Born Hunter
-
Content Count
17,865 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
31
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Articles
Gun Dealer's and Fieldsports Shop's
Reloading Room
Blogs
Calendar
Store
Classifieds
Everything posted by Born Hunter
-
What about the Rodeo? It's not as refined as the D-max but is it a good truck? 2009/10? Edited: Just realised that the Rodeo is the 1st gen D-max, just branded Rodeo for UK market.
-
They should be hosing his brains off the pavement after a counter terror team engaged him as an immediate threat to life. f**k knows how many times it went down like that in the 70s.....
-
Never mind a couple a cowards throwing out spineless threats..... This f****r was actually on his way to do it! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11400242/Teenage-Islamist-fanatic-caught-on-his-way-to-behead-a-British-soldier.html ISIB; Islamic State of Ireland and Britain! Alright fella, if you're representative of ISIB I think we'll manage. Incompetent fucktard. No mention of why they initiated the arrest at such an opportune and critical moment..... that'll be the suits and boffins at MI5 and GCHQ giving us tax payers value for money. Quietly protectin
-
Gotta admire the Jordanians...
-
Just found this; http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_9_of_the_Constitution_of_Japan It explains what I've been trying to. You're right they are militarily restricted, as I have been saying to self defence. Whether their constitutional pacifism was pushed on them or self imposed is debateable but it's still their constitution and only they are needed to change it. Modern day Japan is different to post hiroshima Japan, they have a much better relationship with the yanks. And the yanks support them being a more proactive Pacific player.
-
I think you're talking about the mutual security pact which I think is different to the constitution. And the mutual security pact is mutual, the japs did not have to resign it in 1970 and can pull out at any time. It's a simple agreement to let the yanks have a base there for a military alliance/security. Their constitution of pacifism is very much publicly backed and their own. I haven't seen anything that supports them needing a legal okay from anybody but themselves. This may have been pushed on them post war by the yanks as is customary or may have been their choice in such a situation,
-
Yeah I've read that mate. Like I said, they can if they want to. It's their constitution. They need a two thirds parliamnetary majority and a simple public majority. They're far more concerned about China and North Korea. If they wanted to deploy troops in the middle east they can do, but they haven't the will or the right tools..... yet.
-
And if they're occupied, with such strong social anti militarism, why keep a 170'000 strong standing army and the 7th highest defence budget in the world? Why would an oppressor with an entire fleet based there allow that when the public don't even want it? Why risk that?
-
Occupied country since 1945, heirachy go along with it or their f****d, they can't make a decision for themselves, much like us Without investment they wouldn't have got where they are, not that the general population have gained by it, you don't seriously think it went any other way do you? Like i said, a country on its knees full of robots who do what they are told, perfect, and no union problems...............Look at the suicide rates, its an epidemic, because the younger generation know, and there's f**k all they can do, suicide rate here is catching up, lost a few mates myself. Well
-
I didn't say that you said I was a fool, I said you implied it, probably more accurately I inferred it. But I'd say that's fair inference considering me being taken hook line and sinker and having little understanding of Japan, eh? I'm still struggling to see this offensive capability of Japan and the legal framework which restricts them from controlling their own forces though... which after all is what I'm wrong about, right?
-
Regularly, hence me asking for you to back it up rather than just imply I'm a fool...
-
Dan you f***ing b*****d! LOL LOL You have ruined my childhood in one fell swoop!
-
So you have nothing to counter what I have said, just more of your usual conspiracy bollocks. Okay fella, I can live with being called a fool by the tinfoil hat brigade.
-
to my understanding it is the Japanese constitution that they are bound by not American say so. They need parliamentary approval as well as public approval to rewrite their constitutional policy of pacifism. It's their choice.
-
The only "LOL" i can see is your lack of understanding about japan, sad really for an educated person, hook line and sinker unfortunatly You're good at calling people c**ts but not very good at backing it up. Explain to me where I'm wrong? The japs are constitutionally bound for self defence, offensive tech is against their constitution. They can deploy troops abroad and have done but are incredibly reluctant to for constitutional reasons. Their airforce has no ground attack capability and their navy is limited to maritime patrol, logistic support, sub warfare and anti air defence. So cr
-
The japs have deployed troops operationally abroad! They can do it if they want, but to go to war is very much against their constitution to my understanding. It's them that don't want it! Their entire defence strategy is one entirely of self defence. I don't think they have any real expeditionary capability like we do and certainly no experience. They're not going to risk thousands of green troops and billions of dollars just to avenge a couple of their citizens. LOL
-
you know that's the sad thing we squandered our military in pursuit of oil riches chasing our so called best friends around the globe, prior to those conflicts the british army had a record of going into places and getting results fair n square, now there is a genuine reason to go to war sat in the form of IS Id imagine any soldier seeing that sort of behaviour being carried out would be only too glad to assist sorting it all out that's what they join for to protect those that need protecting not fighting to make sly gutless people richer, Nobody gives the slightest f**k about defence anymore,
-
Doesn't matter anyway, by the end of the year we'll not have a military left! Just two aircraft carrier sat in dock. It's f***ing disgraceful.
-
since max is going on IFS, if that does happen, least there will be oil left when scotland finaly votes yes Oil left that has become uneconomical to recover.in future, tech will improve, costs will lower... also the oil on west coast were trident is blocking"This is not an industry where you can say, OK, well slacken off for a couple of years and well pick up where we left off. Well lose key assets, well lose key people and we may even lose some of the confidence of investors that the North Sea really is an important medium-term play. We must avoid that." http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d4668426-
-
since max is going on IFS, if that does happen, least there will be oil left when scotland finaly votes yes Oil left that has become uneconomical to recover.
-
We'll see won't we. The north sea needs investment, it's a very costly region. The Saudis want to cripple the US shale industry and the north sea could fall as collateral.
-
Lol, the oil price will rise. But will the north sea still be operational when it does?
-
I'll stay f****d then thank you very much. I'm led to believe my Godless kind are destined for the fiery pits of Hell anyway.
-
King, I'd have to disagree with you on that generally. But you have your opinion and I try to respect that. I do believe we have a very serious problem with immigrant AND Islamic subcultures in the UK today. Subcultures foreign to our own native one/s that are based around large non integrating immigrant population and/or Islamic populations. For me, this problem has always been cultural. I want to live in a country that allows controlled beneficial immigration, I want to live in a country that has the fundamental right to religious freedoms.... I do not want to live in a country where cer
-
Well you explain to me if it's a race or religion. Born hunter ? The only thing I wanted to explain to you was that Muslims and Pakis are not a race. You seem to have the rest figured out all by yourself. So you are going to act like a politician and dodge the original question born hunter ? Dodge? No, refuse to get into a serious discussion with someone that thinks Muslims and Pakis are a race, yes. We'll educate me then born hunter. Race is subjectively determined by a persons genetic heritage. Being Pakistani is again subjective but comes down to a persons ethnic/national heritage.
