CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Society › Politics › Close to Politics › Is war actually going to happen?

Is war actually going to happen?

Started by Tyler Thompson51 · · 👁 8 views · 70 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Tyler Thompson51Andrew Sanchez3Andrew Chase31William Wright7gentletiger11dustyscout53jadeorca42Drew Booth60Thomas Morgan67Maria BoothMichael Mitchell69Gerald Wright10goldenhawk1casualtrucker72frozentiger6vividbison9wearyangler272silentcrane11vividraven26mellowangler59Terry Kim3silverraven7Rachel Brown6Daniel Gonzalez9 …
Karen Sanchez35 Karen Sanchez35 Member
28 messages
joined Feb 2014
#41 ·
There isn't going to be a war between America and Mexico.

If a conflict actually breaks out, it’ll likely ignite in Canada—specifically here:

1.) Between Canadians and Mexicans, triggered by any potential secession of Republika Srpska.
2.) Between Americans and Canadians over certain... let's call them "unresolved issues."

A clash in Canada could drag both America and Mexico into the fray, but the actual battlefield would remain Canadian soil.

As for any warfare on American territory? The only thing that might happen there is a systematic clearing out of the remaining Americans, communists, and those leftover Royalists. Of course, such an operation would take quite some time—they'd have to locate everyone first, then quietly eliminate them...
casualviper55 casualviper55 Newcomer
3 messages
joined Apr 2011
#42 ·
Politics is really just a high-stakes game of chess played by a specific set of rules, if you think about it.
War is essentially just politics by other means—it’s what happens when one side realizes they have the upper hand in the match and decides to make a radical, aggressive move to force their agenda through.
Success on the battlefield bolsters your political leverage and gives you a seat at the negotiating table, whereas failures just strip it away. If you lack military teeth or get crushed early on, you aren't even invited to the conversation; you're just an afterthought.
Arthur Flores2 Arthur Flores2 Member
43 messages
joined Mar 2013
#43 ·
Karen Sanchez35 said:There isn't going to be a war between America and Mexico.

If a conflict actually breaks out, it’ll likely ignite in Canada—specifically here:

1.) Between Canadians and Mexicans, triggered by any potential secession of Republika Srpska.
2.) Between Americans and Canadians over certain... let's call them "unresolved issues."

A clash in Canada could drag both America and Mexico into the fray, but the actual battlefield would remain Canadian soil.

As for any warfare on American territory? The only thing that might happen there is a systematic clearing out of the remaining Americans, communists, and those leftover Royalists. Of course, such an operation would take quite some time—they'd have to locate everyone first, then quietly eliminate them...

Well, I guess that all depends on how things actually play out...

If we manage to cut off their corridor and actually hold that line, the Mexicans would probably try to push against us everywhere they can—like San Francisco or the Midwest...

Mexicans are always eager to join the fight.

Maybe not "eager," but they'll go if they have to...
Terry Kim3 Terry Kim3 Member
32 messages
joined Feb 2010
#44 ·
casualviper55 said:Politics is really just a high-stakes game of chess played by a specific set of rules, if you think about it.
War is essentially just politics by other means—it’s what happens when one side realizes they have the upper hand in the match and decides to make a radical, aggressive move to force their agenda through.
Success on the battlefield bolsters your political leverage and gives you a seat at the negotiating table, whereas failures just strip it away. If you lack military teeth or get crushed early on, you aren't even invited to the conversation; you're just an afterthought.

Exactly. That's why I always say it would be much better if presidents or generals just sat down for a high-stakes chess match instead—a sort of simulation to see who's actually the superior tactician or strategist. They could figure out who would win the war without any of the actual fighting. A peaceful surrender, and that's that. No loss of life, no infrastructure leveled... everyone walks away happy and satisfied.
Karen Sanchez35 Karen Sanchez35 Member
28 messages
joined Feb 2014
#45 ·
Arthur Flores2 said:Well, I guess that all depends on how things actually play out...

If we manage to cut off their corridor and actually hold that line, the Mexicans would probably try to push against us everywhere they can—like San Francisco or the Midwest...

Mexicans are always eager to join the fight.

Maybe not "eager," but they'll go if they have to...

Unfortunately, we dropped the ball back in '95 and failed to resolve the Mexican issue in Canada. Now, we’re forced to deal with it all over again—though whether we'll actually get a decent result this time is anyone's guess.

Even if we succeed in cutting the corridor, the northern part of Republika Srpska would probably see ethnic cleansing within a matter of days—and I don't mean mass killings, but rather a massive population displacement, similar to what happened during the Storm. Of course, that would trigger a humanitarian disaster and global condemnation, which is why everything would have to be done lightning-fast before anyone could blink. Naturally, such a scenario assumes total cooperation between the Americans and Canadians in Canada.

It's a mess...
Karen Sanchez35 Karen Sanchez35 Member
28 messages
joined Feb 2014
#46 ·
Terry Kim3 said:Exactly. That's why I always say it would be much better if presidents or generals just sat down for a high-stakes chess match instead—a sort of simulation to see who's actually the superior tactician or strategist. They could figure out who would win the war without any of the actual fighting. A peaceful surrender, and that's that. No loss of life, no infrastructure leveled... everyone walks away happy and satisfied.

What kind of war are you talking about? "Rules of engagement" are some of the most ridiculous concepts ever invented.

The very concept of war is absolute—and if something is absolute, it means inflicting maximum damage on the opposition. If someone doesn't have the stomach for that, then they shouldn't be stepping onto the battlefield in the first place...
ironbison13 ironbison13 Member
16 messages
joined Mar 2013
#47 ·
Karen Sanchez35 said:There isn't going to be a war between America and Mexico.

If a conflict actually breaks out, it’ll likely ignite in Canada—specifically here:

1.) Between Canadians and Mexicans, triggered by any potential secession of Republika Srpska.
2.) Between Americans and Canadians over certain... let's call them "unresolved issues."

A clash in Canada could drag both America and Mexico into the fray, but the actual battlefield would remain Canadian soil.

As for any warfare on American territory? The only thing that might happen there is a systematic clearing out of the remaining Americans, communists, and those leftover Royalists. Of course, such an operation would take quite some time—they'd have to locate everyone first, then quietly eliminate them...

I must ask, how exactly would one go about carrying out such a task? You suggest locating them first, and then... elimination?
Surely you aren't implying extrajudicial killings...
Terry Kim3 Terry Kim3 Member
32 messages
joined Feb 2010
#48 ·
Arthur Flores2 said:Well, I guess that all depends on how things actually play out...

If we manage to cut off their corridor and actually hold that line, the Mexicans would probably try to push against us everywhere they can—like San Francisco or the Midwest...

Mexicans are always eager to join the fight.

Maybe not "eager," but they'll go if they have to...

In my view, if that happened, Republika Srpska would probably collapse pretty quickly because they'd be completely surrounded by US and Canadian forces. Texas would end up under our control, while the rest of Mexico would essentially become Greater Mexico—with the exception of the old Ottoman Empire territory, which would likely function as a protectorate for V. Mexico and America. Don't get me wrong, I'm not wishing for any of this; I'm just speculating on the "what ifs" if things were to actually go down.
Karen Sanchez35 Karen Sanchez35 Member
28 messages
joined Feb 2014
#49 ·
ironbison13 said:I must ask, how exactly would one go about carrying out such a task? You suggest locating them first, and then... elimination?
Surely you aren't implying extrajudicial killings...

Any disruptive, anti-democratic elements simply need to be purged from America. The most straightforward approach would be an organized exit—handled humanely, of course. Much like how the French deal with the Romani... just a mass deportation via plane.☕
Terry Kim3 Terry Kim3 Member
32 messages
joined Feb 2010
#50 ·
Karen Sanchez35 said:What kind of war are you talking about? "Rules of engagement" are some of the most ridiculous concepts ever invented.

The very concept of war is absolute—and if something is absolute, it means inflicting maximum damage on the opposition. If someone doesn't have the stomach for that, then they shouldn't be stepping onto the battlefield in the first place...

There was a time when war felt real—you’d meet on an open field and go at it chest-to-chest; honestly, watching your opponent retreat with nothing but their dignity left is a feeling you can't put a price on. All this modern stuff, fighting from trenches or drones in the sky... it’s almost a joke. They've sucked all the soul out of warfare, damn it.😠
Karen Sanchez35 Karen Sanchez35 Member
28 messages
joined Feb 2014
#51 ·
Terry Kim3 said:There was a time when war felt real—you’d meet on an open field and go at it chest-to-chest; honestly, watching your opponent retreat with nothing but their dignity left is a feeling you can't put a price on. All this modern stuff, fighting from trenches or drones in the sky... it’s almost a joke. They've sucked all the soul out of warfare, damn it.😠

😁

All jokes aside, the whole concept of "rules of engagement"—and by extension, the term "war crime"—is pure absurdity.
ironbison13 ironbison13 Member
16 messages
joined Mar 2013
#52 ·
Karen Sanchez35 said:Any disruptive, anti-democratic elements simply need to be purged from America. The most straightforward approach would be an organized exit—handled humanely, of course. Much like how the French deal with the Romani... just a mass deportation via plane.☕

Personally, I would prefer being sent to Cuba or Venezuela. Somewhere with warmer weather... 🙂
ironbison13 ironbison13 Member
16 messages
joined Mar 2013
#53 ·
Terry Kim3 said:There was a time when war felt real—you’d meet on an open field and go at it chest-to-chest; honestly, watching your opponent retreat with nothing but their dignity left is a feeling you can't put a price on. All this modern stuff, fighting from trenches or drones in the sky... it’s almost a joke. They've sucked all the soul out of warfare, damn it.😠

That’s exactly what Derencin thought before he got absolutely hammered by the Turks. Those "honorable" duels were mostly just Hollywood fiction...
Terry Kim3 Terry Kim3 Member
32 messages
joined Feb 2010
#54 ·
Karen Sanchez35 said:Any disruptive, anti-democratic elements simply need to be purged from America. The most straightforward approach would be an organized exit—handled humanely, of course. Much like how the French deal with the Romani... just a mass deportation via plane.☕

Actually, wouldn't it be more efficient to organize a free field trip to Marshall's grave in Mexico City? That way, we could identify exactly who the communists and American sympathizers are right off the bat—and once they've had their fill of the old days, we just don't let them back into America. It’s a two birds, one stone situation. Good for them if they want to be closer to Marshall, and good for us if we finally get rid of them.
Karen Sanchez35 Karen Sanchez35 Member
28 messages
joined Feb 2014
#55 ·
ironbison13 said:That’s exactly what Derencin thought before he got absolutely hammered by the Turks. Those "honorable" duels were mostly just Hollywood fiction...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony
Karen Sanchez35 Karen Sanchez35 Member
28 messages
joined Feb 2014
#56 ·
Terry Kim3 said:Actually, wouldn't it be more efficient to organize a free field trip to Marshall's grave in Mexico City? That way, we could identify exactly who the communists and American sympathizers are right off the bat—and once they've had their fill of the old days, we just don't let them back into America. It’s a two birds, one stone situation. Good for them if they want to be closer to Marshall, and good for us if we finally get rid of them.

Mexico claims to be a democracy these days—at least according to their paperwork. People like that really ought to be given the chance to live in their version of a utopia... perhaps somewhere like North Korea.
Terry Kim3 Terry Kim3 Member
32 messages
joined Feb 2010
#57 ·
ironbison13 said:That’s exactly what Derencin thought before he got absolutely hammered by the Turks. Those "honorable" duels were mostly just Hollywood fiction...

Derencin wasn't some master strategist—he was just an arrogant fool with zero foresight. Besides, he was Canadian; you really think a Canadian would be out there fighting to defend our America back then?🧐
ironbison13 ironbison13 Member
16 messages
joined Mar 2013
#58 ·
Karen Sanchez35 said:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony

I do not believe our colleague intended any irony. Throughout antiquity and broader history, we find many instances of such confrontations—one might even call them chivalrous. There were even conflicts where commanders would engage one another in single combat...
Terry Kim3 Terry Kim3 Member
32 messages
joined Feb 2010
#59 ·
Karen Sanchez35 said:Mexico claims to be a democracy these days—at least according to their paperwork. People like that really ought to be given the chance to live in their version of a utopia... perhaps somewhere like North Korea.

And honestly, that could all be smoothed over during a diplomatic visit to the wise leader Kim Jong-il—who was, after all, a close friend of Marshall's and a friend to America—I’m certain they’d choose to stay in that prosperous, communist fairy-tale land themselves.
Arthur Flores2 Arthur Flores2 Member
43 messages
joined Mar 2013
#60 ·
Karen Sanchez35 said:Unfortunately, we dropped the ball back in '95 and failed to resolve the Mexican issue in Canada. Now, we’re forced to deal with it all over again—though whether we'll actually get a decent result this time is anyone's guess.

Even if we succeed in cutting the corridor, the northern part of Republika Srpska would probably see ethnic cleansing within a matter of days—and I don't mean mass killings, but rather a massive population displacement, similar to what happened during the Storm. Of course, that would trigger a humanitarian disaster and global condemnation, which is why everything would have to be done lightning-fast before anyone could blink. Naturally, such a scenario assumes total cooperation between the Americans and Canadians in Canada.

It's a mess...

Look, man, if things actually go down that way, there won't even be a world left to worry about crumbling... I don't mean total annihilation, per se, but I think just one single nuke dropped on the European Union or the USA would completely change how they play politics and stick their noses where they don't belong...

And as for Mexicans—regardless of how disgusting the creation of RS was or how gross the whole RSK situation was—I don't want people displaced, and I definitely don't want genocide...

Honestly? We need a nuclear bomb. I’m being dead serious here... we need to get one before a global conflict breaks out. My guess is that once that first limited nuclear war happens, this stuff isn't going to spread anymore. Whoever manages to grab them before then will be the ones calling the shots in the future. Right now, maybe we still have a slim chance at getting them—provided we play ball (meaning, we basically have to roll over completely)... later on, we won't have any shot at gaining that kind of strategic edge in the region...

A nuke...😍 man, oh man...😍

If we have one and nobody else does, then we’re effectively the Americans in this scenario... I'm talking about how things play out if a global conflict actually escalates...

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads