11 Aug 2016 16:58:52
I thought it was Reagan who had dementia. Could have been both though.
KimPhilby’s profile
KimPhilby
Published posts and replies
11 Aug 2016 16:59:25
It sounds wonderful.
Read discussionIt sounds wonderful.
11 Aug 2016 09:29:55
I think he may have been referring to Geldof's knighthood.
Read discussionI think he may have been referring to Geldof's knighthood.
11 Aug 2016 00:47:19
Yes troops in Germany, Japan, South Korea. Plus what was in Iraq and Afghanistan which is being redeployed. The the Persian Gulf and Mediterranean fleets.
Russia an China are pretty much all at home. America particularly with its navy an air force has more of a force projection.
Read discussionYes troops in Germany, Japan, South Korea. Plus what was in Iraq and Afghanistan which is being redeployed. The the Persian Gulf and Mediterranean fleets.
Russia an China are pretty much all at home. America particularly with its navy an air force has more of a force projection.
11 Aug 2016 00:35:05
I thought Geldofs behaviour in the referendum run up was bad. Sitting on the Thames quaffing champagne shouting insults to people. Sure he was there for Farage. But many of those he was insulting were working men. The worst kind of socialist is the champagne socialist or band wagon jumper.
Read discussionI thought Geldofs behaviour in the referendum run up was bad. Sitting on the Thames quaffing champagne shouting insults to people. Sure he was there for Farage. But many of those he was insulting were working men. The worst kind of socialist is the champagne socialist or band wagon jumper.
11 Aug 2016 00:32:28
Yes. There hasn't been a publicised attempt since Reagan or a successful one since Kennedy. So the law of averages suggests one is due.
Read discussionYes. There hasn't been a publicised attempt since Reagan or a successful one since Kennedy. So the law of averages suggests one is due.
11 Aug 2016 00:36:12
For those whose dictionary of English slang is out of date? I am not 'down with the kids'.
Read discussionFor those whose dictionary of English slang is out of date? I am not 'down with the kids'.
10 Aug 2016 17:13:52
Hmmm who leaked that an how did they get.
Read discussionHmmm who leaked that an how did they get.
10 Aug 2016 13:12:52
Just search on twitter for Hilary psychopath. Some shocking things on there.
Read discussionJust search on twitter for Hilary psychopath. Some shocking things on there.
10 Aug 2016 10:38:20
Britain is in the top 5. Its ranked on more than just firepower. Technology, logistics, support, strategic capabilities etc.
Read discussionBritain is in the top 5. Its ranked on more than just firepower. Technology, logistics, support, strategic capabilities etc.
09 Aug 2016 21:36:14
Trumps just an arrogant attention seeker. Likes to be in the spotlight and to hear the applause. Not the ideal leader. But not the worst. Hilary. Well definitely not right in the head.
Read discussionTrumps just an arrogant attention seeker. Likes to be in the spotlight and to hear the applause. Not the ideal leader. But not the worst. Hilary. Well definitely not right in the head.
09 Aug 2016 16:23:14
Yes muscatred its logistics that wins wars. Logistics and intelligence.
Read discussionYes muscatred its logistics that wins wars. Logistics and intelligence.
09 Aug 2016 16:21:13
She's definitely sociopathic/ psychotic.
Read discussionShe's definitely sociopathic/ psychotic.
09 Aug 2016 15:18:20
I hadn't seen it. There are various organisations that that rank various nations military capabilities. Janes's for example. They all agree current number one is America. This website may be of use.
goo.gl/trv67
Read discussionI hadn't seen it. There are various organisations that that rank various nations military capabilities. Janes's for example. They all agree current number one is America. This website may be of use.
goo.gl/trv67
09 Aug 2016 11:11:42
As I said French arrogance, bad weather and good tactics from the English including the terrain.
Read discussionAs I said French arrogance, bad weather and good tactics from the English including the terrain.
09 Aug 2016 11:09:33
They could fit the H into the name.
Read discussionThey could fit the H into the name.
06 Aug 2016 16:42:36
Yes but a combination of French arrogance, bad weather conditions and good use of tactical topography by the English results in the victory at Agincourt.
I'm not saying you couldn't win a war against China. But it would be very difficult.
In the mid 1960s Khrushchev thought about attacking China and decided against it after weighing up the advice of the Marshals. Many of whom had won the war against the Germans.
Forces with numerical inferiority often win because of technical superiority. Like Agincourt or your colonial wars in Africa and India. Today the technological gap is greatly reduced.
Read discussionYes but a combination of French arrogance, bad weather conditions and good use of tactical topography by the English results in the victory at Agincourt.
I'm not saying you couldn't win a war against China. But it would be very difficult.
In the mid 1960s Khrushchev thought about attacking China and decided against it after weighing up the advice of the Marshals. Many of whom had won the war against the Germans.
Forces with numerical inferiority often win because of technical superiority. Like Agincourt or your colonial wars in Africa and India. Today the technological gap is greatly reduced.
06 Aug 2016 09:42:56
No. I'd say the Russian forces are currently the second strongest in the world. Putin has invested heavily after the neglect of the buffoons years.
But you'd be crazy to take on China for several reasons.
Lets assume a conventional war as nuclear weapons are understood by all as the last resort not the opener.
1. Geography. Russia shares a lengthy border with China. Easier to invade on a broad front with air support. America lacks nearby bases. Air support could operate from Taiwan, Japan and South Korea but where's the nearby land base? For Iraq they used Saudi Arabia.
2.Numbers. With a population of 1.2 billion China has the worlds largest army and air force. You'd be fighting against overwhelming odds. I read a book a few years ago on your involvement in the Korean war. The battle of the Imjin River aka Gloucester Hill. The quote goes something like this "we worked out that if you made the entire population of China walk past a post the line would never end due to new people being born".
3. The Chinese, like Russia, have spent heavily on the military over the last decade. They've been developing their own kit rather than just copying old Russian equipment. The Americans would be in for a far harder fight than Iraq 13 years ago.
4. Appetite. The ordinary American is sick of war. Its a hard sell these even for one with a cause like post 911. Manufacturing a reason to attack China? can't see many buying it. Also there would be a lack of allies. Britain for example post brexit isn't going to throw trade away. South Korea would be occupied with the North which surely would take the opportunity to attack with the Americans busy. Japan has no real military. The rest of Europe would stay out. Isis is a threat. China isn't.
Lastly given the large Chinese communities around the world in places like London, New York and Los Angeles just how many do you think would be sympathisers at least or sleepers at most. Even 5% would be enough to cause huge disruption.
What was Napoleons quote on China? Let her sleep for when she awakes the world will tremble?
Read discussionNo. I'd say the Russian forces are currently the second strongest in the world. Putin has invested heavily after the neglect of the buffoons years.
But you'd be crazy to take on China for several reasons.
Lets assume a conventional war as nuclear weapons are understood by all as the last resort not the opener.
1. Geography. Russia shares a lengthy border with China. Easier to invade on a broad front with air support. America lacks nearby bases. Air support could operate from Taiwan, Japan and South Korea but where's the nearby land base? For Iraq they used Saudi Arabia.
2.Numbers. With a population of 1.2 billion China has the worlds largest army and air force. You'd be fighting against overwhelming odds. I read a book a few years ago on your involvement in the Korean war. The battle of the Imjin River aka Gloucester Hill. The quote goes something like this "we worked out that if you made the entire population of China walk past a post the line would never end due to new people being born".
3. The Chinese, like Russia, have spent heavily on the military over the last decade. They've been developing their own kit rather than just copying old Russian equipment. The Americans would be in for a far harder fight than Iraq 13 years ago.
4. Appetite. The ordinary American is sick of war. Its a hard sell these even for one with a cause like post 911. Manufacturing a reason to attack China? can't see many buying it. Also there would be a lack of allies. Britain for example post brexit isn't going to throw trade away. South Korea would be occupied with the North which surely would take the opportunity to attack with the Americans busy. Japan has no real military. The rest of Europe would stay out. Isis is a threat. China isn't.
Lastly given the large Chinese communities around the world in places like London, New York and Los Angeles just how many do you think would be sympathisers at least or sleepers at most. Even 5% would be enough to cause huge disruption.
What was Napoleons quote on China? Let her sleep for when she awakes the world will tremble?
05 Aug 2016 18:29:23
Sorry didn't mean to be picky. The whole Yugoslavian situation was a mess and I'd imagine a lot of things were never reported or misreported.
Read discussionSorry didn't mean to be picky. The whole Yugoslavian situation was a mess and I'd imagine a lot of things were never reported or misreported.
05 Aug 2016 10:37:16
More to the point who would he want to use them against?
Britain and France are allies. As is Israel. India and Pakistan are an irrelevance in US foreign policy as far as military matters are concerned. Trump isn't as anti Russian as Hilary. North Korea can't get it to work. Iran doesn't have them yet. And no one is stupid enough to go to war with China.
So who does he intend to use them on?
Read discussionMore to the point who would he want to use them against?
Britain and France are allies. As is Israel. India and Pakistan are an irrelevance in US foreign policy as far as military matters are concerned. Trump isn't as anti Russian as Hilary. North Korea can't get it to work. Iran doesn't have them yet. And no one is stupid enough to go to war with China.
So who does he intend to use them on?