World Cup!

My son play world of tank everyday. He loves to play with the stug and the Tiger.

The NFL will attempt an overseas adventure with an team, i can’t say it will work or not. Worth a try, better than a small U.S market city. The London game should have been better teams, first class teams like a Dallas Cowboy and Oakland Raider match up.

@Jermofoot:

@Gamerman01:

Oh, and the umpiring left something to be desired.  Nothing egregious, but as a whole it seemed to heavily favor the Cards.

That blown tag at first was a terrible call in game 3. That call would not have been blown had one of the top storied teams been in the series.

I’ve always thought MLB was backwards in its thinking about instant replay. Had a guy the other day defend MLB by saying it would lengthen the games. I replied, have you watched a baseball game, it has plenty of time. Give each team a certain amount of replays for fielding calls, one replay would work for me, just something. Don’t think you can touch pitching calls.

@M36:

Speaking of Korea though, it is true that South Korea is an immensely prosperous nation, while North Korea languishes in poverty. South Korea became “Americanized” and now places that where once rice patties and dusty mountain roads are prosperous metropolises. ( I know this because my sister is serving in Korea with the Army engineers) Without our intervention, South Korea would have been conquered, and would be no better off than North Korea is under the heel of communism. The Korean conflict was one of our more noble military ventures.

Sure, military means money.  S. Vietnam had a huge jump in economy when we were there that mostly collapsed after we left.  It would happen no matter where we go.

However, the state of Korea today has less to do with them being dirty communists, and more with the disintegration of the USSR and a horrible famine during the 90’s.  They simply could not support themselves because their primary trading partner disappeared and was unable to supply what they needed, only to be subjected to a series of disastrous floods and drought.  Of course, it’s not helped by their military-oriented economic policy, but we do similar and still sustain ourselves (but we’ve got the goods).

But we took a number of casualties in Korea, was it worth that sacrifice of American lives? As a Marine I believe we are all expendable to accomplish our mission, but the call is yours. How many of us will you sacrifice to accomplish the objective? You should be willing to sacrifice all of us. That kind of resolve no longer exists in America.

Tough to say.  As an elite group of fighters, I wouldn’t send Marines in frivolously.  When it comes to Korea, we are exactly where we were after WW2 (except no skirmishes and such).  So did it do any good?  I guess so, primarily economically.  Are your lives worth promoting the economy of another country?  Are anyone’s?  Especially when that country actually competes with our own?

But here’s the thing: we installed an unpopular dictator in S. Korea that resigned.  A military coup followed that was just was tyrannical and ruthless.  It really goes unnoticed because the economy surged and we “saved” them from communism.  But I don’t think we accomplished all that much.

I’m not sure when or where you guys should be deployed.  Hopefully never, but that’s a pipe dream.

@whoman69:

I wouldn’t at all say stomped.  In fact he was not defeated, merely not able to further advance due to the logistics.

Logistically, beginning the overland journey from Boston to Quebec City in September was a dumb idea to begin with, but Arnold then lost the part of his army that hadn’t died from disease or exposure in his attack on the city itself. The city was held with the loss of only 5 of its defenders. Arnold should get credit, however, for having his men going into the attack on Dec 31st knowing that their enlistment was up the following day…

Carlin at Carnegie
and
Carlin on Campus

:-D

@F_alk:

Clausewitz would be quite astonished.

touche! :wink:

I believe a variation of DS’s “Oil is the worst thing for a country to have…” forum would go quite well here. The oil allows some of the Middle East governments to prop themselves up. Saudi Arabia, Libya, and Jordan, to name a few(and previously Iraq.) Syria has been using the UN embargo of Iraq to make money off its neighbor.

I do believe some of the leaders of some of these countries want to hold on to their form of government(the few making most of the decisions for the many) and their power as long as they can. The struggle for the leadership(prince v prince) is one example.