Damn I didnt know about that, the more you know eh?
Write one sentence less than 20 words responding to this pic
- Thread starter Lord Vutulaki
- Start date
Agree entirely with your second point, the first im not sure about, India has proven that its useless in war over the last 2,000 years or so. Might be different now that its a united country and not a bunch of Princely states like before the Mughal and the Raj united it.
Back to WMD's not only do rouge states like NK and PK have nukes but Iraq never had any in the first place and they knew it.
Rogue.
The US have taken years to deal with Iraq and Afghanistan, spending over a trillion dollars and pissing off a lot of voters. They couldn't successfully invade Vietnam.
Imagine trying to invade India. The idea is absurd.
Yeah but India cant count on foreign hindu insurgents unlike Astan and Iraq
A prime Iraqi military would have pwned a prime Indian military with ease.
That said India doesnt give the US false reasons to invade, you want to send weapons inspectors in? no problem is what they would say.
We the west have done much worse, just cause we are more sophisticated about it doesnt mean shit IMHO
Plus soon the number of unarmed US citizens killed by their police forces will rival Assad's body count, should the average American have to deal with a foreign invasion because of that?
first off .. we didn't invade vietnam.. we inherited a war from the french.. who when the tough got going.. bounced. same is often said of soviet union in regards to Afghanistan..
Saddam was more successful with the kurds than turkey. Gaddafi provided clean drinking water for my uncles family. Assad is a civilised man dealing with savages.
LOL come on mate, come on..
Firstly, none of that is relevant to my point that the US failed to win against Vietnam, meaning that going to war with India would be nuts.
Secondly, how do you "inherit" a war? If you don't want to be there, stop killing the Vietnamese, stop drafting your own citizens, stop blowing through cash and go home.
Agreed about the French though.
clearly you lack any insight into the vietnam war then.. first and foremost Vietnamese where killing each other.. along with the Chinese killing Vietnamese along with the french.. the era of the cold war and communism vs good old capitalism.. seems like most of you kiddies don't remember it. whatever.
i do not agree with the take down of saddam.. my initial post was that of the 20 words or less request which i did.. clearly politics of each nation is unique.. saddam is more of a civilized man than assad and gaddafi imo.. gaddafi put a bomb on a plane over scotland.. assad is a putin puppet.. saddam crushed iran.. back when reagan/carter wouldn't.
Your ad hominems don't invalidate what I said.
yeah.. i lost uncles in the war.. you.. nothing. i will invalidate everything you say. like i said.. viets were fighting each other.. learn your history
Not going to get into quantifying evil. Never ends well.
Good question.
Too big to destabilize?
We need India as a buffer against our sneaky Islamic so-called ally aka Pakistan?
Indeed.
The U.S. government mingled in central and South America from the 60s to 80s. Destabilized a bunch of countries and sponsored dictators and their goons/death squads all in the name of Cold War.
I'm pro west as they come, but I'm not blind to the stuff the west and mainly, the U.S. govt. has done before in the Americas and that now it's doing in the Middle East. Same recipe really... Different ingredients.
Cmon.
Spit it out.