Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Somehow I find the idea of satisfaction at the rise of a quasi-fascist power as supreme rather distasteful. China may be very shrewd, as well as efficient, when it comes to solid national policies, but those policies only benefit the state as its own entitity, and not the pride and well being of the individual people. Most times it is incredibly detrimental. Anyways, other than foreign policy, the nation is a shambles. It lacks cohesion, with seperate districts making all sorts of different trading policies with each other and foreign powers. Without the brute military command of the central committee, the country would fall apart.

All this discussion is rather moot. The canadians are bitter because we are the strong-willed superpower and they are the weak-willed northern syncophant. THey are bitter because Britain fought to keep us, while throwing them away freely. They are jealous no one wanted them. So cry for me Canada, cry and show us your pathetic weakness because mommy didn't want you.

While some mistakes will be made, terrorists aren't winning. Passengers are getting more alert, more pro-active. They aren't stupid cattle to be butchered anymore. Acts of terrorism will be harder and harder to commit with passengers paying attention to their surroundings. Granted, people are jumpy now, but it will get better, but we'll never stop being alert. The terrorists are losing. People are being pushed their politically correct views of not singaling anyone out or making a big deal when something looks suspicious.

I would normally say its rather impossible, but at this point, with the race-divided teams on survivor, I think the show might inadvertantly jump-start a racial civil war.

Hillary/Obama versus Rice/... somebody

At 8/25/06 02:06 AM, shi_huangdi wrote:

At 8/25/06 12:46 AM, General_Patton wrote: I believe that it is very likely that Patton would have responded with physical violence, such as a vigorous slap. Therfore, I resorted to the verbal equivilant.

aye i thought of that, but at the very least a better insult could have been used

I think "your face" is a rather subtle insult if used correctly.

At 8/25/06 01:16 AM, RedScorpion wrote: Now they're just teasing the people. Give them $215 each, over 230,000 people - let them have it for awhile, and then say 'Hey, we're going to be taking that money back now' - and then disappear into the night.

Let's poke our citizens some more! *pokes random people*

How about in broad daylight, but using those ninja smoke bombs? That would be pretty cool. Show up, yell, "no money for you" snatch the money away and BANG! ... gone.

At 8/25/06 12:58 AM, cOnScRiPtRED wrote: Good lord it was a joke the posting between me and patton were under my understanding jokes. Since anyways hes a navy serviceman in the USA.

Yeah! I'm not english! Its just fun to pretend to be!

At 8/25/06 12:40 AM, cOnScRiPtRED wrote: GOD DAMN! You snivelling twit! Canada bailed your fucking ass out of WW1 and 2 and you still call us leeches? We won our freedom in battle fighting a common enemy while your men drank tea and commanded us into suicidal assaults. Statute of Westminster ring a fucking bell? You cant be serious claiming even India ranks higher than us in the Commonwealth? Get your god damn story straight.

Poppycock! India was and remains the crown jewel of the Empire, as soon as we can get things going again with the empire on track and whatnot. Canada is part FRENCH, and the english have beaten the french many-a-time, and we can do it again.

At 8/25/06 12:40 AM, Peregrinus wrote:

At 8/25/06 12:35 AM, shi_huangdi wrote: the bastard child? as opposed to which other commonwealth countries?

Australia, the prison continent?

And Patton, stop smearing the honorable man who's name you stole.

I believe that it is very likely that Patton would have responded with physical violence, such as a vigorous slap. Therfore, I resorted to the verbal equivilant.

At 8/25/06 12:35 AM, shi_huangdi wrote:

At 8/25/06 12:31 AM, General_Patton wrote: Please, don't compare the bastard child of Canada to the great cultural achievement of the Commonwealth.

the bastard child? as opposed to which other commonwealth countries?

As opposed to your face!

Look, Bush is awesome.
A. He set the presidential world record by bench-pressing 300 pounds in Singapore.

B. That means he could beat you up.

C. Michael Moore is a fat shit.

There are better and more substantial arguments I could make. In fact, that last one isn't even a real argument. However, they are more fun to say.

At 8/25/06 12:27 AM, cOnScRiPtRED wrote: Uh same question an Englishman could have asked in the 60's. Why do you claim we imitate you? Hell weve been around longer than you. We both contribute to WESTERN (not American) culture, and we certainly dont need to be in the same label as you jerks.

Please, don't compare the bastard child of Canada to the great cultural achievement of the Commonwealth. Yours is a suckling leech on the side of a superpower and England was a global superpower in its own right. Granted, Canadians may contribute to Western civilization (captain kirk, for example), but usually that is through american media or institutions.

Since all this nonsense about American knowledge of geography is on the docket, let me state that I am an american and I can name and label correctly every country on earth... except the really tiny ones off of the Dominican Republic and Venezuela. But no one cares about them.

I think that should average out the rest's lack of knowledge.

At 8/23/06 10:54 PM, sdhonda wrote:

If you hate the US so much, and you think your country is so much better... WHY DO YOU IMMITATE OUR CULTURE???

Immitate? No, you see, like most of the world, your culture gets shoved down our throats.

No, it just makes you the most money, you take it up freely, and use it as an excuse to complain to us. You could reject it, but what the hell is Canadian culture anyway? Beer, candystripers, and hockey? As good as those things are, that's about it.

Essentially they are biting the hand that feeds them. WIthout America, Canada would be nothing. Hell, when they gave troops for work in Afghanistan, we had to give them a lift, because they didn't have the equipment to transport them.

At 8/23/06 09:43 PM, Peternormous wrote: Fuck world politics, I'm moving to New Zealand. I'm getting tired of being scared shitless by the fact that WWIII could start at any moment.

New Zealand is where they filmed Lord of the Rings. Lord of the Rings was written by Tolkein as an analogy for Catholicism. Catholicism is a religion of the infidel. You will not be safe!

The irish are good catholics, they have lots and lots of sex after getting married, and have lots and lots of kids.

At 8/23/06 03:20 PM, Mick_the_champion wrote: A Priest is closer to God if he keeps celibate, he's not giving in to the temptation of the flesh - a Priest shouldn't just be a Religious leader, he should be a figurehead in a community/parish and as such shouldn't be expected to take a wife as well as his parish.

Exactly. A priest can only have one family, the parish. He shouldn't have to choose between the attentions of his parish family of which he is a father, and his personal family.

At 8/23/06 03:02 PM, stafffighter wrote: What is served by dieing in a pointless war? Friends of mine have talked about entering the armed forces out of college, among other things in the name of public service. This is an ideal I can understand. I can see that there are causes and ideals worth fighting for and while not eager I would be willing to throw my life infront of one of them. But if none of those exist then what is it you're willing to die or kill for?
One friend said that his father enlisted for Vietnam just so others wouldn't have to. From what I've seen and read of Vietnam they took the other men as well.
Service to your country is a noble thing, as long as your country remembers what it is practicle and right to send forces for. It is fully understood that soilders do not pick the conflicts they are sent to but in times of war there is an indisbutable polorization. So while applauding the heroism of public service I ask again the question that I started this with. What is served by dieing in a pointless war?

I too am joining the service after college, like your friend. I actually plan to fight in the so-called pointless war. To answer your question without reference to the conflict, nothing is served by dying in a truly pointless war. However, now the argument is whether the current conflict is worthless. Clearly your mind is made up, and it is moot to argue, but perhaps your friend, like I do, sees differently.

If you'd pay attention to the headlines, or at least page 3 or 4, you'll find that the pentagon has recently de-classified documents that report on large gas-artillary being found in Iraq. Sure, its WWII era, but it will certainly fuck you up. Most of the documents haven't been declassified, but it is giving us a glimpse at what the search actually revealed.

I'm not homophobic, just like I am not handicapped-people-phobic. My understanding is that homosexuality is largely a genetic or physiological disorder, kinda like being born with both sexual parts or having a broken leg. I don't dislike homosexual people, its just when they try to pass off their disorder as natural and good that I get irritated. You don't have handicap pride parades or "ADD and proud of it" parades, because its something to be overcome, not to embrace.

At 8/23/06 01:15 AM, jeremiah_bullfrog wrote:

At 8/23/06 01:11 AM, shi_huangdi wrote:

At 8/23/06 12:32 AM, General_Patton wrote: I don't like hippies.

i've smoked pot and i think it should be legal but i still hate hippies.

one of your favorite bands is Sublime, Sublime is a California hippie band for sure now they arent stereotypes but they are hippies and to the other hippie bashing guy both of the guys in Tenacious D smoke pot

Tenacious D smokes pot? I've never been so disappointed. I thought they merely channeled demonic forces. Dammit.

At 8/23/06 01:00 AM, IAMTHEGANJA wrote: I hope everybody understands that this is a joke. Visit the link, its their for a reason. Along with mosquitoes that bite adulterres. Cmon.

What? I don't check the link. Are you kidding? Man...

Clearly, this is not so much a breach of our privacy as a burden for employees of Homeland Security. Do YOU want to have to look at ream after ream of disgustingly obese people... NAKED? No! So they have to do it for you, to make sure that johnny-42-waist-jihad doesn't spray you with his fat when he tries to blow up the plane.

At 8/23/06 12:53 AM, Proud_American wrote:

At 8/22/06 09:26 PM, Snubby wrote:

At 8/22/06 02:11 PM, Proud_American wrote: You are an idiot.

WOW WHAT A GREAT ARGUMENT! Hey, next time somebody presents evidence that shatters my case, I can just call them an idiot! Yay!

Wow! You're a great debater! You only come back with a counterarguement that has nothing to do with anything, and you only countered one part of my arguement! Yay!

Go back to General.

My question is how you managed to snag that name! I'd have taken that if I hadn't assumed it was long LONG taken.

At 8/23/06 12:40 AM, freakybeastie wrote:

At 8/23/06 12:24 AM, General_Patton wrote: No, everything isn't predestined. We still have to make the decisions. It wasn't "destined" to happen, we made a decision. Fate doesn't exist, we make our own path through history. Plus, you have alot more of that argument to deal with than just that.

You seem to be going 'round in circles. Obviously God has a plan, He knows the what we're going to do am I right? Decision or not, it's part of God's plan, so whats all this about making our own path. Sure we made decisions, but God meant for us to make those decisions.

That is where we disagree. I don't think God meant for us to make those decisions. I think we made those decisions.

So.,, at this point I don't know if your TRYING to play a charicatureof a conservative religious guy, because if you aren't and you are one, you're kinda embarassing us in general. Where in there did I say science is better than relgiion, or that science says I hate god. I used it as an analogy. Do you know what an analogy is? Because it is a useful litarary tool that some use to explain complicated things in simple stories. I don't even know what that last sentence is supposed to mean. Unlike you, Jesus was very eloquent and could utilize his spoken toungue. Of course, being God, he could do that. Outside of the fact that your statement is grammatically unintelligble and bizarre, but none of the partial-points you throw out have anything to do with what I am saying.:

I said you were selective in your beliefs, obviously because you don't really believe in anything you just pick and choose those that suit you. You also mentioned that science was right more times than religion on the case of morality. our religion is a moral compass, how is science involved?
I am embarassing YOU?
wrong way around.

No, you see, take another look. This is where we get the idea of "situational awareness". I said that modern physics is more accurate than newtonian physics. Just as, get this, we are making an analogy, Catholicism is more accurate than protestantism. One is definitely right, like Catholicism, the other not so right. See? That was simple enough. I could make another analogy, that a gyroscopic compass is more accurate for navigation than a magnetic one. There, that has nothing to do with science, but the same job is done. Anyway, no where in this discussion have I "picked and chosen" amongst my religious beliefs. It seems as though you've used this as a random barb against my legitimacy as a source. We've been discussing, at this point, basically predestination versus free will and whether I am a hypocrite or not. There is not picking and choosing being done. The only picking and choosing is your choosing easy arguments and totally ignoring the rest of what I am saying.

I don't like hippies. I don't like their smelly unwashed clothes, or their stupid placards. They run around calling everyone "man" and telling me to "chill out". Well, they won't be so chill when I burn down all their pot fields and throw them in ass-pound-prison. So there!

At 8/23/06 12:25 AM, shi_huangdi wrote:

At 8/23/06 12:15 AM, General_Patton wrote: You don't think the fine folks at Orkin won't notice the Weed forest when you call them to get rid of America's rightious army of narcotic-killing insects? Huzzah!

whether or not these grasshoppers would be able to detect the plants inside a building would be interesting to know, but i doubt they would.

If they can now control a cockroach with a computer chip in their brain, we can make bionic-enchanced urban-capable grasshoppers.

At 8/23/06 12:09 AM, freakybeastie wrote:

At 8/22/06 11:57 PM, General_Patton wrote: God's omniscience and our free will are exclusive. Just because God has a plan, and knows exactly what we are going to do, does not mean we don't make those decisions of our own free will. The conduit between God and us is not a chain. God has given us the gifts necessary to make the decisions he wishes us to. A burning bush isn't following us around giving us directions. God is not a TomTom GPS device. We have to work toward our development, it isn't handed to us on a silver platter. Its not a matter of "listening hard enough" it involves hard work, dedication, and a personal inisight. We are not spiritual invalids like the animals. We have been given self direction so that we may use it or abuse it.

So, you're saying that God has a plan, he knows whats going to happen and what decisions we are going to make and everything is predestined. I agreed with you there.

No, everything isn't predestined. We still have to make the decisions. It wasn't "destined" to happen, we made a decision. Fate doesn't exist, we make our own path through history. Plus, you have alot more of that argument to deal with than just that.

Flip-flopper? I sense you've detected my conservativism and tried to use it again me. Anyway, religion is a set of beliefs. Some are more correct than others. As flawed beings, we cannot all be absolute servants of God, since we were incapable of doing it from the very beginning. Anyway, religion is not evil, but it can be made evil. And, to be more specific, in so doing is no longer a religion. As to the not all being right, I might use an example from science. I, as a Catholic, obviously believe Catholicism is the closest thing you can get to the truth. Let us consider this modern physics. However, on a large scale, pure newtonian physics also works. Let us consider this protestantism. While both might work on a large number of things, and have the same root (an explanation of the same phenomenon, which we would consider in this case morality), modern physics is far more accurate.:

So... Science is right and you hate God. You don't debate the bible, picking and choosing, if you don't have confidence to back your beliefs up, you're a Jesus hater.

So.,, at this point I don't know if your TRYING to play a charicatureof a conservative religious guy, because if you aren't and you are one, you're kinda embarassing us in general. Where in there did I say science is better than relgiion, or that science says I hate god. I used it as an analogy. Do you know what an analogy is? Because it is a useful litarary tool that some use to explain complicated things in simple stories. I don't even know what that last sentence is supposed to mean. Unlike you, Jesus was very eloquent and could utilize his spoken toungue. Of course, being God, he could do that. Outside of the fact that your statement is grammatically unintelligble and bizarre, but none of the partial-points you throw out have anything to do with what I am saying.