Forum: The Classroom Topic: Canadian Soldiers are Supa 1337 started by: Sunspot Posted by Sunspot on Sep. 25 2000,18:30
Canada dosen't have many solders so they have to make up for it by well equiping the ones they have. Each Canadian soldier has so much high tech equipment and they are so well trained, One figher can take out 20 guys from any other army in the world!!!
Posted by Lordbrandon on Sep. 25 2000,19:33
you used your first post to say that?
Posted by Sunspot on Sep. 25 2000,19:36
Sure why not? Did I waste your time? Im just testing the waters =) Posted by Lordbrandon on Sep. 25 2000,23:51
i hate you
Posted by Sithiee on Sep. 26 2000,00:04
canadia has armed forces? ha! i laught at your "army". geez, US waged war on the persian gulf and had a total of like 9 casualties, and that was because we accidently took out one of our own coptors...
Posted by darksol on Sep. 26 2000,00:12
are you sure it was an accident? and also, the canadian army the best in the world? Surely you jest my friend. If you really believe that then I would say that is nationalism going a little to far, and your putting your faith in an institution that would get put down in a couple seconds if it ever faced the U.S. army. ------------------ Posted by j0eSmith on Sep. 26 2000,00:22
Sunspot: Are you on crack? I LIVE in Canada man. Our armed forces are PITIFUL. Our navy is 20 years old. All we have are DIESEL SUBMARINES. Our Air Force consists of F-18s, Hercules transports and maybe a couple bombers. Our coast guard rescue Labradour Choppers are ancient. Our ground forces enlisted men live barely above the poverty line. Officers don't fare much better. Well armed? Well equiped? Ha Ha Ha. ------------------ Posted by askheaves on Sep. 26 2000,00:24
The thing about the US ever fighting Canada. Even if their soldiers could kill at a 20:1 ratio, we wouldn't be sending 700,000 troops to walk to Canada and start fighting. We'd be total bastards and would bomb all sorts of useful things to Canada. I don't think Canada has any major Air defenses (like the US). Pretty quickly, Canada would be unable to support its super 1337 forces, and they would give up.Having the best army in the world (though debateable) is one thing. Having the biggest bastards of a military force is a totally different story. How many ground troops did we use in Kosovo? None until they agreed to let the UN in for peacekeeping. Posted by Lordbrandon on Sep. 26 2000,00:57
what air defences do we have? ive never seen a AAA batery walking thru San Francisco. or maby they're hidden. if canada wanted they could probably drop a buncha bombs on NY before they got shot down on the way back.theres nothing to stop them
Posted by damien_s_lucifer on Sep. 26 2000,04:06
wtf? If the supa 1337 Canadian Army got sent in somewhere, they might win the battle but it would only be because the enemies would be laughing so hard they wouldn't be able to shoot straight..."Hey Abdul!" Posted by Happyfish on Sep. 26 2000,04:39
Hey! Canada used to have a great army - back in WW1 and WW2. Though our army does suck now.. BUT! Canada did beat the US in the war of 1812...
Posted by Sithiee on Sep. 26 2000,08:32
first off, in the war of 1812, it wasnt really canada's army, but rather england's. thats why its considered the last war between US and england. i dont know of a single war of canada and the US...and about being a cheap army, you are wrong. i would hate to see you as a miltary commander. youd prolly do something like "oh, well carpet bombing is an unfair tactic, because they couldnt fight us back, lets send in 700,000 men, and hope none get killed!" when we bomb places its so that we dont lose people that we dont have to. but maybe you dont value human life, i dunno. Posted by jim on Sep. 26 2000,12:33
quote: I was in the Marine Corps during that period. You are very misinformed. There were many operations that went on durning that time period, and only part of the time were we actually 'AT WAR'. There were casualties before the war started, during, and after, and there are still people suffering from experimental drugs given to the Armed Services personal to 'protect' them from chemical weapons. ------------------ Posted by Rhydant on Sep. 26 2000,12:37
ok, my turn to make fun of Canadia!!!well, i forgot all the jokes... but... the US does have a supa advanced air defense system. ever heard of NORAD? its in that big ass mountain in colorado springs. then theres the fact that we have jets taking off and landing every 20 minutes to make pratrols about places like washington and other important places. so there fore, w3 0wnz j00 canada. ------------------ Posted by askheaves on Sep. 26 2000,14:25
I looked back at my other post, and it didn't look very clear. Yes, I meant that Canada has crap for an anti-aircraft network (SAMs, AAA Batteries, flak?). I meant to convey that we are on a level playing field in that respect (hense: like the US). I don't want to see the day when there's a AAA battery in Northern Minnesota (or Southern Arizona, for that matter). We can get away with having no land based AA defenses because we don't get bombed very often.You're right about the NORAD deal, though. We have excellant control over our airspace. Good luck getting in! Posted by hyperponic on Sep. 26 2000,15:03
darn, and i thought the only canadian army was a couple of red-coated bufoons and a handful of militia men who defected from the united states. i suppose i'll have to reconsider my invasion now------------------ Posted by Kayy on Sep. 26 2000,16:17
quote: Correction, you'd try to bomb all sorts of useful things to Canada, but like many other people, I've read the report into the USAF bombings in Kosovo, you know the ones, the ones where only around 110 of the 1000+ bombs dropped actually hit within a 50 metre radius of their specified targets. Hell, from what I hear, you dont even get more than 2 people in a 50 metre radius in Canada Posted by NiGHTS_01 on Sep. 26 2000,17:05
Hahaha Haha Hah *wheeze*Whoo... Canada jokes never get old! Or maybe it's this 36 hours without sleep thing that's making this so funny. *shrug* ------------------ Posted by Blain on Sep. 26 2000,17:42
Last year I read an article in the Denver Post that stated that the Canadian military was so under-equipped that they could fit 1/10 of all the Canadian army supplies on one navy carrier. And they did. And it got HIJACKED!!!! HAHAHA HA HAHA!------------------ Posted by damien_s_lucifer on Sep. 26 2000,19:17
why Toronto? Can't we bomb Quebec instead? Those damn French Canadians really piss me off. If we got rid of them we'd have the rest of Canada on our side.We fart on your country! Posted by DrunkNigel on Sep. 27 2000,00:52
Can't you guys just take Quebec from us? I swear, those french are the source of half this country's problems ;PSure, our Military is old, poor, and pathetic... who gives a damn? If any military or government were stupid enough to 'invade' Canada, you guys (US) would be up here in a snap. Why? Because we are allies. :P and all this USA 'invading' Canada rot... *sigh* ------------------ This message has been edited by DrunkNigel on September 26, 2000 at 07:53 PM Posted by Cyrino on Sep. 27 2000,01:14
I don't know how well-versed you guys are in Canadian history, but if you feel so inclined, look into a little project called the Avro Arrow. You will find that a while ago, we actually cared about our military. You will aslo find how stupid some of our past administrations were. Now, I'm quite patriotic, but I couldn't care less as to how big our army is. I'm not really one for going around and saying, hey, my gun's bigger and shit like that, but you guys can have your fun.------------------ Posted by Sithiee on Sep. 27 2000,01:47
Jim, what were the actual death tolls for the US in Persian Gulf?
Posted by marc c on Sep. 27 2000,02:00
quote:If I remember correctly, it was something like 200 killed in and out of battle. ------------------ Posted by damien_s_lucifer on Sep. 27 2000,02:29
well, if someone tried to invade Canada, we'd wipe them off the map. We have to protect our comedian supply.Seriously, though, we should just ANNEX Canada. You guys would barely notice except you'd start spelling things like "armor" correctly. And while we're at it, we should annex Mexico. Mmm... tacos... anyway let's make the United States of America include the whole damn continent. Manifest Destiny has only been partially fulfilled. That makes me mad. Let's get up off our asses and DO something about it! Posted by Happyfish on Sep. 27 2000,04:19
quote: Maybe if you knew what you were talking about you'd know that the fist part of NORAD means North American, Not United Sates. Canada is a big part of that too - ever heard of Alert? Look it up. And yes, the Avro Arrow kicked major ass. A lot of the ppl that worked on that now work for NASA and helped design the space shuttle. Posted by whiskey@throttle on Sep. 27 2000,05:37
Canada: "they're not even a real country anyway." Ha! That's the most hilarious line from the entire South Park movie. But just to show that I learned nothing about sensless scapegoating and bigotry, I have forecasted the bout between US and Canada.
Day # "Did I say death camps? I meant happy camps..." ...South Park rules. p.s. Don't take me seriously, I love Canada Posted by BLacK-JEsuS on Sep. 27 2000,12:06
I believe the total KIA for the US in the gulf war was approximately 81. As for those killed in accidents or off duty, I'm not sure for that total.
Posted by jim on Sep. 27 2000,12:31
quote: Gulf War: Combat Deaths: 147 Note that the 147 is COMBAT Deaths. Also note, that of the 665,476 people serving in the Gulf War, approx. 100,000 have registered with the VA with health concerns. Of these 100,000 approx 15,000 have the exact same symptoms. Which is now commonly reffered to as Gulf War Syndrome. ------------------ Posted by kuru on Sep. 27 2000,14:27
yeah, my nukes are bigger than your nukes. the only thing more frigging sad than a dick measuring contest is when you're not even measuring your own dicks.------------------ Posted by Sithiee on Sep. 27 2000,22:07
every war we enter we end up having fewer and fewer deaths...wonder how long before we have none...anyone see that thing in popular science a little while ago? about the soldier of the future? if we actually get that working right, i think our army will be supreme...until it gets on the black market anyway... Posted by Keeps on Sep. 28 2000,00:17
Popular Science has those at least once a year. I just want Starship Troopers soldiers. The real Starship Troopers, not that movie.
Posted by whiskey@throttle on Sep. 28 2000,02:36
War is definitely not what it used to be...the battles of WWII are a thing of the past. Perhaps Sithiee is right, and our combat casualty rate will slowly dwindle to nil. Heck, not one Naval serviceman/woman was killed during the entire Desert Storm/Desert Shield operation... Now, what this says for our opposition is a whole different story...
Posted by DrunkNigel on Sep. 28 2000,22:39
quote: DAMN! That would be hella cool. And he's talking about THE BOOK, not the movie. Think of the game Heavy Gear 2, just a bit smaller. :P Do yourself a favor and go read the book; ------------------ Posted by Rhydant on Sep. 28 2000,23:16
Time's have changedOur kids are getting worse They won't obey their parents They just want to fart and curse! Should we blame the government? Or blame society? Or should we blame the images on TV? Heck NO, blame Canada Don't blame me And my boy Eric once My son could've been a doctor or a lawyer it's true Blame Canada ------------------ This message has been edited by Rhydant on September 28, 2000 at 06:17 PM Posted by kuru on Sep. 28 2000,23:31
We must blame them and cause a fuss Before someone thinks of blaming us
------------------ Posted by Sithiee on Sep. 29 2000,00:25
starship troopers was an awesome book, its a double edged sword, on the one hand, its an awesome book, but on the other, ill never be able to enjoy starship troopers(movie) in the same way again....same thing happened with blade runner...
Posted by pengu1nn on Sep. 29 2000,12:52
mad doesn't just include the USA. the reason it's called "Mutual" (as in the feeling is mutual) is if anyone launched a "nuke" everyone else would launch theirs. that includes russia, china, and north korea (prolly some more too) thats why it is "Assured Destruction"and we don't need those damn subs with nukes, we would use the long range silo nukes (don't remember what they are called IMHO maybe?/something like that) Posted by Observer on Sep. 29 2000,12:58
I think you're looking for 'ICBM'.And I think that figure of 81 that someone posted came from a Bill Hicks routine. "You mean we could have just sent 82 guys over there and we could have won?" --Bill Hicks ------------------ Posted by kuru on Sep. 29 2000,14:31
mutually assured destruction isn't a new concept, and sometimes it's the only thing that keeps a war from happening. take the cuban missile crisis for example. russia points their nukes at the usa. the usa points their nukes at russia. if one launches, the other side detects launch and returns fire. the "birds are in the air" and can't be called back. theirs hit us, ours hit them, and there's nothing left for the winner to take over.it's messy, but it's peace. as for the usa and canada, NORAD is a joint effort. the border between the usa and canada is the longest undefended national border anywhere in the world. from the coast of maine to the coast of washington, there's not a single fort along the border. seems to me like that's somethin to be proud of. ------------------ Posted by whiskey@throttle on Sep. 29 2000,14:43
quote: Yup. Hence, the whole friggin cold war.
quote: Or perhaps...afraid of...
Posted by mqa on Sep. 29 2000,17:39
NORAD isn't in it of its self a defense system. yes our jets can knock any plane out of the air, but thats as far as our physical defense goes, we have no AA or anti missle installments (unless they have secret lasers in space...). The real power of the United States is the fact if anyone fucks with us, we can effectively destroy the earth as we know it at least 10 times over. Ever heard of the MAD policy? It stands for Mutual Assured Destruction. It says that at any given moment the US has enough submarines at sea, with enough nuclear missles, to destroy the world. So if the US were ever to suffer a catstrophic attack, you can be assured that revenge would be had. And there is not a damn thing any candian soldier can do about THAT!
Posted by Mahdimael on Oct. 06 2000,02:15
In the future, war will be fought in space, or possibly on the top of a very tall mountain. In any event, these wars will be fought buy robots, and as you go forth, your duty is clear: to build and maintain those robots.Or something ------------------ Posted by Willy Pete on Oct. 18 2000,13:16
No doubt technology is important, but what any war comes down to is real estate. Some real estate is more valuable than others. Some has important resources, some is more so because of it's location and the influence it exerts over other locations.You will ALWAYS need grunts to take and hold real estate. Tanks can help take it, arplanes can bomb it, nukes can vapourise it, but you always need to have some guys there waving your flag over it if you want to make use of it. As for ICBM's, they are only of value with regard to an opponent who has similar weapons and a desire to survive. If my religion says that the ultimate aim in life is to make it to paradise and to do so I must destroy the infidel with a small nuke strapped to my back, then I'll be running through Washington yelling 'Praise God' and pushing small buttons. If the collective nation behind such an action doesn't mind being sacrificed in the name of their beliefs if it helps destroy the enemy oftheir beliefs, then such a policy nullifies the threat of ICBMs. Also, let's not forget that most (if not all) have been decommissioned. That's why the US needs subs with cruise missiles. Posted by Lordbrandon on Oct. 19 2000,18:15
we have subs with cruse missels
Posted by Lordbrandon on Oct. 20 2000,15:55
And we also have subs with provolone and fresh bread baked every day
|