Doesnt 'fighting', by definition, imply more attacks by both sides? After Pearl Harbor, when we declared war on Japan, did their attacks decrease?Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
Printable View
Doesnt 'fighting', by definition, imply more attacks by both sides? After Pearl Harbor, when we declared war on Japan, did their attacks decrease?Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
You are totally right but just for arguments sake I will interject that no one thought Germany could be a threat to the world either and the US is considerably larger with more resources. If our next president had a little tiny mustache and could speak with some charisma the world should watch out. ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by kagemusha
Yesdachi.Thats my biggest fear.It would mean the end of the world,im afraid.You are right about the Germany before WWII the world just couldnt believe what the Nazis represented.Instead they lived in a falce hope.
Wise man hopes for the best and prepares for the worse.~:)
Panzer,Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
when I was a little boy I saw all the trouble in the world (Vietnam, Israel and so on). My idea was to conquer the world and make it a better and peaceful world. I had no doubt that I could handle that. Hey, this idiot from Austria had almost made it and I was much smarter then. Guess it was due to a DNA demage - I am German you know. A couple of months older and wiser I realized that there were two hurdles:
1) Obviously I could conquer the world. Problem was to keep it peaceful. A strong central foreign government would create lots of 'freedom' fighters. So I would be busy to kill them all the time. That did not match with my goals.
2) Nukes. Nukes are a reality. And to conquer the world I had to depopulate big parts of it.
So I realized that the whole plan just would not pay. And I started working on my scientific career.
Very telling that the one point Panzer doesn't confront is the one that shows the fundamental inconsistency behind his views.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman