728 Forum Posts by "implodinggoat"
At 1/17/03 08:24 PM, Ted_Easton wrote: They do it for their own good, but at a huge cost for others and with no consideration to them.
The US only gave back control of the Panama canal four years ago!
They've been controlling it until then!
They have been making huge profits through war-mongering in many different ways. Either taking something and fixing it, or fixing it and giving it back, or many other things.
There's nothing wrong with doing something in your own interest, but you should do something for common good, and consider others.
So you are saying that the U.S. didn't do good in building the Panama canal? We built the thing with our own workers, we payed for its construction, and we paid the Panamanias ten million dollars in turn of the century dollars to build there. Once the canal was built the Panamanian people had a source of income where as they had no draw to their country before hand. In addition the benefit to international commerce was substantial.
At 1/17/03 09:19 PM, swayside wrote: i want to know just how many conservatives/republicans there are in this forum.
i would like to know you're opinions on some contraversies like abortion, affermative action, marajawana leagalisation, governmental policy, and other things. even people of the same party differ sometimes.
this topic is not for you left-wingers, liberals, and democrats to cause trouble in, please be civil and leave this topic alone.
I vote Republican and I am generally considered a conservative. Although I disagree with a number of conservative stances.
I am a Republican mainly due to my great dislike of the Democratic party. I feel their attempts at social engineering inevitably lead to a larger more powerful and more controlling government and thus to a populous unable to live or think on their own.
Do you think that people should implicitly trust their government or should they attempt to limit their government's power over them whenever possible?
At 1/16/03 04:55 PM, Slizor wrote:
Also, there wouldn't be a systematic wiping out of most other races. It kinda doesn't go with the idea of equality.
Perhaps not your idea of equality...however a warped individual such as Hitler didn't consider other races and ethnic groups as human beigns. A socialist system could institute genocide just as easily as a fascist one.
At 1/16/03 07:54 AM, Slizor wrote:Yeah but he was also the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' party (NSDAP)(the official name of the Nazi party), dumbass.What you say, and what you do are two different things.
Hitler's economic policies were actually very similar to those of FDR. The main diffrences were that while FDR employed citizens by having them work on public works Hitler had the German people construct a war machine.
At 1/15/03 11:23 AM, Bizud wrote: And Hitler was decidedly anti-communist.
Yeah but he was also the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' party (NSDAP)(the official name of the Nazi party), dumbass.
At 1/14/03 02:12 PM, patton55 wrote: You are giving a lot of people credit implodingoat. i figured the total number of idiots on this Earth is about 99%. though i am not surprised there are some people who do not know the size of Canada but it is sad nonetheless
Yeah I was feeling generous. 99% is probably more accurate.
At 1/14/03 07:25 AM, Ted_Easton wrote: I'm not referring to the distance from Toronto to Montreal, but the fact that they didn't know Ontario was a province.
Specific knowledge is OK not to know, but when you can't even use common sense...
When you think we live in igloos and hunt seal meat, than you're a little bit stupid.
And I;m not bigoted. All I said was I loved the Show Talking to Americans.
What is bigoted about me?
I was refering to L337Clock's comments about southerners. By and large we aren't the smartest people on the planet, but we aren't stupider than Californians.
At 1/13/03 10:19 PM, Nevah73 wrote: I was gonna respond to calmius in saying that "excessive" masturbation has made me far less irritable than lack of it...
But then I realized:
This is calmius I'm talking to.
Doesn't he see that masturbation is the cure to Americas weight problem?
Ever since I went on a strict regiment of at least thirty masturbation sessions a day the wieght has been just falling of and I'm in the best shape of my life. Not to mention that I now have the forearm strengh of a gorilla on PCP.
At 1/13/03 02:42 AM, L337Clock wrote: Where in America was this friend from? I'd say his ignorance is acceptable if he's from the west coast (as there are no large Canadian cities near the west coast except Vancouver) and most people on the west coast are pretty stupid. Same goes for the midwest (not the stupid part, the not-many-big-cities part) unless you count Saskatoon. This goes double for the south. If this friend is from the east coast or great lakes region, however, then he is probably not that bright, because people living near the cities should know how far away they are.
I am from the south and I don't appreciate your bigotry. His friend is obviously retaurded if he doesn't realize that Canada is larger than the U.S..
About 90% of the people on this planet are complete idiots. In the U.S. I'd say its about 75% that sounds pretty good on a global scale but when compared to other developed nations I doubt its very good.
I ask you non U.S. citizens out there are there as many idiots in your country's as there are in mine?
At 1/13/03 09:42 AM, Slizor wrote:(Not that I agree with your completely unqualified statement.) So...? What if greed is inherent...what do the companies do?And why is that?because greed is inherent
They exploit people if they are left totally unsupervised. However that is hardly a just cause for putting your life into the hands of a socialist government. Thats been tried and has had rather unfortunate results...such as in Germany circa 1935.
At 1/12/03 04:24 PM, Dillandau wrote: No, I would definately not die for this country. As long as we have a president who can pronounce less words correctly than his IQ, I would definately not defend the country which he represents, especially in a war that serves no other putpose than to protect our supply of oil. If some day we are lucky enough to get a president that can make intelligent decisions about things and one that worries about the issues in this country that actually need solving, THEN I just might give a rats ass about this country. But until then, I'm stuck here worrying about the day when we're all inevitably screwed over because of some stupid decisions on the president's behalf.
You place entirely too much importance on who the president is. You shouldn't base your support of your country on something as transient as who the president is at the time.
In addition I'm not sure that you realize how fucking important oil is.
At 1/12/03 04:50 PM, Slizor wrote:The United States is as Democratic as is possible for a coutry of its size Slizor. I can't see how the fuck you can make a claim that the United States isn't democratic.Hahaha. Okay then, what about these points
1) It is an unrepetant two-party system, historically and by design
The founders didn't intend to have political parties at all thus there is no mention of them in the consitution. Political parties evolved because there are to many people in the U.S. too have a canidate present himself as an individual. The two party system evolved because political partoes combined to make themselves more powerful until there were but two.
2) It has the electoral college
That is a minor point....its a relic of the past any way
3) It is an elective dictatorship
I have no idea what the fuck you are trying to say here.
4) It is dominated by the rich
That is your opinion and what the fuck does that have to do with it not being democratic anyway?
At 1/12/03 04:35 PM, Slizor wrote:I do like laissez faire economics but a totally unsupervised economic system will lead to corporate exploitation.And why is that?
because greed is inherent
At 1/12/03 03:06 PM, Newgrundling wrote: You are epitomizing vice, ignorance, and stupidity; I hope intentionally and sarcasticly so.
That was my intention.
If I didn't have anyone to hate I would have a lot of pent up agression.If true you need to work on anger management.
Yeah, I've been in one of those anger management groups ever since I burned down that orphanage...damn orphans that'll teach them to make faces at me.
At 1/12/03 02:55 PM, Newgrundling wrote: "the Biggest asshole on Newgrounds": people who post threads eliciting unnecessary hate on NG.
What you don't like hate?.....Its good stuff especially totally arbitrary hatred like the kind you might have for someone on the internet who you've never even met.
If I didn't have anyone to hate I would have a lot of pent up agression.
At 12/29/02 04:47 PM, DracoShadowfire wrote: who the fuck revived this gay topic? fucking fags
Hey chode master, its not a gay topic.... although I don't know why the fuck anyone revived it, I started the damn thing like a year ago.
At 1/12/03 07:55 AM, Slizor wrote: So you think it is the duty of a government to stop sweatshops? You think that there should be restrictions on business?
I do like laissez faire economics but a totally unsupervised economic system will lead to corporate exploitation.
At 1/12/03 08:31 AM, Slizor wrote:You wouldn't die for Democracy?He said he would not die to "protect democracy", not die for the democratic idea(although he probably wouldn't.) The idea that America(and pretty much anywhere) can be called a democracy is laughable. It is not democratic in its systems and its reality.
The United States is as Democratic as is possible for a coutry of its size Slizor. I can't see how the fuck you can make a claim that the United States isn't democratic.
At 1/11/03 10:35 PM, Scaletail wrote: Nobody stuck a gun to anyone's head the first time they smoked a cigarette. Tobacco has existed for hundreds of years, and so has smoker's cough. We didn't need a goddamn study to show the two were connected. Yet people still actually sue the companies for getting cancer, ect. Come on, if you didn't know smoking is bad for you when you started, then you are a fucking MORON and DESERVE cancer. Period. I don't care if it was 1999 or 1830, they still knew back then it wasn't exactly great for ya, even if they didn't know about cancer.
Damn Straight...you know what all those smoking related cancer deaths every year are? Thats natural selection in action.
This is a totally uncreative topic but it does make for a good source of argument.....my nomination is obvious.
Lyndon B. Johnson.....that damned fascist...or maybe John Adams and his alien and sedition acts.
At 1/11/03 09:56 PM, Nevah73 wrote: I would not die to expand America's borders.
I would not die to protect its president.
I would not die to "protect democracy".
I would not die to eliminate a regime half a world away.
I would not die to counter terrorism.
But I would die for the American people, because on the whole, we mean well, even though we tend to be rather ignorant of anything outside of our borders.
You wouldn't die for Democracy? I'd die for that before I'd die for the American people. Read 1984 there are fates worse than death.....
At 1/11/03 06:59 PM, Slizor wrote:
Most nations have based their economy on sweatshops at one stage or another.
You have a very warped view of history
They exist everywhere but they are prevelent only in nations with corrupt governements.Are you saying that the definition of a corrupt government is one that lets Corporations have sweatshops in their country?
No. If I say that all Jehova's Witnesses are dumbasses it does not neccesarily follow that all dumbasses are Jehova's Witnesses. If a government allows legal sweatshops it is corrupt, but that is not the only way that a government can be corrupt.
Never mind...the bitch's profile has been deleted and the real author has gotten his credit.
Hes put out a second one....I suggest everyone go and blam the fuck out of it. I gave the damn thing a four before I found out it was stolen.
Man I'm amazed it didn't get caught earlier....that little bitch needs to have his profile deleted.
At 1/9/03 10:02 PM, Red_XXV wrote:At 1/9/03 09:26 PM, Scaletail wrote: I think you're failing to realize that Israel has an army AND intelligence that both rival that of the USA.Really? And I thought all this time that the Israeli settlers were throwing rocks and wood chips at the Palestinians. That would explain a lot, thank you.
If Israel wanted peace, they would still be at their original UN created boundaries. They're not. Israel is a state created by the UN, which means it has more political right to exist than any other country on the globe, but the state of Israel has gotten bigger over the years. Now, I doubt that Egypt, Jordan, and Syria have given Israel more land. Sure, the Arab nations provoked Israel, but all Israel had to do was force out the Arab troops, not invade and take even more territory, which they know will be a provocation and a problem within the territory they take.
Hell yes they pushed beyond their own borders. The arab nations declared war on them and the Israelis won. In the process they took some more land. Are you aware that the Israelis took over the entire Sinai penninsula in addition to what they own now. You know why they don't own the Sinai penninsula anymore? Because they gave it back.....the Sinai penninsula is as big as there whole fucking country and they gave it back. "Turning the other cheek" is not a wise answer to military agression. If the Israelis had just given everything back then the Arab nations would walk all over them. You have to make your enemy feel loss in order to dissuade future agression.
The question of whether I would die for my country or not is not a simple yes no question.
I personally think that war is a viable method for change..however it would depend on the circumstances of war of whether I would die for my country.
If the United States goes to war with Iraq I would support it but I wouldnn't want to go fight. If drafted I would go but I would be pretty defensive in my actions.
However if the United States was fighting for survival against a fascist or communist state I would be on the front lines with a pair of M-16s in a second.
At 1/10/03 05:36 PM, Ted_Easton wrote: No, I wouldn't.
And i think you mean the stupid insult douche, not the term deustch which refers to something dutch.
Deustch is German for being German its not Dutch.
