superman22x
Golden Master
- Messages
- 7,904
Armed Chinese Troops in China!
- Thread starter superman22x
- Start date
~Darkseeker~
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 2,494
- Location
- Welwyn Garden City, United Kingdom
Not a very good metaphor, military occupation of the US by China would be a nuclear threat.
OP
OP
superman22x
Golden Master
- Messages
- 7,904
I made a mistake on the Title... meant to say in Texas, not China, lmao!
I don't think it would mean a nuclear threat any more than Iraq. No one will launch against us because we have enough Nukes hidden out at sea to blow the moon up.
I don't think it would mean a nuclear threat any more than Iraq. No one will launch against us because we have enough Nukes hidden out at sea to blow the moon up.
Ummm...
that's all very well if you don't know history.
the video is clearly emotional, but pretty much debased of quite a few facts.
the example that Rome fell because it was bankrupt is laughable, Rome didn't fall because it was bankrupt.
sooo, another politician just lied to you. they made a good point, did it well. then spoiled their message with a lie that relies on people being too stupid to either know or check the facts...
that's all very well if you don't know history.
the video is clearly emotional, but pretty much debased of quite a few facts.
the example that Rome fell because it was bankrupt is laughable, Rome didn't fall because it was bankrupt.
sooo, another politician just lied to you. they made a good point, did it well. then spoiled their message with a lie that relies on people being too stupid to either know or check the facts...
~Darkseeker~
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 2,494
- Location
- Welwyn Garden City, United Kingdom
"You'd rather stand in the fog of your inability to google" I think Root is saying 
If Obama was a dictator, and said he was going to give nuclear weapons to a known and dangerous terrorist organisation or something, and China intervened with tactical nuclear action, I'd say that's justifyable. But since America is a democratic country and part of an alliance of other fair, democratic countries I doubt this would happen frankly.
Also, China would absolutely destroy America if war was ever declared between the two I think. The willpower of the chinese would be formidable, combined with their nuclear stockpile and the vast size of their army, and the patriotism of their people for their country. Being a communist country they can drum up huge amounts of support and fighting spirit to protect the way they operate.
If Obama was a dictator, and said he was going to give nuclear weapons to a known and dangerous terrorist organisation or something, and China intervened with tactical nuclear action, I'd say that's justifyable. But since America is a democratic country and part of an alliance of other fair, democratic countries I doubt this would happen frankly.
Also, China would absolutely destroy America if war was ever declared between the two I think. The willpower of the chinese would be formidable, combined with their nuclear stockpile and the vast size of their army, and the patriotism of their people for their country. Being a communist country they can drum up huge amounts of support and fighting spirit to protect the way they operate.
OP
OP
superman22x
Golden Master
- Messages
- 7,904
Rome collapsed under the weight of it's own decadence, a path we seem to be hellbent on following.
sniperviper21
Golden Master
- Messages
- 5,460
- Location
- USA
"You'd rather stand in the fog of your inability to google" I think Root is saying
If Obama was a dictator, and said he was going to give nuclear weapons to a known and dangerous terrorist organisation or something, and China intervened with tactical nuclear action, I'd say that's justifyable. But since America is a democratic country and part of an alliance of other fair, democratic countries I doubt this would happen frankly.
Also, China would absolutely destroy America if war was ever declared between the two I think. The willpower of the chinese would be formidable, combined with their nuclear stockpile and the vast size of their army, and the patriotism of their people for their country. Being a communist country they can drum up huge amounts of support and fighting spirit to protect the way they operate.
apparently you don't realise with all this countries rednecks and their guns...plus the military.
China has no chance. Plus our military is better equipped.
besides the Chinese wouldn't get past the rockies.
they are not used to that climate.
Like Germans invading Russia.
moving on..
Yeah, because it's not like China has mountains or snow... oh wait.
and it's not like a load of Chinese people weren't in the Rockies before... I'll admit that many of them died but that was mainly due to mining accidents, being over works, explosives going off... and since I doubt that any invading forces would be building a transcontinental railway line again...
I think that the reason for the collapse of Rome is probably quite long and complicated, and I'll be the first to admit that I don't understand them all. but I can tell you pretty much for sure, it wasn't simple because the empire went bankrupt. Which is what the video appears to say...
Other than that it's a very clever video, I'm not sure that the message in the video isn't a bit too clever for some people though... I just find it a huge shame that the video whilst pretty factual throughout had to go and mess it up at the end with a pointless lie.
OP
OP
superman22x
Golden Master
- Messages
- 7,904
I'm still not seeing the lie... And I think the point you are making about Rome is sort of irrelevant. The fact is it's very similar.
the point...
Rome had slave labourers, and military might, they didn't need to afford anything, the only thing that Romans really needed to do was keep their citizens happy, and their soldiers busy.
The largest accepted reason as to why Rome fell is that neither of these were really that possible, as a nation their values were based not so much on what they had, but getting what they did not have, thus once Rome had conquered the known world their armies sat fallow.
without any thing left to go and get, the get up and go people of Rome fell bored, it wasn't that they couldn't afford the decadence, because the decadence essentially cost nothing. Slaves built the roads, slaves fought in the armies, slaves farmed the fields. The reason that Rome fell was that for the original Roman ethos, the decadence in itself was repugnant, corruption followed in their democracies and eventually the empire fell...
the biggest point is that it wasn't, or solely to do with Money at all... it wasn't even largely to do with Money, Money plaid very little part in it.
and that's my point.
the video is perfect. why insert a factually controversial and practically irrelevant point in at the end? all it does is make a guy making a very good point into a guy making a flawed argument, with floored comparisons, that dilute the message.
Rome had slave labourers, and military might, they didn't need to afford anything, the only thing that Romans really needed to do was keep their citizens happy, and their soldiers busy.
The largest accepted reason as to why Rome fell is that neither of these were really that possible, as a nation their values were based not so much on what they had, but getting what they did not have, thus once Rome had conquered the known world their armies sat fallow.
without any thing left to go and get, the get up and go people of Rome fell bored, it wasn't that they couldn't afford the decadence, because the decadence essentially cost nothing. Slaves built the roads, slaves fought in the armies, slaves farmed the fields. The reason that Rome fell was that for the original Roman ethos, the decadence in itself was repugnant, corruption followed in their democracies and eventually the empire fell...
the biggest point is that it wasn't, or solely to do with Money at all... it wasn't even largely to do with Money, Money plaid very little part in it.
and that's my point.
the video is perfect. why insert a factually controversial and practically irrelevant point in at the end? all it does is make a guy making a very good point into a guy making a flawed argument, with floored comparisons, that dilute the message.
