Why is the United States Navy in the Persian Gulf? It is called the Persian Gulf because it is Persian. The United States has no business over there. Iran will soon take serious and strong action. Get ready folks
Printable View
Why is the United States Navy in the Persian Gulf? It is called the Persian Gulf because it is Persian. The United States has no business over there. Iran will soon take serious and strong action. Get ready folks
:vd:Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
brockton, the United States can park it's Navy damn near anywhere and nobody can do a bloody thing about it #1. #2 The only thing that is going to happen to Iran is the mullahs are going to lose power and the Iranian people are going to take back some power, that day is coming, might not see a return of the Pahlavi's but very soon Iran will move to be more Westernized as it once was.
To think that in 1979 women were all "Thank God I don't have to wear miniskirts and high heels on my way to my college classes to learn to be an engineer.....oh how I wish to be smothered in black polyester and have acid thrown at my face should I ever attempt to educate myself again, only good things can come of this revolution"
:shakehead:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxGYLk92edY
I still think Iran is going to strike multiple u. S. Navy vessels in the Gulf very shortly
Shahab-1
Shahab-2
Shahab-3
Wicked missiles to say the least
Many Americans know there has been a U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf since Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1991.
But the reality is that U.S. forces have been stationed there much, much longer.
The U.S. Navy first entered the Gulf in 1944 during World War II, after Italian bombers aligned with Axis forces attacked U.S.-owned oil installations in Saudi Arabia and the neighboring emirate of Bahrain.
Their main purpose then, as it is now, was to guard the oil resources of the West and its communications lines with Europe and the Far East.
Ever since, the Bahraini city of Manama has served as home port and shore base to what is now called the U.S. Fifth Fleet. There is also a military installation at Bahrain's Muharraq Airport.
One thing I know is that the Chinese string of pearls is about to take out the US 5th Fleet
Unfortunately, you do not seem to have remembered Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, or even Syria today, Lyle. Sure, the US can try and do what it likes, but whether it meets its objectives is another thing entirely. The Vietnam war was a failure. The results of Afghanistan today say that this was a failure. Iraq based on lies no doubt a failure. Syria and the arming of ahem moderate rebels also a failure. Now, you can potentially start another war, but don't be too arrogant. And be very careful about the chain of motion it might set about unleashing. You have been lucky so far, but one day that hubris could crush you and wipe out humanity.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong:vd:Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
brockton, the United States can park it's Navy damn near anywhere and nobody can do a bloody thing about it #1. #2 The only thing that is going to happen to Iran is the mullahs are going to lose power and the Iranian people are going to take back some power, that day is coming, might not see a return of the Pahlavi's but very soon Iran will move to be more Westernized as it once was.
To think that in 1979 women were all "Thank God I don't have to wear miniskirts and high heels on my way to my college classes to learn to be an engineer.....oh how I wish to be smothered in black polyester and have acid thrown at my face should I ever attempt to educate myself again, only good things can come of this revolution"
:shakehead:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxGYLk92edY
I agree with Miles here. The United States went into Iran in the mid-1950s and did an evil Act when they took out Mossadegh.
That was an evil Act by an evil Nation.
Then the genius United States put in the Shah of Iran.
What an evil Act. Satanic an Unforgivable.
When the Iranian people rightfully rose up and overthrew the Shah, the United States rightfully reaped what it sewed
This is how stupid John McCain is I mean was. He was such a stupid ass that he ignored everything that I just wrote above.
How could dumb John McCain ignore what I wrote above? That's how dumb he was let alone that's how evil he was.
"Bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran "
this was the song that John McCain used to sing to the beach boys hit Barbara Ann.
Then the United States wanted to cry like a little baby when the Islamic revolution took over and the Ayatollah Khomeini came into power and the puppet loser piece of garbage CIA operative Shah of Iran had to run out of Persia like a little coward and go with his family abroad and Hide in a little skunk hole
Next year will be 40 years since the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran.
Persia has been around for at least 2,800 (two thousand eight hundred) years of recorded history.
Yyyyyyyeah, the United States has been about 242 years
No I know all about them. I know politicians know how to fuck up a war, I know they know how to start a war as well. Vietnam was a clusterfuck and we can thank France and that lying sack of rat shit LBJ for getting us into that one. The Gulf of Tonkin incident is one of THE major False Flag operations of all time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Afghanistan today? If the goal was "getting Bin Laden" (even though he was most likely killed in Tora Bora) then check that one off the list. The Taliban sucks for Afghans but they haven't really hurt us directly...heroin was certainly less of an issue prior to that invasion :scratchchin: gee I wonder why?
Iraq was going to be invaded regardless of who won the 2000 election Bush or Gore (go back listen to the rhetoric on both sides) and regardless of 9/11...it was going to happen. The invasion of Iraq (initial invasion) was one of the best showings of military might in the history of the world. The HOLDING of Iraq was one of the dumbest, most illogical, fuck ups of all time. That said Trump came in office and he let General Mattis run the war and he's done an excellent job.
Syria (and Libya to an extent) are just as bad as how we got into Iraq. Malevolent forces in government got us in there, it wasn't in our national interests to get involved. Let's take a gander at exactly who is fighting in Syria on one side Assad & Russia on the other side I'm sure some decent people , but also ISIS and Al Qaeda...as an American citizen I'm comfortable letting that play out and us staying on the sidelines...but SOME of our politicians are asshats and want to get involved in everything, luckily Trump is fairly level headed in regards to getting into another conflict.
Iran is like North Korea, constantly saber rattling yet not doing too much, not much since the Lockerbie bombing which let's face it was a return shot for Iranian Air flight 655. The Iranian people have 0 beef with the US and the American people have 0 beef with the Iranian people...the Mullahs and our Government don't like each other which stems back to the 50's when England got us involved in Iran and said "They'll turn Commie if you don't keep the Shah in power" apparently because the Brits were too fearful of reprisal to do it themselves or they needed our help.
When it comes down to brass tacks and the United States wants to lay all it's cards out on the table....0 nations, 0 people, 0....beat our military. We've got enough nukes to end the entire world just by our lonesome, we have more guns even citizens with guns than anyone else Isoroku Yamamoto once claimed that mainland America could not be invaded because "behind each blade of grass is an American with a gun" (illegal immigration seems to have proven Yamamoto wrong it seems).
Hubris indeed, I'd rather America sat on the sidelines and let shit just happen to other nations, they expect too much of us and take it for granted that we'll fix something.
@brocktonbockbust your disappointment with American politics is noted. Persia has indeed been around for a long time and it's been a long time since they produced anything of note. They've been around so long they decided to take their women back in time and cover them head to toe in bin bags....how progressive, perhaps you'd like that for American women?
On land, China is already much more powerful than the USA, and they are catching up at sea and in the air.
With the western allies (UK, France, Canada, Australia) gradually becoming weaker due to Cultural Marxism, A Russia-China-Iran alliance is formidable enough to win a war. China has no problems of mass migration, there are no anti-Chinese (((media people))) and no Soros-funded far-left violence and rioting.
Always fighting with one hand behind their back with constant negativity and undermining from their own mainstream media, the US could not even decisively defeat Afghanistan and Vietnam.
China had their chance in Korea they were SLAUGHTERED they sent troops into battle with 0 guns. They said "If you don't have a gun, just pick one up off a dead guy in front of you as you march towards certain doom" :11fb8:Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom
Yeah Europe is cucking out big time can't argue against that.
We weren't allowed to give 100% effort in wars after Korea, the politicians didn't allow it. And if you know of Q then you likely know why that is.
Korea was 70 years ago, Lyle. It's a very different world. Some nations are stronger whilst others are weaker. Sure you can destroy the world but that's a sad legacy and not a good indictment of humanity. Truth is Iran and NK have done nothing to you, but you have zero influence or control over your military so the wars keep happening. Meanwhile national debt is how much? The economy is doing great but the debt keeps growing? Andrew Jackson would think you have all lost your minds. A war isn't only conducted with bombs.
https://i.4pcdn.org/pol/1421699951994.png
That right there is air superiority wherever we go
Besides that the Chinese have how much of our debt? You can't cash in if we're not around to pay.....so yeah yall sit down and have a good hard think about it and get back at me.
There is a big push in Congress right now to increase our military hardware in response to China’s doing so. One issue we face is as China brings new ships etc online our existing ones will be set for scrap.
Active personnel: USA: 1,301,300 China: 2,300,000Quote:
Originally Posted by walrus
Available for military: USA: 73,270,043 China: 385,821,101
China has more armored fighting vehicles (46,000 to 4,788) more artillery (9,726 to 3,269) more self-propelled artillery (1,710 to 950), more rocket artillery (1,770 to 1,197). And China has more tanks.
So China has a HUGE advantage on land.
On the oceans, China has more frigates (51 to 0), corvettes (32 to 0) and submarines (73 to 70). US has more destroyers (85 to 32).
USA still has the advantage in the air, with 12,100 aircraft to China's 3,729.
US has more multi-role aircraft: 2,062 to 567, more attack aircraft (470 to 300) and more helicopters (5,000 to 1,627).
But China has far more fighter aircraft, 1,199 to 388.
The one major advantage the USA has is having far more aircraft carriers. But with China having three times as many fighter aircraft, how long would it tale them to sink those carriers?
China also shot a satellite with a missel from earth.
Lyle, my point has nothing to do with religion or how they want the women covered. On a personal note yes I think it is much more modest and appealing when a woman is covered then when she walks around with everything hanging out disrespecting herself or husband (if she ever will find a decent one with her feminist nudity) that I think you should be against based on what you have talked about femininity no?
My point rather was about a country going into another country and taking out a leader that it does not like and putting in another one. And that's what the United States did with mossadegh.
You reap what you sow. Hence the Islamic revolution and the problems now
With Ships and Missiles, China Is Ready to Challenge U.S. Navy in Pacific
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world...cid=spartanntp
A centerpiece of this strategy is an arsenal of high-speed ballistic missiles designed to strike moving ships. The latest versions, the DF-21D and, since 2016, the DF-26, are popularly known as “carrier killers” since they can threaten the most powerful vessels in the American fleet long before they get close to China.
The DF-26, which made its debut in a military parade in Beijing in 2015 and was tested in the Bohai Sea last year, has a range that would allow it to menace ships and bases as far away as Guam, according to the latest Pentagon report on the Chinese military, released this month. These missiles are almost impossible to detect and intercept, and are directed at moving targets by an increasingly sophisticated Chinese network of radar and satellites.
The United States is like Joe Louis when he fought Rocky Marciano. The United States is like Jack Johnson when he fought Jess Willard. The United States is a dilapidated out-of-shape living in the past wishful thinking kind of thing. The typical Chinese or Korean or Russian or Egyptian Soldier would kick the living s*** out of any American Soldier.
that's because the people from those countries are eating real food and doing real exercises but American soldiers are eating GMO garbage and getting excused from difficult basic training because it is racism or bigotry against fat people
disrespecting her husband? That’s pathetic. Why don’t you wear a sheet over your face? unlike those women you’d actually look better and like less of a twit.Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
Pathetic if rather someone sees not how semi naked women (or men) would not be disrespectful to their spouses in public.
Says the man who appears in just his shorts working out in a public park ;D Come on man. They don't own each other and so surely have the right to choose individually what is appropriate to wear. If men are going to look at women in bikinis etc sexually and women look at men in budgie smugglers in the same way then surely there is nothing to worry about. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
Geese, budgies ...roast chicken, fuck knows what that is all about..fowl :lickish: :yay2:
What a foul post 😀. I'm not saying people don't have the right the dress however they want and if they want to risk the nudity laws they can also go outside completely naked and risk being arrested of course everyone has the right to do that
All I am saying is that there used to be something sacred about the privacy of spouses and now they're they are on full display for the entire public to see their sex organs and Ogle at lust after and that goes for the men and the women by the way just to be clear
Master said.."Where"?
Pathetic to change the goalposts like that. Define semi naked? I think most people dont mind in the slightest if others find their spouse nice to look at. Where are sexual assaults(including amongst couples) more common? countries under sharia, or those where women can dress how they like?Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
As with everything, there's a common sense line. Most people don't mind if others find their spouse nice to look at, but they'd probably mind if others stared with their tongues hanging out while saying "hubba-hubba."
Then again if your spouse has enormous tits, and goes out with you wearing a see-through blouse or a plunging neckline showing tons of cleavage, you'd better expect some stares.
sexual assaults and rapes are much more common in Western countries where women walk around semi-naked and you know what semi-naked means so don't be disingenuousQuote:
Originally Posted by p4pkingPathetic to change the goalposts like that. Define semi naked? I think most people dont mind in the slightest if others find their spouse nice to look at. Where are sexual assaults(including amongst couples) more common? countries under sharia, or those where women can dress how they like?Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
I don't think the word pathetic is useful.
and Tito...always with the big jugs ;D:p
I included amongst couples for a reason. The statistics on sexual assaults aren’t reliable anywhere because most go unreported, but in strict Muslim countries that goes 100 fold, you know that so speak for yourself. I’m just wondering what kind of line you’d like drawn. Under sharia jeans and a sweater is severely punishable. You’d rather see women cover their faces in public? As I said, I’m sure most would feel the same about you.Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbustsexual assaults and rapes are much more common in Western countries where women walk around semi-naked and you know what semi-naked means so don't be disingenuousQuote:
Originally Posted by p4pkingPathetic to change the goalposts like that. Define semi naked? I think most people dont mind in the slightest if others find their spouse nice to look at. Where are sexual assaults(including amongst couples) more common? countries under sharia, or those where women can dress how they like?Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
Think a gal who faces getting stoned (and not the good kind) to death if she can't produce 4 men to corroborate her story of rape is going to be eager to be all "That dude raped me!"???? I mean maybe you're just trolling, but if serious that's pretty fucked up.Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbustsexual assaults and rapes are much more common in Western countries where women walk around semi-naked and you know what semi-naked means so don't be disingenuousQuote:
Originally Posted by p4pkingPathetic to change the goalposts like that. Define semi naked? I think most people dont mind in the slightest if others find their spouse nice to look at. Where are sexual assaults(including amongst couples) more common? countries under sharia, or those where women can dress how they like?Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
Triple b needs to learn how to pick his spots. Less is more, baby.
I'll beat anyone in a debate on this topic 24/7
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVCtkzIXYzQQuote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
If by “beat anyone in a debate on this topic” you mean, “prove how incompetent I am”, I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
bwaaaaHAHAHA 😂
I kind of agree with Brock here. I wouldn't want to be with a woman who shows cleavage and wears a mini skirt. I think women that dress like that do it solely for the attention and I don't want someone who is meant to be with me looking for attention. It is visual flirting. Borderline slutty.
Thankfully, neither of you have the option.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
In saying that Burka, mini skirt, all your own choice, but I do favor classy and stylish over slutty and revealing. Why would a woman wear a miniskirt when she has to take a subway and knows people can see her undies going up the escalator? Surely she knows people will be looking. I don't get it. It does become sexualisation to have breasts in the flesh revealed in front of you. There is something to be said for taste and modesty.