918-1919. Massive gap, big enough to sail the Nimtz through.

And yes, I did re-read.

you are reading too much into that single passage... i clearly say that the coup d'etat was in 1953 (CIA was formed in response to the the second world war, being founded in 1947.)

The fact that Iranian Oil kept the UK afloat after the 1st world was only to illustrate how long it had been keeping us going and how important it in fact was, the fact is we would not have been sustainable as a World power without this income.... surely you can cope with that?

Then you should have been more clear from the start. Do not get all bent out of shape because I pointed out some apparent inconsistancies.

Jenos Ridan wrote:

jiminski wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:The CIA did not exist prior to the Truman Administration. WWI ended about 1918-1919. Massive gap, big enough to sail the Nimtz through.

And yes, I did re-read.

you are reading too much into that single passage... i clearly say that the coup d'etat was in 1953 (CIA was formed in response to the the second world war, being founded in 1947.)

The fact that Iranian Oil kept the UK afloat after the 1st world was only to illustrate how long it had been keeping us going and how important it in fact was, the fact is we would not have been sustainable as a World power without this income.... surely you can cope with that?

Then you should have been more clear from the start. Do not get all bent out of shape because I pointed out some apparent inconsistancies.

you did not point out inconsistencies and i was perfectly clear.. you just leapt to the wrong conclusion instead of taking the detail as it was laid out. You then proceeded to tell me i was wrong, when i was not ... hence the call to arms.
But i assure you, no disfigurement of form resulted.

Jenos Ridan wrote:

jiminski wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:The CIA did not exist prior to the Truman Administration. WWI ended about 1918-1919. Massive gap, big enough to sail the Nimtz through.

And yes, I did re-read.

you are reading too much into that single passage... i clearly say that the coup d'etat was in 1953 (CIA was formed in response to the the second world war, being founded in 1947.)

The fact that Iranian Oil kept the UK afloat after the 1st world was only to illustrate how long it had been keeping us going and how important it in fact was, the fact is we would not have been sustainable as a World power without this income.... surely you can cope with that?

Then you should have been more clear from the start. Do not get all bent out of shape because I pointed out some apparent inconsistancies.

Uhm Jenos, you're the one who thought it was inconsistent or actually meant something significant. Most other people assumed what jimmi meant.

Why is there no "none" in your categories?

nesterdude wrote:Why is there no "none" in your categories?

What are you, a hippie?

Snorri1234 wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

jiminski wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:The CIA did not exist prior to the Truman Administration. WWI ended about 1918-1919. Massive gap, big enough to sail the Nimtz through.

And yes, I did re-read.

you are reading too much into that single passage... i clearly say that the coup d'etat was in 1953 (CIA was formed in response to the the second world war, being founded in 1947.)

The fact that Iranian Oil kept the UK afloat after the 1st world was only to illustrate how long it had been keeping us going and how important it in fact was, the fact is we would not have been sustainable as a World power without this income.... surely you can cope with that?

Then you should have been more clear from the start. Do not get all bent out of shape because I pointed out some apparent inconsistancies.

Uhm Jenos, you're the one who thought it was inconsistent or actually meant something significant. Most other people assumed what jimmi meant.

Keyword: Thought. Appears that I am mistaken.

Would not be the first time, now wouldn't it?

nesterdude wrote:Why is there no "none" in your categories?

'cos if you chose that, you get wiped out yourself...

Jenos, it's nice to see that I'm not the only one who can say "my mistake", instead of escalating the whole "I said, you said" nonsense. Well done.

jonesthecurl wrote:Jenos, it's nice to see that I'm not the only one who can say "my mistake", instead of escalating the whole "I said, you said" nonsense. Well done.

It's hardly a naturaly reaction, most people get defensive when they are wrong.

Jenos Ridan wrote:

jonesthecurl wrote:Jenos, it's nice to see that I'm not the only one who can say "my mistake", instead of escalating the whole "I said, you said" nonsense. Well done.

It's hardly a naturaly reaction, most people get defensive when they are wrong.

who you calling defensive!?

jiminski wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

jonesthecurl wrote:Jenos, it's nice to see that I'm not the only one who can say "my mistake", instead of escalating the whole "I said, you said" nonsense. Well done.

It's hardly a naturaly reaction, most people get defensive when they are wrong.

who you calling defensive!?

don't you start Jimbob.

GET RID OF HANNAH MONTANA!!!! or Miley Cyrus or Hannah Grace Cyrus! Whatever you wanna call her(other then hot)

Riskmaster101 wrote:GET RID OF HANNAH MONTANA!!!! or Miley Cyrus or Hannah Grace Cyrus! Whatever you wanna call her(other then hot)

I second this motion. All in favor say "Aye".

DAZMCFC wrote:

jiminski wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

jonesthecurl wrote:Jenos, it's nice to see that I'm not the only one who can say "my mistake", instead of escalating the whole "I said, you said" nonsense. Well done.

It's hardly a naturaly reaction, most people get defensive when they are wrong.

who you calling defensive!?

don't you start Jimbob.

exactly!


PS .. i also am not keen on Hannah Montanah

Hologram wrote:

Riskmaster101 wrote:GET RID OF HANNAH MONTANA!!!! or Miley Cyrus or Hannah Grace Cyrus! Whatever you wanna call her(other then hot)

I second this motion. All in favor say "Aye".

Aye and aye and aye a-bloody-gain.