3,094 Forum Posts by "Empanado"
At 2/5/04 09:45 PM, Ellov wrote: We can have them because all our Allies allow us to have them because they trust us.
"Trust" is a very subjetive term, y'know. That's no guarantee at all. As far as i know, any leader from the U.S., at any moment, could have a nerve crisis or mental disorder suddenly, and God knows what the hell is going to happen with the world if they have the time to give any orders. Probably something very similar of what happens on that Dr. Strangelove movie would happen.
:We are going after Korea because no one trusts them.
Are there any facts that they're going after North Korea? I don't quite think so. Y'see, ALTHOUGH on Irak the troops kicked Saddam's ass and liberated the iraqi people (not that they're much better at the moment anyway) and all that, that WASN'T the reason of why Bush started the war. That's the real point. He wanted oil, for God's sake, everyone knows it. There's no oil (or any important natural resource either) In N. Korea as far as i know. The best that Bush could get from there would be some nice and tasty rice plantations. Do you like rice?
Oh well, if he DOES attack N.Korea, i will admit that i was wrong. But the chances of that happening are... y'know, about...zero.
At 2/4/04 08:41 PM, bombkangaroo wrote: well he did say all, although i havent seen any reports of recent incidents of israeli terrorist actions.
what many forget is that the occupation of territories siezed during the six day war is being used as an excuse for a genocidal war of hatred against the israelis. even if the occupied territories are returned there will still be terrorism, just as there was before 1967. the six day war was started because (some of) the arab nations took exceptions to jews being alive.
Talking about occupation and seize, do you actually KNOW how the modern Israel was founded? That's a "glass roof house" as we say here, y'know.
there will never be peace in the middle east until the terrorists are crushed completely.
That depends on what do you consider terrorism. Of course, palestinians aren't happy goody-two-shoes guys, but that doesn't mean that they're all going to attach a bomb to their bodies and blow up. Most of the suicide bombers are fanatical, radical extremists. Just because you have a big tank when you kill innocent people dosn't stop you from being a terrorist, y'know. (that doesn't mean that ALL israeli soldiers kill innocent people or are terrorists, tho). All i know, is that i wouldn't like to live there.
At 2/3/04 08:54 AM, Veggiemeal wrote: I read this somewhere in a small newspaper. It said he was nominated by a member of the Norwegian parliament, because he got rid of Saddam Hussein with his war in Iraq.
I sincerely hope this is a cruel joke. Can anybody confirm this?
It's true, pal. But don't worry, i don't think he wins. Besides, it's not even "that" hard to postulate for that prize. There are hundreds of nominates as far as i know.
In fact, if he wins, i will repeteadly beat myself with an iron bar while singing a sad song in a pit of acid with a pineapple on each knee and performing a mambo dance. Word.
At 2/3/04 04:41 AM, cockjockey wrote: Perhaps God is anti-American. Probably didn't appreciate the use of his name without permission on dollar bills.
Or maybe his true Name is Bob, and we will never know it...
Actually i would choose Bush rather than Hitler ruling the world any time, fo the simple reason that Bush is funny. Hitler's not, he just has cheesy gestures. And there wouldn't be much difference between one or another government anyway, so i'd choose the funny geek.
Who the hell is Peter Andre?
Excuse my ignorance, but me knows not.
I just can't understand the way you think. Isn't globalization meant to STOP that, among other things? So you go for the military supremacy of the U.S. rather than the welfare of it's population. No offence, but that's very similar of what the russians did on the Cold War.
At 1/28/04 06:04 PM, stonedpimp69 wrote: Empanado, would you be preaching the same thing, if it was your country(btw what is it? Brazil? Columibia? just a question I have) sending *killer toys* to space? That would be quite a military edge heh? And wrong timing? There can NEVER be wrong timing for getting scientific data of THAT caliber....
I'm from Chile (what the hell is Columibia?). And yes, i would be certainly preaching the same thing. If you think that being patriotic means to agree with everything that your government does, well, you're wrong. And don't you think that there could be a LOT of other destinations for the money that's going into that spacial stuff, huh? Maybe i would support it if it were meant only for scientifical research purposes, but it's not. They're also going to put a whole military base who knows where, for god's sake.
Looks like whe just don't think the same way. I wouldn't feel better knowing that my country has the heaviest, biggest and most expensive military in the whole world. But it looks like you do.
At 1/27/04 11:13 PM, stonedpimp69 wrote: empanado, you see
Huh?
"spending billions of dollars to send toys to mars".
Scientifically were getting great data, and also. Face it. Space WILL be used for war. Just imagine if america really gets a base on the moon and/or mars.
I can imagine that. And i don't think it would be nice.
:No more satellites for you eh?? and imagine a chemical warhead blowing in the atmosphere over say Syria? that would fuck them up pretty bad wouldn't it?
I don't want Syria to fuck up pretty bad. And i kinda like our satellite. What's the pro in that, then? I mean, what if it blows somewhere else? Would the world be happier?
:(1) I'm against EVER using WMD.
Then tell me why the hell did you just said all that?
:2)trust me it'll blow
reasons: gravity on moon=very little. With timing, you can launch a missile to enter earths atmosphere at high speeds. At that speed incredible heat will come and blow the warhead.) Now imagine an EMP rocket blowing above SYria? Or a HUGE fragmentation missile?(imagine the frag radius.
Ohhh they can blow half the world up with that thing! Now i really feel safer.
Now on the flip side. We get invaluable scientific data in one package. So what reason do you have to NOT launch thos *cough* *toys*?
I'm not saying anything like, "Hey, science is the devil, and God doesn't want us to discover anything. Let's be monkeys!". What i'm talking about is that i don't think this is the best time to do it. I think that your country has other priorities. Of course there would be scientifical discoverings, but why the hell should the war go to the space? Now, besides living with fear of a nuke from another country exploding on us, we can ALSO have fear of a nuke from another ATMOSPHERE exploding on us. Hooray.
I'll change "send toys to Mars" for "send killer toys to Mars", then.
At 1/24/04 09:27 PM, red_skunk wrote: Well Empanado, I would hope you would care a little bit more, because this effects who we'll invade next, or which treaty we'll withdraw from next, or the amount we fuel a new arms race by building a missile defense program (Russia has stated that any new missile defence program from the US would cause them to double, triple, increase their military substationally. Same thing from China). Or, on the flip side, how much money we'll commit to the un, to humanitarian needs, to cheap aids drugs, etc etc.
Whoops! I realized yet again that i'm far away from passing my English tests this year. You see, i was trying to say something like "You americans that can vote, check this out and pay attention to it! I can't vote so there isn't too much i can add to this cause."
But it was expressed mo'like "Bleh, i'm not american so i don't care at all about this bullshit"
My bad.
At 1/24/04 08:32 AM, JamsterBoyo wrote: Please check this out...
You've GOT to be kiddin' me.
At 1/24/04 02:17 AM, LadyGrace wrote:
:(things)
Interesting. I would actually care about it if i were an american.
At 1/24/04 03:20 AM, bumcheekcity wrote: Yeah, but we're talking about actual fighting, with guns.
Y'know, we had a funny president at the time the WWII was almost over, and he happened to declare war on Japan. The point is, he declared war on Japan 1 day after the U.S. dropped the atomic bomb. So, technically Chile became involved directly on the WWII, with the exception that... it didn't.
Another irrelevant point brought to you by Empanado.
At 1/22/04 02:39 PM, JamsterBoyo wrote: WTF the only continent not affected by World War 2 was South America.
Actually we DID get affected and a lot, but mainly on economic ways. For example, Chile, after the WWI, started to get a lot of money from exporting a mineral fertilizer (i don't know the English word for it), and, at those times, its economy was mainly sustained by the exports of that product. However, somewhere in the Middle of the WWII, Germany developed a syntetical, cheaper version of the same product, causing the chilean economy to almost collapse.
(Actually, this doesn't matter for shit into this topic, but i just felt like talking about boring stuff)
At 1/22/04 02:03 PM, calculon000 wrote:
(things)
I guess you're right, i didn't inform myself good enough, my bad.
At 1/22/04 05:03 PM, swallowing_shit wrote: I, for one, will proceed to kiss your arse for such a well-structured letter.
No offence, but wouldn't that result inmediately on the act described in your nickname?
j/k
Well, it is a well-structured letter, in fact. One or two flaws, but nothing to really care about. But i'm not going to kiss anybody's arse. Yuck.
Looks like the core itself of this conversation is the human nature rather than the theories of communism.
At 1/22/04 02:10 AM, TuRbanNatoR wrote: And im planning on joining the military and fighting for my freedom my opion and my rights and MY COUNTRY
Please, do it. And fight always on the first front line.
And watch your mouth when you talk about my country. At least we have fair elections, a president with decent mental capabilities, more educational options, less corruption (YES, less corruption), economy growing at faster rates, better diplomatical relationships (except with Bolivia and some other countries), 13-year-old boys with better grammatical abilities than you, less racism and/or xenophobia, less guns, less violent death rates, and hey, less terrorist attacks. And all that after a 17 years long dictatorship that your lovely country installed. We're more than just a shitty country. And i don't plan to come to YOUR country ever, ever, ever, thank you.
BTW, have you ever tought about the tv can, well, LIE?
At 1/22/04 01:54 AM, TuRbanNatoR wrote: war well be around till humans are around
war is more apart of human life than anything else
The soilders where unpupared for that attack on them so first of all more soilders wouldnt have died if we would of stayed cuase we wouldnt have stayed to feed them we would of stayed there to kick there asses
you`ll never do nothing with your life you`ll sit here and talk on fourms all day and think how smart you are and saying how stupid americans are
you`ll sit on your fat ass saying how you feel sorry for those thrid world people but your going to sit there on your ass your not going to do nothing your going to die in that chair with out donig nothing in your life
you have no idea what reality is
I do, i plan to study political sciences, and to actually do something for my country. I look forward to know what will YOU do in your life besides attacking someone personally when you don't know what else to say. And for your information once again, i feel sorry for "those third world people" because my uncle is one of them. Of the ones who died, of course. If you mean plain third world people, by definition i am, my whole family is, and all my friends are from the third world. You, instead, are from the powerful United States and i haven't seen anything smart from you since you started posting. Is every kid on your country like you? That makes me wonder about the future of the world.
Thanks. And Turbannator, maybe you could care about READING something of what's written?
At 1/22/04 01:36 AM, TuRbanNatoR wrote: No i didnt care about them i care about americans and americans only why should i care about them???????they didnt care about americans on 9/11 did they?
Strangely that doesn't surprise me. Oh well. Then, do you care about your country's internal affairs or not? (supposing that you know what an internal affair is, of course)
Now put everything that you've learnt so far on these words:
No ties between Hussein and 9/11
And For that other guy that was saying clinton pulled out are troops in aferica becuase the people were going nuts by seeing dead bodies being dragged thru the street
OKIE FIRST OF ALL YOU DONT PULL THE TROOPS OUT MITE AS WELL BEND OVER AND LET THEM FUCK YOU IN THE ASS ALL YOUR DOING IS SHOWING THEM THAT THEY BEAT US WHAT WE SHOULD OF DONE IS STAY ARE AND GET REVANGE
That means you'd want your soldiers to die, then? Even for no other reason than "not getting bend over and let them fuck you in the ass"? The way you talk convinces me even more than most americans are arrogant and vengeful.
but theres to many pussies in this country that wouldnt fight for there fucking lives that rather get raped to death insted of fight back
its sad
Fight back for what?? The basics of military tell that when the objective isn't worth the men loss the obvious act is to retreat. They were suplying food. How many men did they lost?
Again, can you think in anything besides war and all that shit?
At 1/22/04 12:18 AM, TuRbanNatoR wrote: Empanado
you are indeed a perfect example of a totall idiot
democrates ruin america there all about money
clinton pulled are troops outta aferica after the black hawk inceddent happened witch gave al quida the chance to build
Al Qaeda works in many other african (and also asian) countries with important Muslim presence. Nothing new on that.
what did the war in iraq do for the states?what the fuck you think it did it made it alot safer if you knew your shit you`d know that if we had never went to iraq the terroist wouldnt have been busy trying to take us out in there own place insted they`d be here car bombing are country
First: Get some punctuation. I can barely understand what you're saying. Oh well it must be your EDUCATION, isn't it? Second: I'm still waiting for you to give any proof that Irak is involved with the 9/11 attacks. Just because your government "tied" them, it doesn't mean they are. In fact, your OWN government is now saying that most surely there wasn't any Hussein/ Al Qaeda ties.
And third: No, they wouldn't be car bombing you. There's more terrorists than what you think, and they're not all on the Middle East. If they wanted to car-bomb something in the U.S., they'd already done it.
you know what we need a terroist to set off a nukeular bomb and destory this world we need the human race to be killed off idiots roam this world idiots that block every thing out that they dont wana know okie you know what lets have a democrate elected and lets pull the troops out of iraq and let the terroist have that country and lets let them get on are school bus`s are blow themselfs up and murder are children HEY U KNOW WHAT THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT PEOPLE WELL BURN TO DEATH AND GET BLOWIN AWAY EVERY DAY BUT THE ECONMY WELL BE UP!
Ok, if you can't make a half-decent blabbing then just don't say anything at all. And it's not just about money, it's about education and healthcare, enviromental affairs and a lot of other things. For example, about your daddy's job. And you still don't say anything about internal affairs of your country. I'm really starting to think that you don't know a shit about anything but "Saddam is bad. It's good that we kill Saddam and teh terroists". Also, Clinton did relatively good with the economics and i didn't hear about thousands of innocent people burning to death and get blown away everyday, (besides poor people of the 3rd world that you certainly don't care about) Did you?
Go learn something before you ever post anything here again, would you?
Ok, i've decide to post on this one.
First of all, it's good to see that this topic has been debated half-decently, haven't seen any kids throwing shit at communism just because their daddys told them once that it was bad and evil. I was pretty sure i was going to see more than one of those here.
Well, second, in my opinion, communism is not bad or good, it's something that we're not ready for yet. You'll see, in order to make a communist society to work as its top capacity, global community must first evolve both on economic and psychological ways. About economics, the ideal would be to have a powerful economy and a rich-poor breach as small as possible. A capitalist society would achieve a strong economy faster, but would diminish the rich-poor breach very slowly, it could even enlarge it. A socialist society would achieve a strong economy slower, but it would be great at diminishing rich-poor breach. In conclusion to that, a socialist society would be the best way of preparing the global community to communism, altough it wouldn't be as fast as a capitalist one to achieve economical development. (A capitalist, fully developed economy would have a fairly big rich-poor breach, so all in all it wouldn't be much faster than a socialist society to achieve the ideal state in order to use communism) In theory, communism should work full scaled when used on a fully developed economy like this. Now, on the psychological, aspect, it would take generations of intensive teaching values to children at school, values that would encourage them to do the best for their country, to support teamwork, to reduce greed, to promote the satisfaction of a job well done, etc. Once ready to introduce communism as a way of government, tough, maybe the society would want to avoid risks and keep the same socialist style of goverment that had lead them where they are. I still haven't decided this point myself clearly.
Oh well, there you go. Altough, i still think that Cuba without the current economical embargo would result in something very interesting.
At 1/21/04 08:27 PM, TuRbanNatoR wrote:
Ok, so there's been no terrorist attacks since 9-11, ok, but tell me, how many terrorist attacks took place BEFORE that? Not too many did they? Besides, there's the attack to the UN's hqs in Irak and also the attack to the Red Cross, the first one since it was founded i think. And, remember that the twin towers almost got blewed up around the '93, but that time at least they prevented it from happening. So the economy can't work when there's some terrorism around? Well then that means countries like Colombia have done much better than you, they've had terrorism for about 40 years and their deficit is not nearly as big as the one Bush as developed.
So, you don't honour us all with responding to this? Oh, sorry, maybe you're too superior to get yourself into anything related to a poor country of the 3rd world or anything bad that Bush has done.
Omaha's sacrifice, as you say, was for a reason. There's no reason on Irak, besides taking Saddam out (and that's the only good thing that will come out of this). There's nothing that the US can actually benefit from the war on Irak.
THE TERROIST ARE FIGHTING ON THERE LAND NOT OURS!Yes there was a reason to attack iraq free people under a evil dictator ship and not only that like iv said 100000000000000 times
Makes you wonder why the US government put him there in first place. For GOD's sake, learn how to spell "terrorist" at once. And anyways, why is this war useful to the States? Do you have any opinion at all about the economic crisis that's messing your country up? It didn't just happen because of the 9/11 did you know?
And yes ther was idiot..........Stop watching CNN(Coumminst News Network)Theres proven facts he has ties to Al quida and that he was involed with 9/11 he hates america and he would of done any thing to kill as many americans as he could we all know he suported terroist
You know that there's NO LINK AT ALL between the 9/11 attacks and Saddam Hussein, right? It strikes me as a little odd that you can only care about that and you don't seem to care about the internal affairs in your country (unemployment, crisis--i mean "recession", laws that fuck up the enviroment and that enlarge the rich-poor breach, spending billions of dollars to send toys to Mars, bad education plans, etc. etc., besides of the fact that he shouldn't even be on the White House 'cause he didn't win the elections.)
FOR YOUR INFORMATION, i'm socialist democratic and proud of it. And i've only seen CNN once or twice in my life, because i'd rather choose local (chilean) media, as it's a little more unbiased.
There's NO PROOF of that "ties". If there is, show some proof. Go watch americaforsale.org to get more useful info.
I'm going to teach you something: Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda don't just make terrorist attacks "because they are bad" as you may think, or because they're drug smugglers, or because they're assholes, no. They make terrorist attacks because they're religious fanatics. Fanatics like them would never accept support from anyone that didn't seem as a proper Muslim to them. Osama acussed Saddam of being a bad Muslim several times. Even if Hussein was willing to help them, Al Qaeda wouldn't accept his support. Besides, once again you only talk about the Irak issue, as if you didn't know even a shit of what's going on in your country.
At 1/21/04 04:18 PM, The_Mailman wrote: The President, as his cabinet, are violently opposed to men with facial hair, especially beards. It just isn't good political practice to be unshaven. o.O
God how didn't i notice that?! The war on terror is just a cover-up, guys, this is really a war on facial hair!! (Think about it... Osama, Saddam, now Castro... you KNOW it can't be coincidence) That would explain why the U.S don't want to attack north Korea, wouldn't it? The conspiracy has been revealed! Next victims of the war on facial hair:
- Jose Maria Aznar, Spain: That black moustache must be wiped off the planet!
- Carlos Mesa, Bolivia: We don't care if you want a seapass, you have facial hair! DIE!
- "Lula" Da Silva, Brazil: You will not send any more bananas, you hairy bitch!
And more coming!!!
At 1/21/04 11:52 AM, TuRbanNatoR wrote: thats stupid he must not know what a world war is then
At least you're right on that one, war on terrorism isn't a world war.
WOLRD WAR= When the world is at war
No, actually none of the world wars got the WORLD at war.
Cold War was between us and russia
And a lot of other countries caught in the middle of it.
War aginst Terroism us and britian aginst Terroist
Not sure what's "terroism" or "terroists". I must check my english translator i guess.
saddam/osama all them
In fact, only Osama. There's no link at all between Saddam and Osama, except by the fact that they're both assholes. But being an asshole isn't enough reason to make a link between them, is it?
WWI WWII
was when every one was fighting not just 2 countrys
No, not every one was at war. On WWI, it was mainly just Europe, the U.S., and some other nations. It was also a stupid war that had no apparent reason. WWII got some more countries on it, but still not even close to "every one". That seems as the only war that had a good purpose since 1900.
and world wars dont last 3 weeks like when we took iraq
Yeh, it lasts three weeks when the world's heaviest militar superpower rushes against an "army" whose weaponry consists basically of a WWII (or so) rifle and an old helmet for each soldier. Makes you wonder how is it that there's still american soldiers dying on a daily basis, y'know.
At 1/21/04 12:08 PM, JamsterBoyo wrote: Sorry but by your logic I could say. Since I started wearing my new trainers there hasn't been any terrorist attacks. Which is true therefore my trainers must be affecting terrorists.
And your trainers haven't caused any crisis by doing so! George should get one of those. Jamster's trainers for president(s)!
At 1/21/04 12:02 PM, TuRbanNatoR wrote: People all day sit around me at school at work on t.v on internet telling me how much of a fuking idiot bush is
O yea he is a fucking idiot but there hasnt been no terroist attacks since he took action for 9/11 how the fuk are you going to get the econmy up when theres people willing to drive a car into a building and blow it up????are willing to drive airplanes into buildigs????i dont wana be around crowds no more i dont even like leaveing my house cuase i wonder today when i get to school is a car going to be crashing thru the door of the school blowing half the building up????what he is doing now is makeing them fight on there land yes american soilders are dieing but its there job to do what ever it takes to protect are country
Ok, so there's been no terrorist attacks since 9-11, ok, but tell me, how many terrorist attacks took place BEFORE that? Not too many did they? Besides, there's the attack to the UN's hqs in Irak and also the attack to the Red Cross, the first one since it was founded i think. And, remember that the twin towers almost got blewed up around the '93, but that time at least they prevented it from happening. So the economy can't work when there's some terrorism around? Well then that means countries like Colombia have done much better than you, they've had terrorism for about 40 years and their deficit is not nearly as big as the one Bush as developed.
On omaha beach the soilders knew there chance`s of liveing where very small but they took the sacarfice of dieing for there country they lasted maybe 5 seconds beforing geting blowin away by a mg42 but they did it for are freedom and soilders complaing now have no idea how bad it can be!
Omaha's sacrifice, as you say, was for a reason. There's no reason on Irak, besides taking Saddam out (and that's the only good thing that will come out of this). There's nothing that the US can actually benefit from the war on Irak.
my point is pres.bush knows what he is doing and he is doing a good job at keeping america safe when the war in iraq was happeing i knew id be safer than with out it happening
KEEP THEM ON THERE LAND NOT OURS!
You know that there's NO LINK AT ALL between the 9/11 attacks and Saddam Hussein, right? It strikes me as a little odd that you can only care about that and you don't seem to care about the internal affairs in your country (unemployment, crisis--i mean "recession", laws that fuck up the enviroment and that enlarge the rich-poor breach, spending billions of dollars to send toys to Mars, bad education plans, etc. etc., besides of the fact that he shouldn't even be on the White House 'cause he didn't win the elections.)
Well they're all hot if you ask me :)
Anyways, i think i get your point. But i don't have a very good eye when it comes to determining ethnicity, so i can't even differ a black woman from a light-skinned black woman or mulatto. All i know is that the presence of both of them in my country is basically 0.
:"why would they enlist yourself in the army if you're a coward in first place?"
I meant, why would YOU enlist yourself in the blah blah blah.
