Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 11/30/07 02:08 AM, Imperator wrote:

I have the feeling if we pulled out tomorrow there's be more countries saying "Good riddens" than anything else.

I wasn't referring to Iraq, but places like South Korea and Japan. If we were to pull out of South Korea I wouldn't be surprised if Kim Jong Lee would build up his forces and invade the south.

At 11/29/07 11:06 PM, Humbucker740 wrote:

At 11/29/07 10:15 PM, LordJaric wrote:

I can't find anything with NATO involvement in Afghanistan, care to explain

Read the damn quote. "collective DEFENCE, in RESPONSE, to an ATTACK, from an EXTERNAL PARTY"

Las time I checked, NATO was helping us, that is as far as I know.

No, the point for nations to look at things going on in the world not just in their own nations.

Thats not really a counter point. That may be true but you're in denial if you don't believe that we're expected to do all the work.

I pretty sure other nation contribute, but we do more considering we are a world superpower. Like one man said, "With great power, comes a great responsibility."

I would have to say Trema from X-2

At 11/30/07 12:34 AM, slowz wrote: Why is everyone talking about foamy now :|

Because of me.

Infinite-one I can understand Foamy just fine, besides the Alvin the Chipmunk voice seems to make it even funnier.

At 11/30/07 12:11 AM, Infinite-one wrote: Foamy is for the weak minded, as anyone here can explain.

Foamy speaks the truth, but says it in a way that people can laugh their asses off.

At 11/30/07 12:07 AM, fuSEEk wrote: The politically-correct term is African American, they've been through a lot.

Fuck political correctness, it was their ansestors that went through a lot, not them.

Drugs are a crutch for reality, to escape the pains of life. You're the dumbass for not using them.

Drugs are for the weak minded, as this guy can explain

At 11/30/07 12:06 AM, Infinite-one wrote:

At 11/30/07 12:03 AM, LordJaric wrote:

At 11/30/07 12:01 AM, slowz wrote: Not to be racist but she was black.

It is not racist to call someone black when they are indeed black.

And as I always say, drugs are for dumbasses

That all depends on what drugs they are.

The illegal ones.

At 11/30/07 12:01 AM, slowz wrote: Not to be racist but she was black.

It is not racist to call someone black when they are indeed black.

And as I always say, drugs are for dumbasses

They are cute.

This guy can help you.

At 11/29/07 11:06 PM, shaunofthefuzz7 wrote: wha? I'm not a troll, I just really don't know what yall are talking about.

Ok when you are looking at topics on a page of to the side of them they will have a face or sometimes not a face, if you see a angry face hold your cursor over it and wait.

At 11/29/07 11:18 PM, LordJaric wrote: If it does happen, I'm going to make a bunch of fat santas with the a word bubble saying "ho ho ho", and "this is not ment to be offensive" written somewere on it, and hang them all over my city. That would get a good laugh.

I'm not jokeing ether, I give you my word I'll do it.

At 11/29/07 11:12 PM, homor wrote: they suggested that, but no one is going to be fucking stupid enough to go that far.

....atleast i hope not.

If it does happen, I'm going to make a bunch of fat santas with the a word bubble saying "ho ho ho", and "this is not ment to be offensive" written somewere on it, and hang them all over my city. That would get a good laugh.

This video is perfect for this thread.

At 11/29/07 10:39 PM, Serbian-terrorist wrote:

At 11/29/07 10:27 PM, 2good2b4goten wrote: This is my first visit to Newgrounds.

...?

That's what I was thinking.

At 11/29/07 09:43 PM, Humbucker740 wrote: I meant Afghanistan.

Wikipedia:
"the organization established a system of collective defence whereby its member states agree to mutual defence in response to an attack by any external party."

I can't find anything with NATO involvement in Afghanistan, care to explain

Obviously you miss the point behind the UN.

You mean that they expect us to throw our entire military force behind whatever they want and not help us at all?

No, the point for nations to look at things going on in the world not just in their own nations.

What do you think Congress' reason was?

Tell me.

I thought it was obvious that we wanted to keep our power and not associate ourselves with Russia.

Which was pretty arrogant.

By the way I think if we do pull out of NATO and the UN, we will loose any respect we still have with the world.

At 11/29/07 09:17 PM, Humbucker740 wrote: All they do is pull us into other affairs which costs us more and more money, and more and more men. And look how they helped us in Iraq!

Thats what happens in all alliances and Iraq doesn't fall under NATO for obvious reasons.

We don't NEED their support. For anything. At all. "All they do is pull us into other affairs which costs us more and more money."

Obviously you miss the point behind the UN.

What do you think Congress' reason was?

Tell me.

China had denied the Kitty Hawk carrier group to enter the port of Hong Kong for thanksgiving. As the article states China overturned the decision but it was to late the carrier group was all ready heading back to it's Japanese base. What I heard on CNN today was that the reason China denied the group was because we support Tibet and Taiwan freedom, that says alot now doesn't it.

Now it seems it is just getting worse. China had performed an exsersise with 2 of it's fleets, that was a test to blockade Taiwan.

What do you think about this.

At 11/29/07 07:52 PM, Lindione wrote: Of course, if humans exist by the time of the big crunch we will probably have figured out a way to save ourselves by then

Unlikly, because the entire universe will collapse on it's self, where are humans going to live.

At 11/29/07 07:28 PM, morefngdbs wrote:

At 11/29/07 07:23 PM, LordJaric wrote: Well the theory is that there will be a Big Crunsh.

;
And there's the theory that we'll keep expanding & there will be a cosmic rip.
But I'm liking my idea that goes with Einstein's Theory of relativity, where nothing can be created or destroyed, matter , energy everything can only be changed.

So instead of a crush or a Rip, there's just going to be a change ;)

I think I may of been misunderstood, what I ment to say was the Big Crunch

defenation of big crunch

1. A model of the future of the universe in which it stops expanding and ultimately collapses on itself due to the force of gravity of its constituent parts.
2. The point at which such a collapse occurs.

Well the theory is that there will be a Big Crunsh.

At 11/29/07 06:09 PM, Humbucker740 wrote:

At 11/29/07 05:56 PM, LordJaric wrote:

wants us to pull out of NATO

Protect American business.

All nations need allys, even us.

wants us to pull out of UN

Which we do not have the support of,

Just because of the Iraq war, once that is over we can rebuild our influence in it.

and, we were not originally in (league of nations).

I believe Congress had a reason (can't remember what it was) for not wanting to be in it.

:As a world power we probably shouldn't be in it anyway.

As a world power we should be in in.

wants to end war on drugs

Costs us much more than the benefit we get for it. MUCH much more.

And if we don't have it, more drugs will get into our country.

At 11/29/07 05:51 PM, Imperator wrote: You know what? You assailing him makes my support of Ron that much stronger.....

He is still an idiot,

wants us to pull out of NATO
wants us to pull out of UN
wants to end war on drugs

More then enough for me not to waist by first vote on him

Shut up watch this and (somewhat related to your topic) and leave the fat people alone.

At 11/28/07 05:59 PM, Thesuit11 wrote:

At 11/28/07 05:56 PM, LordJaric wrote:

At 11/28/07 05:40 PM, kingkillah wrote: Leet

And how does it mean that.

I think we have a winner!

Fucking dumbass.

Well sorry for not thinking about puting the numbers into letters

geez

At 11/28/07 05:40 PM, kingkillah wrote: Leet

And how does it mean that.

At 11/28/07 05:32 PM, Euroc wrote:

At 11/28/07 05:29 PM, LordJaric wrote: I'm a strong supporter of gay rights (no I'm not gay), even though I'm christen I don't believe god hates them or disapproves of them.

Wait... are we talking about homosexual rights or the right to say fag?

Gay rights = homosexual rights

At 9/4/05 06:52 PM, LilGoosemcSHNICK wrote: Denying gays there rights is just plain wrong its almost as bad as blacks were treated in the 50s and 60s.

Such a said fact that our nation (land of the free) is repeating it's dark history

I'm a strong supporter of gay rights (no I'm not gay), even though I'm christen I don't believe god hates them or disapproves of them.

I've only seen 2 reasons why people don't want gays to have equal rights

1. Religion

This goes against the constitution so it doesn't matter.

2. They don't like it.

So what, I hate racist, but I don't see any rights being taken away from them.

So really there is no good reason to deny them their rights.

At 11/27/07 09:53 PM, TonyTostieno wrote: Step right up and shoot political correctness, completely free as long as you have a satisfied look on your face once you've shot the bastard.

I going to do it, and these basterds can't stop me.