User Controls
Why can't non whites use stores correctly
-
2020-02-23 at 10:59 PM UTC
Originally posted by Splam You need to outnumber the enemy for a successful attack. An outnumbered enemy can easily defend.
All about right thing at the right time.
You really don't know a thing about war or tactics.
Battle of Gaugamela, also called Battle of Arbela, (Oct. 1, 331 bc) battle in which Alexander the Great completed his conquest of Darius III's Persian Empire. It was an extraordinary victory achieved against a numerically superior army on ground chosen by the Persians. -
2020-02-23 at 11:07 PM UTCGiven tactics and equipment are equal, Speedy.
I'm well aware of how military tactics can change the balance of battle.
Defenders are still generally regarded as having the high ground. Look no further than the Battle of Thermopylae (300). Or a more modern example is Pavlov's house.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavlov%27s_House -
2020-02-23 at 11:08 PM UTC
Originally posted by Splam Given tactics and equipment are equal, Speedy.
I'm well aware of how military tactics can change the balance of battle.
Defenders are still generally regarded as having the high ground. Look no further than the Battle of Thermopylae (300).
You have too simplistic of a view to have an effective grasp of this topic. -
2020-02-23 at 11:11 PM UTCGiven tactics are equal, given equipment and training are equal, and man power is equal, I'll put my money on the defenders. Sure there's no way to entirely predict a fight.
-
2020-02-23 at 11:17 PM UTCIn third-world countries, if you're polite and let the other guy go ahead, you and your whole family end up starving to death.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-02-23 at 11:22 PM UTC
-
2020-02-23 at 11:47 PM UTCyou can't win by defending. you can only keep what you have. that isn't winning. that's surviving... at a cost.
unless you're attacking, you can't win. there's no such thing as 'defensive victory', that's just a modern euphemism politically correct term for 'well, we still exist, i guess' after being fucked with.
the only path to victory is by unrelenting attack. -
2020-02-24 at 12:15 AM UTC
Originally posted by snab_snib you can't win by defending. you can only keep what you have. that isn't winning. that's surviving… at a cost.
unless you're attacking, you can't win. there's no such thing as 'defensive victory', that's just a modern euphemism politically correct term for 'well, we still exist, i guess' after being fucked with.
the only path to victory is by unrelenting attack.
The Vietnamese won, and they lost almost every time they attacked. -
2020-02-24 at 12:24 AM UTC
Originally posted by Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country The Vietnamese won, and they lost almost every time they attacked.
the vietnamese didn't win anything. almost 2 million of them died, and they gained nothing. they did lose every time they attacked. the vietnam war was 0% profit 100% loss for the vietnamese. they got literally nothing but suffering and sorrow and death and destruction and setbacks that continue to this day out of the vietnam war.
that is not victory. -
2020-02-24 at 12:26 AM UTC
-
2020-02-24 at 12:30 AM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL Same with America.
and you know why we didn't win anything? because we didn't attack. if we had marched into north vietnam and started brutalizing the civilians in every city, we could have easily won. but we just moped around the jungle in the south.
we definitely got the better of it, holy fuck did we slap the shit out of vietnam in terms of k/d. but we didn't win: because we didn't attack. -
2020-02-24 at 12:45 AM UTC
-
2020-02-24 at 12:47 AM UTC
Originally posted by snab_snib you can't win by defending. you can only keep what you have. that isn't winning. that's surviving… at a cost.
unless you're attacking, you can't win. there's no such thing as 'defensive victory', that's just a modern euphemism politically correct term for 'well, we still exist, i guess' after being fucked with.
the only path to victory is by unrelenting attack.
Absolutes are simplistic like you. -
2020-02-24 at 12:47 AM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL Yeah, right. They all just went over there to say hello.
all we did we patrol and defend south vietnam from north vietnam. we didn't cross the border into north vietnam, which would be attacking.the NVA and VC literally just poured over the border to kill americans. they came to us. -
2020-02-24 at 1:09 AM UTC
-
2020-02-24 at 1:11 AM UTC
-
2020-02-24 at 1:13 AM UTC
-
2020-02-24 at 1:20 AM UTCexceptions that prove the rule.
also, i don't disagree with everything everyone else says. i just disagree with retarded things that people say. which, is actually almost everything that gets said on here. almost all of you are totally retarded. that's a fact. it's not a coincidence. just how it is. -
2020-02-24 at 1:21 AM UTC
Originally posted by snab_snib exceptions that prove the rule.
also, i don't disagree with everything everyone else says. i just disagree with retarded things that people say. which, is actually almost everything that gets said on here. almost all of you are totally retarded. that's a fact. it's not a coincidence. just how it is.
No, not everyone here is "totally retarded". They simply disagree with you. There's a difference.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-02-24 at 1:23 AM UTC
Originally posted by snab_snib you can't win by defending. you can only keep what you have. that isn't winning. that's surviving… at a cost.
unless you're attacking, you can't win. there's no such thing as 'defensive victory', that's just a modern euphemism politically correct term for 'well, we still exist, i guess' after being fucked with.
the only path to victory is by unrelenting attack.
If you achieve your goal you have won. Else where does it end? You either loose or you conquer the world? That mentality sounds like Ricky Bobby, if you're not first, you're last!
Originally posted by snab_snib the vietnamese didn't win anything. almost 2 million of them died, and they gained nothing. they did lose every time they attacked. the vietnam war was 0% profit 100% loss for the vietnamese. they got literally nothing but suffering and sorrow and death and destruction and setbacks that continue to this day out of the vietnam war.
that is not victory.
Their goal was a united, sovereign Vietnam. They achieved that. At a cost. By your definition everyone in war is a looser. They fucking won. USA fucking lost. Get over it.
