As much as i dislike US foreign policy, i think they should keep their forces in Japan due to their strategic value in the southern Asia region.

Protection from what? They are not there for protection, they only act as a shoulder to daunt N.Korea (and in some ways also China). :rolleyes:

While all of them are started because of monnneh!

Russian military influence? In Japan? It's not the19th century anymore. The only local military interest they seem to have right now is in the SW part of Asia.

I strongly suggest you look for Robert Stinnett's Day of Deceit, if you haven't read it yet.

More advanced? In some areas yes, but they are bot as flexible as the US armament, mostly practicing "head on" philosophy with little regards to stealth or tactics (this seems to be strong rooted in their military machine since the WWII lol), not to mention heavy shortage in quantity of this equipment and the overall poor qualification and low morals of their troops. Nevertheless they are still a force to reckon with.

Nope, they have modernized the armament of their strategic forces. A lot of the nuclear warheads that survived the collapse of Soviet union have now been re-utilized and put in-to new carrier missiles. Others have been dismounted and/or sold to other countries (rumors, o/c).

[quote=Amnell;430984]Ramones1976: First of all, "faux" does indeed mean "false". However, it is pronounced like "foe", so when you say it out loud, you sound like a complete moron. That aside, personally I like that Fox News is right-wing biased. I think there should be more right-wing biased news networks on the air, in fact. Poor Fox News is up there waving the Conservative banner all alone, standing defiantly against the sea of super-liberal news networks that have owned the airways for the last half-century.

Who the fuck are you calling moron, ************ (angrily swears)
Second, politically I'm very liberal, so Fox new is bloody bollocks

If you want fair and balanced, you have to watch CNN for an hour, then watch Fox News for an hour. That way you get super-liberal and "super"-conservative viewpoints on the same bullshit. Better yet, don't even watch the news. It's all controlled by people who don't give a shit about giving you-the-viewer an accurate report of events, whose sole interest is making money, whose favourite form of self-amusement is sensationalizing something that makes no difference to anyone on the face of the planet and starting a nationwide panic-over-nothing (like global warming, for instance--it's true, but it's way played up).

I watched a few minutes of Fox and I swear I wanted to bitch slap the news reporters, I couldn't stand listening to them, the things they said pissed me off :mad:
Personally I like BBC news


Actually, I believe Afghanistan was sanctioned by the UN; it was Iraq that the UN was opposed to.

No I don't think so

We were neutral for a good long time, actually. Between 1812 and WW1, I don't believe that U.S. was involved in one conflict between European countries. That's more than a century.

Bollocks, the US was far from neutral during the 19 century...
The war of 1812, the war in Algeria, the war with Mexico...
They oppressed, horribly treated, and stole land from the natives, stole Hawaii, and south west states from Mexico, bought Alaska, and during the war with Spain got a hold of the Philippines, Cuba, Puerto Rico, and Nicaragua.

The sunday comment was just a joke XP .

So funny I forgot to laugh

So, from my reading, Vietnam was not an officially UN-sanctioned war. However, as the motivation of the war was to halt communism, pretty much everyone in Western Europe was (initally, at least) on our side, even if they couldn't say so. You could argue that the attitude was one of pride, but it was more the restoration of reputation than it was about "we can kick your ass, just you watch".

Yes it was american arrogance...
Well look how well the us did of 'kicking ass"...
More like they got their asses kicked...by peasants with without as much technology

Look I said I don't want to bicker and argue, so just drop it please

Nope, they have modernized the armament of their strategic forces. A lot of the nuclear warheads that survived the collapse of Soviet union have now been re-utilized and put in-to new carrier missiles. Others have been dismounted and/or sold to other countries (rumors, o/c). [/quote]

Oh okay...