Topic: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun. (Read 10049 times)

Roachor · « **Reply #30 on:** October 10, 2012, 04:40:52 am »

Quote from: codave on October 10, 2012, 02:10:56 am

Pungi Knuckles?

Ahh... yeah, and the US had about 60k KIA, and about 300k WIA... while the VC/NVA was around, oh a million KIA.

Their AC trolls got nerfed too, man.

And america was all "zomg we lost expensive gear to naked bluesuits?" /ragequit

Fat Man · « **Reply #31 on:** October 10, 2012, 05:59:27 am »

He's lost it he's comparing real life wars to blue suit trolls.

Insulting vetnam veterans isn't going to change the fact that they are going to change the mechanics of heavy handed.

LeonTheNorse · « **Reply #32 on:** October 10, 2012, 09:49:07 am »

Quote from: Roachor on October 10, 2012, 04:40:52 am

And america was all "zomg we lost expensive gear to naked bluesuits?" /ragequit

nah they said hmm we got merc wm, lets use or wm arty on them.

Fat Man · « **Reply #33 on:** October 10, 2012, 01:41:33 pm »

Quote from: LeonTheNorse on October 10, 2012, 09:49:07 am

nah they said hmm we got merc wm, lets use or wm arty on them.

Actually it was more like small gun sneakers with assault rifles vs big gunners and merc leaders ;d

Swinglinered · « **Reply #34 on:** October 10, 2012, 05:33:07 pm »

US had vertibirds.

NVA/VC had fast relog and infiltrators and sneaks.

Fat Man · « **Reply #35 on:** October 10, 2012, 05:53:01 pm »

Quote from: Swinglinered on October 10, 2012, 05:33:07 pm

US had vertibirds.

NVA/VC had fast relog and infiltrators and sneaks.

They also retreated to world map alot.

If you don't get reference there was treaty agreement with cambondia (or some other country think it was cambondia) where the U.S. was not allowed to engage the vietcong in their boarders. Basically the U.S. knew where they were and could have killed them easily but had peace agreement or some treaty agreement not to go into that country. And the vietcong knew this and always retreated to this country.

Perteks · « **Reply #36 on:** October 10, 2012, 05:58:51 pm »

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GgflscOmW8" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GgflscOmW8</a>
But i sense shitload butthurt and ragekid fighting over something very dumb

Horatio · « **Reply #37 on:** October 10, 2012, 06:15:23 pm »

I still think the bluesuits nowadaways wear ninja suits.

Roachor · « **Reply #38 on:** October 10, 2012, 06:33:25 pm »

Quote from: Fat Man on October 10, 2012, 05:53:01 pm

They also retreated to world map alot.

If you don't get reference there was treaty agreement with cambondia (or some other country think it was cambondia) where the U.S. was not allowed to engage the vietcong in their boarders. Basically the U.S. knew where they were and could have killed them easily but had peace agreement or some treaty agreement not to go into that country. And the vietcong knew this and always retreated to this country.

and the us fought in Cambodia illegally anyways

Fat Man · « **Reply #39 on:** October 10, 2012, 07:20:15 pm »

Quote from: Roachor on October 10, 2012, 06:33:25 pm

and the us fought in Cambodia illegally anyways

Honestly what is your issue with the United States? I think you are jelly that buttermilk syrup is way better than maple syrup.

Roachor · « **Reply #40 on:** October 10, 2012, 07:23:15 pm »

Quote from: Fat Man on October 10, 2012, 07:20:15 pm

Honestly what is your issue with the United States? I think you are jelly that buttermilk syrup is way better than maple syrup.

First off buttermilk is for poor people, secondly it has nothing to do with me not liking america. It has to do with using a military example that you chose to believe ended differently because of your susceptibility to propaganda. I bet you think they won in afghanistan too.

Fat Man · « **Reply #41 on:** October 10, 2012, 07:39:31 pm »

Quote from: Roachor on October 10, 2012, 07:23:15 pm

First off buttermilk is for poor people, secondly it has nothing to do with me not liking america. It has to do with using a military example that you chose to believe ended differently because of your susceptibility to propaganda. I bet you think they won in afghanistan too.

So you are telling me that a person who lives in their own country doesn't know their history better than somebody who doesn't?

Do you not know that our evil brainwashed by propaganda American citizens during the time of vietnam war were protesting it and this war had like no approval rating which had a big infuence on withdrawling from this war? But go ahead continue with the bull shit and the childish remarks about this war. The Americans who fought in this war had no choice in the matter, they were drafted and came back home got spat on and trashed and nobody showed any respect for them when they got back home. Some how I think you think this is funny to make fun of people who died in this conflict. War is not something to be makeing jokes about.

OG · « **Reply #42 on:** October 10, 2012, 07:53:15 pm »

Quote from: Perteks on October 10, 2012, 05:58:51 pm

But i sense shitload butthurt and ragekid fighting over something very dumb

Perteks at his best

Roachor · « **Reply #43 on:** October 10, 2012, 08:32:57 pm »

Quote from: Fat Man on October 10, 2012, 07:39:31 pm

So you are telling me that a person who lives in their own country doesn't know their history better than somebody who doesn't?

Do you not know that our evil brainwashed by propaganda American citizens during the time of vietnam war were protesting it and this war had like no approval rating which had a big infuence on withdrawling from this war? But go ahead continue with the bull shit and the childish remarks about this war. The Americans who fought in this war had no choice in the matter, they were drafted and came back home got spat on and trashed and nobody showed any respect for them when they got back home. Some how I think you think this is funny to make fun of people who died in this conflict. War is not something to be makeing jokes about.

American education is painfully one sided when it comes to their own history, it's about as truthful as a soviet history class. Yes it was a war america had no place in, yes they treated their own soldiers like shit when they came home. Doesn't change the fact that men in pyjamas with no resources beat an enemy that had them insanely outgunned using stealth and fastrelog.

T-888 · « **Reply #44 on:** October 10, 2012, 09:05:41 pm »

It is over, pyjamas not so powerful.

Author Topic: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun. (Read 10049 times)

Roachor

Re: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun.

Fat Man

Re: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun.

LeonTheNorse

Re: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun.

Fat Man

Re: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun.

Swinglinered

Re: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun.

Fat Man

Re: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun.

Perteks

Re: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun.

Horatio

Re: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun.

Roachor

Re: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun.

Fat Man

Re: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun.

Roachor

Re: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun.

Fat Man

Re: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun.

OG

Re: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun.

Roachor

Re: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun.

T-888

Re: Reasons why a man in pyjamas can beat a man in combat armour with a minigun.