34 Forum Posts by "DivineSlayer"
At 5/4/03 12:52 PM, mrpopenfresh wrote:At 5/4/03 09:17 AM, AmericanBADASS wrote:or seen the whole country and not just the psycho's in New York?
Well, i guess your in no position to talk. Isnt that kinda stereotypical?(yes, yes it is)
And in your profile you say "cnn brainwashed redneck". Is that stereotypical? (yes, yes it is)
Wow this is the biggest pile of shit I have ever seen. In lots of other forums you would be banned for posting useless threads like this.
If poker, rummy, bullsh*t, or any other good card games were board games I would say those were my favorite... But they aren't so I hate board games.
If cards were a game I would say that was my favorite... But they aren't so I hate board games.
At 4/29/03 01:21 PM, bumcheekcity wrote:At 4/28/03 11:58 PM, Shih wrote: Basically if you make sense I'll probably support you.Thats the best way to work politics.
Thats probably how most people work. Then again that is just going with what he thinks makes sense. Its all part of what he believes in and what he thinks is right. Same as almost everyone.
I have laughed more staring at a rock than with this cartoon.
Llamas are cool animals. They'd spit at you if you kicked them. Like a camel... Lol I have no idea what I'm talking about.
*kicks the dog in my mind*
If I were Saddam I would give up on the power in Iraq. I might plan some small terrorist actions and try to assassinate Bush but for the most part I would be finished. After the terrorism business I would slink off to some other country and live out the rest of my life until death in a cardboard box begging for food.
At 4/27/03 10:44 AM, Jiperly wrote:At 4/26/03 09:08 PM, DivineSlayer wrote:Do you consider hot dogs a name for 5 yr. olds? Same thing as in this case. The name got changed when we go against Germany. Freedom fries is a dumb name but I'm not totally opposed to the idea of changing the names. If they are'nt french then why do we call them french fries? Why don't we just change it?theres a flaw in your logic there boy-o - we were at WAR with Germany, and Germany was agreesivly conquering other nations. What did France do? disagree with Americans stance.
also, if your going to change it because french fries aren't for france, then call them belguim fries- don't make a bigger ass of yourself by changes the name of something in order to make it "correct" but have it even further from the truth.(they're called french fries from the way they are prepared, but the belguims invented fries)
Alright I stand corrected on my comparison between Germany and France but I only mentioned changing the french because he said "French fries arent even french, french people dont even called the french!" If you have two conflicting opinions which do you call them? Belgium for their origination or French for the way they are prepared? I would suggest putting a neutral name or even no first word at all. Calling them fries would end the whole problem.
At 4/25/03 09:53 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote: Who blew up the world trade center, the cast of Friends?
Well it seems that if all you can think of is the World Trade Center then yes you would assume that all terrorists are from the middle east. But others around you have broader views and know about other acts of terrorism not affiliated with Bin Laden. Go back to watching the news. Then you will see Bin Laden and the suicide bombings and that will be all the justification you can get. And for one last thing the World Trade center was not blown up.
I got tired of seeing the same things over and over for just about every single event ever done in the history of my life. The News is desperate. A man could stick his finger up his ass and there would be 7 reporters reporting it live with breaking coverage for the next 7 years.
At 4/26/03 11:39 PM, FUNKbrs wrote:At 4/26/03 02:56 PM, mrpopenfresh wrote: This shows just how immature americans can be. Freedom fries? Common! Its not like the average american is 5 yrs old. French fries arent even french, french people dont even called the french! Anyone who calls fries freedom fries, well you could just fuckoff for all i care.It sure is common. What is wrong with being common? nothing, as long as youre not an elitist canuck.
*kicks a moose*
Umm... he didnt mean common. He meant cmon. I hope your joking but on the internet its hard to tell.
At 4/13/03 01:44 AM, evilkate wrote: This bothers me because I, myself, was put on medications at a relatively early age and you're basically calling my mother who raised me single-handedly unfit.
I think that it is actually necessary in most situations, but even when its not- smacking a child for misbehaving will only teach the child violence. Not discipline. And many times parents go too far and it becomes abuse. Abuse can result in disorders and depression later in life for them which will require medication anyway.
OMG I got smacked for being a smart ass... Must restrain the urge to kill. I have been taugh violence, now I will become a scourge to society and maim and kill until I am caught and put on trial.
Soooo logical. Smacking your kids will not cause them to become cop killers later in life. I should send you back 200 years when there were no drugs and discipline was the only way to keep them straight.
I truly don;t think its much of a "war coverage" anymore. Its the rebuilding of Iraq and the anti-terrorist coverage now.
At 4/26/03 04:12 AM, jimsween wrote:At 4/25/03 06:13 PM, Slizor wrote:If we didnt get involved japan wouldve taken over evry country touching an ocean, they had just developed jet planes without help from ANYONE.
Ah, the American version of history. The tide was turning in WW1 before the US entered and in WW2 France would have been "liberated" eventually, even if it didn't involve America.
Japan would not have taken over every country touching an ocean. For one thing, America is touching an ocean is it not? This statement is ridiculous and unfounded. Then again I support the fact that we did get involved in the war because Japan was a big part of the Axis.
At 4/26/03 01:25 PM, Shangui wrote: I think that US troops should leave Iraq and let the Irqi people govern themselves. If they get another dictatorship running, well it's their responsability to build a governement they like. The problem with Iraq is that it's separated in many factions which will all fight for power. If US troops leave now, their will probably be a civil war in Iraq.
I just hope that when democracy is up and running in Iraq, things will repair on their own, with time. It would be funny if Saddam survived, presentes to the next Iraqi election and win.
I hate you so much... Ok where to start where to start.
#1- If they built another dictatorship we would end up being involved in another war.
#2- You forget about the oil.
#3- Why do you say "If US troops leave now, their will probably be a civil war in Iraq." and then say that we should leave.
#5- If Saddamn had survived and stuck his head out of the snakes hole he was hiding him he would not survive long. America would get him.
#6- I am completely sure that we would let him become the leader.
#7- I hate you so much.
At 4/26/03 03:23 PM, mrpopenfresh wrote: When the war is gonna be over American troops are gonna be checking every square inch of the country and find absolutely nothing, like the first time.
If you are referring to the first war we had you need to check what your saying. Please explain to me when we searched the entire country and found nothing. If you are referring to the weapons inspectors then you are also wrong. We found he had illegal weapons. Weapons outlawed to him that he built and had in his country anyway. I wish everyone would understand that there are more than just WOMD that he cannot have.
Btw, I meant 2 lines not 2 sentences.
At 4/26/03 03:23 PM, mrpopenfresh wrote: Saddam cooperated, the U.S. and the un inspectors found nothing, then france and germany asked for more time, the U.S. said no and started attacking iraq.
Wow, you have just successfully combined 12 years into 2 sentences. Umm.. I think there is a bit more to the story than just that.
At 4/26/03 02:56 PM, mrpopenfresh wrote: This shows just how immature americans can be. Freedom fries? Common! Its not like the average american is 5 yrs old. French fries arent even french, french people dont even called the french! Anyone who calls fries freedom fries, well you could just fuckoff for all i care.
Do you consider hot dogs a name for 5 yr. olds? Same thing as in this case. The name got changed when we go against Germany. Freedom fries is a dumb name but I'm not totally opposed to the idea of changing the names. If they are'nt french then why do we call them french fries? Why don't we just change it?
At 4/26/03 12:38 AM, alejandro1 wrote:At 4/25/03 09:40 PM, DivineSlayer wrote: I've often thought about reducing the world's populaion by dropping a nuke on countries like India and China. Whoops there goes half the world's population. Everybody move on in.1) China has nukes, bad bad idea.
2) Then there's the nuclear winter. What do you plan to do with a large chunk of radioactive land that's uninhabitable for 50 years?
Lol I know its a dumb idea. I was joking when I said it. But there have been wars over land. No one has used nukes but in small countries like Japan there have been wars. Eventually when countries become overpopulated there will be genocides to make room. Especially since life spans and disease and famine and all that will eventually be fixed. Way too many people.
At 4/8/03 12:58 AM, mysecondstar wrote: turn the other cheek. show compassion to your enemies as you would your friends and it will all stop. an eye for an eye will always lead to more pain and suffering for more people.
instead of biting back when bitten, we should flood them with compassion and understanding to try and lift any questions of fears that they may have of us. and once we get all the kinks out, there will be no more fighting because we will have a better understanding of one another. Vengence shall be the Lord's if you believe in that stuff. we shouldn't hold it upon ourselves to pass judgement or fight with one another because we feel like we have been wronged.
granted it not only takes a great deal of humility to even be compelled to not fight, and it would only be possible in a perfect world, but that's what we have strive for, is it not?
No matter how much I would love to believe that I know its never gonna happen. The middle eaterners won't just say "Oh look at that the US is a nice happy place lets all go running with love and happiness streaming out of our asses". The suicide bombing and terrorism is a part of their religion. Fighting the holy war. I would love to see world peace but we aint Jesus and we have to do what we can to protect the innocent. And that includes deterring criminals with penalties.
So stereotypical to assume that a terrorist is from the middle east. Why would you have to put your head in the sand and pray to Allah? Why not just go to a church and pray to God. Not all terrorists are middle eastern you know.
I've often thought about reducing the world's populaion by dropping a nuke on countries like India and China. Whoops there goes half the world's population. Everybody move on in.
There is no way that we could deal with Iraq peacefully. Saddam would never turn over his WOMD and I'm certain he has them. Even without them he was still building weapons that violated the treaties so for the UN to keep its face before the world it would have to do somehting eventually. For 12 years it refused and finally the US realized its policy of "stay strong = stay safe" wouldn't stop terrorists and Iraq's most likely attack on the US would be through these terrorists, the US had to attack. That and the whole oil deal. In any case Saddam had 12 years and he wasted all the chances we gave him.
In response to the original topic I say...
If questions are the stupidest thing of all time. They show no logic so I refuse to answer them. We haven't lost the war so asking it is completely pointless. What if America was rendered powerless? What if the anti-americans shut up? Who knows but I'll tell you that it sure aint gonna happen anytime soon. Now as for France and the US saiving them I believe that thats another if question in the making. What if the US hadn't been there? Would France have been saved. This is more of a logical if question so I put it out to all of you to answer it.
Background checks won't always help. All it takes is some guy who keeps his insanity hidden long enough to get a liscense and theres nothing we can do. How are we to decide whether a pilot is going to commit terrorism. They don't always have to be linked to a terrorist group. In closing I would have to say that there is no sure way to protect our airplanes.
Soadclown...
This is the same damn shit I'm hearing from every anti-war protestor. So far in the war there hasn't beem that many casualties. Besides, compare this to any of the numbers of people that Saddam has killed. Are you saying Saddam is better than GW or are you just refusing to bring other factors into the equation. One of the things I seriously dislike is saying half the story.
War is bad but necessary.
What is the point of that post. Put it somewhere else... Then again I'm doing the same thing. Well I haven't been reviewing for too long but I always write up something.
Why are you all saying American dominates the world. If we did it would be a lot more obvious. If satellites and a bit of too much privacy makes America evil then it is. Why don't you go commit genocide with Saddam and yell at us?
We are mad at the French because they are being pussies. I don't personally hate them but they should stand up for what is "right". If your anti-war obviously your not going to agree. The want for more weapons inspectors is just dumb. Why the hell should we give him any more time. We've given plenty.
*kicks the anti-war protestors*
