Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

---

At 2/7/08 07:33 PM, Cuppa-LettuceNog wrote: Ahaha. You said Canada leads the world in killing civilian children. I said I thought that was B.S, you said that I'm an idiot for disagreeing with you. Now either prove your point and shut me up, and admit the statement was wildly inaccurate, and that you once again look like an asshole for personally insulting you for disagreeing with a point that eventually gets proven wrong.

;
He may have been confused by the fact that Canadians murder thousands of babies every year about this time of the year.
We do , I've actually witnessed a part of it a couple of years ago.
But you see the babies are seals, white coats are what we used to kill, now we wait & kill 'em when they molt.
The perfered method is to bash their skulls in, you don't ruin the pelt & its cheaper than bullets.

Unfortunately our military isn't nearly big enough to do a good job so we let the fishermen do it. (we got shitloads of them)

So I can see why someone could easily get confused by the bad press it gets , the "Canadians Killing Babies" protest signs that Peta & others put up in Europe etc. are pretty well done, just deceptive.

Still changes nothing in U.S. may be the Biggest, doesn't make 'em the Best.

---

Ok, I read from Mofowhateverhisnameis, and what point to you mean? In terms of total soldiers taken out of action, then yes, the wounded should be counted. If you mean his claim that America leads in indiscriminate killings, that can mean a multitude of things;

The leaders of the Army in the U.S are least likely to consider civillian casualties when making plans

The soldiers are the least likely to refrain from opening fire due to possible civilian damages

The soldiers are most likely to kill innocents for fun.

Number 1 and 3 seem immensely suspect, since there are many nations out there who wouldn't mind killing a thousand innocents to flush out 100 enemies. Number 2 really seems to be a basis-by-basis thing.

I may (may) go as far as to say that amoungst "free" nations, the U.S soldiers are most likely to fuck up and commit a My Lai or Rape of Nanking or Somolia Incident, against the express will of the higher ups. However, this can NOT be blamed on a nation itself, but the people involved. And while the U.S Army DOES do cover ups, SO DOES EVERYONE ELSE, and usually theres more people unwilling to follow that coverup in the U.S.

So no, I think his statements are complete bullshit too.

---

At 2/7/08 12:22 PM, morefngdbs wrote:

At 2/7/08 12:13 PM, Transkar wrote: We have better technology accociated with our troops, we spendhundreds of thousands of dollars to maybe train one man.

I can hardly believe your recruits are so poorly set up that it costs that much to whip 'em into shape... I'm not surprised though, anyone who can't do anything else starts at the bottom of the military.
When your marks are that low & your background is poverty, it probably looks good.

Morefngdbs, you are a coward, a misinformed, uneducated coward with no sense of reality and only your Canadian brainwashing as your source of arguments. You get proved wrong all the time and just keep spouting out equally ignorant shit over and over again, without ever responding to the facts.

Now you're claiming people who join the military are impoverished or uneducated, thus parading your VAST ignorance yet again, in a lengthy history of you doing so.

Facts:

- 98% of US military enlistees have a highschool diploma or better, compared to 75% of the general population.

- Now, since you're an idiot, you'll probably say something like "lolz that's not saying much cuz Americans R dumb lolz". Consider the fact that the US has higher educational attainment compared to Canada (pg 42,43), as well as compared to most major industrialized nations.

---

At 2/7/08 12:22 PM, morefngdbs wrote: When your marks are that low & your background is poverty, it probably looks good.

Interesting, because there is NO connection between backgrounds of poverty and enlistment in the US military.

The majority of enlistees come from middle-income neighborhoods, and a higher proportion of enlistees come from the highest income quintiles than the lowest.

How you manage to get routinely proved wrong, yet you still somehow think your words have any credibility, is proof of how blinded you are by your narrow Canadian mindset. You WANT something to be true so much because it makes you feel better about your country, that you say it even after it gets proved wrong.

---

At 1/24/08 07:49 PM, Al6200 wrote: The USA. No contest.

I would like to see a comparable list from someone with a better background, like TheMason.

I live in America, and i have to say this... How are the soldiers gonna stay alive if our healthcare sucks?

---

At 2/7/08 08:26 PM, DeathAura wrote: I live in America, and i have to say this... How are the soldiers gonna stay alive if our healthcare sucks?

Prepare to be raped by cellardoor6...

---

Yes thats right Canada is rarely involved in major combat operations... WRONG! I've been trying to tell you that our 2000 men are doing the job many more troops are needed for. I said that our forces are tiring out because there is no reinforcement/rotation or relaxation. Dont try to minimize my country's role in Afghanistan. I certainly haven't done so to yours.

---

None of you can prove the U.S. is the best.
You can prove its the biggest.
You can prove your spend way more money on it than anyone else is, & that isn't sustainable forever.
You can prove you have more than anyone else.
I never said you didn't & I'm not saying that now .

Does not prove your better. Bigger is not always better in many things in this world.
I don't see being the biggest military, proves that you are the best military in the world.

As to my remarks about Vietnam & Korea , I just read a portion of a speech from your President & This War on Terror 's 3 objectives
quote" Our startegy is threefold: one ,protect the homeland ; two , stay on the offensive with these folks ; three, provide an alternative--a hopeful alternative to despair and doubt and hopelessness."

As I see this he never wants to stop, & is hopeful everything works out some day.
Probably exactly what went on in those two previous Uh ,hem wars.

I suppose this is also for the better ?
I'd say bigger for sure, not at all better.

---

At 2/7/08 07:33 PM, Cuppa-LettuceNog wrote:

At 2/7/08 06:33 AM, cellardoor6 wrote:

I think YOU prove it all the time.

I prove that Canada leads the world in innocent killings?

Wow, you're doing it AGAIN.

You love to do that don't you? You always intentionally leave out areas of posts, and then make a post that is COMPLETELY incongruent with the nuance of the argument. You use continued efforts to twist the entire argument.

I said you were as idiotic as Canadians, you told me to prove that statement, and now you twisted it to suggest that what you just replied to was me saying that you proved that Canadians are responsible for the most innocent killings. It was obvious I was saying that YOU prove by what you say that you are as idiotic as Canadians.

You do this as the basis of your arguments all the time, semantics and intentional distortion of the whole thing. We've been through this before, and you've been caught doing it a lot as documented by: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Then you get caught lying about those instances.

Oh, and the grandaddy of it all... where you got caught lying about having a gun. You had an elaborate lie the entire time, and you slipped up, showed that you were lying, and then you ran away and only recently have you come back to NG after that.

You have a long history of contradicting yourself over and over again, constantly editing posts certain ways to ignore what was just previously said to shape the argument to help you retreat from the actual nuances. And you've even been caught lying out of your ass just for the purpose of perpetuating an argument you already lost.

And you think that I'd forget about it or something? You think you can get away with it?

First, I didn't say that.

True. You did, however, say something awefully similar.

No Cuppa-contradictions, you're once again deliberately distorting the nuance and hyperbole of what was said.

Let's recap:

What morefngdbs said, that you obviously consider to be true because you didn't respond to it in context of my response:

At 2/6/08 10:50 AM, morefngdbs wrote: When it comes to indiscriminate killing, the U.S. Army has them & everyone else beat by miles & miles.

Not only did he not prove this, but you didn't address it either.

What I said in response:

At 2/6/08 10:17 PM, cellardoor6 wrote:

When it comes to being racist, white supremacists who torture, mutilate, and murder children, to later joke about it, the Canadian Army is the best in the world.

This is obvious hyperbole. Canada's military is not without blemish, but it's obviously not responsible for the most torture and mutilation of children in the world.

I responded to his accusation of the US being the best at indiscriminately killing people, by providing an instance of Canadian soldiers INTENTIONALLY and METICULOUSLY brutalizing children while doing this "peacekeeping" Canadians think their military does so well. Thus showing Canada's military is not without blemish, and I later referred to the fact that the simple fact that Canada's military is so small and does so little allows them to create the illusion that their soldiers are morally superior.

Like I said; I didn't say, "prove it leads in killing kids", just prove that it's amoungst the most abusive nations in non-third world dictatorships.

Prove that the US kills the most people indiscriminately.

And I'll take it by this point that you don't have any evidence that backs up your Canada assertion.

Prove that the US military is the most abusive. See, you're only proving what I said earlier. You assume from the beginning as a status quo or given fact that the US military was quilty of the criticism that morefngdbs said.

I never said it was the most abusive, ever. And I have no idea what morefngbs said, because I attempt not to read what he says unless it's imperative to the topic.

Lol...

Thus showing how null your entire arugment is. You never, EVER respond in the full context of the issue, you run and hide from it, and your entire participation consists of weaseling your way through the argument, lying, deceiving, and distorting everything.

I didn't bother reading what he said.

Yep, because you have a mental problem where you can't ever provide a coherent, in-context argument.

I'm done with you. I'm ignoring you, because there's about a 99% chance that your next post will be made up entirely of some more of your misquotes, your contradictions, and your cunning editing of quotes.

---

At 2/7/08 08:38 PM, morefngdbs wrote: None of you can prove the U.S. is the best.

It's a simple fact.

You can prove its the biggest.

It's not even the biggest.

Does not prove your better. Bigger is not always better in many things in this world.

We have the most advanced and most effective military in the world.

I don't see being the biggest military, proves that you are the best military in the world.

I don't see how a Canadian whose entire military is dependent on the US can suggest can at the same time suggest it is better in any conceivable aspect.

I don't see how a Canadian who gets proved wrong every single time he talks about any military issue, can keep talking over and over again and expect his words to have any credibility. This thread is just another example, because you've done it before, you run your mouth and get proved wrong.

---

Better training in the US? Bleh. I think you guys really need a reality check. Money doesnt make a soldier, quality instruction does. Truthfully we train with the US forces and often only with the Airborne and Marine units as they are considered more or less equal to our soldiers training than your standard US Army Grunt. Not in quality mind you just training. I believe the respect for our forces is best said by American Lieutenant General Daniel K. McNeil where he told our defence minister that our first 800 troops were better than the men under his command. The men he commanded were Special Forces.

---

At 2/7/08 08:43 PM, cOnScRiPtRED wrote: Better training in the US? Bleh.

Yep.

I think you guys really need a reality check.

Lol, your entire view is based on rumors you hear as a Canadian.

Go ahead and provide this "reality check".

Prove that US army training is inferior.

Gp.

Truthfully we train with the US forces and often only with the Airborne and Marine units as they are considered more or less equal to our soldiers training than your standard US Army Grunt.

Prove it.

Not in quality mind you just training. I believe the respect for our forces is best said by American Lieutenant General Daniel K. McNeil where he told our defence minister that our first 800 troops were better than the men under his command.

Prove it.

The men he commanded were Special Forces.

Prove it.

---

At 2/7/08 08:43 PM, cellardoor6 wrote:

At 2/7/08 08:38 PM, morefngdbs wrote: None of you can prove the U.S. is the best.

It's a simple fact.

I never learned it in history class.

You can prove its the biggest.

It's not even the biggest.

Does not prove your better. Bigger is not always better in many things in this world.

We have the most advanced and most effective military in the world.

Who told you this? Was it the world military rater's guild?

I don't see being the biggest military, proves that you are the best military in the world.

I don't see how a Canadian whose entire military is dependent on the US can suggest can at the same time suggest it is better in any conceivable aspect.

Dependent how so? BTW be less sarcastic and more respectful.

I don't see how a Canadian who gets proved wrong every single time he talks about any military issue, can keep talking over and over again and expect his words to have any credibility. This thread is just another example, because you've done it before, you run your mouth and get proved wrong.

What proof? We have to assume you know what your talking about.

---

At 2/7/08 08:48 PM, cOnScRiPtRED wrote: What proof? We have to assume you know what your talking about.

;
give it up, your wasting your time.
IF cellie says the biggest blah blah blah is the best that's it.
Nothing else matters & he'll pull charts & B.S. web pages out of his ass for days.
He can't get it that comparing oranges to cocnuts can never prove one is better than the other.
Ignore him that's what I do.

---

At 2/7/08 07:59 PM, cellardoor6 wrote:

- 98% of US military enlistees have a highschool diploma or better, compared to 75% of the general population.

Another point you might want to look at (according to many sources, including an ex-vietnam vet teacher who tends to be very up to date on military issues and who has helped numerous students enlist over the years), is that the military plain ol' WILL NOT accept a persons enlistment if they do not have a diploma or G.E.D.

I would risk saying that that's a requirement VERY few other nations in the world have. I don't agree with it, to be honest, but it certainly says something about the expected education and intelligence of a U.S military man.

---

At 2/7/08 08:46 PM, cellardoor6 wrote:

At 2/7/08 08:43 PM, cOnScRiPtRED wrote: Better training in the US? Bleh.

Yep.

I think you guys really need a reality check.

Lol, your entire view is based on rumors you hear as a Canadian.

Go ahead and provide this "reality check".

Prove that US army training is inferior.
How am I supposed to do that? This is the internet its all opinions.
Gp.

Truthfully we train with the US forces and often only with the Airborne and Marine units as they are considered more or less equal to our soldiers training than your standard US Army Grunt.

Combined Training

Each year, Canada and the United States routinely participate in many cooperative land, air, and sea training exercises. These joint and combined training exercises play an important part of Canada-US defence cooperation by ensuring interoperability and operational effectiveness, helping our forces to function together seamlessly, building on each other's strengths to achieve objectives, while minimizing risks. These operations regularly host marines, I know because they train in my town.

Prove it.Combined Training

Not in quality mind you just training. I believe the respect for our forces is best said by American Lieutenant General Daniel K. McNeil where he told our defence minister that our first 800 troops were better than the men under his command.

There was pretty intense fighting there last year, and our Canadian brothers did an excellent job of holding forth on that. Mcneill. (The quote is in my book Canada in Kandahar so I cant link that)

Prove it.

The men he commanded were Special Forces.

I meant past tense he was commander of the 82nd Airborne.
Prove it.

---

At 2/7/08 08:39 PM, cellardoor6 wrote:

Wow, you're doing it AGAIN.
You love to do that don't you? You always intentionally leave out areas of posts, and then make a post that is COMPLETELY incongruent with the nuance of the argument. You use continued efforts to twist the entire argument.
I said you were as idiotic as Canadians, you told me to prove that statement, and now you twisted it to suggest that what you just replied to was me saying that you proved that Canadians are responsible for the most innocent killings. It was obvious I was saying that YOU prove by what you say that you are as idiotic as Canadians.

You said the comment about Canadians. I said it's bullshit. You said I'm stupid for disagreeing, and I said prove it. ANYONE looking at it from an objective angle would see I was saying "prove the canada point", not "prove I'm an idiot".

You do this as the basis of your arguments all the time, semantics and intentional distortion of the whole thing. We've been through this before, and you've been caught doing it a lot as documented by:

Semantics? I said "prove it", obviously referring to your Canada point. Even if you where confused by what I meant, I go on in great detail later in the post CLEARLY showing I am asking you to prove the Canada point. I don't CARE if you think I'm an idiot, and it clearly can't be proven or disproven.

Then you get caught lying about those instances.

Except, again... I wasn't.

I mean, I can take anytime you get proven wrong and call it a "lie" too. I can say you lied about Grammars alts. I can say you lied about the guitarist from metallica. But I don't, because I have just enough of a life that I don't bookmark everytime you look less then perfect because... I don't care.

Oh, and the grandaddy of it all... where you got caught lying about having a gun. You had an elaborate lie the entire time, and you slipped up, showed that you were lying, and then you ran away and only recently have you come back to NG after that.

I didn't get "caught lying" about that. It's really not that hard to fathom a person crediting the reload mechenism of the gun he most commonly uses (every friday at the gun range) and which he was brought up on, with that of a similar gun with a different reloading mechanism; a good analogy would be a person raised on a manual transmition automobile reffering to "gearing up" their automatic.

Of course, when your predetermined to call everyone a liar whom doesn't agree with you, mistakes don't exist. I'm just another part of the anti-cellar conspiracy.

You have a long history of contradicting yourself over and over again

Again, not really. I remember this all started when I "contradicted" my terrorist statements, which is only true when you deny theres a difference between "kill" and "assassinate"; when there is.

constantly editing posts certain ways to ignore what was just previously said to shape the argument to help you retreat from the actual nuances.

Source?

And you've even been caught lying out of your ass just for the purpose of perpetuating an argument you already lost.

Again; not that hard to fathom someone making a mistake, Although again if I wanted to call you a liar I would point to you lying about what a mod said about Grammar. I, of course, am not going to call you a liar, because I'm not so biased against you that I refuse to acknowledge you could have mistaken what a mod told you.

And you think that I'd forget about it or something? You think you can get away with it?

Sure, Cellar. I got so scared, I not only stopped posting, but stopped watching flash, signing onto my account, or even visiting Newgrounds. Then I made that long elaberate "Im back" topic, filled with lies, just to throw you off.

Instead of simply starting a new account, which is what anyone would have simply done instead of not going to newgrounds for a few months.

No Cuppa-contradictions, you're once again deliberately distorting the nuance and hyperbole of what was said.

Saying "Canada leads the world in killing Children" and "Canada is the most abusive" aren't that seperate; killing children tends to be considering very abusive. But if you don't like me likening the terms, then let me state now that you did NEVER say they are the most abusive, and you indeed only said they lead in killing children. PERSONALLY, I consider the two terms to go hand in hand, but I will be the first to admit you NEVER said "abusive", that was merely my interpretation. You win.

What morefngdbs said, that you obviously consider to be true because you didn't respond to it in context of my response:

Actually, I specifically addressed this; I said I didn't bother reading his garbage.

Hey, who's distorting what I said now?

Oh, and I obviously don't consider it true, since after you got pissed, I went in, read what he said, and posted my opinion for your benefit.

Not only did he not prove this, but you didn't address it either.

Of course he didn't prove it, it's a moronic point. And I addressed it once you urged me to read it.

This is obvious hyperbole. Canada's military is not without blemish, but it's obviously not responsible for the most torture and mutilation of children in the world.

Yet, wait a second... when I said they aren't and the points B.S, you said something along the lines of "that's because your as stupid as the candiians" (not the exact quote, dont call me a liar). If it was a mere hyperbole, why would you defend it?

I responded to his accusation of the US being the best at indiscriminately killing people, by providing an instance of Canadian soldiers INTENTIONALLY and METICULOUSLY brutalizing children while doing this "peacekeeping" Canadians think their military does so well.

Which certainly points out Canada isn't without faults. I'm sure all nations are guilty of civilian killings, not just the U.S: the U.S just gets blamed more because our military doesn't cover up as much. Theres almost always a percentage of people who will rat when the U.S fucks up, and our higher percentage of honest people ironically means we get more shit.

Thus showing Canada's military is not without blemish, and I later referred to the fact that the simple fact that Canada's military is so small and does so little allows them to create the illusion that their soldiers are morally superior.

Yet you didn't say that: you said they where the worst. Now, if I said "that's BS", and you responded by saying "Dude, it's a fucking hyperbole, duh", then you would win; but you didn't. You insulted me for disagreeing with it, hence implying you where defending the statement.

Prove that the US kills the most people indiscriminately.

That's going to be hard: I greatly doubt the U.S DOES kill the most indiscrimnately amoungst "free" nations, and I can gurantee they dont from a world view.

Thus showing how null your entire arugment is. You never, EVER respond in the full context of the issue, you run and hide from it, and your entire participation consists of weaseling your way through the argument, lying, deceiving, and distorting everything.

"lying decieving and distorting everything"? I think the man is garbage, so I don't read what he say's. It's that simple.

Yep, because you have a mental problem where you can't ever provide a coherent, in-context argument.

No, because Mofo doesn't OFFER a coherent, in-context argument, nor would he respond to me correctly if I made one. Arguing with him is like arguing with Memorize, except that it doesn't offer the undeniable fun of arguing with memorize.

Memorize, come argue with me about something :(

I'm done with you. I'm ignoring you, because there's about a 99% chance that your next post will be made up entirely of some more of your misquotes, your contradictions, and your cunning editing of quotes.

Hahaha. Wow. Funny; by bringing up previous arguments, you COMPLETELY avoided this one; the fact that you are full of shit about Canada; if it indeed was a hyperbole, then you had NO REASON to insult/disagree with me when I called that hyperbole bullshit. In other words, theres no reason for what you said

---

At 2/7/08 08:55 PM, morefngdbs wrote:

give it up, your wasting your time.
IF cellie says the biggest blah blah blah is the best that's it.
Nothing else matters & he'll pull charts & B.S. web pages out of his ass for days.
He can't get it that comparing oranges to cocnuts can never prove one is better than the other.
Ignore him that's what I do.

"Bullshit charts" are better then "no charts". While his statement about Canada was bullshit, so was yours about America. If truly all the shit he's saying about America is false, then it shouldn't be hard in the least to disprove, right? I mean, it's not a matter of opinion; if he say's, for example, American Jets can fly twice as fast as Canadian jets, and that's false, there will be documents out there specifically proving it's false.

If what your saying is true, what he's saying is false, and theres no room for interpretation or opinion, then prove him wrong already. If not, shut up.

---

At 2/7/08 08:48 PM, cOnScRiPtRED wrote:

At 2/7/08 08:43 PM, cellardoor6 wrote:

At 2/7/08 08:38 PM, morefngdbs wrote: None of you can prove the U.S. is the best.

It's a simple fact.

I never learned it in history class.

You're Canadian.

Your country's entire perception of history is distorted by your inferiority complex.

Canadians are so brainwashed they actually believe they won the war of 1812, a war that occurred decades before Canada even existed as a country.

We have the most advanced and most effective military in the world.

Who told you this?

It's not something that has to be told to you outright.

The US has the most advanced equipment, the most diverse forces, some of the best, if not the best training, the most special forces, the best and most proven tactics etc... I could fill 10 pages outlining all of this, the vast superiority the US has in every measurable force quality basically.

No country comes close. In fact the entire EU of 27 countries is only has 1/10th the capabilities the Us has.

I don't see how a Canadian whose entire military is dependent on the US can suggest can at the same time suggest it is better in any conceivable aspect.

Dependent how so? BTW be less sarcastic and more respectful.

Your country is basically defenseless were it not for American technology. The US funds most of NORAD, is the source of most of Canada's equipment. Canada needs the US to mobilize its forces, it relies on American aircraft, American vehicles, American weapons, and access to American technology such as GPS in order to simply operate. Canada can't even deploy its forces outside of its border without the direct assistance of either the US or the UK... and the UK is in turn reliant on the US as well.

I don't see how a Canadian who gets proved wrong every single time he talks about any military issue, can keep talking over and over again and expect his words to have any credibility. This thread is just another example, because you've done it before, you run your mouth and get proved wrong.

What proof? We have to assume you know what your talking about.

Well, here's a notable example of morefngdbs getting proved wrong about military issues involving Canada.

And if you look at this thread alone, he got proved wrong as well a few times.

He simply has no credibility, he argues purely on his own imagination and what he WANTS to be true.

---

At 2/7/08 09:18 PM, cOnScRiPtRED wrote:

Each year, Canada and the United States routinely participate in many cooperative land, air, and sea training exercises.

Each year, the US and the forces of Ethiopia train together and conduct small-scale joint training operations.

This doesn't mean Ethiopia's forces are comparable to US forces.

---

At 2/7/08 08:55 PM, morefngdbs wrote:

At 2/7/08 08:48 PM, cOnScRiPtRED wrote: What proof? We have to assume you know what your talking about.

;
give it up, your wasting your time.
IF cellie says the biggest blah blah blah is the best that's it.

Yes, when I provide facts that disprove you, and you can't even attempt to support your argument anymore, that's it.

Nothing else matters & he'll pull charts & B.S. web pages out of his ass for days.

And you'll do nothing use your vivid imagination as your argument, talk trash about the person who disproves you, all while being too much of a coward to actually respond.

He can't get it that comparing oranges to cocnuts can never prove one is better than the other.

You can't get it that just because as a Canadian, you hear shit that Canadians conjure up to feel better about their dependence on the US, doesn't constitute proof, and doesn't override the facts just because you want it to.

Ignore him that's what I do.

You ignore me because you know you're incapable of actually providing any evidence for what you say, let alone responding to the areas where what you said was completely discredited.

---

At 2/8/08 12:41 AM, Transkar wrote: I think its funny how cellar brings resources and proof to his posts while you other 3 just spew bullshit out of your ass. Bring some resources in people!

Assuming I'm one of the other three... what "resources" do you want? Theres no "studies" pointing out that Canada ISN'T the leader in negligent military civillian slaughter of Children. If they WHERE I'm sure there would be an article, but there isn't.

---

At 1/24/08 07:15 PM, PubicTears wrote: What country has the best army? I mean soldiers equipment, and training etc. Not the amount of soldiers the country has. So who do you think and why?

Well I do know that the U.S. has the most bloated military budget in the world. It's bigger than the next 18 nations combined. In fact, it is responsible for over 48% of the worlds total military spending.

As far as the best military in the world, I can't answer that. (Assuming biggest doesn't = best)

---

At 2/8/08 01:05 AM, Transkar wrote: I was talking about the Canadian military having the better trained men.

I don't really care to get into this bitchfest, but I don't like it when people make stupid arguments, or demand stupid things stupidly.

So, if you want them to "prove" Canada having better trained troops, let's lay the ground rules, shall we? Otherwise it'll be another 10 pg flame war.

1.) State your criteria, ie, your variables. It doesn't do any good if Cuppa presents you a stat and you say "that's not indicative of better training!", or vice versa. Tell them what specifically you think are the measurable quantities for a "better trained man" is.

2.) Weigh your criteria. Does having better equipment supercede longer durations in boot camp? Does the dollar/man ratio work better than combat results? Categorize your criteria by importance.

3.) Don't be an asshole. If you do the two above steps, and these guys can find the data to show that Canada has better trained men based on your formula, don't come bitching.

I tire of this "X is better than Y" bullshit, because 99% of the time you're all using different variables, and just scream at each other for 20 pgs.......

---

USA puts more money into warfare, but their troops are not very professional, like most other nation's troops

---

At 2/8/08 09:39 AM, valium9 wrote: USA puts more money into warfare, but their troops are not very professional, like most other nation's troops

Basis? In fact our military is perhaps one of the most professional in the world. Everything we do is done with an eye towards following what is commonly known as "international law". Every commander has a JAG (lawyer) advising him on such issues.

Furthermore, if it had not been for the professionalism instilled in us servicemen no one would have ever known about the abuses at Abu Gharib because it was a soldier (not Amnesty or the press) who turned in the pictures that got those people arrested.

Finally, if there is an incident where unprofessional conduct is suspected a courts martial is conviened or some other board of inquiry.

Ah...I love it when ppl say things they either 1) don't understand what it is they are saying or 2) have no concept of that upon which they speak.

---

At 2/8/08 12:01 PM, Transkar wrote: Why don't you look up the lone survivor. It's about 4 navy seals in afghanistan who stumble upon goat herders. They knew they should of killed them because it was a secret mission and these guys could go tell taliban. But because they were afraid of being thrown in jail because of the liberal media and their actions they let them go. An hour later they were swarmed by Taliban and only one of them survived.

That's not being professional. It's humanitarian yes, and to an extent should be commended, but it's not professional. Proffesonal would be following orders to the letter, and in this case that would probably involve killing said goat herders so they were not discovered so the soldiers could complete their mission.

I'm not saying that the US forces aren't professionals, just that your example to try and prove your point isn't a very good one.

---

At 2/8/08 11:12 AM, TheMason wrote: Every commander has a JAG

*shudder*

i've been avoiding this topic because i'm sure its safe to assume its a shit fest but some points i think i saw;
technology, personnel and training cannot determine the best army individually its a combination of factors.
but why do we need this thread and what the hell is it supposed to prove?

"my cocks bigger!" "well my cock is more high-tech!" "well i know how to use my cock!" who gives a fuck?
and no i will not read any previous pages.

---

At 2/8/08 12:43 PM, Transkar wrote:
The point I was trying to make was that people in here were calling the Americans warmongering civilian killers so I gave them that story.

Great. Fantastic. A bunch of idiots said Americans are warmongering, and you replied like an idiot.

1.) Who gives a shit what a few people on NG say?
2.) What the hell makes you think a pretty story is gonna convince them? Every army has such stories.
3.) Did you really feel the need to defend that "American pride" of yours....over the internet....to a bunch of nobody strangers.....thereby affirming the stereotypes of hybris and arrogance?

---

At 2/8/08 12:28 PM, SolInvictus wrote:

At 2/8/08 11:12 AM, TheMason wrote: Every commander has a JAG

*shudder*

i've been avoiding this topic because i'm sure its safe to assume its a shit fest but some points i think i saw;
technology, personnel and training cannot determine the best army individually its a combination of factors.
but why do we need this thread and what the hell is it supposed to prove?

"my cocks bigger!" "well my cock is more high-tech!" "well i know how to use my cock!" who gives a fuck?
and no i will not read any previous pages.

I totally agree with everything you say. It's true, you can't just decide "I have a better military." There are just too many factors. I can't believe 11 pages were filled with people who think it's possible to simply put a military on a scale and read how "good" it is.