France Alarmed at Obama's Iranian Capitulation

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Incidentally, does anyone seriously believe that all it would take to wipe out ninety percent of the American population is to turn off the electricity?

Granted, Americans today are not made of the same stuff as the folks who subdued THE ENTIRE NORTH AMERICAN CONTINENT without electricity, but ninety percent?

Really?

Have we really become so insipid, weak and frail?[/quote]

I’d place a fair sized bet that the number would exceed 50%. Wouldn’t happen overnight though.

Have you done any extensive reading on the subject?

The ripple effect of the effects of a destroyed power grid are stupendous.[/quote]

I don’t know what the death toll would be but it would be absolutely hideous. I don’t see how you could feed big population centers in modern times without power.

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Incidentally, does anyone seriously believe that all it would take to wipe out ninety percent of the American population is to turn off the electricity?

Granted, Americans today are not made of the same stuff as the folks who subdued THE ENTIRE NORTH AMERICAN CONTINENT without electricity, but ninety percent?

Really?

Have we really become so insipid, weak and frail?[/quote]

I’d place a fair sized bet that the number would exceed 50%. Wouldn’t happen overnight though.

Have you done any extensive reading on the subject?

The ripple effect of a destroyed power grid are stupendous.[/quote]

The more I think about it, the more plausible it becomes. I think a sizable percentage of the population would simply kill themselves because no more televised football or Xbox.

But hey, think of how much less crowded it would be!

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Incidentally, does anyone seriously believe that all it would take to wipe out ninety percent of the American population is to turn off the electricity?

Granted, Americans today are not made of the same stuff as the folks who subdued THE ENTIRE NORTH AMERICAN CONTINENT without electricity, but ninety percent?

Really?

Have we really become so insipid, weak and frail?[/quote]

I’d place a fair sized bet that the number would exceed 50%. Wouldn’t happen overnight though.

Have you done any extensive reading on the subject?

The ripple effect of the effects of a destroyed power grid are stupendous.[/quote]

I don’t know what the death toll would be but it would be absolutely hideous. I don’t see how you could feed big population centers in modern times without power.
[/quote]

Oh, I don’t know, maybe city people will be forced to learn how to grow their own fucking food.

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Incidentally, does anyone seriously believe that all it would take to wipe out ninety percent of the American population is to turn off the electricity?

Granted, Americans today are not made of the same stuff as the folks who subdued THE ENTIRE NORTH AMERICAN CONTINENT without electricity, but ninety percent?

Really?

Have we really become so insipid, weak and frail?[/quote]

I’d place a fair sized bet that the number would exceed 50%. Wouldn’t happen overnight though.

Have you done any extensive reading on the subject?

The ripple effect of the effects of a destroyed power grid are stupendous.[/quote]

I don’t know what the death toll would be but it would be absolutely hideous. I don’t see how you could feed big population centers in modern times without power.
[/quote]

Oh, I don’t know, maybe city people will be forced to learn how to grow their own fucking food.[/quote]

There’s a learning curve and you need real estate. In the meantime, I suspect lots of people would starve.

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Incidentally, does anyone seriously believe that all it would take to wipe out ninety percent of the American population is to turn off the electricity?

Granted, Americans today are not made of the same stuff as the folks who subdued THE ENTIRE NORTH AMERICAN CONTINENT without electricity, but ninety percent?

Really?

Have we really become so insipid, weak and frail?[/quote]

I’d place a fair sized bet that the number would exceed 50%. Wouldn’t happen overnight though.

Have you done any extensive reading on the subject?

The ripple effect of the effects of a destroyed power grid are stupendous.[/quote]

I don’t know what the death toll would be but it would be absolutely hideous. I don’t see how you could feed big population centers in modern times without power.
[/quote]

Oh, I don’t know, maybe city people will be forced to learn how to grow their own fucking food.[/quote]

There’s a learning curve and you need real estate. In the meantime, I suspect lots of people would starve. [/quote]

Yeah, well, they probably all vote Democrat anyways. So fuck 'em.

Or no… wait… we were on a Nazi sympathiser kick, weren’t we?

“Zese vifty perzent are prezicely ze people zat ve vould not mind zey are missing, ja?”

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
But Bismark, you are failing to take into account the fact that Iran is rumored to have in their possession copies of blueprints of a Chinese bomb that some experts believe might be able to be modified to fit onto the long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles that it is assumed that they might have in the near future!!!
[/quote]

I hear they have a stockpile of Vergeltungswaffe 2 rockets. [/quote]

Ausgezeignet.

Then they can maybe hit the general vicinity of Tikrit from their western border.
[/quote]

Ein Unternehmen gegen die Untermenschen.

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
But Bismark, you are failing to take into account the fact that Iran is rumored to have in their possession copies of blueprints of a Chinese bomb that some experts believe might be able to be modified to fit onto the long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles that it is assumed that they might have in the near future!!!
[/quote]

I hear they have a stockpile of Vergeltungswaffe 2 rockets. [/quote]

Ausgezeignet.

Then they can maybe hit the general vicinity of Tikrit from their western border.
[/quote]

Ein Unternehmen gegen die Untermenschen.[/quote]

Vielleicht die Religion ist das Opium des Volkes, aber der Hass ist das Amphetamin des Untermenschen.

[quote]pushharder wrote:

If you honestly think China didn’t support Vietnam during the war you are dumber than any Yank on any short bus in all the land.

Go do your homework and leave your ignorant belittling somewhere else where folks don’t know any better.[/quote]

Reading comprehension, reading comprehension is lacking.

I said “supported reluctantly”. Like the US does with Ukraine, although from ineptitude and not cynicism, I could elaborate how, if Vietnamese mattered to the Chinese we would have seen another influx of “volunteers” like in Korea and not half-assed efforts designed to extract maximum casualties from Vietnamese and maximum material support and costs from the USSR.

If the Chinese were supporting North Vietnam and waging a proxy war, Nixon wouldn’t have run into their arms to reestablish the US-China relationship.

But it doesn’t matter, because - you know, reading comprehension…

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
So, the consensus was my articles were pure # 4 !

How about this one: Iran celebrates the framework of a nuclear deal.

Still waiting to hear from Biz about how if the Soviets were wrong for waging total war in Afghanistan, than how our “nation building” turned out to be a total bust there as well…Two sides to the war coin, each came up empty.[/quote]

But the Soviets were commies! Oh I get what your sayin’…[/quote]
Actually Biz was the one who made the comment in some thread in regards to a comment by chicken who said we should bomb the enemy all to hell to which Biz responded “how’d that work out for the Russians?”. To which I replied " the Russians brutalized the Afghans and fueled a popular uprising. We on the other hand attempted to “nation build”… So what went wrong? What should we have done? And how did we screw up?". Best of my knowledge Biz probably has me on ignore or some shit…[/quote]

I’m not ignoring your post, but your questions are enormous in scope. Two theses in fact, and given I’m currently working on one of my own, I wouldn’t be able to put forth the time and effort to adaquately address them. Basically, Angrychicken thinks it’s in the American interest to deliberately target civilian populations in states that terrorists or insurgents that use terrorist tactics reside. I think that his “strategy” is indescribably wrongheaded and untenable.
[/quote]

Why? In these terrorist MUSLIM countries, the civilians are a fucking part of the resistance! There are two common reasons for this 1) they are ideologically aligned and help the terrorists because they WANT to, because “fuck America”. Or B) they are afraid of the terrorists MORE than they are afraid of us.

Bombing the shit out of them solves both problems quite neatly. Our current problem is that the rules of engagement SUCK. Soldiers on the ground cant kill anyone not firing at them - even if it compromises a mission and guarantees they WILL soon be fired on, while drones can have as much “collateral damage” as they want. That seems a wee bit backwards to me.

Bombing the shit out of muslim countries that support terrorism accomplishes a very important goal: LESS MUSLIMS ON THE PLANET.

Does ANYONE here who is not a camel fucking liberal muslim apologist think that concept is a BAD thing?

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Incidentally, does anyone seriously believe that all it would take to wipe out ninety percent of the American population is to turn off the electricity?

[/quote]Not 90%, but a very significant percentage. There are a lot of variables that could affect the outcome. Time of year being the largest - if it happened during the colder months, a very large percentage would both starve AND freeze. Then there would be a secondary die off when things started to warm up and those who did survive would be out looting and killing people over a can of Campbell’s soup. Not to mention disease from the filth that they would be living in, after all, the pumps at most waste water treatment plants run on electricity (and take workers to run them)…

Not very many people would be able to grow their own food - I mean, aside from hard core preppers, how many folks have heirloom seeds stockpiled? How many people have ANY skill at animal husbandry? And with our over crowded cities, WHERE exactly would they be expected to grow food? And let’s say a rather industrious person found a scratch of cultivatable land, would he then have the resources to both farm it AND defend it? Cuz not everyone would suddenly say, “kumbaya” and start farming all at the same time…

No, with the entitled masses that currently occupy our cities, the first day after the EBT cards stopped working, there would be looting. The second day there would be riots and the beginning of a mass exodus (which would only serve to clog the highways, blocking the delivery of any other food), and by the third day, people would be robbing the “haves” of their food and resources. By the end of the week there would be the beginning of cannibalism. Make no mistake, the thin veneer of civilization would be torn to shreds after the majority of the population misses NINE MEALS. Assuming the average person has a few days of food in the cupboard, it will take more or less a week.

The cities will turn into hell holes and the die off will be immense. The countryside will turn into a group of small “city states” of common minded neighbors banding together to defend what is theirs. The government will no doubt try to enact emergency measures to try and TAKE the food from the people in the country (who will be pretty offended by said action) and will probably start shooting at the agents of the state deployed to take the food. This will ultimately lead to a civil war where not only are people dying from exposure and starvation, but from government sponsored violence and roving bands of looters and raiders who will travel across the land like a swarm of locusts, looting and raping everything in their way.

Good times!

[quote]

Granted, Americans today are not made of the same stuff as the folks who subdued THE ENTIRE NORTH AMERICAN CONTINENT without electricity, but ninety percent?

Really?
[/quote]Like I said, that’s probably the WORST CASE scenario, but even other scenarios are a pretty fucking high percentage once you game it out[quote]
Have we really become so insipid, weak and frail?[/quote]

Weak and frail is not the issue. Dependent on food stamps, living in an over crowded area with not enough resources, and lack of general skill/knowledge of BASIC food production is the issue. I don’t care HOW strong you are, if you are starving, you will quickly turn weak in mind, body and spirit. Once the competition for resources becomes too intense, you will simply die…

To reply to Angry Chicken: My take on it is this: ISIS drew first blood by beheading Western Hostages. They didn’t have to do that. We should have responded this way: “ISIS, if you harm any of the hostages, it will mean you have no regard for the lives of civilians, including your own. If any of the hostages are harmed, we will attack you indiscriminately because you started this war by harming civilians.”

And not only ISIS, bomb the hell out of the Nigerian & Somalian mass murdering butchers as well. I have no patience, sympathy or empathy for a group of people who slaughter indiscriminately or in an attempt at ethnic cleansing or genocide. It takes no balls to fire at and kill unarmed civilians and once this has been breached by the enemy, it should then open the flood gates up for the same type of retaliatory strikes.

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Once the competition for resources becomes too intense, you will simply die…[/quote]

And a well armed criminal element and or the police/military would have the best chance, not the best and brightest. The so-called “subhumans” if well armed, would thrive in this type of event.

[quote]Gkhan wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Once the competition for resources becomes too intense, you will simply die…[/quote]

And a well armed criminal element and or the police/military would have the best chance, not the best and brightest. The so-called “subhumans” if well armed, would thrive in this type of event.
[/quote]

Once martial law is declared, the cops and other agents of the state would have full reign. Here is what it’s like NOW, with full constitutional protections in place. Imagine if those protections were suspended?

Civil war would be the only rational alternative.

[quote]pushharder wrote:

Adverbs and other details certainly bring more light to the subject but nonetheless China was a benefactor of Vietnam.
[/quote]

And in any event they were definitely an ally of North Korea…and still are. Ironic, one of the richest countries in the world backing one of the most oppressive & poorest. You’d think they’d want to beef up the economy of the North to compete with Capitalist South. No reason the North couldn’t be the next Hong Kong, Shanghai, or even a place like Singapore. Boggles my mind.

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]loppar wrote:

I said “supported reluctantly”…[/quote]

Like I said, China supported Vietnam during the war.

Adverbs and other details certainly bring more light to the subject but nonetheless China was a benefactor of Vietnam.
[/quote]

The USSR supported North Vietnam significantly more than China during the Vietnam War.

Edit- I should have read through the thread further.