Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

europe and US going to war who would win

123457»

Comments

  • #182
    wyk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 456 ✭✭wyk


    Ahh, so that's the bloke sat next to me at O'briens the other day, then. I was wondering what he was on about...sumfin musta stuck.


    Wez
    Lirange wrote:
    Er ... Guy Fawkes?

    McVeigh? You're not related to Esteban Cambias are you? ;)


  • #183
    angelsfire
    Closed Accounts Posts: 72 ✭✭angelsfire


    If a war broke out between the US and Europe...there would be no winner. War brings no winners. Just losers. War isn't good no matter what country you live in. And thinking of more war out there in the world makes me shudder. Isn't the war going on in Iraq enough for now. Let's bring those brave men and women home before we start talking about more war!!

    (Mother of Soldier in Iraq)


  • #184
    Parsley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,144 ✭✭✭Parsley


    Capt'n Midnight wrote:
    Anyway I don't think the Canadians would be interested, they have already invaded the US and burnt down Washington DC so they don't need to prove anything.
    Was that not the British?

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


  • #185
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    Parsley wrote:
    Was that not the British?

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

    I think that wiki article needs to be re-editted.
    Canada is definitely the only country who ever managed to successfully invade the US (and burn large parts of its capital to the ground). Canada successfully fought off an invasion attempt by General Hull in the war of 1812, and Canadian forces under the command of Commander Ross, in 1814 occuppied and destroyed much of Washington DC. While their commander was English- the troops under his command were wholly Canadian, were thrilled at the prospect of revenge (General Hull had sacked and burnt Toronto 18 months previously at the battle of York).

    S.


  • #186
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,456 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Dar wrote:
    Bush couldn't get a majority with only TWO candidates. You do the math.

    That's odd. I just know my ballot sheet had more than two Presidential candidates on it. Indeed, there were at least six registered parties.

    Besides, in 2004, Bush got 50.7% of the vote.

    NTM


  • Advertisement
  • #187
    Terry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,061 ✭✭✭✭Terry


    You know damn well that there are only ever two viable candidates.
    One from the republican party and one from the democrats.
    Anyone else is viewed by the majority as a wasted vote.


  • #188
    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,556 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    Ralph Nader 08!


  • #189
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,446 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Manic Moran wrote:
    Besides, in 2004, Bush got 50.7% of the vote.
    impressive when you realise just how much of the voting is still done without diebold machines

    anyway if we wanted to take over the US, we would just buy the president and other politicians and best of all due to subsidies we could do it with money from the US treasury


  • #190
    eoin5
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,141 ✭✭✭eoin5


    I think these guys would beat the crap outta these guys


  • #191
    Acid_Violet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,295 ✭✭✭Acid_Violet


    Europe cos the rest of the world (bar Israel, possibly Australia and possibly some other places which don't come to mind) would be backing us!


  • Advertisement
  • #192
    kowloon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,507 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    eoin5 wrote:
    I think these guys would beat the crap outta these guys

    That post started off a mini wiki-hunt that resulted in this gem:
    The UK version of the single had to be put back due to a printing error on the sleeve, which missed out an 'o' to read The Final Cuntdown.


  • #193
    wyk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 456 ✭✭wyk


    Isn't that what this entire thread was all about?
    ;)

    Wez
    kowloon wrote:
    That post started off a mini wiki-hunt that resulted in this gem:


    The UK version of the single had to be put back due to a printing error on the sleeve, which missed out an 'o' to read The Final Cuntdown.


  • #194
    Rossibaby
    Closed Accounts Posts: 421 ✭✭Rossibaby


    europe,firstly we have great guerilla war abilities even in this country!then we have countries like england and russia,we'd win


  • #195
    kowloon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,507 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    I should have resisted the urge, now im going to have that theme in my head for the rest of the month.
    Maybe if i find its antithesis, the theme from grandstand, theyll cancel each other out.


  • #196
    wyk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 456 ✭✭wyk


    This is one of the reason invading the US might be bad policy:


    By Laura MacInnis Tue Aug 28, 1:25 PM ET

    GENEVA (Reuters) - The United States has 90 guns for every 100 citizens, making it the most heavily armed society in the world, a report released on Tuesday said.
    ADVERTISEMENT

    U.S. citizens own 270 million of the world's 875 million known firearms, according to the Small Arms Survey 2007 by the Geneva-based Graduate Institute of International Studies.

    It's actually one of the reasons I've left. The gun violence in that country is just ridiculous.

    Wez


  • #197
    Reku
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,766 ✭✭✭Reku


    Another reason why Europe would win: if the US tried to bomb/nuke/invade most of their ordinance/troops would end up elsewhere as most of them can't find Europe on the map.:D


  • #198
    inspiron77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15 ✭inspiron77


    i think Europe will win..my 2cents..


  • #199
    BrotherTotz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 52 ✭✭BrotherTotz


    Given that no one else would ever side with America and that they could be up against some sort of super army force:

    Organised with German efficiency
    Supported by the sheer number mass of Russia
    With Swiss financial management/timekeeping
    With British military training
    With Turkish determination/fanatics (one of the largest armies in the world btw!)
    That would always look good and be well presented (Italians)
    Kept fed and nourished with French food
    And aye yea the Irish there...for the craic (morale)...did dilly aye..potatoes whoop!! *starts clapping and dancing*

    As well as the confidence/aloofness of the French and Brits all rolled into one!!!

    Ahhhhhh stereotypes....

    Not a chance them yanks would have...after they realise Europe isnt part of Alaska

    Actually…Vietnam...Afghanistan...Iraq…...not really on the best run a form now on that side a things are they?


  • #200
    Dub13
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,254 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dub13


    Terry wrote:
    You know damn well that there are only ever two viable candidates.


    You could say the same about our election.


  • #201
    Terry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,061 ✭✭✭✭Terry


    Not really.
    I vote Labour and my local TD was re-elected.


  • Advertisement
  • #202
    Dub13
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,254 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dub13


    Terry wrote:
    Not really.
    I vote Labour and my local TD was re-elected.


    There was not much chance we would get a non FF or FG Taoiseach.


  • #203
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,456 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    wyk wrote:
    This is one of the reason invading the US might be bad policy:

    A fact not lost on the Japanese in WWII. With the US in such disarray and unpreparedness, a raid on the West Coast would have been quite feasible. When asked after the war why they didn't do such, a Japanese admiral stated
    We did indeed know much about your preparedness. We knew that probably every second home in your country contained firearms. We knew that your country actually had state championships for private citizens shooting military rifles. We were not fools to set foot in such quicksand.

    Yamamoto purportedly used the phrase "A rifle behind every blade of grass" when discussing the same concept.
    It's actually one of the reasons I've left. The gun violence in that country is just ridiculous.

    To each their own. It's one of the reasons I went the other way: Target/recreational shooting in Ireland at the time was virtually non-existant, and I happen to enjoy the sport.
    Another reason why Europe would win: if the US tried to bomb/nuke/invade most of their ordinance/troops would end up elsewhere as most of them can't find Europe on the map

    Ah, but although most American's can't find anything on a map, see this cartoon from 2002.

    http://www.snopes.com/quotes/graphics/iraq.jpg


    NTM


Advertisement