About Us ThisisBigBrother.com

lostalex · 11-09-2011, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobnot

Tragic but nothing compared to the 920,000 people murdered in Iraq and Afghanistan in response to it.

920,000(that's not an accurate number, but i don't give a **** enuf to argue right now) were kille by the same al quedaa an taliban that cause 9/11.

The terrorists kille those people just like they kille the inocents on 9/11, so get yur facts right.

no other country has spent more time an money to protect civilian lives than America has. No other country in the HISTORY of warfare has spent more time an care to protect the innocents. How many hospitals did the british build for the germans during ww2? How many schools did you build for them? How many roads? All of the innocents died, these wars were started by because of the terrorists, not America.

how dare you imply otherwise.

Marsh. · 11-09-2011, 10:09 PM

I remember watching the documentary about the woman who lied about 9/11.
From what I recall she didn't pretend she was there, she pretended one of the victims was her boyfriend and wormed her way into his parent's lives and got loads of publicity and stuff. Pretty horrid thing to do, didn't they say she's out there somewhere and no one knows where she is?

Pyramid* · 11-09-2011, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lostalex

920,000(that's not an accurate number, but i don't give a **** enuf to argue right now) were kille by the same al quedaa an taliban that cause 9/11.

The terrorists kille those people just like they kille the inocents on 9/11, so get yur facts right.

no other country has spent more time an money to protect civilian lives than America has. No other country in the HISTORY of warfare has spent more time an care to protect the innocents. How many hospitals did the british build for the germans during ww2? How many schools did you build for them? How many roads? All of the innocents died, these wars were started by because of the terrorists, not America.

how dare you imply otherwise.

*Cough* VIETNAM *Cough*

Shasown · 11-09-2011, 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lostalex

no other country has spent more time an money to protect civilian lives than America has. No other country in the HISTORY of warfare has spent more time an care to protect the innocents. How many hospitals did the british build for the germans during ww2? How many schools did you build for them? How many roads? All of the innocents died, these wars were started by because of the terrorists, not America.

how dare you imply otherwise.

No other country since the start of last century has the highest number of civilain coolateral damage. Or Blue on blue incidents (you call them friendly fire, when rounds start zipping around your ass they are far from friendly even when fired by allies).

Would recommend you read up on an unbiaised WW2 history, the US didnt want to involve itself in reparations or any other form of civil assistance after WW2 initially.

There were lots of schools, hospitals and churches etc built and rebuilt or simply funded by the British after WW2, you see we were at a slight disadvantage, we had held germany off for a few years before the US decided to join the party, during which time we took the brunt of the German War machine.

How many bombs fell on the US mainland during ww2, I dont mean own goals either but dropped by enemy forces?

You were late turning up for the party in France and Belgium (WW1) too. Bad form that.

lostalex · 11-09-2011, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

*Cough* VIETNAM *Cough*

America didn't fight against Vietnam, we fought FOR vietnam, with the people fighting against communism. We didn't start that war, we just chose a side. Vietnam was a civil war.

just like the French helpe America in our civil war.

Marsh. · 11-09-2011, 11:46 PM

Bugs me when people get into a history argument and use "we" and "us" as though you were personally involved. Your country, your ancestors, but you? No.

lostalex · 11-09-2011, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shasown

No other country since the start of last century has the highest number of civilain coolateral damage. Or Blue on blue incidents (you call them friendly fire, when rounds start zipping around your ass they are far from friendly even when fired by allies).

Would recommend you read up on an unbiaised WW2 history, the US didnt want to involve itself in reparations or any other form of civil assistance after WW2 initially.

There were lots of schools, hospitals and churches etc built and rebuilt or simply funded by the British after WW2, you see we were at a slight disadvantage, we had held germany off for a few years before the US decided to join the party, during which time we took the brunt of the German War machine.

How many bombs fell on the US mainland during ww2, I dont mean own goals either but dropped by enemy forces?

You were late turning up for the party in France and Belgium (WW1) too. Bad form that.

No other country has RECORdEd the numbers like America. Obviously there were more friendly fires in other wars, they just weren't counted. any intelligent person would agree.

If you count them all, tell me how many friendly fires is britain guilty of in history??? you don't know because they weren't counted.

Shasown · 11-09-2011, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lostalex

No other country has RECORdEd the numbers like America. Obviously there were more friendly fires in other wars, they just weren't counted. any intelligent person would agree.

If you count them all, tell me how many friendly fires is britain guilty of in history??? you don't know because they weren't counted.

Not a lot because even now the US are adopting British Small unit tactics which reduce the number of blue on blue incidents. For example correct positioning of support fire teams, Unit fire control, decent FAC. and a lot of other improvements.

The UK forces may only be small but we are a lot better than most countries, aftr all when you care enough to send the very best.

Pyramid* · 11-09-2011, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lostalex

America didn't fight against Vietnam, we fought FOR vietnam, with the people fighting against communism. We didn't start that war, we just chose a side. Vietnam was a civil war.

just like the French helpe America in our civil war.

Tell that to the Vietnemse innocents that the Americans killed in their attempts to control communism and 'contain' a civil war when America decided to 'just chose a side'.

lostalex · 11-09-2011, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shasown

Not a lot because even now the US are adopting British Small unit tactics which reduce the number of blue on blue incidents. For example correct positioning of support fire teams, Unit fire control, decent FAC. and a lot of other improvements.

The UK forces may only be small but we are a lot better than most countries, aftr all when you care enough to send the very best.

that sounds very theoretical, an not at all like cold hard numbers.

Where are the numbers?

If we are to talk about American friendly fire, let's hear about British friendly fire. it's only fair. right?

Pyramid* · 12-09-2011, 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 08marsh

Bugs me when people get into a history argument and use "we" and "us" as though you were personally involved. Your country, your ancestors, but you? No.

How do you propose people discuss history then? Replacing British by us, Russians by them - makes no difference whatsoever.

Oh, i see, we are meant to say, My Country, My Ancestors?....ie: the very same terminology, just different words.

lostalex · 12-09-2011, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

Tell that to the Vietnemse innocents that the Americans killed in their attempts to control communism and 'contain' a civil war when America decided to 'just chose a side'.

okay, an tell that to all the southern Americans who were killed by France financing the Union against the south.

It was right for the french to help the union soldiers in the American civil war, and it was right for America to help the pro-democracy soldiers in vietnam, and it is right for America to always help pro-democracy soldiers in all country's civil wars.. IMHO.

Pyramid* · 12-09-2011, 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lostalex

okay, an tell that to all the southern Americans who were killed by France financing the Union against the south.

It was right for the french to help the union soldiers in the American civil war, and it was right for America to help the pro-democracy soldiers in vietnam, and it is right for America to always help pro-democracy soldiers in all countries. IMHO.

You made your position very clear on your thoughts on Southern Americans....... or was that only the ones in the deep south you didn't give a rats arse about?

lostalex · 12-09-2011, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

You made your position very clear on your thoughts on Southern Americans....... or was that only the ones in the deep south you didn't give a rats arse about?

Just because I don't want to BE southern, does not mean I don't value them as part of the Union.

Your logic fails.

You don't have to want to live in Scotland or Wales to value the Unite Kingdom.

Pyramid* · 12-09-2011, 12:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lostalex

Just because I don't want to BE southern, does not mean I don't value them as part of the Union.

Your logic fails.

ah...so it's okay for Blacks to be sent to war to be killed....that's when you value them.

Nice.

lostalex · 12-09-2011, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

ah...so it's okay for Blacks to be sent to war to be killed....that's when you value them.

Nice.

I think if you read more history you will find many blacks fight in that war because they believe in it, not because they were "sent". also many Native Americans too. Even some Canadians (or "British North American's" as they were known at the time.)

Pyramid* · 12-09-2011, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lostalex

You don't have to want to live in Scotland or Wales to value the Unite Kingdom.

United Kingdom.

I disagree, that is an entirely subjective point of view and speaking as a Scot, I am quite at liberty to have.

Pyramid* · 12-09-2011, 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lostalex

I think if you read more history you will find many blacks fight in that war because they believe in it, not because they were "sent". also many Native Americans too.

I was referring very obviously to your personal view on Blacks as you stated, non too subtley, on another thread - not whether Blacks went to war of their own violition.

lostalex · 12-09-2011, 12:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

United Kingdom.

I disagree, that is an entirely subjective point of view and speaking as a Scot, I am quite at liberty to have.

LOL, my new keyboard is delivered on monday) my "d" key is broken, i have to paste every "d" into my posts.

it's much more labour intensive than you can imagine.

Shasown · 12-09-2011, 12:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lostalex

that sounds very theoretical, an not at all like cold hard numbers.

Where are the numbers?

If we are to talk about American friendly fire, let's hear about British friendly fire. it's only fair. right?

First off its not friendly fire, live rounds travelling in excess of 900m/s from aircraft machine guns, or small arms (A-10 cannon = 990m/s M16 and L86 = 940m/s) arent friendly when they meet human flesh.

Lets play shall we, lets just do from mmmm the start of the first party in the desert

Number of US troops killed or injured by British Munitions havent managed as yet to find any declared incidents.

Number of UK troops killed or injured by US Fired Munitions, wow this may take a while google has pages and pages of incidents. well bugger me sideways with a banjo fancy that.

Pyramid* · 12-09-2011, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lostalex

LOL, my new keyboard is delivered on monday) my "d" key is broken, i have to paste every "d" into my posts.

it's much more labour intensive than you can imagine.

Didn't see you having too much bother with the other 5 times you had to do it in that same post.

lostalex · 12-09-2011, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

United Kingdom.

I disagree, that is an entirely subjective point of view and speaking as a Scot, I am quite at liberty to have.

So you woul prefer Scotland was completely seperate? If most Scots feel that way, then why doesn't Salmon hold the referndum NOW????

Pyramid* · 12-09-2011, 12:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shasown

First off its not friendly fire, live rounds travelling in excess of 900m/s from aircraft machine guns, or small arms (A-10 cannon = 990m/s M16 and L86 = 940m/s).

Lets play shall we, lets just do from mmmm the start of the first party in the desert

Number of US troops killed or injured by British Munitions havent managed as yet to find any declared incidents.

Number of UK troops killed or injured by US Fired Munitions, wow this may take a while google has pages and pages of incidents. well bugger me sideways with a banjo fancy that.

You slipped that in there for good measure didn't you!