- 1,292
- 53
Must of won WW3 so quick that it didn't even make the news.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Let's make war hand to hand
lol we won WW3 for a reason........our military has nothing to do with brave men.
Must of won WW3 so quick that it didn't even make the news.
No that is like sayingi the Broncos have a machine that launches the football and tracks it directly to a player's hands....
So should the Broncos bench Peyton and play their bench because they have a better weapon? The hell kind of logic is going on inside of your head?
Here's the logic, people in here are slow. The Peyton analogy was terrible lol, I admit that.
The point I'm making in this thread is modern warfare doesn't require as much brute strength as you think. We use drones, and drop bombs to win wars. Our soldiers aren't any stronger or braver than our enemies.
Make sense?
You're sort of all over the place bro. You called the U.S. "dumb and ignorant," but then admitted we win wars by fighting remotely. If anything, it's an advanced tactic, which is NOT a sign of "ignorance."
Here's the logic, people in here are slow. The Peyton analogy was terrible lol, I admit that.
The point I'm making in this thread is modern warfare doesn't require as much brute strength as you think. We use drones, and drop bombs to win wars. Our soldiers aren't any stronger or braver than our enemies.
Make sense?
well that would technically be equal....aka we will do equal work in exchange for equal pay...I don't get it, yall want woman to do the same amount of pull ups as men?
You did back pedal, and I'm no child. You did it just again right now...saying that "modern war is very cowardly". When originally you said that the U.S. specifically wins with cowardly tactics. Now you wanna include all modern warfare, and not specify the U.S. It doesn't make the U.S seem cowardly when you say "modern war" as a whole.
I didnt back pedal, I said modern war is very cowardly and that the US doesn't win because their soldiers are brave.....see where Im going with this....do you see child?
I don't get it, yall want woman to do the same amount of pull ups as men?
well that would technically be equal....aka we will do equal work in exchange for equal pay...
But, like, no sh**
I've remained consistent with my point this entire thread in saying that war doesn't require as much brute strength as it used to.
exactly there for they technically cannot do a equal job.... Im all for equality... keyword equality... but making a exception regardless of certain disadvantages etc means that it is no longer equal.Men and women body compositions are different, there is no reason they should have the same physical requirements.
true but it still wouldn't be equal per say....aka suppose you doing a job iuno like warehouse and loading a truck based on piecework.... if a man loads 100 50lbs boxes in a truck an hr... and a woman loads 50 15lbs boxes an hr.... Anyway you slice it the amount of workload expected and actually achieved isn't equal. Anyway you try to spin it.
as long as they set a minimum requirement that is reasonable for men and another that is reasonable for women i dont see what the big deal is
it would depend on there mos.... amongst other things... now if it was something like combat arms... or horizontal engineering a few other moss's then no.
Oh so you agree with me that women although not as strong can be effective soldiers? Carry on then, we are on the same page.
yes then for that job it wouldnt be fair to be a man, however in the army there are jobs that even with the lack of strength, women would be able to do at the same efficiency as a man given the proper training.true but it still wouldn't be equal per say....aka suppose you doing a job iuno like warehouse and loading a truck based on piecework.... if a man loads 100 50lbs boxes in a truck an hr... and a woman loads 50 15lbs boxes an hr.... Anyway you slice it the amount of workload expected and actually achieved isn't equal. Anyway you try to spin it.
as long as they set a minimum requirement that is reasonable for men and another that is reasonable for women i dont see what the big deal is
The male counterpart would have a higher productivity rating aka generate more revenue for the company also while costing the company less.... aka be more efficient so how exactly would that be equal?
One person generates twice as much all while costing half as much is equal to a person that is costing the company twice as much and producing half as much. Don't see how that is same/equal.
WRONG. First off...I'm 28 so i'm no child. Secondly, you weren't speaking as generally as you are now. You referred to the U.S. specifically, stating that we won wars through cowardly tactics like dropping bombs. You looked stupid, so now you're back peddling and generalizing/watering down what you originally said by applying your views towards war tactics in general, when you referenced the U.S. explicitly in your original statement. Call me a child all you want, but it's your posts that look juvenile....just sayin.
I've remained consistent with my point this entire thread in saying that war doesn't require as much brute strength as it used to. I could duplicate this post if it makes you feel better child.
This is your original statement. Back pedal all you want....but here it is. Blatantly pointing fingers at the U.S. for dropping bombs. This wasn't a statement made generally about war tactics in general. This is a statement referencing U.S. military using explosives, calling the acts cowardly. Lookin foolish right about now. Now you wanna call it "modern warfare" in general. Good luck with that.
LOL a country that wins with cowardly acts like dropping bombs and using drones is complaining about women not being able to pull them out of a ditch?