Smelly food on public transportation.
I know it must be wonderful for you, but your garlic fried tofu fartburger smells like shit.
I know it must be wonderful for you, but your garlic fried tofu fartburger smells like shit.
What Pisses You Off?
- Thread starter Vinjay
- Start date
the russians would have RAPED the Germans reguardless of US involvement. they had a grudge against socialists and germans in general.
The Russians also kinda ended the war in the pacfic as well. they declared war on Japan on august 9, and within 5 days they would surrender. The thing with the japanese is they have no problems with atomic bombs (fire bombings in Tokyo killed more people then both atomic bombs) it was the russians they feared. The russians also kind of had a grudge agaisnt the Japanese from the Russ-Japanese war, which russia lost.
heres an anology: you're beating someone up. you punch them in the groin. they get hurt but they dont surrender.now your friend is running towards the fight to help you, your friend sent 1 other guy to the hospital prior to that fight. while your friend (russia) is on there way, the kid (japan) surrenders in fear of being hospitalised (same fate of germany)
LOL
There are not enough L's and O's for what you just said are worth.
What would Russia beat the Germans with? Throwing stones? They had NO SUPPLIES
There's a good British documentary on this subject on youtube, you might be interested in what Stalin says, in his own words, about the situation at the 3:45 mark:
"Stalin says he will no longer be able to continue the struggle against Hitlerism unless he has 400 aircraft per month, 500 tanks per month, and 30,000 tons of aluminum immediately."
There are not enough L's and O's for what you just said are worth.
What would Russia beat the Germans with? Throwing stones? They had NO SUPPLIES
There's a good British documentary on this subject on youtube, you might be interested in what Stalin says, in his own words, about the situation at the 3:45 mark:
"Stalin says he will no longer be able to continue the struggle against Hitlerism unless he has 400 aircraft per month, 500 tanks per month, and 30,000 tons of aluminum immediately."
[QUOTE="NYCFCFan10, post: 3487, member: 78"
What would Russia beat the Germans with? Throwing stones? They had NO SUPPLIES
There's a good British documentary on this subject on youtube, you might be interested in what Stalin says, in his own words, about the situation at the 3:45 mark:
"Stalin says he will no longer be able to continue the struggle against Hitlerism unless he has 400 aircraft per month, 500 tanks per month, and 30,000 tons of aluminum immediately."[/QUOTE]
you're right, absoleutely right about Russia and its supplies problems. But did Stalin ask Churchill for supplies, not FDR? Russia approached Britain for supplies. Didnt you originally say "Without US manufacturing and supplies early on Britain and Russia would have been annihilated."
You shouldve said without British manufacturing and supplies early on, Russia would not have done as well"
What would Russia beat the Germans with? Throwing stones? They had NO SUPPLIES
There's a good British documentary on this subject on youtube, you might be interested in what Stalin says, in his own words, about the situation at the 3:45 mark:
"Stalin says he will no longer be able to continue the struggle against Hitlerism unless he has 400 aircraft per month, 500 tanks per month, and 30,000 tons of aluminum immediately."[/QUOTE]
you're right, absoleutely right about Russia and its supplies problems. But did Stalin ask Churchill for supplies, not FDR? Russia approached Britain for supplies. Didnt you originally say "Without US manufacturing and supplies early on Britain and Russia would have been annihilated."
You shouldve said without British manufacturing and supplies early on, Russia would not have done as well"
No, first off, Clarkson has a penchant for bending the truth in British favor. When he says he wrote Britain, he did, but what Clarkson leaves out is that he's writing Britain about getting him American aide. These are the actual telegrams:
Grabbing the actual figures:
The policy whereby the U.S. supplied the allies was known as "Lend-Lease". In all, $31.4 billion went to Britain, $11.3 billion to the Soviet Union, $3.2 billion to France, $1.6 billion to China, and the remaining 2.6 to the other Allies. A total of $50.1 billion (equivalent to $656 billion today), which when you consider the cost to make things was cheaper back then, is even more than it sounds like in today's money.
For instance, a P-51 Mustang fighter plane, in 1942, cost about $51,000. That's $850,000 in today's money. An F-22 Raptor costs $150 million each. So for the total amount of goods the U.S. gave to the allies, they could have given them 771, 765 fighter planes. A Sherman tank could be had for $33,000. So you could buy well over a million tanks with that money. You get the idea.
By the end of the war, USA supplied Russia with 2,000 locomotives, 11,000 train cars, 51,000 jeeps, 375,000 trucks, 15 million pairs of boots, 15,000 aircraft, and 7,000 tanks. That's not even taking into account the guns and ammunition and perhaps most importantly, the food, that we were supplying.
We gave the British nearly 3x that amount, too.
I found a website that archived all of Stalin's telegrams to both Churchill and Roosevelt in World War 2.
What the telegram to Churchill really says is that Britain agreed to sell Russia 200 fighter planes and a further 200 in the future. Stalin was angered by the fact that the deliveries of these planes was sure to take awhile and not be anywhere near enough resources for him to keep the fight up against Germany. He even admits that Russia will be defeated without further supplies and an allied invasion in the West.
http://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/Stalin/v17_1941.htm
When people chew like a cow or slurp soup/drinks extremely loud.
That one doesn't really bother me. Where basketball is played is a court, where football is played is a field, where hockey is played is a rink and where soccer is played is a pitch. It's just what it's called.
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
In soccer, they call it a "pitch" because that's just what the British call a "field". I have no freaking idea why but it is what it is. When they see an American football field with lines on it, a casual Brit calls that a "pitch" as well. Just as if you bring a casual American to a soccer game, they're going to call it a "field".
Both cultures just happen to agree on what constitutes a court or a rink but that's not the case with fields/pitch. Just as its not the case with pants(trousers), a car hood(bonnet), a car trunk(boot), chips(crisps), fries(chips), gas(petro), sedan(saloon), ect...
Its a cultural difference. I really hate the hardcore soccer fans that not only call it a "pitch" but have the audacity to say "sport" instead of "sports". Its so fake and forced, it kills me.
If you want the average American to take to the sport, let it flow naturally. Though I suspect some of the hardcores like it for its foreign-ness.
The "field" is called a pitch in the UK because of the prevalence of the term pitch in cricket. Funnily enough, the cricket pitch is just the crease (the area between the two sets of stumps) and the whole field is known as a...field, actually. Nevertheless, the term pitch was the one that got transported into other sports usage. Football pitch, rugby pitch, hockey pitch. It even gets occasionally used for sports not played on grass - netball pitch, and so on.
It's funny, but it seems that back in the 19th century, we did use the word field. Then it just got abandoned, like many so-called Americanisations which are actually British terms we gave up on ("fall" for the season Autumn, the New England accent is the 18th Century British accent but ours has since evolved, the overprevalence of the letter Z, even the pronunciation of Z as "zee" (it's "zed" FYI
).
It's funny, but it seems that back in the 19th century, we did use the word field. Then it just got abandoned, like many so-called Americanisations which are actually British terms we gave up on ("fall" for the season Autumn, the New England accent is the 18th Century British accent but ours has since evolved, the overprevalence of the letter Z, even the pronunciation of Z as "zee" (it's "zed" FYI
).
People who complain too much.
Ironically, with that said: driving.
I love driving. I've driven in the USA, the UK, Ireland, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Czech Republic, Austria, Germany, and possibly other countries that at the moment allude me. I've driven pick-ups, saloons, compacts, executives, and sports cars. Manuals from 4 to 7 gears, and automatics. There's nothing like driving. However, driving is a privilege, not a right, it is also something not to be taken lightly. Too many people either believe that no matter what they should be driving when all logic tells them they shouldn't, or that they, and they alone, are the only one on the road and no-one else exists.
No indication, braking before indicating, not being aware of the surroundings, not understanding what causes accidents, not reading the road, finding other things they consider warrant their attention more whilst behind the wheel. Then there are the anti-drivers; speed kills, cars are a blemish upon society, etc, etc, etc.
When I drive, and I do virtually every day, I have fun, and a lot of it, but at the same time I am aware of what the vehicle, three cars in front, is doing. I know what is to my left and to my right, and behind me at all times. I read the traffic lights way into the distance. I notice the man on the sidewalk, the woman pushing a buggy, the bird pecking at the edge of the road. It's all done without having to think about it. In all my years no accident I have been involved in has been my fault, nor have I ever had a speeding ticket. I've avoided, many times, other drivers who weren't paying attention and were about to collide with me, because I was aware of the possibility of it happening before it did.
But I have driven at over 150mph on a public road. Does all this make me dangerous or overly confident? Neither. I am aware of my ability behind the wheel. Speed doesn't kill, disrespect and not paying attention does. And there are way too many of these sorts on the roads. They all need to wake the hell up and pay attention or ditch the car for good, because it is these sorts who cause accidents.
I would also add speed cameras to my rant. Nothing to do with safety, and everything to do with being a cash-cow. It is irresponsible to drive fast through a school-zone during school hours, it isn't on an open road on a clear day or night.
Pay clear attention to what is going on at all times, and you are very welcome on my road - if not, you can get the hell off it.
/rant over
Ironically, with that said: driving.
I love driving. I've driven in the USA, the UK, Ireland, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Czech Republic, Austria, Germany, and possibly other countries that at the moment allude me. I've driven pick-ups, saloons, compacts, executives, and sports cars. Manuals from 4 to 7 gears, and automatics. There's nothing like driving. However, driving is a privilege, not a right, it is also something not to be taken lightly. Too many people either believe that no matter what they should be driving when all logic tells them they shouldn't, or that they, and they alone, are the only one on the road and no-one else exists.
No indication, braking before indicating, not being aware of the surroundings, not understanding what causes accidents, not reading the road, finding other things they consider warrant their attention more whilst behind the wheel. Then there are the anti-drivers; speed kills, cars are a blemish upon society, etc, etc, etc.
When I drive, and I do virtually every day, I have fun, and a lot of it, but at the same time I am aware of what the vehicle, three cars in front, is doing. I know what is to my left and to my right, and behind me at all times. I read the traffic lights way into the distance. I notice the man on the sidewalk, the woman pushing a buggy, the bird pecking at the edge of the road. It's all done without having to think about it. In all my years no accident I have been involved in has been my fault, nor have I ever had a speeding ticket. I've avoided, many times, other drivers who weren't paying attention and were about to collide with me, because I was aware of the possibility of it happening before it did.
But I have driven at over 150mph on a public road. Does all this make me dangerous or overly confident? Neither. I am aware of my ability behind the wheel. Speed doesn't kill, disrespect and not paying attention does. And there are way too many of these sorts on the roads. They all need to wake the hell up and pay attention or ditch the car for good, because it is these sorts who cause accidents.
I would also add speed cameras to my rant. Nothing to do with safety, and everything to do with being a cash-cow. It is irresponsible to drive fast through a school-zone during school hours, it isn't on an open road on a clear day or night.
Pay clear attention to what is going on at all times, and you are very welcome on my road - if not, you can get the hell off it.
/rant over
Sounds like we're speaking the proper English and you guys are ruining itThe "field" is called a pitch in the UK because of the prevalence of the term pitch in cricket. Funnily enough, the cricket pitch is just the crease (the area between the two sets of stumps) and the whole field is known as a...field, actually. Nevertheless, the term pitch was the one that got transported into other sports usage. Football pitch, rugby pitch, hockey pitch. It even gets occasionally used for sports not played on grass - netball pitch, and so on.
It's funny, but it seems that back in the 19th century, we did use the word field. Then it just got abandoned, like many so-called Americanisations which are actually British terms we gave up on ("fall" for the season Autumn, the New England accent is the 18th Century British accent but ours has since evolved, the overprevalence of the letter Z, even the pronunciation of Z as "zee" (it's "zed" FYI
Zed sounds too much like a word to be a letter name. Zee fits in better with the rest of the alphabet. B, C, D, E,G,P,T,V,Z....
Zed is like that freak W
Sounds like we're speaking the proper English and you guys are ruining it
Zed sounds too much like a word to be a letter name. Zee fits in better with the rest of the alphabet. B, C, D, E,G,P,T,V,Z....
Zed is like that freak W
There is a school of thought that American English is closer to real British English than the British would have you believe. When they left for the 'new land' in the 1600s they took with them Shakespeare's English of the day and there it remained, whilst British English began to change slowly over time.
Yeah but we've since seen a huge influx of Germans, Irish, Russians, Italians, Africans, Asians, Mexicans and whatever planet Southerners are from.
They all seem to speak their own version of English.
Sounds like we're speaking the proper English and you guys are ruining it
Zed sounds too much like a word to be a letter name. Zee fits in better with the rest of the alphabet. B, C, D, E,G,P,T,V,Z....
Zed is like that freak W
Zed has class and distinction, just like its pronounciation, and doesn't mess around with the riff-raff letters. It only involves itself in highly cultured words, such as Zoo, Zebra, pizzazz, and...uh...pizza.
Oh thank God. You just became my best friend. Some of us are life long soccer fans. Others from 2002, 2010, however we got to this point... Either way, using european terminology (as opposed to soccer terminology) is a one-way street to unimportant in America.
It's not a kit, It's a uniform. It's not a pitch, it's a field. It's not a side, it's a team. Those aren't soccer-specific. Those are British/European specific.
Another thing that pisses me off is when people make a big deal about what you call things in soccer. Who gives a shit, everybody knows what everybody is talking about. Relax with the snobbery.
