Who is most evil?
- Thread starter Bob McDob
- Start date
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
We did, multiple times -- Tolwyn most probably referrs to the fact that they never responded to our political declarations...
I must say that on the back of Fleet Action, where is says, "true to the tradition of democracies everywhere, the Confederation falls for it" has got to be one of the funniest things I've heard in WC. (Since it's true, and the only person who could have come up with such a thing is Jukaga. Seems like the Kilrathi need their own psych department like Confed had. 
)
)Thymerlord
Rear Admiral
The only thing I can think that he meant was America with Pearl Harbor and England(or maybe Chamberlin) with Hitler.
Quarto
Unknown Enemy
The statement on the back of Fleet Action was merely supposed to get your attention . And, while I don't know anything about the publishing business, it seems probable that it was the marketing department, not Forstchen, that wrote it.
Yet, if you were to point out that the US economy did not do badly during the Vietnam War, you'd be quite right. It's a matter of scale. Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan today - none of these were/are really wars as far as the US is concerned, not in the Confed-Kilrathi War sort of way. They were/are tiny little conflicts, where the US' losses, though at first glance quite large, were nothing compared to the US economy's ability to replace them. So even these conflicts are more comparable to WWI than WWII - at least from the US' point of view.
...Look at Vietnam, from the other side, though - the Vietnamese won, didn't they? So how come they still haven't recovered from the damage?
. And, while I don't know anything about the publishing business, it seems probable that it was the marketing department, not Forstchen, that wrote it.I did... it all boils down to his last sentence, where he states that all his points lead to the conclusion that war is good for the economy. It is this conclusion that I disagree with, and I certainly did not twist anything for the sake of arguing.
You would certainly be correct, if one was to ignore the insigificant fact that when you actually get involved in a war, you tend to lose people, resources, and infrastructure, all of which has an annoying tendency to add up to a lot more than the profit the country made in fuelling the war.
No. Supporting puppet nations does not mean that you get involved in the war itself - the Vietnam War is an exception, not the rule. Most of the conflicts that can be considered collectively as the Cold War did not directly involve US or USSR troops, nor did they take place within US or USSR borders. The Cold War was almost never a military confrontation between the USA and the USSR. If the US economy indeed got a boost out of this (though I have yet to see any data about that), it was on a basis similar to WWI - sell arms, sell training, offer loans, and try to stay out.
Yet, if you were to point out that the US economy did not do badly during the Vietnam War, you'd be quite right. It's a matter of scale. Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan today - none of these were/are really wars as far as the US is concerned, not in the Confed-Kilrathi War sort of way. They were/are tiny little conflicts, where the US' losses, though at first glance quite large, were nothing compared to the US economy's ability to replace them. So even these conflicts are more comparable to WWI than WWII - at least from the US' point of view.
...Look at Vietnam, from the other side, though - the Vietnamese won, didn't they? So how come they still haven't recovered from the damage?
Wulf
Vice Admiral
First of all, it is very offending to me and to those who served in Vietnam to call it a 'conflict'. The last thing I would say to my neighbor, a sniper during that WAR, is,"Vietnam wasn't really a war." All the stories he's shared with me about all the shit that went on over there doesn't deserve to be summed up as a "tiny little conflict." Also, try telling my grandfather the same about Korea.
Second, some very good family friends of mine, who are Vietnamese, make trips to their homeland at least once every two years. They take many pictures, and from those pics plus the accounts of their trips, Vietnam is doing quite well these days. As a matter of fact, US/Vietnam ties are becoming a lot closer these days, and our recent lifting of business sanctions with them will help them prosper even greater.
Bob McDob
Better Health Through Less Flavor
Well, the truth is (and I mean no offense to you or veterans of ANY military) that Vietnam WAS, at least compared to WWII, a 'tiny little conflict' - sure, hellish and stupid enough for twenty wars, but a 'conflict' all the same. Obviously, Quarto's looking strategic while you're down in the trenches - with all due respect.
Also, what does your grandfather think of MacArthur?
Also, what does your grandfather think of MacArthur?
Battler Hawke
Spaceman
Originally posted by Quarto
[B
No. Supporting puppet nations does not mean that you get involved in the war itself - the Vietnam War is an exception, not the rule. Most of the conflicts that can be considered collectively as the Cold War did not directly involve US or USSR troops, nor did they take place within US or USSR borders. The Cold War was almost never a military confrontation between the USA and the USSR. If the US economy indeed got a boost out of this (though I have yet to see any data about that), it was on a basis similar to WWI - sell arms, sell training, offer loans, and try to stay out.
during the korean war airplanes from 1 of our carriers got into a fight with ussr airplanes from one of there bases in the ussr.
there where other but in most of the cases they where not recagnised by ether side.