You are welcome to find any undertones you wish, be my guest. I never said the people of Korea or Vietnam were "dirty third world savages", this is your false positive expression.
But look on the bright side - the US grunts who fought in Korea and Vietnam may just agree with your terminology of "dirty third world savages". So you call all these brave US soldiers RACIST ? They sure were and felt very strongly about it..
well, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...
I didn't call you a racist, I said that your post had disturbing racist undertones.
what do you think the undertones of saying that America were driven out of Vietnam by guys on bicycles. (yeah, lol cause that's what the far east is famous for! they can't afford cars!)
You're either being intentionally critical of the Vietnamese and playing them down as some kind of third world nation to increase the spite of your post against the US army, or you genuinely think that about the Vietnamese (that they are only poor farmers on bikes), or are stupid. I don't know or care which.
The fact is that they weren't just poor people on bicycles, they were a very well trained army/militia, with immediate and in depth knowledge of their surroundings and geography, they were well armed.
They were able to move around their jungles (their as in the jungles of their country) quickly and easily, and silently.
they knew instinctively about the local flora and fauna, what was safe to eat and what wasn't, they knew that cooking on charcoal would be quick and easy, and virtually undetectable due to the limited amount of smoke.
they knew, instinctively, what it took the Americans, years to figure out. even trying to cook food gave away positions of troops before they figured out how to make the smokeless cookers that the enemy were using.
and
that is the threat that North Korea poses, if you bring a fight to someone else's country, and you are unfamiliar with the terrain/flora/fauna/seasons/weather, then you are at an immediate disadvantage.
It is rather common to be called "racist" by people who do not understand a single thing that is being discussed, but only focus on any criticism of a race or people and immediately scream RACIST !
i'd like to believe that I'm actually showing a better understanding that you, Mr "landmas is the most important things, but little countries can still kick the most well funded military ass..." at least I've been consistent in what I've said.
far from me not understanding the subject matter, the point is that race has nothing to do with military strength, I don't understand why you've bought it into the conversation, if not to say "look inferior race beats US army"?
-please don't take the time to enlighten me, I don't want the thread to deviate too much from the original subject, (That a guy has died)
It is usually a means of admitting argumentative and intellectual defeat.
Admitting defeat, you have a strange idea of how discussions work, you don't admit defeat, you concede that you were wrong, or misinformed and you learn something... (or at least that's what I do during discussions/exchanges of ideas)
the warning works like this.
I am a member here, I talk to you and with you as a member. I don't consider myself more knowledgeable than anyone else on the facts of the Vietnam war, indeed aside from having seen Forest Gump or Full Metal Jacket I've got no experience at all, because, I wasn't even alive, and whilst I have a friend who's father did actually fight there, he doesn't talk about it. -a lot of people involved in that war don't talk about it, because it was not a good time for anyone. as with most wars.
given that you appear to be older than I am, and was possibly alive at the time, you may be able to remember stuff that I can only read about. it may be that you are more knowledgeable that I am, and indeed I could learn something from you about this war.
so in this conversation, as with pretty much all of the conversations, I consider myself equal to other members,
but
you'll also see "site team" under my user name, that means when I say, "I'm starting to find your posting style disturbing", that you can take it as a warning that you need to change. I didn't just call you a racist, I said that there were undertones of that in your post. it was a friendly way of asking you to think about what you're writing before pressing submit.
as a moderator here, it's a part of "the job" to not let conversations descend into what this thread appears to fast be becoming. (a huge mess of misguided patriotism and xenophobia)
(actually xenophobic would have been a better word to use than racist, but it was late, I was tired and not feeling particularly lexical)
Now that I've better described what I meant, I hope you'll understand, perhaps try re-reading what you've written and you might see the same as what I saw in it, maybe not. in any case, it's not open for discussion... it's just a message, think about what you're saying.
and now to get back on topic...
My standard issue green socks have more combat experience than the entire french population... Do any of your special forces even have combat experience or does it consist entirely of waving white flags?
that may be so, but the French
foreign legion is called that because, whilst they fight on behalf of France, they are not French.
Not sure I get the part about waving white flags... (I understand it's a joke aimed at the French, but John Bull is British?)
