Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

I find this one interesting; Mr. Sanford Smith died at the age of 14 at the time of his death his wife (Priscilla Whippo) was 11. So logically they must have concieved thier baby when the girl was 11 or earlier. And even more interesting, thier baby (Harriet Smith) was not born until 1800, 26 years after her dad died.

The only possible conclusion, that girl needs to shower more.

I see nothing wrong with using napalm as long is there isn't a risk of civilian death. Whats worse about burning a man rather than shooting him?

"The answer is that a cruise missile with a military hologram aboard crashed into the building."

Hahahaha.... I'm no conspiracy buff, but wouldn't it be easier to just wire some cemtex to the base?

At 4/3/04 07:18 PM, mrpopenfresh wrote:

At 4/3/04 07:12 PM, ineffable_fetus wrote:
You might, but then that would be a lie. I haven't even said that once in this thread.

I said either by "give me a rebuttall" (wich you have said) or "your'e wrong" (wich you haven't said but usually pounce on the occasion to use it).

If there is an occasion to use it, doesn't that imply it is appropriate to use?

Now, shut up and stop trying to debate over anything and everything. If I keep replying to what you say, this may never stop.

Then why don't you "shut up".

At 4/3/04 07:06 PM, mrpopenfresh wrote:

At 4/3/04 06:49 PM, ineffable_fetus wrote:
Oh, and I might add, HE was the one that said "you're wrong", dumbass.

Might I point out that half of your posts have "you're wrong" in them at least once.

You might, but then that would be a lie. I haven't even said that once in this thread.

At 4/3/04 06:15 PM, mrpopenfresh wrote: God damm sween, could you lay off your harcore debating for a minute and actually give an opinion? At first your hard head was mildly entertaining, but now its just plain old aggravating.

Please stop ruining threads with your "give me a rebuttal" and "you're wrong".

The threads in this forum are already ruined, they were ruined before I even came to this forum. No thread has ended with people coming to a civil agreement, because everyone is constantly changing the topic and making claims with no backing.

Oh, and I might add, HE was the one that said "you're wrong", dumbass.

At 4/3/04 05:40 PM, JudgeFUNK wrote: Ph33r teh 5chweenie. Teh Schweenie > j00.

What's your point?

At 4/3/04 03:54 PM, bumcheekcity wrote: Maybe the reason the US soldiors are getting attacked isn't because of their number, but more to do with the fact that THEY HATE YOUR GUTS...

Possibly... i'm jjust saying.

Oh yeah, and I'm sure they love the UN soooooooo much. Anybody occupying thier country, they will hate, simple as that.

At 4/3/04 04:04 PM, bumcheekcity wrote:

At 4/3/04 12:31 PM, ineffable_fetus wrote: No, because death is unintentional, it doesn't need to be justified, it was an accident. However, to some degree they knew deaths would happen, so they did take a risk and are partially responsible for thier deaths, and that risk has been justified time and time again in other threads, it just depends on your point of view.

So, all 10,000 deaths were justified? Possibly. If the missiles were not 100% accurate though... were their deaths due not to accidents, but to failibility of weapons?

Your post doesn't make much sense. The fact that we used those missiles, proves that we attempted to reduce civilian life, and that the deaths that did happen were unintentional. I don't see what that has to do with your post.

What about all those kids who picked up bits of cluster bomb and then got blown to smithereenes? Is that intentional? Cluster bombs are, in fact, DESIGNED to do this.

That was Afghanistan.

At 4/3/04 05:30 PM, Jlop985 wrote: JAPANESE PEOPLE ARROGANT. ARROGANCE NOT HUMILITY. ARROGANCE OPPOSITE OF HUMILITY.

And what is your evidence that they are arrogant? They could very well be denying it out of shame, which would only make thier humbleness greater.

At 4/3/04 02:28 PM, Jlop985 wrote: So, seeing how the Japanese government refuses to acknowledge the atrocities committed during the Sino-Japanese War, and that a significant portion of the Japanese people deny that the acts ever occurred, I draw my conclusion that the Japanese's pride does not allow them to confess to the brutal murder of hundreds of thousands of Chinese civilians, not to mention American POW's as well. The Chinese have sought a simple apology, but the Japanese have not even expressed regret.

You can draw all the conclusions you want, but that doesn't prove a point. Until you can make an argument as to why them not confessing makes them not humble or respectfull, you haven't proved a thing.

At 4/3/04 01:01 PM, mrpopenfresh wrote:

At 4/3/04 12:23 PM, ineffable_fetus wrote:
I don't see what bombing pearl harbor has to do with respect. The Japanese were simply following orders from thier emporer, who they were incredibly loyal to. Really, explain what that has to do with being humble and respectfull.

Is it respectful to have a suprise attack on someone who wasn't expecting it at all? Was it honorable to attack your ennemy who was unprepared for it?

First of all, Honor has nothing to do with this. Second, it is respectfull to have a suprise attack on someone, as long as you do not prolong thier suffering or disgrace them in some way. Third, it should not have been a suprise attack, the fact that it was a suprise was entirely the US's fault.

And what does that have to do with the argument at hand? Was it a long time since you last insulted Americans so you just had to do it again?

I was merely poiting out how retarded your lagic was by using it in a similar scenario, replacing the french by americans.

The logic works, Americans often are pretentious. Are you denying that?

The UN has about 60,000 troops deployed across the world, the US has 80,000 troops in Iraq. Now even if the UN took all the troops away from everywhere else, they would still fall short of the amount of troops neccesary to do the same crappy job the US has been doing.

Simply put, the UN is useless. If we did hand over control, we would either have to keep all our troops there, or Iraq would... die.

If we didn't do something just because the NAZI's did it, we wouldn't have lots of things. Lets face it, the man was insane, but like many other insane people, he was very intellegent, so not all of his ideas are going to be horrible.

At 4/3/04 03:49 AM, bumcheekcity wrote:

At 4/2/04 07:19 PM, ineffable_fetus wrote: I can justify it, none of those deaths were intentional. This is evident because we used preciscion weapons to target military facilities instead of just randomly bombing, we didn't have to, but we did.

Because a death is unintentional, it is justified? Interesting. How do we define unintentional?

No, because death is unintentional, it doesn't need to be justified, it was an accident. However, to some degree they knew deaths would happen, so they did take a risk and are partially responsible for thier deaths, and that risk has been justified time and time again in other threads, it just depends on your point of view.

At 4/3/04 07:32 AM, Jlop985 wrote: Fetus, did you even read my post? The Japanese committed atrocities against the Chinese. At least the Germans recognize that there was a Holocaust.

Again, what does that have to do with being humble and respectfull? Killing a person doesn't mean you don't respect them, killing someone and then bragging about it, or spitting in thier face, would. I asked you to prove how these "atrocities" mean that they are not respectfull or humble, and you have not done it. Thats what you have to do to prove a point, mmkay?

At 4/3/04 11:30 AM, mrpopenfresh wrote:

At 4/2/04 08:46 PM, ineffable_fetus wrote:
People have hated the French since France was united. People like Asian cultures because most asian cultures are very respectfull and humble, they are taught to be that way.

Yerah, they were really humble and respectful when they sneaked up on you guys in Pearl Harbor.

I don't see what bombing pearl harbor has to do with respect. The Japanese were simply following orders from thier emporer, who they were incredibly loyal to. Really, explain what that has to do with being humble and respectfull.

So really, it's a matter of who would you rather hate, someone who bows when you meet them, or someone who acts like you are wasting thier time with your horrible comprehension of the French language.

I have never seen an american give someone who dosen't speak acceptable english the time of day. So logically, I must hate them with all my heart.

And what does that have to do with the argument at hand? Was it a long time since you last insulted Americans so you just had to do it again?

At 4/3/04 08:20 AM, D2KVirus wrote:

At 4/2/04 08:36 PM, ineffable_fetus wrote:
Yet again, all you accomplished is said a bunch of crap, and did not back up a word. Not a rebuttal. Are all your posts this bad?

Once again, Jimsween "keeps a debate going" in the time-honoured way, which isn't whiny, annoying, or pathetic in any way.

Irony, Jim, is too far out of your sight.

Do you actually have a rebuttal or are you just going to keep makingyourself look like an ass?

At 4/3/04 05:01 AM, shitt0r wrote:

At some ghey time, ineffable_fetus wrote:

i am a fgag lololololololol0lol0ollolololol

There we go.

You're a dumbass.

At 4/2/04 10:15 PM, Jlop985 wrote: Funny you should say that the Japanese are humble, because my two best friends- both Chinese, say that the Japanese will still not admit the atrocities they committed against China in WWII.

What does that have to do with being humble? I mean, I could see if they rubbed it in every day how Japan pwned China that would be an example, but I don't see a connection with not owning up to something and not being humble.

At 4/2/04 09:04 PM, peedee wrote:

acctually some, not all, japanesse are not respectful. they come over here and rip us off, hurt our woman and they are pigs. not all.

Of course not all, but most are. It's part if thier culture.

At 4/2/04 05:49 PM, bumcheekcity wrote: What is the point of having the best economy in the world if the people in the country are unemployed and badly-paid in their jobs?

Well, it seemed to work for France. They lowered thier work week to 45 hours to save jobs. The problem is, there is only so much work out there, and only so much money, and not everyone can be getting a huge share of the money.

At 4/2/04 06:45 PM, mrpopenfresh wrote: Alot of you have missed the fact that I tried to point out that is americans hate the french because of something they supposedly did in WWII. Yet, they don't despise the japanese for bombing Pearl Harbor, mostly because they are the gods of technological materialism.

And I'm saying people don't hate the French because they surrendered in WW2, they don't hate them beause they held out on Iraq either, those don't help it though. People have hated the French since France was united. People like Asian cultures because most asian cultures are very respectfull and humble, they are taught to be that way.

So really, it's a matter of who would you rather hate, someone who bows when you meet them, or someone who acts like you are wasting thier time with your horrible comprehension of the French language.

At 4/2/04 06:26 PM, CrassClock wrote:

At 4/2/04 04:34 PM, ineffable_fetus wrote: Because the Japanese are respectfull and humble, while the French are snooty and pretentious.

What about Americans?

They are lazy, but I don't see what at all this has to do with anything.

At 4/2/04 05:42 PM, shitt0r wrote:

At 4/2/04 05:37 PM, ineffable_fetus wrote: First of all, you're a moron.

No I'm not.

Yeah, ya are.

I used those words for a reason.

No you didn't.

Yes, I did.

Stereotypes are often based on truth.

No they aren't

Yes, they are.

I challenge you to actually give a rebuttal instead of just changing the quote around and thinking you made some point.

REBUTTAL see, you're at it again.

I did make a point matey, you're the stereotypical bastard here.

Yet again, all you accomplished is said a bunch of crap, and did not back up a word. Not a rebuttal. Are all your posts this bad?

At 4/2/04 06:05 PM, CrassClock wrote:

At 4/2/04 05:50 PM, ineffable_fetus wrote: And the fact that the GDP of Saudi Arabia is $268.9 billion shows that these investors must not be official residents of Saudi Arabia and are also not paying taxes there. Unless they have some sort of magic power that allows them to make thier money exist and at the same time not exist.

Well congratulations on making all sorts of assumptions about a topic you just discovered.

Unless you can show me who those investors are, and what their status is in regards to Saudi Arabia, I really don't see why your assumptions are accurate. Three posts ago you didn't even know about this 750 billion.

I don't have to, I have factual proof of Saudi Arabia's GDP. That is proof that no other money can be in the possesion of one of the residents of that country, whats there is it. Thats what the GDP is.

At 4/2/04 06:17 PM, CrassClock wrote:

At 4/2/04 05:52 PM, ineffable_fetus wrote: First of all, there is a difference between attacking the people who attacked you, and killing a bunch of innocent contractors on purpose.

Americans are their ennemy, the contractors were American.

I don't see a difference.

So all you have to do is call somone your enemy, and then you can kill them? Thats some line of reason you got there....

Second, the war on Afghanistan was no justified by revenge, it was justified by taking out a threat, Osama was clearly a threat, so we attacked his base.

The Taliban were willing to hand over Osama if the US showed them proof of his connection to the 9-11 attacks.

There was no proof of him being guilty presented to them or us. Without any proof of him being a threat, I don't see how he's a threat.

He admitted to the attacks, you don't need to present proof after that.

At 4/2/04 05:53 PM, bumcheekcity wrote: How can anything justify it? How can you justify 10,000 civilian deaths? You can't. How can you justify 9/11? You can't, but the 10,000 is nothing more than a statistic. Humans can comprehend 4 deaths of humans, but not 10,000. It's just a number to us, but nothing can justify senseless murder.

I can justify it, none of those deaths were intentional. This is evident because we used preciscion weapons to target military facilities instead of just randomly bombing, we didn't have to, but we did.

At 4/2/04 05:25 PM, shitt0r wrote: The actual killings weren't in the sickest of manners, it's just what they did after they killed them...

Rumors are they weren't dead after the Grenade attack, that they actually died in the process of having thier carcasses mutilated.

At 4/2/04 05:50 PM, CrassClock wrote:

At 4/2/04 05:42 PM, ineffable_fetus wrote: And that is justification.. how?

Kinda like how the US was justified by the 9-11 attacks to bomb Afghanistan: revenge.

First of all, there is a difference between attacking the people who attacked you, and killing a bunch of innocent contractors on purpose.

Second, the war on Afghanistan was no justified by revenge, it was justified by taking out a threat, Osama was clearly a threat, so we attacked his base.