Page 4 of 4

Re: estonia owned?

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2007 6:22 pm
by Phoenix of Terra
We were talking about the possible loyalties of soldiers to the EU. You were for it and I played devil's advocate because, while the idea sounds great, I felt that certain countries might manipulate the EU for national (well, seemingly provincional in this case) interests.

Your post ;)

Re: estonia owned?

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 12:38 am
by Brdavs
Lol Putin proposes that Russia and the US jointly use a radar system in Azerbaijan to develop a missile shield that would cover all of Europe. The catch being that the radar in Azerbaijan just happens not to cover the entire european part of Russia all the way to Ural, unlike the proposed Check one... You gotta hand it to the sneaky Russian, brilliant move there! :lol: Backed Bush straight into a corner. Either he accepts or it becomes crystall clear (as if it isn`t now, eh) that the missle defence system is not aimed at "rogue Iran" but at Russia and China in an attempt to disrupt the cruical balance of power. The same balance of power wich insures MAD and wich in turn ensured our survival over the past 60 odd years. Annother "brilliant" move by the current US administration. I just hope I die of natural causses be4 the morons get us all blown up... It`s hillarious if you think about it... Up untill now the crazy prospect of all out destruction kept us safe. With this shield the prospect of nuclear war actually becomes more real (as it would be the last missing piece (or the first giant step towards it) to a sucessfull preemptive nuclear strike. This would surely cause a new arms race). And that is *trully* crazy.

Re: estonia owned?

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 1:00 am
by Kalkin
Could you at least change the subject from Estonia owned to Europe owned, because almost none stay in the topic.

Re: estonia owned?

Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 10:00 pm
by keemik
Kalkin wrote:Could you at least change the subject from Estonia owned to Europe owned, because almost none stay in the topic.


Yeah...
And some of my ontopic posts are deleted.

Re: estonia owned?

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 5:44 am
by The Xeno
We shouldn't be dependant on oil period there's absolutely NO reason why we shouldn't already be using another fuel source

Except that Oil is remarkably easy to acquire - extremely robust in terms of application, and does not threaten the subsidy of corn.
(...that last was a joke)

And how many wars were won ONLY because WE (U.S.) stepped in to help?

Aye.

Yeah when someone tries to invade your country and you successfully repel them it says a lot about your strength

More importantly, it says a great deal about your strength when you can go after your enemies, and wage war on their soil - rather than on yours.




What's with the necromancy?

Re: estonia owned?

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 8:13 am
by Phoenix of Terra
Very interesting thread though :smt045

Re: estonia owned?

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 9:44 am
by The Xeno
Don't look at me it was Keemik that did it

Aye... I suppose I should have been more specific :P

keemik: What's with the necromancy?
Huh... there do seem to be posts missing - I thought I had posted in this thread? :?
(Or was that another one... <_< ... geh, there are so many.)

Re: estonia owned?

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 12:58 pm
by Grand Admiral Martin
And how many wars were won ONLY because WE (U.S.) stepped in to help?

Aye.

Yeah when someone tries to invade your country and you successfully repel them it says a lot about your strength

More importantly, it says a great deal about your strength when you can go after your enemies, and wage war on their soil - rather than on yours.




What's with the necromancy?[/quote]


firast qoute i can only think of 2 you joined after it started

second qoute most enemies are too poor or too far away to fund a massive invasion. japs were too stupid, ie pearl harbour. attacked too soon.

Re: estonia owned?

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 1:51 pm
by The Xeno
second qoute most enemies are too poor or too far away to fund a massive invasion. japs were too stupid, ie pearl harbour. attacked too soon.

Aye... so the point still stands. :)

firast qoute i can only think of 2 you joined after it started

WW1, WW2, Vietnam (2nd indochina war), Korea, First Gulf war, Boxer rebellion etc. etc. etc.
Granted: I can't say we were always invited - and in many cases we were a part of an international force (to start with at least)... but two seems a little low, even if we choose to debate the definitions.

Re: estonia owned?

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 1:57 pm
by Phoenix of Terra
The Japanese had two islands in the Aluetians, but like someone has mentioned, no one talks about that. If China hadn't taken up so many troops and Alaska was worth it, they could have probably taken more. The fact that there was an incursion of any sort is the reason places like Whittier have the facilities they have.

Okay, I just wanted to feel special and share that knowledge. :P

Re: estonia owned?

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 10:12 pm
by keemik
Jack O'Neill wrote:Don't look at me it was Keemik that did it


Did what?

The Xeno wrote:keemik: What's with the necromancy?
Huh... there do seem to be posts missing - I thought I had posted in this thread? :?
(Or was that another one... <_< ... geh, there are so many.)


What are you talking about?

Re: estonia owned?

Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:31 pm
by keemik
Jack O'Neill wrote:Resurrected a dead thread


yeah... seems like i did. sorry for that. I just wiewed my posts and noticed new posts in this thread, didnt noticed the date.

Re: estonia owned?

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 8:32 pm
by DarthSavage
Resurected:

Quess where i am from :)

Re: estonia owned?

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 2:48 pm
by Phoenix of Terra
Jack, he can't be Jamaican, that has no relevance to the thread.

He's obviously Russian. I mean, Estonian >.>

Please don't burn me at the stake.