Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Who has been a bigger threat to world peace? watch

Announcements
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Yup. They ****ed the japs up in manchuria. Unlucky the atom bomb ended the war early.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    And when did the Russians get involved in Manchuria?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Biggest threat to world peace? our stupidity and ignorance. And our need to **** measure.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    World peace will never be. People are the problem. Too selfish.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    And when did the Russians get involved in Manchuria?
    Roflllll u need to read more boy

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HucktheForde)
    Roflllll u need to read more boy

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Was it before or after they defeated germany? I'll give you a hint, after marshal Zukhov had conquered Berlin he went East.

    So, the russian army who could only fight on one front at a time with financial, military and equipment support from the U.S., who were in turn fighting on several fronts.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Israel and their Zionist allies in NATO
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Morons - especially with short dicks.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Neo-conservatives, Muslim extremists and Wahhabis, North Korea, many, MANY warlords in Africa, etc.

    It's impossible to point to a single group and blame them for all of the problems.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jibola240)
    It wasn't done for no reason, the Japanese refused to end the war, so the bombing was a last desperate measure. Also USA may be been the ones to drop the bombs but it was in collaboration with their allies, so it's unfair to pin this on just them.
    I often wonder if the people of today could have fought and won a world war. Certainly in Britain we have too many more concerned about the rules of war than achieving victory.

    Japan declared war and suffered the consequences of their actions.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by radicalboujie)
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...051601625.html
    After the 1991 revolution of getting rid of the dictator siad barre, unrest still occurred. Violent tribalist war lords were being funded by America to keep the country "secular" while in fact they were carrying out slaughters, mass rapes of women, and if you weren't of their tribe you suffered even more hence the state Somalis is still in now.
    This is what happens after US intervention failed. (and if your somali you know what tribalism means and what it causes)
    Posted from TSR Mobile
    So the european colonial powers who divided up Somalia along their own interests rather than tribal or ethnic lines have no play in this ?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pocahontas lol)
    Slavery. And yes folks, it's still happening today.
    Shame nobody took any interest in my slavery thread, it explain all the models through the ages to this current one.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NHM713)
    Shame nobody took any interest in my slavery thread, it explain all the models through the ages to this current one.
    Link?

    And well...this may be a student website

    but it isn't hardly an academic website where those kinds of topics are popular. You're better off discussing like...obesity. lol
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pocahontas lol)
    Link?

    And well...this may be a student website

    but it isn't hardly an academic website where those kinds of topics are popular. You're better off discussing like...obesity. lol
    Lol!


    This is the link to the thread. http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=3113519

    This is the video, which is also in the thread.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Certainly in Britain we have too many more concerned about the rules of war than achieving victory.

    Japan declared war and suffered the consequences of their actions.
    Exactly
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Was it before or after they defeated germany? I'll give you a hint, after marshal Zukhov had conquered Berlin he went East.

    So, the russian army who could only fight on one front at a time with financial, military and equipment support from the U.S., who were in turn fighting on several fronts.
    The soviets have been fighting the japs since 1932, boy. The fight wasn't continuous because Japan did not invade soviet aggressively unlike Germany.. 1945 was the final invasion that settles the score. you really do need to read more :rofl:

    and you are just about right. America is indeed 'supporting' and 'supporting' only before pearl habour. The US supported and funded the soviets so they can do the real fighting. And even when that happens the states cannot take both out at once but have to focus on germany first, then japan.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NHM713)
    After watching a video, which posed the same question, I wanted to know what members of the TSR community thought was the answer.
    Religion.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    World peace is unattainable, only temporary silence.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Abrahamic religions, and the countries that follow them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DiddyDec)
    Religious Leaders. In fact religion as a whole.
    Right, because it is priests, rabbis, and imams directing the bombs and buying off the politicians?

    Or .... the other way around?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    So, the russian army who could only fight on one front at a time with financial, military and equipment support from the U.S., who were in turn fighting on several fronts.
    The United States did not supply the USSR with most of its weaponry. The USSR's rapid industrialisation programme, with its great human toll, managed that. The complication was a good portion of the factories were on land rapidly seized by the Nazis in 1941. In any case, it was the Soviets fighting head on while the US and Britain sat on their arses in England and fought skirmishes in North Africa. The invasion of Italy was only in 1943 and Normandy in 1944. It seemed they were curious to see who might win the Eastern Front!

    After all, both Churchill and Truman at different times suggested that the West permit Stalin and Hitler duke it out!

    The Soviets anyway lost 27 million. I think the US was close to one million. The Pacific Theatre had some concentrated, fierce naval and air battles but was not the slaughterhouse that the European Theatre was.

    And you should know all this.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.