WAR! What is it good for?
-
TestesInSac
- Posts: 451
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 8:04 pm
-
TestesInSac
- Posts: 451
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 8:04 pm
-
nymphgonebad
- Posts: 583
- Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 4:05 am
- Location: little forest
- Contact:
actually, that last quote was a thinly disguised version of my post to you.TestesInSac wrote: his penultimate post was pure defensiveness, not that any of us haven't been on occasion.
have you noticed he's also starting saying "y'all"? derivative motherfucker.
i see that you find this just as annoying as i do. if i didn't love him so much, i'd prolly be reading him the riot act. as for impulse control - mine is so flawed that it's simply not my place to judge others about it.Another problem I have with his attitude and style is the control factor. He seems only to want affirmation of what he's posting, but only addresses non-conforming posts in some form of defense, never in affirmation or building on an idea. He also doesn't answer questions, to wit, the one I posed regarding (intellectual) <b>heterogeneity</b>, which doesn't give his posts any positve interaction.
it's not the key factor - just one of many.I've had far more constructive interaction with you and Chickenfish, and you both largely agree with Chimpy, so I'm not inclined to think that political orientation is the key factor here.
i'd love to stay and chat but i gotta run. going to see radiohead at shoreline tonight and i need to drive schreck back to work.
-
TestesInSac
- Posts: 451
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 8:04 pm
-
Kinetic
-
nymphgonebad
- Posts: 583
- Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 4:05 am
- Location: little forest
- Contact:
i bet it's sexy looking - i'd love to see themKinetic wrote:Keeping with the thread, there is one good side to war. I got some awesome pix of the AC-135 Spectre at work from GWII. That plane is pretty scary to think about when you know what it can do.
it's a tremendous comfort to know that i'm not the only woman in the world who is turned on by anything that has an engine. i'm tempted to learn auto repair, but fear that i will distract my classmates to dangerous extremes. what can i tell, you? i get high off the fumes. to me, engine grease is more than a lubricant; it's an aphrodesiac.
-
nymphgonebad
- Posts: 583
- Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 4:05 am
- Location: little forest
- Contact:
personally, i prefer to microwave marshmellow peeps and keep my emoticons for my posts, but hey, that's just me.TestesInSac wrote:All kidding aside, Princess, sometimes I do think women should be running the world. And I'd include a smilie here if I didn't have so much fun watching them microwaved.
Take it up as a hobby. Machines aren't complicated, they just look that way. What they really are is a collection of simple, understandable subsystems. This is true for lawnmowers, space shuttles, and every machine in between. Cars are a good choice because you can have actual adventures with them when you're done building them. I like personal airplanes for the same reason, plus no special tools are required to diagnose and repair them. (And unlike cars they appreciate in value.)princess strych-9 wrote:it's a tremendous comfort to know that i'm not the only woman in the world who is turned on by anything that has an engine. i'm tempted to learn auto repair, but fear that i will distract my classmates to dangerous extremes. what can i tell, you? i get high off the fumes. to me, engine grease is more than a lubricant; it's an aphrodisiac.
You could take up car restoration/repair as a hobby--all you need is a driveway and some basic tools and a mentor. I recommend pre-1970s cars as all their systems are essential only to the purpose of propulsion--no pollution controls, luxury gewgaws, etc. (And an ass-kicking modern stereo is easy to install.)
Or you could just start hanging out in my airplane hangar. Next project: cylinder head repair on the 1947 John Deere M. But there's probably room for your muscle car or street rod of choice.
BTW, I corrected your spelling of aphrodisiac.
Right then,
Wasn't going to post anymore but a couple of dudes have posted me PMs that made me think well hell maybe I should post this to make myself clear
Whatever
A burner suggested to me that liberals sounding off about getting out of Iraq would never think about addressing the question of giving land back to American Indians or reddressing the balance of history by say giving back Australia to the Aborigines - I totally see what he is saying here about hypocrisy re: Aborigines / Native Americans / Africa, pretty much the whole shebang, but my response I think pretty much outlines my own problem with the confict in Iraq -
History is full of invasions and so on, yes I agree entirely. The difficulty though is that we can't change the past, only hopefully affect the future (I hope that doesn't sound trite), we can to some degree, as in the case in South Africa try to unite as a nation in coming to terms with that past though it is obviously extremely painful. This I think is the best we can hope for in terms of dealing with the past, reconciliation and an acceptance of guilt.
My main bag regarding the current conflict is that we had, I think at least, moved on as a society after WW2 with the solid formation of the UN Security Council and the notion of taking multilateral action being set firmly in place. Point being that it set a precedent for reaching a global consensus on when there was a need for military intervention in a sovereign state ie: in the case of genocide. Now whatever you think of the previous regime in Iraq the problem with what the US and UK have done by acting unilaterally is that they have set in motion an opposing precedent that sets global society backwards - ie: Israel could follow suit regarding Palestine, simply choose to declare war and feel thouroughly vindicated in that action by the fact that the US and UK have done precisely the same thing in Iraq. This notion of unilateral unchecked, some would say essentially illegal, military action against sovereign states is such an incredibly dangerous precedent to have set.
Now basically I feel the Republicans have stolen a great country and are in the process of putting it in extreme danger while destabilizing the rest of the world. I don't trust all the liberation rhetoric and much as I think it is fantastic to see Saddam lose power, waging war without the blessing of the UN security council sets the said precedent for unilateral action that I think will prove incredibly dangerous in the long term. A good example of the domino effect I am talking about is the way that Israel and Russia hijacked the use of the term 'War on terror' during the Afghan conflict to commit atrocities (and I am sorry but the shooting of children throwing stones is an atrocity) in Palestine and Chechnya. The war on Iraq will I fear prove to be a Pandora's Box that actually creates a world far more terrorized by extremists than it ever was previously. In no way will it, as is so often claimed, make the world a safer place.
The thing is that I am kinda just postulating a whole bunch of opinions on the eplaya that are anti war because personally I do believe the motivation for this war was and is proving itself to be utterly corrupt nonsense, also I would have liked to have seen some real debate generated, not just a load of vitriol and name calling. What a lot you cats don't realise is that I am just trying to present an opinion, I had hoped some may do the same, some have, Seaquesta for example may not agree but really engaged with the issue, others here are more interested in tit for tat bullshit.
I spent 12 years living with Iraqi refugees next door to me in London and they became close friends of mine and my family - They hated Saddam and had no contact with their relatives who they feared dead. Now, when GW1 happened they were really fucking happy and hoping to see the liberation of their people. When that failed to materialise and the rebels against Saddam's regime were abandoned by the West to suffer brutal retalliation costing thousands of lives they too felt utterly abandoned. On top of this they felt that this betrayal of trust had taken place because the motivation for getting involved in Kuwait was simply the West defending their oil interests. Once those interests had been secured the humanitarian aspect went out of the window.
So many People on this eplaya seem to think that this isn't the business of any European / Brit or whatever to hold any so - called Anti - American feeling (though these feelings certainly aren't Anti - American, my government is as heavily implicated in this mess) or to make anti - war statements. Badger's responses I find faintly ridiculous for example.
It is pointedly everyone's business to talk about this conflict as it will affect us all, all over the world for a long time to come. It has divided the UN security council and continues to do so - perhaps the one body that truly could have lead the way to a better future for us all. The problem is that American unilateral action (the policing of the planet) is seen by much of the rest of this planet as Imperialism.
thanx for all the support Chickenfish, Strych and Tardis -
Testes / formerly Casnimot, I have not answered your question still and I am afraid I have absolutely no intention of doing so - I simply did not appreciate all the childish name calling under your previous monicker and fail to see why I should pay you any creedence at all. The same goes for some others and I am sure you know who you are and will be pleased to hear it.
Wasn't going to post anymore but a couple of dudes have posted me PMs that made me think well hell maybe I should post this to make myself clear
Whatever
A burner suggested to me that liberals sounding off about getting out of Iraq would never think about addressing the question of giving land back to American Indians or reddressing the balance of history by say giving back Australia to the Aborigines - I totally see what he is saying here about hypocrisy re: Aborigines / Native Americans / Africa, pretty much the whole shebang, but my response I think pretty much outlines my own problem with the confict in Iraq -
History is full of invasions and so on, yes I agree entirely. The difficulty though is that we can't change the past, only hopefully affect the future (I hope that doesn't sound trite), we can to some degree, as in the case in South Africa try to unite as a nation in coming to terms with that past though it is obviously extremely painful. This I think is the best we can hope for in terms of dealing with the past, reconciliation and an acceptance of guilt.
My main bag regarding the current conflict is that we had, I think at least, moved on as a society after WW2 with the solid formation of the UN Security Council and the notion of taking multilateral action being set firmly in place. Point being that it set a precedent for reaching a global consensus on when there was a need for military intervention in a sovereign state ie: in the case of genocide. Now whatever you think of the previous regime in Iraq the problem with what the US and UK have done by acting unilaterally is that they have set in motion an opposing precedent that sets global society backwards - ie: Israel could follow suit regarding Palestine, simply choose to declare war and feel thouroughly vindicated in that action by the fact that the US and UK have done precisely the same thing in Iraq. This notion of unilateral unchecked, some would say essentially illegal, military action against sovereign states is such an incredibly dangerous precedent to have set.
Now basically I feel the Republicans have stolen a great country and are in the process of putting it in extreme danger while destabilizing the rest of the world. I don't trust all the liberation rhetoric and much as I think it is fantastic to see Saddam lose power, waging war without the blessing of the UN security council sets the said precedent for unilateral action that I think will prove incredibly dangerous in the long term. A good example of the domino effect I am talking about is the way that Israel and Russia hijacked the use of the term 'War on terror' during the Afghan conflict to commit atrocities (and I am sorry but the shooting of children throwing stones is an atrocity) in Palestine and Chechnya. The war on Iraq will I fear prove to be a Pandora's Box that actually creates a world far more terrorized by extremists than it ever was previously. In no way will it, as is so often claimed, make the world a safer place.
The thing is that I am kinda just postulating a whole bunch of opinions on the eplaya that are anti war because personally I do believe the motivation for this war was and is proving itself to be utterly corrupt nonsense, also I would have liked to have seen some real debate generated, not just a load of vitriol and name calling. What a lot you cats don't realise is that I am just trying to present an opinion, I had hoped some may do the same, some have, Seaquesta for example may not agree but really engaged with the issue, others here are more interested in tit for tat bullshit.
I spent 12 years living with Iraqi refugees next door to me in London and they became close friends of mine and my family - They hated Saddam and had no contact with their relatives who they feared dead. Now, when GW1 happened they were really fucking happy and hoping to see the liberation of their people. When that failed to materialise and the rebels against Saddam's regime were abandoned by the West to suffer brutal retalliation costing thousands of lives they too felt utterly abandoned. On top of this they felt that this betrayal of trust had taken place because the motivation for getting involved in Kuwait was simply the West defending their oil interests. Once those interests had been secured the humanitarian aspect went out of the window.
So many People on this eplaya seem to think that this isn't the business of any European / Brit or whatever to hold any so - called Anti - American feeling (though these feelings certainly aren't Anti - American, my government is as heavily implicated in this mess) or to make anti - war statements. Badger's responses I find faintly ridiculous for example.
It is pointedly everyone's business to talk about this conflict as it will affect us all, all over the world for a long time to come. It has divided the UN security council and continues to do so - perhaps the one body that truly could have lead the way to a better future for us all. The problem is that American unilateral action (the policing of the planet) is seen by much of the rest of this planet as Imperialism.
thanx for all the support Chickenfish, Strych and Tardis -
Testes / formerly Casnimot, I have not answered your question still and I am afraid I have absolutely no intention of doing so - I simply did not appreciate all the childish name calling under your previous monicker and fail to see why I should pay you any creedence at all. The same goes for some others and I am sure you know who you are and will be pleased to hear it.
Last edited by Chimp on Wed Sep 24, 2003 8:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
JezebelinHell
- Posts: 762
- Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 3:29 am
- Location: Reno
In keeping with the thread drift, Princess Strych-9, I am an Aries girl who fixes up classic American muscle cars for fun (just sold two Camaros I've had sitting around for a while), and looks forward to easter every year just so I can blow peeps up to the size of real chickens. Will you marry me?
"The future is a whore, she promises herself to everyone."
--Poe
--Poe
I read this
and this
When France wanders into sovereign nations and takes care of its interests, where are the cries of 'unilateralism'?
There are elements of hypocracy here that never get answered.
And answers are important, in any debate. The give and take, the clash of ideas, without answers to questions--or refutations, there is no debate, merely posturing.
The Israelis always could do this. It is a mark of incredible restraint that they have not--even while their people die for the criminal act of bus-riding. And I agree, that soldiers shooting at people/kids throwing rocks at them is horrible--but is it wrong?
Have you ever stood under a hail of stones to be able to give an experiential answer? Or gotten hit with a thrown rock or brick? When you're being hurt, you defend yourself. Throwing rocks a a person armed with a gun is a good way to get yourself killed.
To be very clear about what I said above, why is 'unilaterality' only a problem when it's the US's actions? (and, regardless if how you feel about the other counries involved, their mere presense renders this action multi-lateral)
There are facts involved here that are routinely run roughshod over because to address them wreaks havoc with the anti-war point. People who support the war effort seem ringed in a mantra of 'but what about's--endlessly pointing out holes or the good or scientific refutations.
The 'sides' need to listen, and understand each other--a concept that is difficult when one side is convinced that the other actually LIKES war.
.My main bag regarding the current conflict is that we had, I think at least, moved on as a society after WW2 with the solid formation of the UN Security Council and the notion of taking multilateral action being set firmly in place. Point being that it set a precedent for reaching a global consensus on when there was a need for military intervention in a sovereign state ie: in the case of genocide
and this
And I watched you lay it at republican feet.....are you not aware that the war in Kosovo was unsupported by the UNSC? That it was initiated by the previous administration without UN sanction? That it's aftermath is still ongoing and has never been called a 'quagmire'?This notion of unilateral unchecked, some would say essentially illegal, military action against sovereign states is such an incredibly dangerous precedent to have set
When France wanders into sovereign nations and takes care of its interests, where are the cries of 'unilateralism'?
There are elements of hypocracy here that never get answered.
And answers are important, in any debate. The give and take, the clash of ideas, without answers to questions--or refutations, there is no debate, merely posturing.
.Now whatever you think of the previous regime in Iraq the problem with what the US and UK have done by acting unilaterally is that they have set in motion an opposing precedent that sets global society backwards - ie: Israel could follow suit regarding Palestine, simply choose to declare war and feel thouroughly vindicated in that action by the fact that the US and UK have done precisely the same thing in Iraq.
The Israelis always could do this. It is a mark of incredible restraint that they have not--even while their people die for the criminal act of bus-riding. And I agree, that soldiers shooting at people/kids throwing rocks at them is horrible--but is it wrong?
Have you ever stood under a hail of stones to be able to give an experiential answer? Or gotten hit with a thrown rock or brick? When you're being hurt, you defend yourself. Throwing rocks a a person armed with a gun is a good way to get yourself killed.
.I don't trust all the liberation rhetoric and much as I think it is fantastic to see Saddam lose power, waging war without the blessing of the UN security council sets the said precedent for unilateral action that I think will prove incredibly dangerous in the long term
To be very clear about what I said above, why is 'unilaterality' only a problem when it's the US's actions? (and, regardless if how you feel about the other counries involved, their mere presense renders this action multi-lateral)
The world is already safer. There are millions of Iraqi children who will never feel the weight of the Ba'athist lash. There has not been another attack on the US.In no way will it, as is so often claimed, make the world a safer place.
But you do seem to react to couiterpoints in a negative way. You don't refute, you don't argue. You cut and paste and get annoyed.The thing is that I am kinda just postulating a whole bunch of opinions on the eplaya that are anti war because personally I do believe the motivation for this war was and is proving itself to be utterly corrupt nonsense, also I would have liked to have seen some real debate generated, not just a load of vitriol and name calling.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by this--debate requires a back-and-forth--which is one meaning of tit-for-tat.others here are more interested in tit for tat bullshit.
...and listen. The problem with this 'debate' is that there is really only one side debating. And, I'm sorry to say, Chimp. it's not yours.It is pointedly everyone's business to talk
There are facts involved here that are routinely run roughshod over because to address them wreaks havoc with the anti-war point. People who support the war effort seem ringed in a mantra of 'but what about's--endlessly pointing out holes or the good or scientific refutations.
The 'sides' need to listen, and understand each other--a concept that is difficult when one side is convinced that the other actually LIKES war.
-
nymphgonebad
- Posts: 583
- Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 4:05 am
- Location: little forest
- Contact:
JezebelinHell wrote:In keeping with the thread drift, Princess Strych-9, I am an Aries girl who fixes up classic American muscle cars for fun (just sold two Camaros I've had sitting around for a while), and looks forward to easter every year just so I can blow peeps up to the size of real chickens. Will you marry me?
well, that depends on a few things:
a) if you'll help me build a '68 el camino with a glasspack muffler, a cherry paint job, a crome front grill with teeth and help me install a flame thrower on the hood.
b) if you agree to build it with me and a hand-picked team of psycho playa mechanics on monster garage.
c) after we finish up in la, we come back here and start building a robot to compete with on robot wars
in return, i promise to love, honor, respect, cherish and make love to you for as long as we both shall live.
as i'm sure you're well aware, peeps aint just for easter any more!
i realize that april is a big month for us:
april 1 - saint stupid's day parade, fool's games
april 6 - my birthday
april 20 - 4/20 games
just to name a few. pesach and easter. we may just have to sustain a month long party to fit it all in. i've never stayed up for a whole month before. i hope you know that we're going to have to head up to hahq to load up on meth for everyone. whaddya, think will one drum barrel be enough, or should be get two? i have to warn you that there's a likelyhood that we'll be sold into white slavery. not to worry, however. we have an entire army of moist glueless burners to stage a rescue of monumental proportions. moist clueless burners need not apply.
btw - where do you want to get married? i'm partial to vegas, but that has quite a lot to do with the nickle slots.
oh, and what's your favorite peep?
-
TestesInSac
- Posts: 451
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 8:04 pm
-
nymphgonebad
- Posts: 583
- Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 4:05 am
- Location: little forest
- Contact:
-
TestesInSac
- Posts: 451
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 8:04 pm
Erm, Princess, look carefully at Stuart Scanlons post, he's the one who made the Camaro crack. I just lauged at it.
And kidding aside, I had a g/f from El Sobrante who had a Camaro. Her dad, who knows quite a bit about American made cars, said it was pretty special, 'cause she got 150k miles out of the thing before trading it in. Went through a few alternators, though.
And kidding aside, I had a g/f from El Sobrante who had a Camaro. Her dad, who knows quite a bit about American made cars, said it was pretty special, 'cause she got 150k miles out of the thing before trading it in. Went through a few alternators, though.
I am my own sock puppet.
Lurker
To quote you - "I agree, that soldiers shooting at people/kids throwing rocks at them is horrible--but is it wrong?"
YES OF COURSE IT IS FUCKING WRONG I SUGGEST YOU AQUAINT YOURSELF WITH AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OR ANY NOTION OF EMPATHY
"There are millions of Iraqi children who will never feel the weight of the Ba'athist lash"
JUST AS WELL WHAT WITH THOSE SANCTIONS, NOT MANY LEFT, STILL WE HAVE THAT KID WITH NO FUCKING ARMS TO PARADE ABOUT ON TV
"When you're being hurt, you defend yourself. Throwing rocks a a person armed with a gun is a good way to get yourself killed.
"
HAHAHA YOU FUCKING SUCK YEAH I DON'T HAVE A GUN BUT IF I DID AND A KID THREW A FUCKING ROCK AT ME I WOULD SHOOT HIM, DEAD...
YEAH FUCKING RIGHT...
BULLSHIT YOU...FUCKIN' CUNT. THAT GUY IN THE TANK YOU ARE THROWING ROCKS AT JUST KILLED YOUR SISTER AND YOUR DAD AND BLEW UP YOUR FUCKING HOME
that is truly it now I am fucking sick of this
" a a person" WTF is that?
To quote you - "I agree, that soldiers shooting at people/kids throwing rocks at them is horrible--but is it wrong?"
YES OF COURSE IT IS FUCKING WRONG I SUGGEST YOU AQUAINT YOURSELF WITH AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OR ANY NOTION OF EMPATHY
"There are millions of Iraqi children who will never feel the weight of the Ba'athist lash"
JUST AS WELL WHAT WITH THOSE SANCTIONS, NOT MANY LEFT, STILL WE HAVE THAT KID WITH NO FUCKING ARMS TO PARADE ABOUT ON TV
"When you're being hurt, you defend yourself. Throwing rocks a a person armed with a gun is a good way to get yourself killed.
"
HAHAHA YOU FUCKING SUCK YEAH I DON'T HAVE A GUN BUT IF I DID AND A KID THREW A FUCKING ROCK AT ME I WOULD SHOOT HIM, DEAD...
YEAH FUCKING RIGHT...
BULLSHIT YOU...FUCKIN' CUNT. THAT GUY IN THE TANK YOU ARE THROWING ROCKS AT JUST KILLED YOUR SISTER AND YOUR DAD AND BLEW UP YOUR FUCKING HOME
that is truly it now I am fucking sick of this
" a a person" WTF is that?
-
nymphgonebad
- Posts: 583
- Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 4:05 am
- Location: little forest
- Contact:
-
nymphgonebad
- Posts: 583
- Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 4:05 am
- Location: little forest
- Contact:
-
Kinetic
Whew, that last post was a little intense...back to the Camaros for a sec...
Having owned 3 of them and with a total of 11 in the family at one time or another, there were a lot of times they were on blocks. They can be total pieces of shit. And alternators got so bad I can rebuild a standard GM alternator in 4:19 seconds. They sucked.
But if you look at them as a blank canvas and build a decent drivetrain, excellent braking and suspension upgrades, stomping import ass and almost anything else was a fun and daily occurance....
I loved having a 3rd Gen Firebird with a Gale Banks twin turbo small block under the hood. No NOS, just a little boost and you felt you needed a pilots license....that car flat moved! No speed limiters and I built it to go whoa as well as it went go. Any fool can drive fast...but to keep it under control is a different story. I built it to fly...and until the turbo bearings failed I ran it every day. I still have the engine even now.
I miss those days. I don't miss making contributions to the law library and teddy bear funds from all those tickets though.
Now back to the flaming Amnesty International/ suffering Iraqi comments.....
Having owned 3 of them and with a total of 11 in the family at one time or another, there were a lot of times they were on blocks. They can be total pieces of shit. And alternators got so bad I can rebuild a standard GM alternator in 4:19 seconds. They sucked.
But if you look at them as a blank canvas and build a decent drivetrain, excellent braking and suspension upgrades, stomping import ass and almost anything else was a fun and daily occurance....
I loved having a 3rd Gen Firebird with a Gale Banks twin turbo small block under the hood. No NOS, just a little boost and you felt you needed a pilots license....that car flat moved! No speed limiters and I built it to go whoa as well as it went go. Any fool can drive fast...but to keep it under control is a different story. I built it to fly...and until the turbo bearings failed I ran it every day. I still have the engine even now.
I miss those days. I don't miss making contributions to the law library and teddy bear funds from all those tickets though.
Now back to the flaming Amnesty International/ suffering Iraqi comments.....
-
nymphgonebad
- Posts: 583
- Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 4:05 am
- Location: little forest
- Contact:
don't encourage behavior you want to irradicate by giving people permission to do more of the same...Kinetic wrote:Whew, that last post was a little intense...back to the Camaros for a sec...
Having owned 3 of them and with a total of 11 in the family at one time or another, there were a lot of times they were on blocks. They can be total pieces of shit. And alternators got so bad I can rebuild a standard GM alternator in 4:19 seconds. They sucked.
But if you look at them as a blank canvas and build a decent drivetrain, excellent braking and suspension upgrades, stomping import ass and almost anything else was a fun and daily occurance....
I loved having a 3rd Gen Firebird with a Gale Banks twin turbo small block under the hood. No NOS, just a little boost and you felt you needed a pilots license....that car flat moved! No speed limiters and I built it to go whoa as well as it went go. Any fool can drive fast...but to keep it under control is a different story. I built it to fly...and until the turbo bearings failed I ran it every day. I still have the engine even now.
I miss those days. I don't miss making contributions to the law library and teddy bear funds from all those tickets though.
Now back to the flaming Amnesty International/ suffering Iraqi comments.....
in the interests of not having to listen to one more goddamned word about all this:
i'm sure everyone will agree that we're all standing around like a bunch of rabid tweakers, kicking the shit of a a dead horse, looking to see if we can recessutate it by using force. i'm sure everyone will also agree that this is the most specious waste of time ever. i know we all enjoy necrophelia (well, some of us do) but fucking a dead animal is gross and unsanitary. the unwashed masses smell like a bed of roses by comparison.
personally, i prefer to do violence to the living. they don't smell as bad, they put up a good fight and they're screams for mercy just put a smile on my face. so back off - and take your louieville slugger with you. that poor creature didn't do anything to you. and even if it did, you already killed it.
so my suggestion is this - there are so many really good wars to talk about, so why are we stuck in this century? i'm gonna get medieval on your asses(because i look so good in chainmail) and direct you back to a time when wars weren't financed by nestle and coca cola.....
the holy roman empire was neither holy, nor roman, nor an empire.
discuss amongst yourselves.
-
TestesInSac
- Posts: 451
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 8:04 pm
-
TestesInSac
- Posts: 451
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 8:04 pm