Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PadFoot90)
    Aren't they very close, or even passing the US in thier number of soliders?

    They have a MUCH larger army in terms of numbers.... I forget the actual figures
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawzzzzzz)
    They have a MUCH larger army in terms of numbers.... I forget the actual figures
    I know china has 2.5 million, i forget the US
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PadFoot90)
    I know china has 2.5 million, i forget the US
    According to this, the US army is 482,000 strong while the total armed forces have 1.2 million people
    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...14_army29.html
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawzzzzzz)
    Thats not strictly true - the purpose is to protect the US - the benefit (whether it comes or not) is a welcomed bi-product

    Yes it is. Protection of the U.S. is one goal. Spreading freedom is another.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moncal)
    Yes it is. Protection of the U.S. is one goal. Spreading freedom is another.
    but are they better off free? in the case or iraq they were safer with sadam in power.
    forget bin laden or sadam the greatest threat to world peace is george W ( hummmm wonder what that stands for) bush.
    the sooner hes out of power the better and he can take his puppet blair with him. i hope the two are very happy together, live a nice life, have lots of children together, but r never seen again.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moncal)
    Yes it is. Protection of the U.S. is one goal. Spreading freedom is another.
    Its a welcomed possibility that can be worked towards - the US does not intervene in nations to spread freedom - Half of Africa and The Middle east know that ....
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lee86)
    but are they better off free? in the case or iraq they were safer with sadam in power.
    forget bin laden or sadam the greatest threat to world peace is george W ( hummmm wonder what that stands for) bush.
    the sooner hes out of power the better and he can take his puppet blair with him. i hope the two are very happy together, live a nice life, have lots of children together, but r never seen again.

    This makes no sense really - you may say they arent better off but only about 20% of Iraqi's agree with you ... so I see no basis for the claim...

    Also I get sick of people calling Blair his puppet - JUST BECAUSE they came to the same decision - why does that mean that he HAS to be doing it because Bush is? Theres just NO proof to that fact - its just a nice way for people who dont like the war or Blair to insult him ...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lee86)
    but are they better off free? in the case or iraq they were safer with sadam in power.
    forget bin laden or sadam the greatest threat to world peace is george W ( hummmm wonder what that stands for) bush.
    the sooner hes out of power the better and he can take his puppet blair with him. i hope the two are very happy together, live a nice life, have lots of children together, but r never seen again.

    Of course they are better of free. Everybody is better off free. Have you ever considered the posibility that blair just has some common sense?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moncal)
    Of course they are better of free. Everybody is better off free. Have you ever considered the posibility that blair just has some common sense?
    no-one is truly free anyway, we must all live by some rules and confides we have just made them free in the terms of the western meaning of free.
    and as for common sense and Mr im so far up bushs' a**e you dont know where he ends and i start Blair, lets just say it doesn't seem to be a happy relationship, although it seems to be a problem shared my many political leaders.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    bush has to answer to congress and in that fact he is not a danger to the world. anyways most of american politics is under the control of industry whether they choose to believe so or not. what is freedom today anyways? eating american food? listening to american music? dressing in american clothes? there's going to be nothing left of this world. i can see that's the future.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.uk-learning.net/t39473.html
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by operato)
    world war cannot exist as there are too many alliances and pacts. say for instance america attacks somewhere, there would be the UN or so to deal with. the warfare of tomorrow will consist of terrorism, that way you can never lose.
    What do you mean if the US attacks anywhere, there would be the UN or so to deal with? I know that is the way it is supposed to be, but ust look at what happened in Iraq. The UN was completely ignored by George Dubya Bush and his allies.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sire)
    What do you mean if the US attacks anywhere, there would be the UN or so to deal with? I know that is the way it is supposed to be, but ust look at what happened in Iraq. The UN was completely ignored by George Dubya Bush and his allies.

    That is because the UN refused to do what was neccesary.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moncal)
    That is because the UN refused to do what was neccesary.

    Thats a wonderful attitude -

    what the US wants = necessary
    Therefore
    If UN disagrees = They refuse to do what is necessary
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Democracy Vs. Islam

    2020 A.D.

    Get your tickets now.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If WW3 was inedible it would be USA + (EU and some other democracies) Vs China and their allies. If you play computer games you will notice China is usually the enemy, since the USSR collapsed and Nazi's are history.

    If it became total war, as in everything or nothing, then USA would win as their nuclear capability far outmatched the Soviets; China had a much smaller arsenal. Technologically USA has state of the art weapons and defence capabilities, much of it we probably we don’t know, the Chinese just managed to put a man in space last year.

    Invading USA would be very hard as I think there aren’t any communist allies on the continent, on the other hand invading China could be easier as Europe could be the bridge and logistics theatre thus making it a world war.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saintsin)
    Invading USA would be very hard as I think there aren’t any communist allies on the continent, on the other hand invading China could be easier as Europe could be the bridge and logistics theatre thus making it a world war.

    Plus everybody and their dog has a gun in the U.S.

    Thats a wonderful attitude -
    That's not what I said. I merely stated since the the UN did nothing then they did much less than neccesary.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moncal)
    Plus everybody and their dog has a gun in the U.S.



    That's not what I said. I merely stated since the the UN did nothing then they did much less than neccesary.

    I misunderstood - apologies
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maddock)
    Democracy Vs. Islam

    2020 A.D.

    Get your tickets now.
    so where does that leave Turkey (an Islamic democracy)? Would they have to play the role of Switzerland in this one?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Anyone care to tell me what arguments people are using? Or must I go through and read them?
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: May 5, 2004
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
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.