Why isn't the United States a member of the Commonwealth of Nations?
-
- RicePikey
- Reactions: 0
- Posts: 1397
- Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 10:06 am
Back to topic ... (Didn't read the many pages after page 3 or so ...)
The United States is a union of 50 separate states, each of which are the size of a traditional country, like England, France, Belgium, etc. Australia might be the equivalent of 2 of the US's states, like Texas and Florida, in everything excel landmass and population (It may be that TX and FL has more HABITABLE landmass and a higher population than AUS). You could argue the UK is 3 states, England, Ireland and Scotland, that'd be fair.
Why would the 50 United States of America join a league of countries lead by a much smaller, albeit more sophisticated country led by the royalty of England?
That'd be like asking the UN to join ASEAN, do you see the scale of what you're asking now, OP?
Anyhow, the Commonwealth is just an organization to deal with the defense of nation-members (I.e., "Call the Riders of Rohan! Will they come to aid of the lesser men of Westernesse?") and some economic concerns, that's it. The sports games I hope you know are a simulation war exercise when the Commonwealth is at peace, behind all the trophies and hoopla.
Also, there is some lingering historical sentiment between the England and the US, they were quite anti-royalty in times past, so joining a coalition led by royalty seems a bit ... backwards to some in the US.
The United States is a union of 50 separate states, each of which are the size of a traditional country, like England, France, Belgium, etc. Australia might be the equivalent of 2 of the US's states, like Texas and Florida, in everything excel landmass and population (It may be that TX and FL has more HABITABLE landmass and a higher population than AUS). You could argue the UK is 3 states, England, Ireland and Scotland, that'd be fair.
Why would the 50 United States of America join a league of countries lead by a much smaller, albeit more sophisticated country led by the royalty of England?
That'd be like asking the UN to join ASEAN, do you see the scale of what you're asking now, OP?
Anyhow, the Commonwealth is just an organization to deal with the defense of nation-members (I.e., "Call the Riders of Rohan! Will they come to aid of the lesser men of Westernesse?") and some economic concerns, that's it. The sports games I hope you know are a simulation war exercise when the Commonwealth is at peace, behind all the trophies and hoopla.
Also, there is some lingering historical sentiment between the England and the US, they were quite anti-royalty in times past, so joining a coalition led by royalty seems a bit ... backwards to some in the US.
Last edited by TristranandIsolde on Sat Sep 10, 2016 11:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
Fool's folly is following another fool.
- The Grand Jester
Caution: all of my posts are to be taken with a grain of salt, heroin, and Everclear. Then you can reply back to us.
- The Grand Jester
Caution: all of my posts are to be taken with a grain of salt, heroin, and Everclear. Then you can reply back to us.
Point taken re Khmer Rouge (and carpet bombing) but the numbers are way, way bogus -- probably by a factor of five -- though still oft used by lazy researchers as the Internet doesn't correct itself. Ben Kiernan got bad numbers from the Pentagon, used them to arrive at inflated figures he published in 2006. Four years later he corrected his estimates, only to find, to his frustration and embarrassment, his correction was much less newsy:spitthedog wrote:Got to wonder how much the Khmer Rouge would have gained traction without the carpet bombing or whatever you want to call it?
''The Khmer Rouge, previously a marginalized guerrilla group, propagandized the bombing campaign to great effect; by the CIA's own intelligence estimates, the US bombing campaign was a key factor in the increase in popular support for the Khmer Rouge rebels.
The United States dropped upwards of 2.7 million tons of bombs on Cambodia, exceeding the amount it had dropped on Japan during WWII (including Hiroshima and Nagasaki) by almost a million tons. During this time, about 30 per cent of the country's population was internally displaced.
Result
Estimates vary widely on the number of civilian casualites inflicted by the campaign; however,as many as 500,000 people died as a direct result of the bombings while perhaps hundreds of thousands more died from the effects of displacement, disease or starvation during this period.''
"High asserted that in the Pentagon’s SEADAB database, the original entries for each sortie under the field of bombing “Load Weight” had been incorrectly keyed in, with a zero mistakenly added to each figure. Those bombing tonnages thus had to be divided by ten.
In June 2010, therefore, we (Ben Kiernan) published our downward correction of our 2006 estimate of 2.7 million tons. We stated that “this tonnage data may be incorrect. In new work using the original Air Force SEADAB and CACTA databases, Holly High and others have re-analyzed the total Cambodia tonnage figures and argue in a forthcoming article that the total tonnage dropped on Cambodia was at least 472,313 tons, or somewhat higher.” We concluded: “It remains undisputed that in 1969-73 alone, around 500,000 tons of U.S. bombs fell on Cambodia".
http://apjjf.org/2015/13/16/Ben-Kiernan/4313.html
The casualty estimates are likewise pretty much drawn from thin air as there were was nobody keeping track of these things (Cambodia did no census between 1962 and the PRK period, the US/CIA estimates, drawn from official thin air were in in the 50,000-150,000 range. They were inflated by subsequent researchers particularly after Kiernan mistakenly quintupled the tonnage estimates. . The correct number is who the fuck knows so just pick the number that suits your agenda (Looking at you Chomsky).. .
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
Last edited by jm on Sat Sep 10, 2016 12:02 pm, edited 5 times in total.
Don't blame me I voted for Sanders
- Khmerhamster
- Bark plop plop bark woof woof
- Reactions: 0
- Posts: 1519
- Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 2:14 pm
No. That would be very unfair. On Wales and Ireland.TristranandIsolde wrote:You could argue the UK is 3 states, England, Ireland and Scotland, that'd be fair.
Wales has been forgotten completely & Ireland is an island not a country.
Does it really matter if the US carpetbombed 100K or 500K innocent Cambodian civilians into oblivion?jm wrote:Point taken re Khmer Rouge but the numbers are way, way bogus -- probably by a factor of five -- though still oft used by lazy researchers. Kiernan got bad numbers from the Pentagon, used them to arrive at inflated figures he published in 2006. Four years later he corrected his estimates, only to find, to his frustration and embarrassment, his correction was much less newsy:spitthedog wrote:Got to wonder how much the Khmer Rouge would have gained traction without the carpet bombing or whatever you want to call it?
''The Khmer Rouge, previously a marginalized guerrilla group, propagandized the bombing campaign to great effect; by the CIA's own intelligence estimates, the US bombing campaign was a key factor in the increase in popular support for the Khmer Rouge rebels.
The United States dropped upwards of 2.7 million tons of bombs on Cambodia, exceeding the amount it had dropped on Japan during WWII (including Hiroshima and Nagasaki) by almost a million tons. During this time, about 30 per cent of the country's population was internally displaced.
Result
Estimates vary widely on the number of civilian casualites inflicted by the campaign; however,as many as 500,000 people died as a direct result of the bombings while perhaps hundreds of thousands more died from the effects of displacement, disease or starvation during this period.''
"High asserted that in the Pentagon’s SEADAB database, the original entries for each sortie under the field of bombing “Load Weight” had been incorrectly keyed in, with a zero mistakenly added to each figure. Those bombing tonnages thus had to be divided by ten.
In June 2010, therefore, we (Ben Kiernan) published our downward correction of our 2006 estimate of 2.7 million tons. We stated that “this tonnage data may be incorrect. In new work using the original Air Force SEADAB and CACTA databases, Holly High and others have re-analyzed the total Cambodia tonnage figures and argue in a forthcoming article that the total tonnage dropped on Cambodia was at least 472,313 tons, or somewhat higher.” We concluded: “It remains undisputed that in 1969-73 alone, around 500,000 tons of U.S. bombs fell on Cambodia".
http://apjjf.org/2015/13/16/Ben-Kiernan/4313.html
The casualty estimates are likewise pretty much drawn from thin air as there were was nobody keeping track of these things (Cambodia did no census between 1962 and the PRK period, the US/CIA estimates, drawn from official thin air were in in the 50,000-150,000 range. They were inflated by subsequent researchers particularly after Kiernan mistakenly quintupled the tonnage estimates. . The correct number is who the fuck knows so just pick the number that suits your agenda (Looking at you Chomsky).. .
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
None but ourselves can free our mind.
-
- RicePikey
- Reactions: 0
- Posts: 1397
- Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 10:06 am
Are cute Rhode Island and Wales comparable? In GDP, population, etc?Khmerhamster wrote:No. That would be very unfair. On Wales and Ireland.TristranandIsolde wrote:You could argue the UK is 3 states, England, Ireland and Scotland, that'd be fair.
Wales has been forgotten completely & Ireland is an island not a country.
Bit I think the *entire* UK is hard-pressed to keep up with California, New York, or Texas. That's just 1 US state, my you.
Fool's folly is following another fool.
- The Grand Jester
Caution: all of my posts are to be taken with a grain of salt, heroin, and Everclear. Then you can reply back to us.
- The Grand Jester
Caution: all of my posts are to be taken with a grain of salt, heroin, and Everclear. Then you can reply back to us.
Fuck yes as a matter of fact I think it does. Unless you think that history just isn't important and we all should just make shit up which suits our mood or political agenda. You change the numbers and you change the narrative. After a while the numbers are forgotten and all that remains is that false narrative.Visser wrote:Does it really matter if the US carpetbombed 100K or 500K innocent Cambodian civilians into oblivion?jm wrote:Point taken re Khmer Rouge but the numbers are way, way bogus -- probably by a factor of five -- though still oft used by lazy researchers. Kiernan got bad numbers from the Pentagon, used them to arrive at inflated figures he published in 2006. Four years later he corrected his estimates, only to find, to his frustration and embarrassment, his correction was much less newsy:spitthedog wrote:Got to wonder how much the Khmer Rouge would have gained traction without the carpet bombing or whatever you want to call it?
''The Khmer Rouge, previously a marginalized guerrilla group, propagandized the bombing campaign to great effect; by the CIA's own intelligence estimates, the US bombing campaign was a key factor in the increase in popular support for the Khmer Rouge rebels.
The United States dropped upwards of 2.7 million tons of bombs on Cambodia, exceeding the amount it had dropped on Japan during WWII (including Hiroshima and Nagasaki) by almost a million tons. During this time, about 30 per cent of the country's population was internally displaced.
Result
Estimates vary widely on the number of civilian casualites inflicted by the campaign; however,as many as 500,000 people died as a direct result of the bombings while perhaps hundreds of thousands more died from the effects of displacement, disease or starvation during this period.''
"High asserted that in the Pentagon’s SEADAB database, the original entries for each sortie under the field of bombing “Load Weight” had been incorrectly keyed in, with a zero mistakenly added to each figure. Those bombing tonnages thus had to be divided by ten.
In June 2010, therefore, we (Ben Kiernan) published our downward correction of our 2006 estimate of 2.7 million tons. We stated that “this tonnage data may be incorrect. In new work using the original Air Force SEADAB and CACTA databases, Holly High and others have re-analyzed the total Cambodia tonnage figures and argue in a forthcoming article that the total tonnage dropped on Cambodia was at least 472,313 tons, or somewhat higher.” We concluded: “It remains undisputed that in 1969-73 alone, around 500,000 tons of U.S. bombs fell on Cambodia".
http://apjjf.org/2015/13/16/Ben-Kiernan/4313.html
The casualty estimates are likewise pretty much drawn from thin air as there were was nobody keeping track of these things (Cambodia did no census between 1962 and the PRK period, the US/CIA estimates, drawn from official thin air were in in the 50,000-150,000 range. They were inflated by subsequent researchers particularly after Kiernan mistakenly quintupled the tonnage estimates. . The correct number is who the fuck knows so just pick the number that suits your agenda (Looking at you Chomsky).. .
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
Last edited by jm on Sat Sep 10, 2016 12:57 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Don't blame me I voted for Sanders
- Hot_Pink_Urinal_Mint
- I need professional help
- Reactions: 71
- Posts: 1035
- Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:19 pm
- Location: Right behind you
Maybe it matters if you are trying to deflect from the numbers by promoting the "genocide" narrative when what happened doesn't fit the UN definitions.Visser wrote:
Does it really matter if the US carpetbombed 100K or 500K innocent Cambodian civilians into oblivion?
Politicide is a more appropriate term for me, but no country would sign-off on that being included in the original Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948).
- Khmerhamster
- Bark plop plop bark woof woof
- Reactions: 0
- Posts: 1519
- Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 2:14 pm
I wasn't commenting about GDP/population etc.TristranandIsolde wrote:Are cute Rhode Island and Wales comparable? In GDP, population, etc?Khmerhamster wrote:No. That would be very unfair. On Wales and Ireland.TristranandIsolde wrote:You could argue the UK is 3 states, England, Ireland and Scotland, that'd be fair.
Wales has been forgotten completely & Ireland is an island not a country.
Bit I think the *entire* UK is hard-pressed to keep up with California, New York, or Texas. That's just 1 US state, my you.
Only on your attempt to educate us using very questionable geography.
Here's a good illustration of why numbers matter, in particular these number re the American bombing:
"In a 1997 interview with Tom Morello, guitarist for the band Rage Against the Machine, Chomsky was similarly misleading with regard to the CIA's estimates:
"In the Nixon years, for example, the bombing of inner Cambodia in 1973 was a monstrous crime. It was just massacring peasants in inner Cambodia. It isn't much reported here because nobody paid attention, but it was quite a part in helping create the basis for the Khmer Rouge. Well, the CIA estimate is that 600,000 people were killed in the course of those US actions, either directed or actually carried out by the United States."(144)
Once again, Chomsky's reference is wrong: the report estimates 600,000 - 700,000 war-related deaths, on both sides, over the course of the entire civil war. It is not an estimate of those "killed in the course of US actions." In Chomsky's interpretation, however, only the US is to blame: the Khmer Rouge and the North Vietnamese, apparently, didn't kill anyone.
The goal of this, one suspects, is to demonstrate some sort of moral equivalence between the Khmer Rouge and the Americans: 600,000 dead at the hands of the U.S., compared to Vickery's estimated 700,000 "excess deaths" during the Pol Pot regime. It's all "about the same."
http://www.mekong.net/cambodia/chomsky.htm
Numbers (wrong ones) used to drive a false narrative. They matter.
By the way see the link and the paragraphs preceding the above quote for some even more astonishing lies with numbers put forward by Chomsky re Cambodia (there was no 78 purge), most deaths were caused by the Viet invasion etc).
"In a 1997 interview with Tom Morello, guitarist for the band Rage Against the Machine, Chomsky was similarly misleading with regard to the CIA's estimates:
"In the Nixon years, for example, the bombing of inner Cambodia in 1973 was a monstrous crime. It was just massacring peasants in inner Cambodia. It isn't much reported here because nobody paid attention, but it was quite a part in helping create the basis for the Khmer Rouge. Well, the CIA estimate is that 600,000 people were killed in the course of those US actions, either directed or actually carried out by the United States."(144)
Once again, Chomsky's reference is wrong: the report estimates 600,000 - 700,000 war-related deaths, on both sides, over the course of the entire civil war. It is not an estimate of those "killed in the course of US actions." In Chomsky's interpretation, however, only the US is to blame: the Khmer Rouge and the North Vietnamese, apparently, didn't kill anyone.
The goal of this, one suspects, is to demonstrate some sort of moral equivalence between the Khmer Rouge and the Americans: 600,000 dead at the hands of the U.S., compared to Vickery's estimated 700,000 "excess deaths" during the Pol Pot regime. It's all "about the same."
http://www.mekong.net/cambodia/chomsky.htm
Numbers (wrong ones) used to drive a false narrative. They matter.
By the way see the link and the paragraphs preceding the above quote for some even more astonishing lies with numbers put forward by Chomsky re Cambodia (there was no 78 purge), most deaths were caused by the Viet invasion etc).
Don't blame me I voted for Sanders
- Jamie_Lambo
- Internet Addiction: it is real
- Reactions: 15
- Posts: 4002
- Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2014 3:13 pm
- Location: Pig Penh
Really? You must be trolling...Lucky Lucan wrote:No, I'm just talking about a large amount of bombs dropped in close proximity to a target, over bombing runs that could be hours or days apart. There's no carpet pattern to it.
During the 11 days of bombing, over 42,000 bombs were dropped... thats 3,818 bombs per day...
Lucky Lucan (apparently not carpet bombing)
Carpet Bombing - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpet_bombinglarge amount of bombs dropped in close proximity
Carpet Bombing - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/carpet%20bomba large aerial bombing done in a progressive manner to inflict damage in every part of a selected area of land. The phrase evokes the image of explosions completely covering an area, in the same way that a carpet covers a floor. Carpet bombing is usually achieved by dropping many unguided bombs.
Carpet Bombing - http://www.dictionary.com/browse/carpet--bombing1: to drop large numbers of bombs so as to cause uniform devastation over (a given area)
2: to bombard repeatedly, widely, or excessively
Carpet Bombing - http://dictionary.cambridge.org/diction ... et-bombing1. systematic intensive bombing of an area
Carpet Bombing - http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dict ... arpet-bombthe act of dropping a lot of bombs all over a particular area so that it will be destroyed
Lucky Lucanto drop a lot of bombs from planes all over an area in order to destroy everything on the ground
It wasn't carpet bombing, it was directed at military targets, railheads etc. Carpet bombing is a completely different thing.
yeah ok mate
Mean Dtuk Mean Trey, Mean Loy Mean Srey
Punchy McShortstacks School of Hard Knocks
Punchy McShortstacks School of Hard Knocks
The aspect your missing JL is "area" . You could repeatedly bomb a shitload of individual targets in different places and not engage in carpet bombing unless your method was to saturate an entire area. Tonnage in and of itself is not the key factor. Carpet bombing would have destroyed the entire OId Quarter (a very small area) , not just one street. Bach Mai hospital was hit because it's adjacent to Bach Mai airfield, the intended target. The greatest civilian damage was done by a B52 going down in the city centre, not by carpet bombs.Jamie_Lambo wrote:Really? You must be trolling...Lucky Lucan wrote:No, I'm just talking about a large amount of bombs dropped in close proximity to a target, over bombing runs that could be hours or days apart. There's no carpet pattern to it.
During the 11 days of bombing, over 42,000 bombs were dropped... thats 3,818 bombs per day...
Lucky Lucan (apparently not carpet bombing)Carpet Bombing - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpet_bombinglarge amount of bombs dropped in close proximityCarpet Bombing - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/carpet%20bomba large aerial bombing done in a progressive manner to inflict damage in every part of a selected area of land. The phrase evokes the image of explosions completely covering an area, in the same way that a carpet covers a floor. Carpet bombing is usually achieved by dropping many unguided bombs.Carpet Bombing - http://www.dictionary.com/browse/carpet--bombing1: to drop large numbers of bombs so as to cause uniform devastation over (a given area)
2: to bombard repeatedly, widely, or excessivelyCarpet Bombing - http://dictionary.cambridge.org/diction ... et-bombing1. systematic intensive bombing of an areaCarpet Bombing - http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dict ... arpet-bombthe act of dropping a lot of bombs all over a particular area so that it will be destroyedLucky Lucanto drop a lot of bombs from planes all over an area in order to destroy everything on the groundIt wasn't carpet bombing, it was directed at military targets, railheads etc. Carpet bombing is a completely different thing.
yeah ok mate
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
Last edited by jm on Sat Sep 10, 2016 9:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Don't blame me I voted for Sanders
- Jamie_Lambo
- Internet Addiction: it is real
- Reactions: 15
- Posts: 4002
- Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2014 3:13 pm
- Location: Pig Penh
then what is the key factor? so what are you saying? that the tonnage/amount of bombs being dropped in that specific area isnt a factor of whether its called 'carpet bombing' or not? i think my quotes above proved that it was a key factor, the bombings did saturate an entire area, the large number of civilian deaths over the space of 11 days proved that alsojm wrote:The aspect your missing JL is "area" . You could repeatedly bomb a shitload of individual targets in different places and not engage in carpet bombing unless your method was to saturate an entire area. Tonnage in and of itself is not the key factor.Jamie_Lambo wrote:Really? You must be trolling...Lucky Lucan wrote:No, I'm just talking about a large amount of bombs dropped in close proximity to a target, over bombing runs that could be hours or days apart. There's no carpet pattern to it.
During the 11 days of bombing, over 42,000 bombs were dropped... thats 3,818 bombs per day...
Lucky Lucan (apparently not carpet bombing)Carpet Bombing - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpet_bombinglarge amount of bombs dropped in close proximityCarpet Bombing - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/carpet%20bomba large aerial bombing done in a progressive manner to inflict damage in every part of a selected area of land. The phrase evokes the image of explosions completely covering an area, in the same way that a carpet covers a floor. Carpet bombing is usually achieved by dropping many unguided bombs.Carpet Bombing - http://www.dictionary.com/browse/carpet--bombing1: to drop large numbers of bombs so as to cause uniform devastation over (a given area)
2: to bombard repeatedly, widely, or excessivelyCarpet Bombing - http://dictionary.cambridge.org/diction ... et-bombing1. systematic intensive bombing of an areaCarpet Bombing - http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dict ... arpet-bombthe act of dropping a lot of bombs all over a particular area so that it will be destroyedLucky Lucanto drop a lot of bombs from planes all over an area in order to destroy everything on the groundIt wasn't carpet bombing, it was directed at military targets, railheads etc. Carpet bombing is a completely different thing.
yeah ok mate
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
i'm not missing anything, the acts that the B52s performed in that mission on them military targets was carpet bombing
it doesnt matter what the Area is, whether its military targets or civilian targets, it doesnt change the meaning of the word "area" and doesnt change the meaning of the word "carpet bombing"
Mean Dtuk Mean Trey, Mean Loy Mean Srey
Punchy McShortstacks School of Hard Knocks
Punchy McShortstacks School of Hard Knocks
- Jamie_Lambo
- Internet Addiction: it is real
- Reactions: 15
- Posts: 4002
- Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2014 3:13 pm
- Location: Pig Penh
But anyway no need to drag it out until it gets repetitive, its not going to change nowt lol
agreed to disagree
agreed to disagree
Mean Dtuk Mean Trey, Mean Loy Mean Srey
Punchy McShortstacks School of Hard Knocks
Punchy McShortstacks School of Hard Knocks
You're being dense here. it matters what the area is in terms of size. If it's an entire neighborhood or district being saturated, as in WW2, that's carpet bombing. If you're hitting individual targets , an airfield, a bridge, a power station, you are not carpet bombing regardless of tonnage unless your method is to saturate the entire district surrounding the target, which was not done in Hanoi. It's friggin obvious when you relate the massive tonnage figures with the relatively low number of casualties as explained in one of those links you apparently didn't read.Jamie_Lambo wrote:then what is the key factor? so what are you saying? that the tonnage/amount of bombs being dropped in that specific area isnt a factor of whether its called 'carpet bombing' or not? i think my quotes above proved that it was a key factor, the bombings did saturate an entire area, the large number of civilian deaths over the space of 11 days proved that alsojm wrote:The aspect your missing JL is "area" . You could repeatedly bomb a shitload of individual targets in different places and not engage in carpet bombing unless your method was to saturate an entire area. Tonnage in and of itself is not the key factor.Jamie_Lambo wrote:Really? You must be trolling...Lucky Lucan wrote:No, I'm just talking about a large amount of bombs dropped in close proximity to a target, over bombing runs that could be hours or days apart. There's no carpet pattern to it.
During the 11 days of bombing, over 42,000 bombs were dropped... thats 3,818 bombs per day...
Lucky Lucan (apparently not carpet bombing)Carpet Bombing - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpet_bombinglarge amount of bombs dropped in close proximityCarpet Bombing - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/carpet%20bomba large aerial bombing done in a progressive manner to inflict damage in every part of a selected area of land. The phrase evokes the image of explosions completely covering an area, in the same way that a carpet covers a floor. Carpet bombing is usually achieved by dropping many unguided bombs.Carpet Bombing - http://www.dictionary.com/browse/carpet--bombing1: to drop large numbers of bombs so as to cause uniform devastation over (a given area)
2: to bombard repeatedly, widely, or excessivelyCarpet Bombing - http://dictionary.cambridge.org/diction ... et-bombing1. systematic intensive bombing of an areaCarpet Bombing - http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dict ... arpet-bombthe act of dropping a lot of bombs all over a particular area so that it will be destroyedLucky Lucanto drop a lot of bombs from planes all over an area in order to destroy everything on the groundIt wasn't carpet bombing, it was directed at military targets, railheads etc. Carpet bombing is a completely different thing.
yeah ok mate
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
i'm not missing anything, the acts that the B52s performed in that mission on them military targets was carpet bombing
it doesnt matter what the Area is, whether its military targets or civilian targets, it doesnt change the meaning of the word "area" and doesnt change the meaning of the word "carpet bombing"
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
Don't blame me I voted for Sanders
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 5 Replies
- 654 Views
-
Last post by Orichá
Thu Sep 02, 2021 5:20 pm
-
-
Foreigners banned from entry: Italy, Germany, Spain, France and the United States
by GMJS-440 » Sat Mar 14, 2020 9:16 am » in Cambodia News - 164 Replies
- 25129 Views
-
Last post by v12
Fri Apr 03, 2020 2:29 pm
-
-
-
Job Vacancies for Cathay United Bank (Cambodia) Co., Ltd
by Heang Leehour » Thu Feb 20, 2020 10:01 am » in Cambodia News - 6 Replies
- 2162 Views
-
Last post by Heang Leehour
Fri Feb 21, 2020 5:07 pm
-
-
- 1 Replies
- 929 Views
-
Last post by ផោមក្លិនស្អុយ
Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:24 am
-
-
Phnom Penh bar offers reward for staff member who absconded with ‘significant funds’
by Londo » Tue May 02, 2023 3:04 pm » in Cambodia News - 2 Replies
- 582 Views
-
Last post by logos
Wed May 03, 2023 2:01 am
-