Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 6/9/05 10:59 AM, punisher19848 wrote: Does this sound at all familiar: they can't do it, the world too to big to rule, their rivals are too powerful, etc...? It should: this is what was spoken of Rome in it's early stages! Eventually, they took the entire civilized world and crushed all opposition within their territory! Keep this in mind before you say "never" again.

You cant really apply the Roman empire to world domination today. What with the civilised world being what it is nations would be able to band together unlike back then. the cost of life would be horiffic if you even tried it and i dont see why youd want to outside of some misguided and out-dated imperialisitc policy.

At 6/9/05 10:59 AM, punisher19848 wrote:
Does this sound at all familiar: they can't do it, the world too to big to rule, their rivals are too powerful, etc...? It should: this is what was spoken of Rome in it's early stages! Eventually, they took the entire civilized world and crushed all opposition within their territory! Keep this in mind before you say "never" again.

Who overreached themselves, collapsed and caused many of their former holdings to plummet into a new and terrible Dark Age. Good model, genius.

yup,capn_g and punisher19848 are both right, but there is a good change it is going to happen

At 6/10/05 05:59 AM, capn_g wrote: Who overreached themselves, collapsed and caused many of their former holdings to plummet into a new and terrible Dark Age. Good model, genius.

Shhh, this is selevtive history, we only read and intrepret the parts we like. The rest is just, ehhhh, didnt happen or doesnt apply.

Should we? I don't think that's the case, in a sense, America has already started to force its beliefs on the rest of the world in subtle fashion. Well, it hasn't done much good, seeing as the majority of the World either hates or distrusts America. Personally, China and America should split the world and govern each's respective halves. China and America would make good World leaders, in my humble opinion. the thing is, is that China doesn't extend beyond it's own borders, so that would never be the case, well that is, unless they decided to disregard their culture of over 2000+ years. America, hell, we ain't kiddin no body, we take over Iraq, with a large pool of oil underneath...its only a matter of time before we take Iran's oil. In some ways, im ashamed to be an American, and in others Im proud to be an American...it's all a matter of what the case is...I suppose...

Too late.

We have been trying to do that if you haven't noticed. We are just very subtle about it.

At 6/8/05 03:41 PM, Tri-Nitro-Toluene wrote:

At 6/7/05 06:38 PM, FAB0L0US wrote: People say a lot of things. I think he is gonna stay. So far, nothing Blair has said or done gives us any reason to think this.

He has said that he will not be the leader of labour at thew next election but with all the pressure that is on him to leave it wouldn't be surprising if he did leave after Britains temr as being head of the EU is over.

I think that the message behind this last election was not "Vote Blair, Get Bush!" like it was in 2001, but "Vote Blair, Get Brown!" I agree with you though, Blair will leave after Britain looses it's stay as EU president, but how soon after depends on how successful G8 and the term as president is.

He will stay.

God I hope not.

Nor do I, as he promised lots and gave ASBOs.

At 6/18/05 09:17 AM, Rukaii wrote: Personally, China and America should split the world and govern each's respective halves. China and America would make good World leaders, in my humble opinion.

Personally, I think that's a crock of s**t as neither the USA or China allows Free Speech, both have terrible standards of living, USA's is better in places but not everywhere. And of course you get WWIII that way as well. Europe would never submit to either one's controls, Africa will unite and rise up and of course the good old Middle East will bomb the crap out of the two sides. Now if you suggested that say... I was to rule the earth then I would glady agree with you. But if the world is ever going to be largely owned by one side, it is either that the entire Earth is united willingly under one mutual banner or not at all.
And yes, you opinion is some humble it could be Amish. Also it is as insignificant as say... a speck of dust in the vacuum of space.

At 6/7/05 03:32 PM, spamishfli wrote: World domination by conquering lands is stupid and wrong.

Correct

World globalization by conquering economies is smart and effective.

Ok asshole put down the vibrator and get REAL. Why do you want the elite brotherhood which you arent part of, to run everything and turn you into a slave?

America taking over the world would start world war 3, besides why should america take it over? America can't be trusted with it's own country, never mind the world.

At 6/19/05 05:18 PM, DuskSkull wrote: Personally, I think that's a crock of s**t as neither the USA or China allows Free Speech, both have terrible standards of living, USA's is better in places but not everywhere.

USA bad standard of living and no free speech? OK, buddy. Proof on both accounts. Cause Ive heard some dumb attacks against the US, but those two may take the cake.

In america you either have it great or have it crap.
<img src=http://www.fis.unipr.it/~alabiso/pagpers/fotonewyork/bronx.jpg>

At 6/19/05 09:09 PM, joe_the_magic_midget wrote: In america you either have it great or have it crap.

Yeah, cause everyone knows, in America, you are either a millionaire or you live in the ghetto. Laff.

When you get out from under your rock you can talk again.

O.k it's 'laugh' not laff, and america has one of the greatest social gaps in the world (thats the difference between rich and poor) so what i said IS correct. You may have my rock I no longer need it.

Hell no. The US wouldn't be able to manage the whole world, and there would be countless resistance. This is just a plain no.

i think the us is already trying to control the world

At 6/19/05 09:19 PM, joe_the_magic_midget wrote: O.k it's 'laugh' not laff, and america has one of the greatest social gaps in the world (thats the difference between rich and poor) so what i said IS correct. You may have my rock I no longer need it.

OK, you make a claim back it up.

We also have a huge middle class, low inflation, low unemployment, growing economy. And our standard of living here is tons better than elsewhere, so bad standards here are laughable elsewhere.

well.....a democratic country like us would not even think of world domination. the goth kids in my school are always talking about it... but those are the only crazy ass failures who would even think of copying Hitler.

At 6/19/05 09:04 PM, FAB0L0US wrote:

At 6/19/05 05:18 PM, DuskSkull wrote: Personally, I think that's a crock of s**t as neither the USA or China allows Free Speech, both have terrible standards of living, USA's is better in places but not everywhere.

USA bad standard of living and no free speech? OK, buddy. Proof on both accounts. Cause Ive heard some dumb attacks against the US, but those two may take the cake.

Put it this way, America had a worse free speech rating than Eastern European countries, this includes the Balkans ok?, on the UN free speech roster. So much for your precious Land of the Free concept. Also, consider the fact that many other 1st world countries allow people to openly criticise on the government on the street, the amount of political satire, the fact that democracy is stronger, the fact they have Parliment or some equivelant where everything is open to debate rather than it is like in Congress, why do you think George Galloway, when in front of the US senate court, was able to stun dry old senators into a silence with his way of openly talking and criticising when these senators are used to question, answer, question, answer, wrong answer, kill him. Teh Edn of part 1. PS you can't go out into the street and criticse Bush, do that and you get taken away.

I apologise, I meant quality of life, not standard of living. 10 million are illiterate for a start, on top of that, many people live in near enough poverty. Why do you think there are all those High Rise tower blocks with shitty appartments with barely the basics? The high(-er than most 1st world countries) drug dependancy rates, the crime levels exceed anywhere else on the planet, the gun crime, the long working hours for minimum wage and of course, the GNP per head thing.
Are these enough good reasons for me to criticise America?

At 6/19/05 09:45 PM, SgtBash_RF3000 wrote: well.....a democratic country like us would not even think of world domination. the goth kids in my school are always talking about it... but those are the only crazy ass failures who would even think of copying Hitler.

America isn't a democracy, it's a Republic. Republics are different, usually it involves a system that allow Proportional Representation (the thing that let Hitler in), doesn't allow free debate in government and so on.
ALso, technically you should not call the USA America, k? It is just the USA, not Canada and the whole of South America as well.

At 6/7/05 02:27 PM, Barin wrote: Should the U.S. attempt world domination? It might stop any future wars from happening, but many cultures would be lost.

Um... no... not really. The U.S. should DEFINATLY not attempt world domination.

1. No leader would ever consider it... unless he was nuts...
2. We wouldn't be able to sustain everything (all the people, ect..).
3. Records in history show no leader/nation ever conquering the whole world. Alexander the Great was the closest ever to world domination.

I think Canada shoudl attemot world domination.

At 6/20/05 05:42 PM, DuskSkull wrote: Put it this way, America had a worse free speech rating than Eastern European countries, this includes the Balkans ok?,

It would nice to see PROOF. Even without proof, this is way overblown, Freedom of Speech is everywhere, just look at all these blogs popping out allowing anyone with a computer to read and comment on people's opinions, and they can create their own blog to post their opinions

on the UN free speech roster.

You mean the same United Nations which has Libya and Sudan on their Human Rights Consul? (something along those lines) Something less corrupt and full of bullshit please, even then, a link would be nice

Also, consider the fact that many other 1st world countries allow people to openly criticise on the government on the street,

The hell, you been living under a rock? Hundreds of thousands of protesters filled the streets just a months ago at the RNC in New York, there seem to be anti war protests everywhere in the US.....you don't call this criticism?

the amount of political satire,

Everything from Jay Leno to the Daily Show

the fact they have Parliment or some equivelant where everything is open to debate rather than it is like in Congress,

It's called a Senate here, hell, nothing has been done there because of debating.

why do you think George Galloway, when in front of the US senate court, was able to stun dry old senators into a silence with his way of openly talking and criticising

George Galloway, the guy who blames other people because he was a part of Oil for Food Scandal. I think they were shocked because he was trying to use a bunch of bullshit as a defence.

PS you can't go out into the street and criticse Bush, do that and you get taken away.

Name me one story, one god damn link where this protestor wasn't breaking any law or blocking traffic, and he was dragged away by the cops, you can't

At 6/9/05 05:24 PM, fenrus1989 wrote:
all the civilized world. China and the rest of the asian countries were centurises advanced than europe was but they worn't conquered, does that make them civilized. How about the Maya or the Inca of North America they were neber conquered, were they advanced.

The Maya came into existence on the other side of the world and near the end of the Roman Empire's days. Also, China as a civilization didn't come into existence until the 500s A.D. Of course there were various tribes in the area that did have some city-states up and going before then, but they were few and far in between. Only a few centuries of brutal warfare did they unite to form the civilization we came to know as China.

At 6/10/05 05:40 AM, LedgendaryLukus wrote:
You cant really apply the Roman empire to world domination today. What with the civilised world being what it is nations would be able to band together unlike back then. the cost of life would be horiffic if you even tried it and i dont see why youd want to outside of some misguided and out-dated imperialisitc policy.

So? A number of nations banded to stop Rome too (needless to say they failed). Although the scale is different, the overall principal is the same. Most of the world's nations are weak and could easily be annexed if only our govt. was gutsier.

Also, I know that the cost in manpower would be fairly high. But if greater power is attained in exchage for them, I see no reason not to risk it. Keep in mind the Roman view of human life: expendable. I don't think we need to go that far, but we need a philosophy close to their to get this moving.

At 6/10/05 05:59 AM, capn_g wrote:
Who overreached themselves, collapsed and caused many of their former holdings to plummet into a new and terrible Dark Age. Good model, genius.

The mistake that Rome made that led to its downfall wasn't overreaching their grasp like many claim it was. The mistake that killed them was allowing foriegners to ascend to the throne of Ceaser: once they got the throne, they taxed the hell out of the Empire and sent it to their homeland for their own treasuries. With Rome bankrupt, they couldn't fight the Barbarian hordes any longer. The rest is history.

If we avoid that mistake, I think we can pull it off to and make it last even longer!

At 6/20/05 09:58 PM, JusticeofSarcasm wrote: I think Canada shoudl attemot world domination.

You have issues. Canada can't even take the state of Montana on in a head-to-head battle, so just scratch even the thought of Canadian world domination.

At 6/21/05 05:40 PM, punisher19848 wrote: You have issues. Canada can't even take the state of Montana on in a head-to-head battle, so just scratch even the thought of Canadian world domination.

Any proof? Or just more opinion? Yeah, just opinion. So be quiet.

At 6/21/05 05:37 PM, punisher19848 wrote: The mistake that Rome made that led to its downfall wasn't overreaching their grasp like many claim it was. The mistake that killed them was allowing foriegners to ascend to the throne of Ceaser: once they got the throne, they taxed the hell out of the Empire and sent it to their homeland for their own treasuries. With Rome bankrupt, they couldn't fight the Barbarian hordes any longer. The rest is history.

Any proof on this? Cause I think Im gonna have to stick with the problem was overreaching and corruption and oppulence of the Emperors and Rome. And the reason taxes DID rise is because of their overextension of their Empire.

And heres a link of Roman Emperors. All were Citzens. And foreigners taxing and sending money away? Pfft. Proof?

At 6/21/05 05:32 PM, punisher19848 wrote: So? A number of nations banded to stop Rome too (needless to say they failed). Although the scale is different, the overall principal is the same. Most of the world's nations are weak and could easily be annexed if only our govt. was gutsier.

What? I guess you dont see the big difference between then and today. Planes. Trains. Trucks. Radios. Communication and transporation change EVERYTHING. If nations banded together to stop America and they decided to start bombing us as we were taking over all important Mexico, the cost would be horrific. And I would love any proof that any large nations decided to actually try to band against Rome.

And what would this gain us? Tacos? More workers? What the hell would more land give us? Nothing but death and hardship.

Also, I know that the cost in manpower would be fairly high. But if greater power is attained in exchage for them, I see no reason not to risk it. Keep in mind the Roman view of human life: expendable. I don't think we need to go that far, but we need a philosophy close to their to get this moving.

Ok, then. Stop talking and join the Marines. Obviously you respect no one elses lives so you should do the doing as much as you do the talking. If you have no reason not to want to risk it, JOIN THE MARINES!!! They really want you.

At 6/21/05 05:40 PM, punisher19848 wrote: The usual

Normally I would complain, but I'm just going to be glad you're not silencedintruder.

If any country or person were to gain control of earth, I don't think it would be through military means, since that would only lead up to nuclear holocaust.