Because of your inability to stay on topic, we went from similarities in WWI trench warfare and trench warfare in Ukraine today, the original topic, to your ethereal interludes about nuclear deterrence, railway logistics, artillery bombardments, star forts, the Czar, cavalry, and the portability of machine guns, etc. etc. etc. little of which has any bearing on my thesis, which is that none of that has anything to do with why there is trench warfare in Ukraine compared to WWI.
Russia is bleeding Ukraine white, like the Germans did to the French at Verdun.
My question of who would have won without American intervention is the resulting question from your inability to stay on topic, and your wandering in left field interpretation of things you think are applicable when they, in fact, not applicable. Combined with your inability to make a cogent argument in English longer than 4 sentences, you defer to insults regarding education and levels of intelligence.
And you can't answer it because it would surrender your wandering meanderings as pointless.
I have raised the similarities repeatedly. At this point I am talking to a retard.
All you have shat out is ignorant stupid trolls. Over and over. You're not on topic. I was. You responded to me, becoming stupider and stupider.
You were rude to me. I didn't ask you for shit. We haven't had any semblance of discourse. None. There is an idiot trying to tell me there is no comparison. When in fact there is every comparison. But an idiot doesn't process it. Why, they're autistic.
English isn't your first language. At all.. You aren't English. We did that already. It is the problem with ignorance it accuses everybody else of the fundamental things it is not and guilty of. They are in fact your ability to comprehend, understand, and rationalise. Or hold any reasonable debate. Explain explain, talking to a retard. They refuse to add anything else. Same bullshit. No understanding. Autism.
What ethnicity are you? Answer. American. You're an ethnic. You aren't English. You're probably even more distant than that. Suddenly you're being cognitive, not at all, it's called autism, claiming somebody else isn't English, when you're not. No actual wonder everything else has had the same lack of thought and input. It is dumbfounding absurdity. There is also the lack of education present. Who won WW1, you must have read it off a corncob. So utterly off topic, where every single time you've opened your cornpone mouth to me, read it. It has been wrong. So you submit a dumb argument over and over on who won WW1, so you can refute any comparison?
I charitably refuse to insult you personally, just attack your arguments and lack of writing ability as it bears on your inane thesis. However, it's apparent that you're a sad sack of shit because you cannot differentiate the difference between the person making an argument and the argument the person is putting forward. It's your inability to stay on topic. Losing the debate, you turn to insults. I feel sorry for you.
I am American, native born. That bears into this discussion only as relevant because I am a native English speaker and your complete and utter failure in this debate partially comes from your lack of writing skills in English. You're pretty good, I admit, but I've read essays by well educated 13 year olds that are better. You cannot stay on topic. Irrelevant single sentence asides, followed by insults are not an argument. No wonder you're upset when I cut through it all to ask a question you won't answer because it will reveal your bullshit.
Who would have won WWI if the America hadn't joined?
You're an ethnic. Say it. American. You're not English. You're an ethnicity of English. So utterly diverse from English, you speak a different language, called a dialect.
What is a native born American? A Kalak. What is that, a wigwam? A canoe? A tepee? Suddenly you're speaking English? Because you read it on a corncob?
The corncob taught you Americans won WW1. It didn't teach you about any artillery. Or the railway lines. Why the trenches were built? America won. Blah blah, cornpone.
Your entire argument has been ignorant. You kept, and it's an American pastime, sticking your foot in your mouth. Until you sought to be even dumber on the actual comparison offered on how it all compares to WW1. Hahaha.
You started hostility. You started the insults. Read them. You replied to me.
The U.S. Census allows you to put "American" as an ethnic identity, which is what I did the last time I filled one out. Checkmate.
Your English is good, but you'd get a C- minus in my high school's English composition class, mostly because you can't stay on topic and your "flow" sucks worse than a broken vacuum. Sorry.
Disagreeing with you is not insulting you. Now you're delusional when you think I insulted you first. Did you get your coffee this morning?
Because of your inability to stay on topic, we went from similarities in WWI trench warfare and trench warfare in Ukraine today, the original topic, to your ethereal interludes about nuclear deterrence, railway logistics, artillery bombardments, star forts, the Czar, cavalry, and the portability of machine guns, etc. etc. etc. little of which has any bearing on my thesis, which is that none of that has anything to do with why there is trench warfare in Ukraine compared to WWI.
Russia is bleeding Ukraine white, like the Germans did to the French at Verdun.
My question of who would have won without American intervention is the resulting question from your inability to stay on topic, and your wandering in left field interpretation of things you think are applicable when they, in fact, not applicable. Combined with your inability to make a cogent argument in English longer than 4 sentences, you defer to insults regarding education and levels of intelligence.
And you can't answer it because it would surrender your wandering meanderings as pointless.
Once again, stay on topic.
I have raised the similarities repeatedly. At this point I am talking to a retard.
All you have shat out is ignorant stupid trolls. Over and over. You're not on topic. I was. You responded to me, becoming stupider and stupider.
You were rude to me. I didn't ask you for shit. We haven't had any semblance of discourse. None. There is an idiot trying to tell me there is no comparison. When in fact there is every comparison. But an idiot doesn't process it. Why, they're autistic.
English isn't your first language. At all.. You aren't English. We did that already. It is the problem with ignorance it accuses everybody else of the fundamental things it is not and guilty of. They are in fact your ability to comprehend, understand, and rationalise. Or hold any reasonable debate. Explain explain, talking to a retard. They refuse to add anything else. Same bullshit. No understanding. Autism.
What ethnicity are you? Answer. American. You're an ethnic. You aren't English. You're probably even more distant than that. Suddenly you're being cognitive, not at all, it's called autism, claiming somebody else isn't English, when you're not. No actual wonder everything else has had the same lack of thought and input. It is dumbfounding absurdity. There is also the lack of education present. Who won WW1, you must have read it off a corncob. So utterly off topic, where every single time you've opened your cornpone mouth to me, read it. It has been wrong. So you submit a dumb argument over and over on who won WW1, so you can refute any comparison?
I charitably refuse to insult you personally, just attack your arguments and lack of writing ability as it bears on your inane thesis. However, it's apparent that you're a sad sack of shit because you cannot differentiate the difference between the person making an argument and the argument the person is putting forward. It's your inability to stay on topic. Losing the debate, you turn to insults. I feel sorry for you.
I am American, native born. That bears into this discussion only as relevant because I am a native English speaker and your complete and utter failure in this debate partially comes from your lack of writing skills in English. You're pretty good, I admit, but I've read essays by well educated 13 year olds that are better. You cannot stay on topic. Irrelevant single sentence asides, followed by insults are not an argument. No wonder you're upset when I cut through it all to ask a question you won't answer because it will reveal your bullshit.
Who would have won WWI if the America hadn't joined?
You're an ethnic. Say it. American. You're not English. You're an ethnicity of English. So utterly diverse from English, you speak a different language, called a dialect.
What is a native born American? A Kalak. What is that, a wigwam? A canoe? A tepee? Suddenly you're speaking English? Because you read it on a corncob?
The corncob taught you Americans won WW1. It didn't teach you about any artillery. Or the railway lines. Why the trenches were built? America won. Blah blah, cornpone.
Your entire argument has been ignorant. You kept, and it's an American pastime, sticking your foot in your mouth. Until you sought to be even dumber on the actual comparison offered on how it all compares to WW1. Hahaha.
You started hostility. You started the insults. Read them. You replied to me.
The U.S. Census allows you to put "American" as an ethnic identity, which is what I did the last time I filled one out. Checkmate.
Your English is good, but you'd get a C- minus in my high school's English composition class, mostly because you can't stay on topic and your "flow" sucks worse than a broken vacuum. Sorry.
Disagreeing with you is not insulting you. Now you're delusional when you think I insulted you first. Did you get your coffee this morning?
Once again.....
Who would have won WWI if America hadn't joined?