Who would win, American vs Great Britan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

Acording to some americans it was :/

Jonno :cool:

---

According to some Americans; ice-cream is the work of the devil, England is the capital of the UK, Jesus is living in an Arkansas trailer park ... .

Teh fook are you getting at :blink:

---

Exactly that :rolleyes:

I'm not rascist but sometimes you fecking Welsh are slow :P

btw.......MacDonalds was great........puts teh Great in Great Britain :01:

Jonno :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

According to some Americans; ice-cream is the work of the devil, England is the capital of the UK, Jesus is living in an Arkansas trailer park ... .

Teh fook are you getting at :blink:

---

Exactly that :rolleyes:

---

Oh wow some Americans are dumm.:O

Sum peepul arr dumm two. Figure that.

http://www.bluelinecomics.com/pictur...upid%20600.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

Edit: Oh yeah I forgot, who was it that marched accross the US and who was it that needed the help of the French to get them out?
Bombs or no bombs, Great Britain rules teh waves :01: .......just a little quieter than we used to lol

---

Congrats- you had a powerful army 230 years ago. not what I would call very current.
and as for navy, congradulations, you have the second most powerfull navy in the world. To bad it's only as powerful as one of our six carrier groups. America controls 53% of the world's navy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

btw.......MacDonalds was great........puts teh Great in Great Britain

---

Yup, I'm sure the jocks would be so chuffed to put the "Mc" in front of the abscess burgers, vegetarian (dripped in animal fats) burgers and plain french (animal fat drenched, yet again) fries into their long lost ancestry. Along with the funding of the IRA for several decades. :smilie4:

Go Scots. :01:

Jebus fucking christ, at least spell Britain right.
You may end up in Birmingham, ffs. :dabs:

every dog has its own day, once was Persia then roman's... then german now america soon but not so soon thier page will purg also. ball will never remains on same ground for ever.

:bawa: :huh:

http://www.frontiernet.net/~joe14580...%20obvious.jpg

I prefer this Captain Obvious.

:shuriken:

From wikipedia:

Quote:

---

Great Britain

Great Britain refers to the largest of the British Isles. The word "Great" simply means "larger" (no connection with "greatness" in other senses is intended) in contrast to Brittany, a historical term for a peninsula in modern France that largely corresponds with the present day French province of Bretagne. That region was settled by many British immigrants during the period of Anglo-Saxon migration into Britain, and named "Little Britain" by them. The French term "Bretagne" now refers to the French "Little Britain", not to the British "Great Britain", which in French is called Grande-Bretagne.

---

Actually, this is all pretty interesting. It's amazing how many people don't know this stuff.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_britain

Proof that Mr Cheese has been round a while,
In Cheddar Gorge near Bristol, the remains of animals native to mainland Europe such as antelopes, Brown Bears, and Wild Horses have been found alongside a human skeleton, Cheddar Man, dated to about 7150 B.C.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

According to some Americans; ice-cream is the work of the devil, England is the capital of the UK, Jesus is living in an Arkansas trailer park ... .

Teh fook are you getting at :blink:

---

Exactly that :rolleyes:

I'm not rascist but sometimes you fecking Welsh are slow :P

Jonno :cool:

---

So to back up a point that you made, you make the point that some other stupid people also say stupid things.

It's all so clear now.


I duno, Jonno, this is only a suggestion but maybe, just maybe, you ought to leave sarcasm to clever people :idunno:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

Exactly that :rolleyes:

I'm not rascist but sometimes you fecking Welsh are slow :P

Jonno :cool:

---

So to back up a point that you made, you make the point that some other stupid people also say stupid things.

It's all so clear now.


I duno, Jonno, this is only a suggestion but maybe, just maybe, you ought to leave sarcasm to clever people :idunno:

---

I think the point he was trying to make was that the the US scared the shit out of themselves when they dropped the bombs on Japan because of the sheer devastation they caused. It was the first real demonstration of nuclear weapons apart from testing in desolate places where the destruction and lasting effects couldn't properly be measured. They like to have the threat of nukes, but it's highly doubtful they would ever use them again, so that arsenal can pretty much be written off. At least that's what I was telling him from the living room.

Or maybe the combination of weed and cold medication frazzled his brain. :unsure:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NikkiD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

So to back up a point that you made, you make the point that some other stupid people also say stupid things.

It's all so clear now.


I duno, Jonno, this is only a suggestion but maybe, just maybe, you ought to leave sarcasm to clever people :idunno:

---

I think the point he was trying to make was that the the US scared the shit out of themselves when they dropped the bombs on Japan because of the sheer devastation they caused. It was the first real demonstration of nuclear weapons apart from testing in desolate places where the destruction and lasting effects couldn't properly be measured. They like to have the threat of nukes, but it's highly doubtful they would ever use them again, so that arsenal can pretty much be written off. At least that's what I was telling him from the living room.

Or maybe the combination of weed and cold medication frazzled his brain. :unsure:

---

So it's your fault! I knew he couldn't have confused himself that much.

Yeah, what you wrote there seems sensible but stop trying to make him write clever things down - it'll only end in tears :nono:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NikkiD

I think the point he was trying to make was that the the US scared the shit out of themselves when they dropped the bombs on Japan because of the sheer devastation they caused. It was the first real demonstration of nuclear weapons apart from testing in desolate places where the destruction and lasting effects couldn't properly be measured. They like to have the threat of nukes, but it's highly doubtful they would ever use them again, so that arsenal can pretty much be written off. At least that's what I was telling him from the living room.

Or maybe the combination of weed and cold medication frazzled his brain. :unsure:

---

So it's your fault! I knew he couldn't have confused himself that much.

Yeah, what you wrote there seems sensible but stop trying to make him write clever things down - it'll only end in tears :nono:

---

Guilty as charged. :D

I confuse him all the time. It's one of my joys in life. :01:

:lol:

You've actually got me feeling sorry for him now.


Oh, wait. That hollow feeling inside I have might just be because I skipped breakfast ... what does compassion feel like again :unsure:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NikkiD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

So to back up a point that you made, you make the point that some other stupid people also say stupid things.

It's all so clear now.


I duno, Jonno, this is only a suggestion but maybe, just maybe, you ought to leave sarcasm to clever people :idunno:

---

I think the point he was trying to make was that the the US scared the shit out of themselves when they dropped the bombs on Japan because of the sheer devastation they caused.

---

Okayyyy he was reaally confused then.

He said it was a test but you say he meant the US was scared.

The fook?:blink:

Nikki, you are a goalie for Man U.:mellow:

nvm

nvm?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by busyman

Nikki, you are a goalie for Man U. :mellow:

---

:ermm:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by busyman

nvm

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by busyman

nvm?

---

:ermm:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

:ermm:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by busyman

nvm

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by busyman

nvm?

---

:ermm:

---

Agreed. I was fucking up.:blushing:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tempestv

Congrats- you had a powerful army 230 years ago. not what I would call very current.
and as for navy, congradulations, you have the second most powerfull navy in the world. To bad it's only as powerful as one of our six carrier groups. America controls 53% of the world's navy.

---

Yes this is true, you've certainly shown your might over the last few years and completely decimated the enemy and are simply hanging around for.........the food? or the entertainment?

@Manker... The point I was making is that if the US were/are still prepared to use Nukes they would have in Nam and the Gulf. Personally I thought that was a pretty simple point but maybe yet again text is typed differently to how it is read. As Nik has found out I make much more sense much quicker is speach than text, probably due to my Norfolk upbringing of carrots.

Jonno :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Numpty

I make much more sense much quicker is speach than text

---

Agreed.

:ermm:

===

Btw and for future reference; when you mean 'if the US were/are still prepared to use Nukes they would have in Nam and the Gulf' then just type 'if the US were/are still prepared to use Nukes they would have in Nam and the Gulf'.

You know it makes sence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NikkiD

I confuse him all the time. It's one of my joys in life. :01:

---

Don't you get bored? :blink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NikkiD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manker

So it's your fault! I knew he couldn't have confused himself that much.

Yeah, what you wrote there seems sensible but stop trying to make him write clever things down - it'll only end in tears :nono:

---

Guilty as charged. :D

I confuse him all the time. It's one of my joys in life. :01:

---

You sick freak

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

...completely decimated the enemy...

---

Alas, another unnecessary bastardization of language.

How many different words are there which describe ruinous destruction, damage, or death?

"Decimate" used to mean to reduce by a factor of one-tenth.

Not picking on you, Jonno, but...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

...completely decimated the enemy...

---

Alas, another unnecessary bastardization of language.

How many different words are there which describe ruinous destruction, damage, or death?

"Decimate" used to mean to reduce by a factor of one-tenth.

Not picking on you, Jonno, but...

---

Actually you are using an archaic form of the word there. The more modern meaning, as in 19th century and beyond, is more along the lines of Jonno's useage i.e. to destroy a large proportion.

Not picking on you, j2, but you are being a bit too etymological.

yeah, cawk

:lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by limesqueezer

I mean if they can't stop somebody taking a plane or placing a bomb anywhere, this shield is just a fairytale of hope propaganda. You can detonate a bomb outside the america or like 1 km away from the submarine. If you detonate 100 megatons you destroy millions and polute the land for thousands of years and to which direction the wind blows, there you die slow death. In Chernobyl disaster they traced radioactive material in sweden first and it didn't even exploded and we were not allowed to eat anything from the forest or your own vegetables for months, and i don't live anywhere near.

---

Goddammit. Not another one.

Quote:

---

Pfft, please think about it

we friggin america

we could take on the world and still be alive

---

Hahahahahahahahahaah.

No.



If the chinese and indians managed to stage an invasion they'd zerg your pants off.

And besides, you couldn't nuke all the rest of the world, the fallout and/or nuclear winter would fuck you up.

And then there's internal politics. Starting too many wars for no reason, hell, starting one war with the UK, would be a sure way to self-destruct politically, for any administration that tried it. And, you know, any companies doing business abroad in whatever region you went after would want the president's arse as well.



Hell, you've not even managed to beat the Iraqis properly, and you damned sure didn't beat Vietnam.

Let's face it, you couldn't use much in the way of nukes, 'cos it'd be crap in the long run for for you.

So if you tried to start a war with anywhere that isn't top-heavy with fanatics and other jobs making the ("western") world at least slightly sympathetic to your cause, you'd pwn yourself.



You might be able to beat a small part of the world. In theory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agrajag

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Alas, another unnecessary bastardization of language.

How many different words are there which describe ruinous destruction, damage, or death?

"Decimate" used to mean to reduce by a factor of one-tenth.

Not picking on you, Jonno, but...

---

Actually you are using an archaic form of the word there. The more modern meaning, as in 19th century and beyond, is more along the lines of Jonno's useage i.e. to destroy a large proportion.

Not picking on you, j2, but you are being a bit too etymological.

---

Yes you are, and yes I am.

It is my way, and you damn well know it. :)

I still object.

It's the first four letters of the word, you see...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agrajag

Actually you are using an archaic form of the word there. The more modern meaning, as in 19th century and beyond, is more along the lines of Jonno's useage i.e. to destroy a large proportion.

Not picking on you, j2, but you are being a bit too etymological.

---

Yes you are, and yes I am.

It is my way, and you damn well know it. :)

---

;)

Aw, fluff, I'm tired.

I lost the thread like three times at least, in my post above.

Should edit, but can't be arsed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnnY

Aw, fluff, I'm tired.

I lost the thread like three times at least, in my post above.

Should edit, but can't be arsed.

I need my hole

---

Fixed.

nuts!

You might want to reconsider that link, given the context.

I saw it as a cunning way of dissuading you from continuing on the path you'd taken.


But then, I hadn't thought it through.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

The point I was making is that if the US were/are still prepared to use Nukes they would have in Nam and the Gulf. Personally I thought that was a pretty simple point but maybe yet again text is typed differently to how it is read.

---

Quote:

---

There is a difference between totally annihilating a country and trying to fight specific folk within it.

---

:slap:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

...completely decimated the enemy...

---

Alas, another unnecessary bastardization of language.

How many different words are there which describe ruinous destruction, damage, or death?

"Decimate" used to mean to reduce by a factor of one-tenth.

Not picking on you, Jonno, but...

---

Jonno used it correctly.:ermm:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnnY

Goddammit. Not another one.

Quote:

---

Pfft, please think about it

we friggin america

we could take on the world and still be alive

---

Hahahahahahahahahaah.

No.



If the chinese and indians managed to stage an invasion they'd zerg your pants off.

And besides, you couldn't nuke all the rest of the world, the fallout and/or nuclear winter would fuck you up.

And then there's internal politics. Starting too many wars for no reason, hell, starting one war with the UK, would be a sure way to self-destruct politically, for any administration that tried it. And, you know, any companies doing business abroad in whatever region you went after would want the president's arse as well.



Hell, you've not even managed to beat the Iraqis properly, and you damned sure didn't beat Vietnam.

Let's face it, you couldn't use much in the way of nukes, 'cos it'd be crap in the long run for for you.

So if you tried to start a war with anywhere that isn't top-heavy with fanatics and other jobs making the ("western") world at least slightly sympathetic to your cause, you'd pwn yourself.



You might be able to beat a small part of the world. In theory.

---

True dat, if we weren't to do these 1st year med student surgical strikes.

Iraq and Vietnam are not good examples. If, instead of operating on the arm we cut it off, we'd win quite easily....even without nukes.

However, that's just not roight.:snooty: We can't take the Azrael against Ebola approach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnnY

I saw it as a cunning way of dissuading you from continuing on the path you'd taken.


But then, I hadn't thought it through.

---

Good decision.