[quote]orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Anyways, someone’s gotta be allowed to be neutral, I guess. Where would one deposit/hide one’s blood money, othewise?
Where would you flee to or hide your money from outrageous taxation?
And no one “allows” them to be neutral.
They make it very expensive for anyone else not to “allow” it.
Hence, behold the Swiss Army, master at winning without fighting, champion of reason, protector of liberty.
[/quote]
Of course they’re allowed to be neutral. If the benefit is greater to let them be, storing your booty there, all the while gassing jews, gypsies, and menacing other nations, why not let them be?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Anyways, someone’s gotta be allowed to be neutral, I guess. Where would one deposit/hide one’s blood money, othewise?
Where would you flee to or hide your money from outrageous taxation?
And no one “allows” them to be neutral.
They make it very expensive for anyone else not to “allow” it.
Hence, behold the Swiss Army, master at winning without fighting, champion of reason, protector of liberty.
Of course they’re allowed to be neutral. If the benefit is greater to let them be, storing your booty there, all the while gassing jews, gypsies, and menacing other nations, why not let them be? [/quote]
The Swiss played no part in gassing the Jews, neither did the Swiss military.
All they did was raising the cost of an invasion to a point where it did not happen.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Didn’t the Swiss just collaborate with Hitler? Technically, they did remain “neutral” during WWII, I guess.
I do agree with the Swiss philosophy of gun ownership.
Anyway, what do you think of my reasons to declare the Swiss Army the greatest Army ever?
For, despite my “problems”, I seem to be able to give reasons for my opinions.
I seriously do think that what makes a “great” army goes beyond the sheer ability to kick ass.
An army should be judged just on how much ass it can kick.[/quote]
[quote]orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Anyways, someone’s gotta be allowed to be neutral, I guess. Where would one deposit/hide one’s blood money, othewise?
Where would you flee to or hide your money from outrageous taxation?
And no one “allows” them to be neutral.
They make it very expensive for anyone else not to “allow” it.
Hence, behold the Swiss Army, master at winning without fighting, champion of reason, protector of liberty.
Of course they’re allowed to be neutral. If the benefit is greater to let them be, storing your booty there, all the while gassing jews, gypsies, and menacing other nations, why not let them be?
The Swiss played no part in gassing the Jews, neither did the Swiss military.
All they did was raising the cost of an invasion to a point where it did not happen.
[quote]orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Didn’t the Swiss just collaborate with Hitler? Technically, they did remain “neutral” during WWII, I guess.
I do agree with the Swiss philosophy of gun ownership.
Anyway, what do you think of my reasons to declare the Swiss Army the greatest Army ever?
For, despite my “problems”, I seem to be able to give reasons for my opinions.
I seriously do think that what makes a “great” army goes beyond the sheer ability to kick ass.
An army should be judged just on how much ass it can kick.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Didn’t the Swiss just collaborate with Hitler? Technically, they did remain “neutral” during WWII, I guess.
I do agree with the Swiss philosophy of gun ownership.
Anyway, what do you think of my reasons to declare the Swiss Army the greatest Army ever?
For, despite my “problems”, I seem to be able to give reasons for my opinions.
I seriously do think that what makes a “great” army goes beyond the sheer ability to kick ass.
An army should be judged just on how much ass it can kick.
I absolute or relative terms?
In absolute terms.[/quote]
Why?
What is the benefit of being able to nuke the world 20 times over instead of 19 times?
Is not an army ultimately a means to an end and should be judged on whether it achieves that ends?
[quote]orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Didn’t the Swiss just collaborate with Hitler? Technically, they did remain “neutral” during WWII, I guess.
I do agree with the Swiss philosophy of gun ownership.
Anyway, what do you think of my reasons to declare the Swiss Army the greatest Army ever?
For, despite my “problems”, I seem to be able to give reasons for my opinions.
I seriously do think that what makes a “great” army goes beyond the sheer ability to kick ass.
An army should be judged just on how much ass it can kick.
I absolute or relative terms?
In absolute terms.
Why?
What is the benefit of being able to nuke the world 20 times over instead of 19 times?
Is not an army ultimately a means to an end and should be judged on whether it achieves that ends?
Just a thought of mine but why invade someone who’s always neutral? Defeat all the others first, then take what you want from the neutral guy when he’s the only one left. Also, both sides need a neutral country for several reasons. Third, why invade the country you’re storing your wealth in?
[quote]sherekahn wrote:
Just a thought of mine but why invade someone who’s always neutral? Defeat all the others first, then take what you want from the neutral guy when he’s the only one left. Also, both sides need a neutral country for several reasons. Third, why invade the country you’re storing your wealth in? [/quote]
Probably true.
But then we could still congratulate the Swiss army and government to have a realistic take on the situation and act accordingly, including being armed to the teeth.
The idea was not so much to decide who has the most awesomest military EVA!, but what makes the “best military ever?”.
Of course they’re allowed to be neutral. If the benefit is greater to let them be, storing your booty there, all the while gassing jews, gypsies, and menacing other nations, why not let them be? [/quote]
And lets not forget the 25,000 odd refugee's who were rejected at their borders or the Swiss citizens of Jewish faith who were refused diplomatic protection within Germany and other occupied countries,
Hey sloth don't u know, counting money is dangerous.
Of course they’re allowed to be neutral. If the benefit is greater to let them be, storing your booty there, all the while gassing jews, gypsies, and menacing other nations, why not let them be?
And lets not forget the 25,000 odd refugee's who were rejected at their borders or the Swiss citizens of Jewish faith who were refused diplomatic protection within Germany and other occupied countries,
Hey sloth don't u know, counting money is dangerous.
[/quote]
May we also count the Jews that were turned away from your and Americas shores?
May we also count the Jews that were turned away from your and Americas shores?
[/quote]
Feel free. Though, in turn, we should get some credit for showing up first hand to liberate concentration camp prisoners while Swiss banks were counting Hitler’s gold.
The best military ever would make itself unnecessary, which probably is not possible.
So we are left with measuring the success with something, something that depends on which aspect we want to stress.