Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

im not trying to say evryone in the army is a psychi, but anyone applying for a job which involves murdering people you have never met before needs their heads examining.

I know what i think about it. I already knew it. France have been supplying Iraq with weapons for ages. But so have Anerica. And when you post, post your own views too, otherwise this will just turn into a flame war.

do you think he would really betray bin laden?

if he says bin laden was in pakistan, the last place he would be is in pakistan

i think when people (esp. the left-wing Brits) say 'America' we mean 'Bush Administration.' I know the American people aren't for war.

It is disgusting however, to think that your government are STILL manufacturing these WMD (and they are) when other countries need the money. A nuke will cost more than some african countries need in a year. At last count (i think) the USA had some 20,000 nukes bult, although some of these may not be active. It would take 27 Nukes of optimum capacity to destroy the world. Totally. Do the math. Its scary, no?

in the UK, there was a survey and it was found that the under-acheivers in the KS3 and KS4 age group (for all my friends across the pond thats 13-18 years old) were young black men.

im not being rascist, but now that i think about it, they're right. all the black teenagers are idiots in my school, apart from two, who are cool.

do other people find this or i this just my school?

At 3/5/03 04:18 PM, TheEvilOne wrote:

At 3/5/03 01:46 PM, bumcheekcity wrote: they say guns don't kill people, people do...
...
...
...
but i think the gun helps. don't you?

To quote Gunnery Sergeant Hartman from Full Metal Jacket:

"Your rifle is only a tool. It is a hard heart that kills. If your killer instincts are not clean and strong, you will hesitate at the moment of truth. You will not kill."

highly true. but you also won't kill if you don't have a rifle in your hands

they say guns don't kill people, people do...
...
...
...
but i think the gun helps. don't you?

Why is it that certain counntries are allowed nukes and others aren't?

Please respons cos i want to know. It seems a bit hypocritical that a country with 20,000 Nukes is attacking a smaller one because they might have one or two.

lol. Nice one. Reckon Saddam would win, but George does have a few thousand nukes at their disposal. Nice post.

Lets stop this. Saddam is a nasty piece of work. So is George Bush.

Saddam probably does have chemical and biological weapons, but why will he disarm if the US will attack him anyway? Theres no point in that. He's not stupid.

He was as good as told to fight the Iran/Iraq war and we gave him weapons and political support for the battle.

And finally, if we do fire a weapon, we will fire it at the largest power installation in Iraq. This will have the effect of crippling their defense and military systems. Unfortunately, the hospitals and schools will also not have power. Civilians will die, but not directly.

Lets face it, telling a country how to rule is Dictatorship. The US at the moment is bribing, threatening and blackmailing the UN Security Council to vote for them.

The world is bent and you know it as well as I do.

Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -5.88
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -4.56

Wow! Tony Blair, the leader of a left-wing party is a right-winger.

At 2/28/03 11:13 AM, Veggiemeal wrote: I don't think so. If they are all right wing, some leader will stand up and they will all adore him, cause he will find some people that are to blame for everything, probably the left wingers. So this leader, let's call him Jake for all i care, tells everyone their misery is caused by the left wingers. So everybody says hurray for jake, and the few people that are smart enough to see jake is a fucking idiot shut their mouths because they will get their asses kicked if they don't.

Nope, i disagree. The leader will either be black or white, and will either be racist towards blacks or whites (whichever one he is not.) This will start a black/white war.

But on the left wing side it won't go very well too. People all want to be equal, and so they come up with rules to make everyone equal. How do we maintain those rules? if someone can punish one other the other person has more power, and that's inequal. So some other clever person, let's call him Pete, says he'll look after the rules and give others jobs to help him. When everything is right, Pete says he'll give up all his power. But everything will never be right, Pete will make sure that never happens, so he keeps his power. And all the people, just like in the rightwing country will just shut up and do what is told.

Uhuh, I disagree. They would form political parties and things would even themselves out. I reckon they'd hold elections and stuff like that. Nobody would be a dictator 'cause then they's be on the right-wingers side of the world eh?

There will be war between the two countries, and that war will go on untill Pete and Jake are dead. After that, people will speak smart and make peace or something. I haven't figured that one out yet.

Nope, because the left-wingers are too busy setting up government and the right-wingers are too busy killing anyone who isn't their colour.

At 2/27/03 12:38 AM, kittie_cross wrote: 1) Yes or no.. why or why not?

Yes. Why? Because a fetus isn't a human. It's a parasite, it feeds off a mother, makes her sick, takes her nourishement. We employ exterminators to do this with rats in their husands.

2) Is it really murder?

Yes, but no. If you define going into someones garage with a gas gun and killing millions of cockroaches, rats, flies etc murder, then yes.

3) Should it be illegal?

Nope. See above.

nah, i bet the right-wing country would destroy itself. the further right-wing you are, the less friends you have.

i reckon the left-wing country would trade peacefully and when the right-wing country tried to invade, they would respond with something that caused no deaths but massive problems for their security. (i.e. destroying all their beer supply or something like that.)

the right-wing country would fight amongst itselves because they would all be racist fashists and then they would split into smaller and smaller countries and eventually nuke each other to death.

anyone agree?

At 2/27/03 03:03 PM, Ted_Easton wrote:

Alcohol and tobacco should also be banned.

What are you, a Jehovah's Witness? Loser.

how do you vote for your goverment across the pond?

i know in britain its simple, with leader party running the country and the second place making their life difficult, but how is it done in america?

i don't mean for this to be a debate about bush and his Florida/Black Voters Scandel. post a new topic for that, this one is because im curious

At 2/23/03 03:19 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote: Seriously, when the left-wing nuts won't even back up your anti-war posts you know you've really blown it. Hahaha.

when you right-wing nuts back up your posts with things such as

:we are going to war not stop your yapping
:Shut your mouth.
:blow me you dumb fuck!
:i'm sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooorry
:u go 2 hell and u die

it makes us left-wingers want to laugh

At 2/23/03 12:16 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote: Does everyone have a TV? People who have no food or running water in a shanty-town in africa get cable news?

thay have an amazing invention called speech. without computers, internet, paper, TV or radio, people can talk and get their veiws across and get news to other countries. people do know about this war.

the funny thing is, one boy in my class didn't know who george bush was. TV works SO well.

At 2/26/03 05:52 AM, PreacherJ wrote: Where do these stats come from? How exactly does one go trudging through the woods looking for people to ask about two leaders they probably haven't heard of and whether or not they should participate in a war they've also never heard about?

it was a UN vote, i believe. and trust me, the leaders of these countries know more than most US citizens

Interesting though, if one could track these folks down, lay out the entire history for them, and then ask them their thoughts.

they know the history. they know how badly they were/are treated but i know what you're getting at.

At 2/25/03 04:11 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote: Funny, I don't remembering hearing about any Worldwide Vote being set up.

open your ears. or otherwise, listen to the news. it was on UK news about 2 weeks ago. if you live in the US, i forgive you cos (and this is not an attack) your news is really highly censored.

At 2/25/03 05:11 PM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote: Well, the people in Zimbabwe aren't sitting at the cockpit waiting to drop the bombs on Iraq, so their opinions, sadly, measure up very small on the grand scale.

unfortunately, youre right. we tend to ignore the smaller countries cos they're poor. we also tens to ignore tha fact that they're poor because they pay us more i third world debt than they get in international aid. shit isn't it?

At 2/26/03 06:32 AM, PreacherJ wrote: Man, this has to be like the fourth or fifth BBS thread asking about being for or against the war.

If people didn't want to talk about it, then there wouldn't be the posts.

More for than against, but nobody really wants a war.

Very true.

what do you think about paedophiles? do you think they should be given life, 20 years or even death sentence. write back and tell me what kind of punishment paedophiles recieve and where you are. ive just watched that michael jackson thing on tape

At 2/25/03 05:23 PM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote: These News Stories of The Day get worse every day.

completely true. stop it please. only post one if it is topical, not stupid

why did you post this? this is just information. if we wanted to know it we'd look it up ourselves. when you do post a new topic, be sure to add a view of your own, or at least ask a question about the matter.

political forums are a place for people to debate about issues, not for posting news bulletins.

don't look as this as an attack, just next time you post, involve other people so they can post back

At 2/24/03 12:00 PM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote: Well...let's kill him anyway. No harm could come from axing Saddam. Besides, if another dictator comes to power, all of you can go ahead and invade.

that really woudn't work. if we were to do it, (even though im against it) i know we would have to place a leader in charge, and make sure politicval parties were set up, and that every 3-6 years, the people could vote.

you can't kill a leader of a country ad expect the country to magic itself better again

At 2/24/03 09:53 PM, kremlorn wrote: Hmm, if 2-3 billion are against the war, doesnt that mean that 3-4 billion are for the war? ;)

nope, about 1.5 billion are for war (these figures are VERY approximate) but 2 bm or so have no feelings or have elected to abstain from the vote

what are you saying? i have no clue.

At 2/23/03 04:46 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote: The USA is going to save this world from the state it's in whether you like it or not, so deal with it.

Nemisis man, what are you smoking? We're not blaming you for being an American (which i guess you are) but the USA has committed terrible atrocities to the Africans and Asians especially. I'm not saying that the developed European countries haven't because we have too, but you just don't seem to care.

It's people like you that make this world a shithole. People that don't care how many people die as long as they get their cash in their wallet at the end of the month.

If Satan exists, i hope he's cooking up some real nice ideas for right-wing idiots like you.

I know that in Britan anything you write, make or do is copyright. This can range from your English Essay for next week to a Published Book. I don't know what the rules are in the US though. Why dont you e-mail tom? <A>mailto:tom@newgrounds.com<A/>tom@newgrounds.com