Europe and asia - Page 5




 
--
 
July 29th, 2004  
Darkmb101
 
let me rephrase my question, tell me is there ANY need to develope a weapon more powerful then a nuclear missle?
July 29th, 2004  
dsj
 
of course. then you can have larger coverage and being able to knock hardened silos which nukes now can't.

And again, china had fought a lot of other minor races which were also very capable in terms of military power and have threatened china seriously. Therefore, ancient china also need better military technology. And this post is about europe being at least not weaker than asia during the medieval ages and the renaissance. Not needs for armies.
July 29th, 2004  
Redleg
 
 
DSJ, stop the double posting at once!!

I've edited a couple of your posts now.

If you have something else to add to your posts then please use the edit button, do not post a new one after one of your own replies!!
--
July 29th, 2004  
Mark Conley
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsj
...of course. then you can have larger coverage and being able to knock hardened silos which nukes now can't...

now i just have to ask this...what weapon do you envision that would be more powerful than a thermo-nuclear device?

and as to the answer to silos...if you can use the nuke to barely penetrate the ground within a certain number of feet (say 800 feet in proximity) the sub-ground burst shock will wreck the delicate missile in its silo, and possibly collapse the tube. Unfortunately, by the time the missile reaches the silo, the enemy with its over the horizon radar and satillite system has already seen your missile coming, and has already launched it right back at you. So really all you get is an empty silo. So i guess it had better be some sort of stealth missile to get past all the darn radars and such for a first strike

And this post is about europe being at least not weaker than asia during the medieval ages and the renaissance? sounds like fun.
July 29th, 2004  
Shadowalker
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsj
The reason that europe was better was because of their advanced military technology and democratic system.
A lot of europen military technology was from the east such as the trebeuchet and gunpowder and the swords in europe were awful compard to asian swords as the broadswords in europe more battered an opponent to death rather than cut them like the samurai etc.
July 29th, 2004  
dsj
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Conley
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsj
...of course. then you can have larger coverage and being able to knock hardened silos which nukes now can't...

now i just have to ask this...what weapon do you envision that would be more powerful than a thermo-nuclear device?

and as to the answer to silos...if you can use the nuke to barely penetrate the ground within a certain number of feet (say 800 feet in proximity) the sub-ground burst shock will wreck the delicate missile in its silo, and possibly collapse the tube. Unfortunately, by the time the missile reaches the silo, the enemy with its over the horizon radar and satillite system has already seen your missile coming, and has already launched it right back at you. So really all you get is an empty silo. So i guess it had better be some sort of stealth missile to get past all the darn radars and such for a first strike

And this post is about europe being at least not weaker than asia during the medieval ages and the renaissance? sounds like fun.
Glad you started to reply again. My point was that there are always needs to be better in military technology. There are always competetors and even if not at the moment there is a natural flow or tendency to advance.
July 29th, 2004  
dsj
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by skywalker
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsj
The reason that europe was better was because of their advanced military technology and democratic system.
A lot of europen military technology was from the east such as the trebeuchet and gunpowder and the swords in europe were awful compard to asian swords as the broadswords in europe more battered an opponent to death rather than cut them like the samurai etc.
but who developed them? Many U.S equipments were invented in britian like the radar but does that mean the united states is technologically inferior to britian? Europe was able to conquer large areas of islamic territories at the heart of the islamic world. That shows their military power that they were not weaker. Europe was capable of armouring extremely large amounts of their soldiers which other cultures could not. Dosen't matter who had it first. And europe did have many inventions too. You are pointing single facts that dose not reprsent their strength. Europe have large quantites of high quality troops and a strong stable ecnonmy as a back supporter for wars,
July 30th, 2004  
Mark Conley
 
 
i'm afraid thats your last back to back post dsj...one more, and we'll have to see what Redleg says...any more back to back found on any forum tonite will result in me locking every single one of your posts until i get the word from Redleg on what to do with you...

i'm very sorry that you cant even obey the forum administrator when he tells you to stop doing an action. i have read your post below: it doesnt matter what is enclosed in the quotes, the back to back posting was to stop. and he posted this right in your topic. and pleading that you are a chinese canadian history scholar ain't going to be an excuse.

edit: okay, so we wont wait for another back to back. thats a cute little troll side slip there dsj. lets see what happens when you lose a few bucks.

and , gee i dont even think ill curse about it. its done.
July 30th, 2004  
dsj
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Conley
i'm afraid thats your last back to back post dsj...one more, and we'll have to see what Redleg says...any more back to back found on any forum tonite will result in me locking every single one of your posts until i get the word from Redleg on what to do with you...

i'm very sorry that you cant even obey the forum administrator when he tells you to stop doing and action. and his post is in the topic. and pleading that you are a chinese canadian history scholar ain't going to be an excuse.
But look at his edits. He didn't edit the double posts that quotes two people's posts each! He only edited the ones that dosen't have quotes on them. Take a look before you start talking. And there is no need for me to plead to anyone here!
July 30th, 2004  
Redleg
 
 
I didn't edit all of your posts because there were too many of them...

DSJ has now been temporary banned, because he has failed too many times to follow the forum rules and the warnings from me and the mods...

It does NOT have anything to do with the content of his posts!!

I'll unlock this post now, so stay on topic from now on...

Please!