1 hour ago, scorecard said:

 

Put your thinking cap on straight. 

So, you were making it up, that's what I thought, thanks! 

2 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So, you were making it up, that's what I thought, thanks! 

That's not what I said.

 

You don't seem to be capable of adult logical discussion, so no further comment from me. Bye.

18 minutes ago, scorecard said:

That's not what I said.

 

You don't seem to be capable of adult logical discussion, so no further comment from me. Bye.

You are unable to support your made-up idiocy, so you blame me. 

 

Go with God brother. 

 

9 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

The idiocy in bold, sorry for the confusion. 

Then I agree with you ,

Perhaps if he changed the word "Many" to some  and the word "Love" to support ,then his statement could arguably make sense . But as it is,  there is no evidence to support that many , or not even any Americans "Love " to get into wars.

If Americans  get into wars, they do so because (right or wrong) they think they have to. 

 

 

What's wrong with you?

 

War between China and the US????

 

Then....

 

GAME OVER

 

End of Organized Human Civilization!

 

What kind of Headline is this on this Topic, anyway?

 

Total lack of understanding, IMHO....

 

Just ask my fellow-alumnus, Noam!

 

 

33 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

What's wrong with you?

 

War between China and the US????

 

Then....

 

GAME OVER

 

End of Organized Human Civilization!

 

What kind of Headline is this on this Topic, anyway?

 

Total lack of understanding, IMHO....

 

Just ask my fellow-alumnus, Noam!

 

 

Your above statement displays a fundamental misunderstanding of the issue.  

There are many levels of war that do not spell "Game over",  but simply a different  game. 

A cold war? 

A hot war but fought with conventional weapons.

And a  limited conflict to accomplish specific goals.

So  why you don't ask your "fellow alumnus" at your next Highschool reunion in Philadelphia.

Do they allow GED certificate holders at these functions? 

Oh and tell him Bob from Cedar park says "Hi" and "what's hanging" which at his age I would guess everything. 

20 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Your above statement displays a fundamental misunderstanding of the issue.  

There are many levels of war that do not spell "Game over",  but simply a differing game. 

A cold war? 

A hot war but fought with conventional weapons.

And a  limited conflict to accomplish specific goals.

So  why you don't ask your "fellow alumnus" at your next Highschool reunion in Philadelphia.

Do they allow GED certificate holders at these functions? 

Oh and tell him Bob from Cedar park says "Hi" and "what's hanging" which at his age I would guess everything. 

 

You must be a young guy who knows nothing about the Cuban Missile Crisis.

 

Is you name Bob?

 

From Cedar Park?

 

You talk like a Texan, for sure.

 

PS:  I was, originally, going to stop at 5900 comments, just because I like this number.

But then, I read your comment, and now you have pushed me to 5904.

Oh, well, then maybe I will stop at 6000, instead.

I like round numbers.

 

 

 

 

1 minute ago, GammaGlobulin said:

You must be a young guy who knows nothing about the Cuban Missile Crisis

Can you also guess what I am holding in my right hand? 

   What kind of insecurity causes you to try and tell others at every opportunity , by dropping names and and pretentious language ?

I am a 66 year old  Greek American fairly well educated , and I fail to see what the Cuban crisis has to do with what you and me are talking about right now.

It certainly did not result in "game over" and accomplished Khrushchev's goal of forcing the US promise to remove missiles from Turkey and by extension Italy. And as a bonus extracted a promise from the US not to invade Cuba. 

It was a limited conflict that accomplished specific goals. 

What are you doing? 

Frantically googling to fact check what I just said?

Because you don't know, do you?  If you did you would had replied already. 

Leeson number 1 son ,

in a debate never ask a question whose answer you don't know!

8 minutes ago, sirineou said:

fairly well educated , and I fail to see what the Cuban crisis has to do with what you and me are talking about right now.

 

"you and me"

 

Really?

 

"fairly well educated" is about right, my friend.

 

Take a course in grammar, Sir, and then get back to me...

 

This here forum is not your average kids' forum.

 

It has been said, somewhere, that we should check our grammar and spelling before posting.

There are suggestions to this effect, on this forum.

 

Get your pronouns right, please.

 

Enroll in a course, if need be.

 

The very worst thing one can do, IMHO, is muck up one's pronouns, since, ...

Mucking up one's pronouns completely degrades the forum.

 

 

 

 

1 minute ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

Take a course in grammar, Sir, and then get back to me...

And here it is.

when one can not refute the facts, results grammars critique. 

Another technique often used by the feeble minded. 

Lesson #2 :

When you play grabass with the big boys . don't get surprised if someone grabs your arse 

1 minute ago, sirineou said:

And here it is.

when one can not refute the facts, results grammars critique. 

Another technique often used by the feeble minded. 

Lesson #2 :

When you play grabass with the big boys . don't get surprised if someone grabs your arse 

 

Most of what you have posted is pure Greek to me, Sir.

 

 

1 minute ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

Most of what you have posted is pure Greek to me, Sir.

 

 

No surprise there. 

3 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

Most of what you have posted is pure Greek to me, Sir.

 

 

When debating, debate the issues not the person, 

 

Just now, sirineou said:

No surprise there. 

 

The Postman Always Rings Twice.

 

Think about it, Sir.

 

 

Wasn't there something about a Russian sub commander finding a way to disobey orders to launch icbm at the last minute  even though the political officer was threatening him ?

 

I’m not thinking of the movie version …

1 minute ago, degrub said:

Wasn't there something about a Russian sub commander finding a way to disobey orders to launch icbm at the last minute  even though the political officer was threatening him ?

 

I’m not thinking of the movie version …

 

Yes.

You are correct.

 

And, this happened a second time in later years when there was a false alert of an imminent missile attack in 1983.

 

We are still on hair-trigger alert, even today.

 

We are always ....  READY-FOR-LAUNCH

 

Hope you sleep well.

 

 

2 minutes ago, degrub said:

Wasn't there something about a Russian sub commander finding a way to disobey orders to launch icbm at the last minute  even though the political officer was threatening him ?

 

I’m not thinking of the movie version …

We are going a bit of topick herem but one of the reasons that nuclear weapon bases in Cuba were not important 

 

5 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

The Postman Always Rings Twice.

 

Think about it, Sir.

 

 

Passive aggressive attitude might work with some , but not with me son.  

It would help if you presented your ideas rather than others, with videos that no one will watch.

If there is something in that video you fint pertinent, stand up and say it. 

say it, and i would be more than happy to debate it.  

11 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

The idiocy in bold, sorry for the confusion. 

The idiocy (getting into a war with China) comes from the idiots the US has in the Congress and Senate.

4 minutes ago, sirineou said:

stand up and say it.

 

Sorry...

 

I cannot stand up and talk at the same time.

 

Just as some cannot chew gum and walk at the same time.

 

Each of us has our own inadequacies we must live with.

 

And yours is grammar, it seems.

 

 

Just now, GammaGlobulin said:

And yours is grammar, it seems

Why do you insist in embarrassing yourself with these feeble attempts.

4 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

The idiocy (getting into a war with China) comes from the idiots the US has in the Congress and Senate.

Further back than the current crowd,  think Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon assenting to Taiwan ( where many of the Nationalists fled ) as a part of communist China as a key part of the deal  to “ open up China to US businesses”. 

9 minutes ago, sirineou said:

videos that no one will watch

 

Literature is full of allusions.

Many writers allude to films and literature to make a point.

If you have not read the literature or watched the films, then you just will not "get the point".

Nobody has time to explain so many allusions to you.

 

When you read books, you might find subtle allusions to other literary works.

 

If you have not read these other books, then you will not understand what is being alluded to...and then...

Woe is you!

 

 

 

 

1 minute ago, degrub said:

Further back than the current crowd,  think Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon assenting to Taiwan ( where many of the Nationalists fled ) as a part of communist China as a key part of the deal  to “ open up China to US businesses”. 

In the opinion of many in the west, The rise of China was inevitable. You can't possibly keep a country with the ,intelligence, education, work ethic, and history down. 

The time of the 100 year humiliation was over, and one way or another China was going to be a player in the world statage.

One way would had been as an adversary, and abothe as a partner. So the Theory was that if China  was  engaged in trade sbstancial trade with the west , it would in time become a liberal democracy. 

And it was a good plan, but what they failed to to consider was the cultural  differences between asean populations and western ones.  The individuality that is ingrained in the western ethos is not a big part of Chinese culture. i 

8 minutes ago, degrub said:

Further back than the current crowd,  think Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon assenting to Taiwan ( where many of the Nationalists fled ) as a part of communist China as a key part of the deal  to “ open up China to US businesses”. 

 

Your statement is baloney.

 

 

2 minutes ago, sirineou said:

what they failed to to consider

 

What they failed to consider is that they were dealing with a Marxist-Leninist state, the leader of which, Mr. Mao, loved to sleep with young virgins, and spit in spittoons.

 

Mao loved young virgins.

But, Mao hated sparrows.

 

 

 

 

5 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

Many writers allude to films and literature to make a point.

You are putting the cart before the horse.

First you make a supporting reference quote, and then you invite people to , watch or read such reference and discuss them.

If there is a reference that supports your position in the videos yo post. quote a brief  summary with a time stamp of where in the video it can be found, and I would be willing to look at it,  

But don't post a whole video , or title of book as implied of special knowledge. 

 

So what of the 1 China, two systems rhetoric vis a vi an island historically not part of China ?