Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

> ISIS declares war on US, France, Canada, Australia

views
     
Artus
post Sep 23 2014, 03:49 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,985 posts

Joined: Jun 2010
IS dared to declare war on all those countries because they are not situated next to Northern Iraq. If China is across the border see they dare to talk big or not?


Artus
post Sep 23 2014, 04:41 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,985 posts

Joined: Jun 2010
QUOTE(ichi_24 @ Sep 23 2014, 04:22 PM)
motherland will nuke them like boss
*
No need to nuke one. Last time China fought nuclear-power US in Korean War, even without heavy weapons and very little air cover. China lose 1 million soldiers also no problem lah, as long as the objective is reached.

China last time invaded Vietnam with heavy losses even though very poorly equipped just to show to Vietnam that Russia won't protect it.

Japan during World War 2 made the mistake of attacking China first and got bogged down in the war, which wasted a lot of their resources and manpower.

No country can afford to use human wave tactics except China.

IS want to conquer China better have 100 million soldiers to do it.


Artus
post Sep 23 2014, 04:48 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,985 posts

Joined: Jun 2010
QUOTE(saigetsu @ Sep 23 2014, 04:45 PM)
so youre saying china has super mn power that even nucleear power cannot bow down. because once nuclear power is used, then nuclear war began.

then what is nuclear for? wayang ony?

telur x da...
*
Let's say China's 100 million army invaded Russia. Can Russia use nuclear on its own soil? The most it can do is to use it on China's soil.


Artus
post Sep 23 2014, 04:52 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,985 posts

Joined: Jun 2010
QUOTE(saigetsu @ Sep 23 2014, 04:50 PM)
then what ure saying earlier not valid.  no matter how many japanese army in tanah melayu back then, 2 blows at japanese, kawtim d.
*
Not really, if the Japanese is on half of US mainland, US cannot afford to nuclear bomb on Japan or else the whole US would be slaughtered.


Artus
post Sep 23 2014, 04:57 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,985 posts

Joined: Jun 2010
QUOTE(TunaFish1990 @ Sep 23 2014, 04:50 PM)
bro..china population is this ->  1,366,900,000...that's 1,366 million....

if IS attk china and plan to conquer..let's assume half of the ppl will take up arms and fight back..that's still 683 million ppl...

IS need 700 mil soldiers to ensure victory...or maybe more since IS weapons arent as hi-tek as PRC...
*
They talk big very easy. Not easy to conquer China. Want to conquer China must wait for it to have internal civil war. That's why Japan attacked China when the Nationalists were fighting the Communists. The Manchus conquered China because a Ming general sided with them because he didn't want to submit to the rebels that overthrew the Ming Dynasty. The Mongols took a long time to conquer China even though it was split into North and South.


Artus
post Sep 23 2014, 05:00 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,985 posts

Joined: Jun 2010
QUOTE(TunaFish1990 @ Sep 23 2014, 04:55 PM)
sometimes, they might still bomb japong motherland...since if ur already losing...what's there to lose further?

its not like the imperial army will spare those amerikano if they invaded US soil..sure 99% kena slaughter..left wimminz like marilyn monroe for lap dancing oni..
*
The Japanese didn't slaughter everyone in China, although many died. If US nuke them if they are already in the US mainland, then definitely everyone would slaughtered. So, it's not so easy.


Artus
post Sep 23 2014, 05:05 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,985 posts

Joined: Jun 2010
QUOTE(TunaFish1990 @ Sep 23 2014, 04:59 PM)
sounds legit...

like how during 3 kingdom era the 3 most powerful generals didnt manage to win anything coz all busy fighting each other...end up 4th force become united china.. lol
*
Yes, the only way to conquer a very strong country is to wait for it to be weakened on its own. But currently Taiwan is not a military threat to the mainland at all, so it is very silly for anyone to try to attack China right now.


Artus
post Sep 23 2014, 05:09 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,985 posts

Joined: Jun 2010
QUOTE(TunaFish1990 @ Sep 23 2014, 05:04 PM)
abang..that was actually atom bomb....very very much diff with nuclear bomb.....
true also..but then kinda hard to say because China didnt causes huge loss to japong as compared to US. As in China army basically were defending their turf...while US went out and bomb japong. So i take it the grudge on US might be more than China. Hence if US were conquered partially, they might kill alot more than what they did to china.

and when that happen...it's possible for a broken arrow situation.. brows.gif

but then that's jst me and my wild assumption....coz if we're to base on sane logic, US might opt your path instead.
*
Japan got terribly bogged down in China, with a lot of wasted resources and soldiers. They attacked the US because US embargoed the sale of oil to Japan, when it needed a lot of oil in the war against China. They invaded Southeast Asia to get to the oil in Indonesia. If they have done that in the beginning instead of attacking China first, then they could have been more successful.


Artus
post Sep 23 2014, 05:26 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,985 posts

Joined: Jun 2010
QUOTE(TunaFish1990 @ Sep 23 2014, 05:20 PM)
actually they attk the US because they dont want US to campur tangan...

anyhow, even if they attked indon 1st..they are still short of many other resources...raw material aside..they are short of manpower as well.
*
It's all about the oil lah:

Attack on Pearl Harbor

QUOTE
The U.S. ceased oil exports to Japan in July 1941, following Japanese expansion into French Indochina after the fall of France, in part because of new American restrictions on domestic oil consumption. This in turn caused the Japanese to proceed with plans to take the Dutch East Indies, an oil-rich territory. On 17 August, Roosevelt warned Japan that the U.S. was prepared to take steps against Japan if it attacked "neighboring countries". The Japanese were faced with the option of either withdrawing from China and losing face or seizing and securing new sources of raw materials in the resource-rich, European-controlled colonies of Southeast Asia.



Artus
post Sep 23 2014, 05:44 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,985 posts

Joined: Jun 2010
QUOTE(TunaFish1990 @ Sep 23 2014, 05:40 PM)
It's not ler bro..from the link you gave..it's actually on the 2nd paragraph on top..
*
Read properly lah. US want to prevent Japan's plan to get to the oil in Southeast Asia, so Japan preemptively attack US lah.

So, it was all about the oil.


Artus
post Sep 23 2014, 06:26 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,985 posts

Joined: Jun 2010
QUOTE(TunaFish1990 @ Sep 23 2014, 06:05 PM)
check this out.... of the dozen documentary i watched in Discovery Channel and Nat Geo..its all about shocking the US to NOT participating in the war....

and similar search revealed the same result....

oil might be part of the purpose..but the main goal is ensuring US cant participate..

Many war historian also conclude that Japan is NOT able to take on UK AND US together....so their have their 1st strike in scaring back the US...only it back-fired.

https://www.google.com.my/?gws_rd=cr,ssl&ei...arl+harbor+1941
*
If US didn't impose an oil embargo, Japan won't need to invade Southeast Asia. And if US didn't plan to stop Japan from invading Southeast Asia to get to the oil, Japan won't need to attack US first. Like I said, it was all about the oil. If not because of the oil, Japan wouldn't need to attack the US.


Artus
post Sep 23 2014, 06:34 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,985 posts

Joined: Jun 2010
QUOTE(TunaFish1990 @ Sep 23 2014, 06:29 PM)
okay.
*
You should read this:

Events leading to the attack on Pearl Harbor

QUOTE
Japan and the U.S. engaged in negotiations during the course of 1941 in an effort to improve relations. During these negotiations Japan considered withdrawal from most of China and Indochina after Japan and Nationalist China drew up peace terms. Japan would also adopt an independent interpretation of the Tripartite Pact, and would not discriminate in trade provided all other countries reciprocated. However, these compromises in China were rejected by General Tojo, then War Minister. Responding to continuing Japanese aggression in China, the U.S. froze Japanese assets in the U.S. on 26 July 1941 and on 1 August established an embargo on oil and gasoline exports to Japan. The oil embargo was an especially strong response because oil was Japan's most crucial import, and more than 80 percent of Japan's oil at the time came from the United States.

Japanese war planners had long looked south, especially to Brunei for oil and to Malaya for rubber and tin. The Navy was (mistakenly) certain any attempt to seize this region would bring the U.S. into the war, but the complete U.S. oil embargo removed any hesitancy. Moreover, any southern operation would be vulnerable to attack from the Philippines, then a U.S. commonwealth, so war with the U.S. seemed necessary in any case. In addition to this, Japan looked to the Dutch East Indies. In the autumn of 1940, Japan requested 3.15 million barrels of oil from the Dutch East Indies, but received a counter offer of only 1.35 million barrels. Therefore, the Japanese were interested in expansion to the East Indies, but Malaya and the Philippines had to have been cleared in order for the Japanese to secure the area. This meant inevitable U.S. intervention



Artus
post Sep 23 2014, 07:13 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,985 posts

Joined: Jun 2010
QUOTE(TunaFish1990 @ Sep 23 2014, 07:04 PM)
did...but seems like still not oil as priority...

from ur link :
Good read. Thanks for the info.
*
In a sense, the US was provoking Japan to attack it because strong anti-war demonstrations at home were preventing the US from joining the world war.



Bump Topic Add ReplyOptions New Topic
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0194sec    0.54    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 30th November 2025 - 07:38 AM