Froch:ill quit super 6 if AA fight is in germany

Can anyone blame Froch? His only chance in Germany is to stop Arthur Abraham which looks a tall order.

 

read the article, it was agreed with showtime before the tournament started.

 

Yes, eventually you would have been independent, like Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

Members of the British Commonwealth with the Queen as your head of state.

All the valuable contributions made to political thought by Franklin, Jefferson, Adams etc would never have happened.

Not to mention Lincoln.

They committed more and better trained troops to the conflict than the 'Colonists' did, and their contributions on LAND AND SEA were decisive.


You would do well to familiarize yourself a little more with your great nation's history.


http://people.csail.mit.edu/sfelshin/saintonge/frhist.html


[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolutionary_War[/ame]


[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France_in_the_American_Revolutionary_War[/ame]


http://xenophongroup.com/mcjoynt/marine.htm



http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/wars_american_independence.html




Without decisive French intervention, the course of your history would have been very different.

 

You seem to take great pride in knowing very little about the USA outside what you read in wikipedia, and then starting hopeless debates about it. Very trollish.

Remember, I already badly schooled you on another American political thread, that you knew the basics about, and then got badly out of your league once I chose to entertain you.

Now go back to reading whatever foreign newspaper you get your "American" knowledge from....

BTW, 6,000 is not greater than 250,000, just an FYI


Keith

 

Maybe just change the rules like Pac likes it. Fight as many fights as possible at bull**** catch weights against shot opponents and pump gear all year long to stay in shape. Lets have the fight in Germany but make AA weigh in at 158.

 

This content is protected

Revisionism seems to be your forte.

The thread you allude to is still there for all to see.

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?p=6115230&highlight=florida#post6115230

You got rather badly manhandled in that litlle fracas, to the point of being exposed as ignorant on the basic workings of your democracy.


And here again, you have been exposed as ignorant of the origins of your nation.

Most of the sites I directed you to were American.

This content is protected

I only tossed in a couple of Wiki references for your benefit as they summarize the struggle somewhat more succinctly, and it's clear that extended reading is not your cup of tea.

I could dig up quotes from Washington, Jefferson and others who actually knew what they were talking about (wonder why?) when they stated the decisive importance of French intervention.

But that probably wouldn't ease your pain or ignorance much as you seem impervious to the facts. In fact, the truth seems to give you a bad dose of rectal heartburn.


Once again, it is a fact acknowledged by most American historians that French intervention, ON LAND AND ON SEA was decisive in the outcome of the war.

 

Yeah, thanks for posting that. Especially the last part where you were obviously wrong, (7-2 ring a bell) and while it was obvious you were frantically looking up any factiod that might support your position, in the end, your lack of depth on the subject was clear.

As on this subject. The French blockade was nice, but not essential. And all historians agree that France didn't even enter the war until they were fairly sure that America was going to win. Did it speed it along, sure did, I already said that. Was it essential in the US gaining it's independance. NOPE.

again, they provided 6000 troops. The Americas provided 250,000.

In fact most of the french fighting was not even done in the Americas.

You should probably try to better understand what you read before trying to apply it. Just because you read something, doesn't mean you KNOW it.

Keith

 

Keith, my poor deluded little ****wit, your sorry ass has already been exposed, again !

You deride posting of the facts. This makes sense from your point of view, because the facts are not your friends.

It is an incontrovertible fact that French intervention was essential and decisive. It's not even controversial among historians, not even American historians.

Your ranting and babbling without a single piece of supporting evidence in the face of what I provided to your confused little brain, indicates again that you not only don't know what your spluttering on about, you don't want to know.

Americans who knew then, and who know now, ( and that group does NOT include you) are pretty clear on the importance of the French financial and military aid in determining the outcome of the War of Independence.

 

THis is all you ever retort too.

You have created this little war based on a little information, and have aggrandized it beyond your own comprehension.

You are so ****ing stupid you actually posted a thread where you PROVEN to know nothing beyond what a headline might have posted.

FACT: The French did not enter the war until the US had turned the tide against the British and we pretty much assured of winning the war.

FACT: Contrary to your incredibly idiotic statement that the French committed more troops to the war than the US, the fact is the US have 250,000 soldiers on the ground to roughly 6,000 from the French.

FACT: The 6,000 Frenchmen were not the overriding factor that the US won the war.

FACT: The French NAvy did help end the war faster by blocking retreat avenues for the British army , however they were not an overriding facot in the win either.

I don't know if you do not understand the meaning of the word essential, or you are just a dip**** who likes to start arguments over nothing and and on topics you obviously don't fully understand.

This is twice now you have jumped on a comment I have made, created some **** storm then got embarassed. Really your depth of knowledge is like that of a 5 year old. ****, even the websites you googled and cited said the French alliance by 1781 was "of very little benefit" to the US.


It's pretty cool you can google key words and find **** on the internet. However that is no substitute for KNOWLEDGE of the subject. You have ****ed up ROYALLY twice now, and it's obvious for all to see that you have no understanding of America outside google, wikipedia, and whatever other crap you read.

If you notice, I post on only a few subjects, the ones I know about. You might try the same, and by KNOW I mean understand. Google does not = understand.

And next time try not to hijack a thread you ****ing troll.


Keith

 

And what would that be ? Straightening out little fools like you when you make daft remarks?

There's no war here Keith, just a minor *****-slapping.

You talk about aggrandizement on my part, and then call your ownage in a boxing forum a war ? What a twit !

WTF is this, lad ? When you're calling someone stupid, it's best to avoid looking stupid by mangling your mother tongue. Grammar doesn't appear to be your friend either.

As I mentioned to you before, the thread is there for all to see, and form their own judgment as to who looked like a twit.

You stating that something has been proven does not make it so. Indeed, it usually shows just the contrary.

FICTION.

As the war could not have been won without French assistance, this statement is completely fatuous.

A tiny misprint you keep harping on. I stated 'more trained', then edited to 'better trained' and accidentally left both words in.

The French ground troops were important way beyond their numbers. They were professional soldiers and not farmboys and youngsters. While many of the colonial soldiers were brave and fought well, the strategy, money and firepower were provided by the French.

Together with the naval assistance, they WERE !

This is FICTION. Their naval assistance was decisive. And blocking British naval lines of retreat was not even their main contribution.

Get back to the books, boy.

For something that is "over nothing" you sure have your knickers in a serious knot.

Again, mon petit choux, French intervention was decisive in the conflict.

No French intervention, no US of A, as you know it.

(But then of course, you hardly know it at all)

It's clear who got embarrassed here. For an American, you really stumble along in a mist of ignorance on the history of your country, its constitution, and the workings of its government. You wear your inadequacy in these areas as a badge of honour and actually treat your ignorance as though it were a virtue.

When challenged on facts, you make up your own. This is indicative of delusion and other mental disorders. At first you might be taken for merely stupid, but upon deeper delving, psychopathology appears to be playing some role in your woeful stutterings.

Well then, as I take that you're fully grown, from this I can deduce that a five-year-old here has more grasp of American history than a lot of American adults.

That would really limit your postings considerably.

And no, I don't notice that at all. Reading the words in your av, it's pretty clear you see yourself as some kind of witty thorn in the side of your opponents (that would make you a troll). That would be fine, if you could carry it off, but I'm afraid you just don't have the tools.

You're missing the knowledge, the wit, the logic etc. In fact, for a man attempting a battle of wits, you're pretty much unarmed.

My knowledge of American history, though far from exhaustive, was sufficient to straighten you out, well before the internet was invented. The main crux of your anal heartburn here is the fact that supporting evidence is showing you up as a fact-challenged fool with but a superficial grasp of your origins and a host of mishmashed mythology and xenophobia. Where those facts are drawn from is irrelevant, but since we're on an internet forum, it might seem reasonable and convenient to make use of the medium.



We could be sitting in a 'paper' library and your sorry ass would get the same kind of raping it's taking here. You are vexed by the message so you knock the messenger and now, the medium as well. Sad case !

You continue to show yourself to be a short-sighted. memory-challenged ****wit. This time, readers don't even need to leave the thread to notice that your head is wedged in your arse.

I posted in the thread, on the thread topic. (post # 82).

Some ****head name of Keith digressed from the thread topic and tried to get in a little dig (post # 81). I slapped him down with a FACT.

His vagina stung as if filled with broken glass and so and he came back with more fiction:

At that point, he got a brief lesson on the history of his mother country.


So who digressed from the thread topic and acted lie a :

This content is protected

You're a sad and sorry case, lad.

 

Show me the contract. :yep

I agree. :deal

 

I REALLY don't want to bash Americans on here, but

 

It's amazing that this isn't obvious to everyone.

If no agreement can be reached, this bout should, IMO, take place in the US (New York or Vegas) with non European officials.

I think there would be interest in it there.

 

:good

 

I agree with this. Both were away in their last bout. Put it in the US. 'Nobody' there cares who wins = fair judges.