Everyone knows how Rome ended its life. We should be afraid of it.America is the new Rome. We are conquering the world, peice by peice, through economic, sociological, propagandist or, when all else fails, military means. Like Rome, we have so much momentum behind us, so much leverage over the rest of the global economy that we will only be stopped by our own decay. Like a man of immeasurable mass who runs faster and faster, unable to be stopped by anything less than his loss of balance.
Yes I said that the US actually gives less than other countries if the statistics I ve seen are correct and if I was able to interpret the statistics you showed me right. If there are countries that give more than the US: So what? You dont have to be the first ones at everything I m not expecting you to give most of all.whittsend wrote:
You clearly implied that the US actually gives less than other countries...further implying that they do not give enough (falling short of EU targets). I am not backing up Orion's statements (I'm sure other countries give plenty), but I'm not going to watch someone imply (or say) Americans are cheap when it comes to charitable giving, when it is quite clearly not true.
But like I said before I do not intend to criticize the USA for this all I wanted to show is that Orion s statements arent right.
I dont want to say they are cheap when it comes to charity stuff but they may not be the ones that give more than anyone else. Thats all!
I certainly wasn't trying to imply that Iraq was evidence of an American conspiracy to rule the world. In fact, I made it a point not to make any point about the Iraqi war at all. In order to understand the American expansion, please look beyond CNN and the BBC, even NPR, and look to our expansion efforts in the smaller asiatic nations, such as thailand and sri lanka, and to extent, even india and pakistan, not to mention practically every country in south america with either oil or arable land or both, and it will be clear to even the naked eye that america, at least the unofficial america, certain doesnt stop at mexico or the coasts. If canada had more arable land, you can be sure that we would expanding and attempting to dominate their economy as well. It is not a coincidence, nor should it be pigeon-holed as some conspiracy, that the majority of south american nations balance their own currency against the dollar, even though america is not by any means the majority importer or exporter of most of their national products (oil, produce, textiles, etc). To say that America is not being conducted, in the international arena, as an empire is fanciful, if not farcical. Let's not even to begin to discuss our economic imbedding in Africa, where we are establishing "lesser-of-two-evils'-style government by backing the more pro-american warlord in places like liberia, kenya, congo, sudan, chad, somalia...the list goes on.
In a certain light, this emperial approach almost has a beneificent aura to it, as if by several decades of global hardship a worldwide community, democratically run at the nation level and dictated at the international level might arise, and peace would be beaten into the globe via a forced network of economic interdependence. In another light, it is simply conquering and raising flags, but using pens and policies instead of bullets. or at least the bullets of the local nationals instead of our own. In the end though, American self-interest drives this cart, and that self-interest I'll back, as I am an American. However, ask yourself, are the French not driven by French self-interest? Or the Germans by German self-interest, etc? And if so, at what point does it become abuse of on nation by another? Where does the scale tip from liberation to oppression, or from partnership to explotation? Should a nation let itself be crippled for the satisfaction of another's imagined or self-defined and self-serving moral code?
As long as men live to possess so much as the clothes and their back and seperate themselves from the rest of the global populace by things like borders, color, religion, etc, there will always, always, always be war. Men are compelled to follow that voice saying "Someone has to be on top, why not you?" We do this to each other at work, in our social circles, even within our own families.
I think I've forgotten the point I was making. Apologies.
In a certain light, this emperial approach almost has a beneificent aura to it, as if by several decades of global hardship a worldwide community, democratically run at the nation level and dictated at the international level might arise, and peace would be beaten into the globe via a forced network of economic interdependence. In another light, it is simply conquering and raising flags, but using pens and policies instead of bullets. or at least the bullets of the local nationals instead of our own. In the end though, American self-interest drives this cart, and that self-interest I'll back, as I am an American. However, ask yourself, are the French not driven by French self-interest? Or the Germans by German self-interest, etc? And if so, at what point does it become abuse of on nation by another? Where does the scale tip from liberation to oppression, or from partnership to explotation? Should a nation let itself be crippled for the satisfaction of another's imagined or self-defined and self-serving moral code?
As long as men live to possess so much as the clothes and their back and seperate themselves from the rest of the global populace by things like borders, color, religion, etc, there will always, always, always be war. Men are compelled to follow that voice saying "Someone has to be on top, why not you?" We do this to each other at work, in our social circles, even within our own families.
I think I've forgotten the point I was making. Apologies.
This picture just needs a place in this forum topic.
Oh, and keeping with the current argument at the moment, America gives the least of all the OECD countries in charitable aid, (money,) per capita, but gives the most in military aid. I suppose that's not entirely selfish.
Oh, and keeping with the current argument at the moment, America gives the least of all the OECD countries in charitable aid, (money,) per capita, but gives the most in military aid. I suppose that's not entirely selfish.
Last edited by Tyferra (2006-01-26 12:51:53)
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Ah, another anti-globalizationist. Great.
welcometotheempire:
1) Globalization (an economic phenomenon) is pretty far from Roman style imperialism.
2) The US is HARDLY unique in it's economic exploitation of other countries. In fact, if I were to list everything in your house which came from another country, you would be amazed at how little of it is American. If you want to weep for a nation exploited by foreign countries with dollar signs dancing in their heads, weep for the US. Our balance of trade is tragic.
3) If you think Foreign Direct Investment is a uniquely American trend, you would be wrong (again). If you don't see other countries in the places you mention, it's because you have come to a conclusion you won't budge from, and stopped looking. US FDI falls in line with the US portion of World GDP: about 20% of total.
Wake up. Just because the US is large and invests overseas does not make it an imperialist conquerer...at least no more than any other developed nation does in proportion to its GDP.
Tyferra:
Wrong. As I have already posted twice, the US actually gives substantially more than any other country. It simply isn't all given through the government (which is fine, as goverment aid is less effective than private aid). Does any one actually read the thread before posting?
http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelate … tributions
welcometotheempire:
1) Globalization (an economic phenomenon) is pretty far from Roman style imperialism.
2) The US is HARDLY unique in it's economic exploitation of other countries. In fact, if I were to list everything in your house which came from another country, you would be amazed at how little of it is American. If you want to weep for a nation exploited by foreign countries with dollar signs dancing in their heads, weep for the US. Our balance of trade is tragic.
3) If you think Foreign Direct Investment is a uniquely American trend, you would be wrong (again). If you don't see other countries in the places you mention, it's because you have come to a conclusion you won't budge from, and stopped looking. US FDI falls in line with the US portion of World GDP: about 20% of total.
Wake up. Just because the US is large and invests overseas does not make it an imperialist conquerer...at least no more than any other developed nation does in proportion to its GDP.
Tyferra:
Wrong. As I have already posted twice, the US actually gives substantially more than any other country. It simply isn't all given through the government (which is fine, as goverment aid is less effective than private aid). Does any one actually read the thread before posting?
http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelate … tributions
Last edited by whittsend (2006-01-26 13:09:29)
not all americans are idiots. just people like cwkatl. he's a fucking dickwad ignorant redneck dumbass. and he's dying to go fuck his sister. some of us (me and other people i know) actually have an IQ unlike cwkatl. i support any form of government over capitalism, besides ones with dictators and kings.
Kekekeke, I dont want to get into this Bush Pro America political agenda setting. I love that people who have never fought for this country or even actually did anything for this country except be born here and be so proud. Do NOT get me wrong, I love the United States and proud to have served this country and the community with in it. But, to come onto a forum for a GAME that places one country versus another as the main goal and then be all AMERICA ROOLZ DOOD is kind of funny. You want to impress me with your American pride, go join the military, Peace Corps, or even do something like a Community out reach and help this country. Every country has its problems, but lets just try to clean up our own.
GOD did bless America, but just for those people who associate G.W. Bush with the U.S. we ALL didnt vote for him or any other president. The truth is we barely have a choice of 4 or 5 people sometimes who were all raised the same way, from wealth, Ivy league schools, and have no real ideal of the American Struggle.
Anyways, some of you political n00bs need to keep practicing this game, or stop playing all together and get a real lesson in US policies and the American way.
God Blessed Humans, but America is just a little lucky. History shows all empires fall, Im just glad to be alive while this one is on top of its game. Right or Wrong.
See you on the battlefields in real life or on this game.
GOD did bless America, but just for those people who associate G.W. Bush with the U.S. we ALL didnt vote for him or any other president. The truth is we barely have a choice of 4 or 5 people sometimes who were all raised the same way, from wealth, Ivy league schools, and have no real ideal of the American Struggle.
Anyways, some of you political n00bs need to keep practicing this game, or stop playing all together and get a real lesson in US policies and the American way.
God Blessed Humans, but America is just a little lucky. History shows all empires fall, Im just glad to be alive while this one is on top of its game. Right or Wrong.
See you on the battlefields in real life or on this game.
@whittsend
About the link you posted: Where exactly does it say there that the US is giving more than ANY OTHER country?
All I found is:
"While Adelman admits that “there are no complete figures for international private giving” she still says that Americans are “clearly the most generous on earth in public — but especially in private — giving”. Hence these numbers and claims may be taken with caution, but even then, these are high numbers."
But later on it says:
"Adelman, further above noted that the US is “clearly the most generous on earth in public — but especially in private — giving”, yet the CGD suggests otherwise, saying that the US does not close the gap with most other rich countries; “The US gives 13c/day/person in government aid....American’s private giving—another 5c/day—is high by international standards but does not close the gap with most other rich countries. Norway gives $1.02/day in public aid and 24c/day in private aid” per person."
--->since Norway seems to give more than the US I cant understand why you are saying:"the US actually gives substantially more than any other country". Did I get sth. wrong? Or do you mean they are in actually giving more because they are more people. I usually interpret "giving more" as the money that is given/capita since anything else would be pretty dumb.
About the link you posted: Where exactly does it say there that the US is giving more than ANY OTHER country?
All I found is:
"While Adelman admits that “there are no complete figures for international private giving” she still says that Americans are “clearly the most generous on earth in public — but especially in private — giving”. Hence these numbers and claims may be taken with caution, but even then, these are high numbers."
But later on it says:
"Adelman, further above noted that the US is “clearly the most generous on earth in public — but especially in private — giving”, yet the CGD suggests otherwise, saying that the US does not close the gap with most other rich countries; “The US gives 13c/day/person in government aid....American’s private giving—another 5c/day—is high by international standards but does not close the gap with most other rich countries. Norway gives $1.02/day in public aid and 24c/day in private aid” per person."
--->since Norway seems to give more than the US I cant understand why you are saying:"the US actually gives substantially more than any other country". Did I get sth. wrong? Or do you mean they are in actually giving more because they are more people. I usually interpret "giving more" as the money that is given/capita since anything else would be pretty dumb.
Last edited by ArMaG3dD0n (2006-01-26 14:23:39)
whittsend, you're obviously well-informed and not a subscriber to MTV news as your primary media outlet. What is confusing to me is how you can miss the point I am trying to make.
First of all, I am not anti-globalization. If it is the natural progression of the evolution of my country to globalize and embed itself as a decision-maker in the nations that it is investing the capital in to establish or (let's be honest) re-establish, then so be it. I remind you again: I am the guy on the news with the machine gun. I am what Noam Chomsky unfairly refers to as "the fist of the empire." However, I sleep soundly every night with a clear concience, because I CHOOSE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MANIFESTATION OF THIS NATIONAL DESTINY.
I am at a loss to understand your distaste for the Rome analogy, so I can't continue to use it. In fact, I would venture to say that there simply is no precedent for our nation's conduct in the world theater. To say that others don't follow our example, and well enough to profit from it, would be false. It would also be false to say that anyone does it as efficiently as we do.
Do you contend that America is not attempting to establish global hegemony through economic leverage and through overt and covert military intervetions? If so, explain. I am truly enjoying this exchange and would like your point of view. Also, do you think that America is trying to establish or re-establish an economic status quo, like the pre-WWI isolationist economic strategy, or do you believe that they are trying, like many other countries, to establish a position of leverage that, depending on the regime at the time, may be used "unfairly" in the global community?
Lastly, I appreciate your barb about the products in my house and their nation of origin, but I ask you in relation to point I was making, how much of it came from say, Chile or Nicauragua?
First of all, I am not anti-globalization. If it is the natural progression of the evolution of my country to globalize and embed itself as a decision-maker in the nations that it is investing the capital in to establish or (let's be honest) re-establish, then so be it. I remind you again: I am the guy on the news with the machine gun. I am what Noam Chomsky unfairly refers to as "the fist of the empire." However, I sleep soundly every night with a clear concience, because I CHOOSE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MANIFESTATION OF THIS NATIONAL DESTINY.
I am at a loss to understand your distaste for the Rome analogy, so I can't continue to use it. In fact, I would venture to say that there simply is no precedent for our nation's conduct in the world theater. To say that others don't follow our example, and well enough to profit from it, would be false. It would also be false to say that anyone does it as efficiently as we do.
Do you contend that America is not attempting to establish global hegemony through economic leverage and through overt and covert military intervetions? If so, explain. I am truly enjoying this exchange and would like your point of view. Also, do you think that America is trying to establish or re-establish an economic status quo, like the pre-WWI isolationist economic strategy, or do you believe that they are trying, like many other countries, to establish a position of leverage that, depending on the regime at the time, may be used "unfairly" in the global community?
Lastly, I appreciate your barb about the products in my house and their nation of origin, but I ask you in relation to point I was making, how much of it came from say, Chile or Nicauragua?
If Bill Clinton had never gotten his dick sucked (or got cought) the world would be a better place.
People forget all Clinton did for the US. All they remember is his got his rocks off. Now these churchy-rednecks think that they can say and do what ever they want because they elected a good old boy from Texas. I don't agree with Bush on anything and if they(stupid people) elect another Bush or anyone from this current Admin., my wife and i are moving to Canada. I'll take the cold over fascist bigots any day.
People forget all Clinton did for the US. All they remember is his got his rocks off. Now these churchy-rednecks think that they can say and do what ever they want because they elected a good old boy from Texas. I don't agree with Bush on anything and if they(stupid people) elect another Bush or anyone from this current Admin., my wife and i are moving to Canada. I'll take the cold over fascist bigots any day.
Cullen, I just visited Toronto it was a nice city. But, moving because of the president in power is too extreme for me. As long as I have a job, roof, warm food, and warm body next to me in the sack, I am ok anywhere. I am not getting shot at either, nor do other countries push their agenda on us. Not that I agree on the way we push ours on others. Either way, Bush is an ASS, but has some descent characteristics, but a shitty domestic leader. I would rather see him in the boxing business. Or some other ultra Testosterone oriented position. But with all that said, let me reiterate Bush is an ASS and does not represent the US even if a little more than half voted for him. Where are these half that voted for him. It is funny I have only actually met a few people that actually voted for him, or at least admit to it. I work in 3 states also. TEXAS< FLORIDA< and MASS? Whatever, I wish this topic would some how make me a better BF2 player, but it doesnt.
Way to win people over to your point of view genius.cullenjackcullen wrote:
If Bill Clinton had never gotten his dick sucked (or got cought) the world would be a better place.
People forget all Clinton did for the US. All they remember is his got his rocks off. Now these churchy-rednecks think that they can say and do what ever they want because they elected a good old boy from Texas. I don't agree with Bush on anything and if they(stupid people) elect another Bush or anyone from this current Admin., my wife and i are moving to Canada. I'll take the cold over fascist bigots any day.
Have fun in Canada. Say hi to Alec Baldwin for me. Oh wait, he's still here too. You aren't moving anywhere, except maybe to another trailer.
One dude where i work voted for Bush. I ask him if he goes to church? Or ownes a company? He said no to both. Then why did he do it? No one will ever know. That is the only guy i Know that voted for Bush.
Have you ever left the tri state area? You might like the rest of the world. (even though they wont like you.)Erkut.hv wrote:
Way to win people over to your point of view genius.
Have fun in Canada. Say hi to Alec Baldwin for me. Oh wait, he's still here too. You aren't moving anywhere, except maybe to another trailer.
I'm not taking sides on the issue one way or another (actually I do, I am for legalizing most drugs. But that isn't germaine to my point, and I certainly don't want to argue about the drug issue now). All I'm saying is that you are incorrect when you say your country's policies do not affect other countries. That is, in fact, entirely wrong.LaidBackNinja wrote:
DON'T even get me started on drugs policies.whittsend wrote:
Not so. Several of your neighbors have a problem with your drugs policy.
Just consider this:
Our neighbours are pissed because we 'somewhat allow marhiuana'
But every-fucking-body drinks alcohol like it's fucking candy.
Now YOU tell ME how mariuhana is any worse? It's this fucking hypocrisy that makes me sick.
Everybody lay off the alcohol, THEN we can talk about marhiuana. Just remember that alcohol is a HARD-DRUG compared to those little joints you can carry around here. I know this is kinda unrelated to the whole America thing, but seriously. STOP fucking WHINING about some weed when ALCOHOL is messing everything the fuck up.
Not saying marhiuana is good for you, only a hell of a lot less worse then alcohol.
Several other countries argue that the policy of the Netherlands is increasing crime in neighboring countries (there is some evidence to support this), and that it is arrogant and selfish of the Netherlands not to change their drugs policy to fix it. In short: The Netherlands are refusing to be a good community player on this issue, in the opinion of many EU states. Clearly you disagree (which I would say is your right), but there are more of them...are you sure you are right? Does any of this sound familiar?
You certainly did rush to your country's defense though, didn't you! That's cute. Next time you attack American policy, remember that you just reacted EXACTLY the same way, and for more or less the same reasons, for which you criticize America(ns).
Just think if China never invented gun powder (or later on no one did too) and the world we live in today was still steel and bow then all the americans woulda been slaughtered
Because an american with out a gun is pretty much a cowardly terrorist with out c4 so they would just run away cause the romans woulda chop em up specially if Japan came in samurai style.
Please no we surrender have a free mcdonalds meal on me (stab)
Because an american with out a gun is pretty much a cowardly terrorist with out c4 so they would just run away cause the romans woulda chop em up specially if Japan came in samurai style.
Please no we surrender have a free mcdonalds meal on me (stab)
Well then I'd just have to use my club to beat your worthless head in instead.Berserk_Vampire wrote:
Just think if China never invented gun powder (or later on no one did too) and the world we live in today was still steel and bow then all the americans woulda been slaughtered
Because an american with out a gun is pretty much a cowardly terrorist with out c4 so they would just run away cause the romans woulda chop em up specially if Japan came in samurai style.
Please no we surrender have a free mcdonalds meal on me (stab)
Please spell "American" with a capital A please, ok thanks, now back to enjoying my super greasy McDonalds double cheeseburger, mmm, so greasy. Wow all this grease all over, I'm gonna slurp it all up. I love America, mmmmm.
Last edited by AirForce2076 (2006-01-26 17:10:27)
I dont think so with out guns you guys are useless cowards if it was close combat weapons with swords Japan or Rome would slaughter all of you and when you talk about america it doesnt deserve to be with a captial A because its small time just like insects.AirForce2076 wrote:
Well then I'd just have to use my club to beat your worthless head in instead.Berserk_Vampire wrote:
Just think if China never invented gun powder (or later on no one did too) and the world we live in today was still steel and bow then all the americans woulda been slaughtered
Because an american with out a gun is pretty much a cowardly terrorist with out c4 so they would just run away cause the romans woulda chop em up specially if Japan came in samurai style.
Please no we surrender have a free mcdonalds meal on me (stab)
Please spell "American" with a capital A please, ok thanks, now back to enjoying my super greasy McDonalds double cheeseburger, mmm, so greasy. Wow all this grease all over, I'm gonna slurp it all up. I love America, mmmmm.
Nor should it, it does not make my argument more or less credible.whittsend wrote:
Truly sorry for your loss, but you post it as if it were a rebuttal. It doesn't change anything I said.Stealth42o wrote:
32 year old american, son of a dead soldier.
I do respect your views, the great thing about this country is we CAN have this conversation, and we can agree to disagree.
I do love my counrty, I am just disapointed in it.
With all the resources we have to bear, we could do so much more. Just frusterating sometimes.
Thank you for serving, we all apreciate it!
Lol, @ this idiot. Yeah sure let's all take a magical portal back in time and let's see what happens to Americans. My god you fucking idiot, Americans migrated from other countries, they didn't come from America. Please let's meet somewhere face to face and I'll give you the pleasure to pound your face flat. I suppose too many Hollywood movies have got you by the ass. America really does brainwash you idiots don't they.Please Berserk_Fag, you are our bitch and always will be our bitch, so please, don't talk anymore or we will constitute an new amendment by not allowing dumbass canadians to talk on message boards anymore. Now go back to your coffin you fucking freak.Berserk_Vampire wrote:
I dont think so with out guns you guys are useless cowards if it was close combat weapons with swords Japan or Rome would slaughter all of you and when you talk about america it doesnt deserve to be with a captial A because its small time just like insects.AirForce2076 wrote:
Well then I'd just have to use my club to beat your worthless head in instead.Berserk_Vampire wrote:
Just think if China never invented gun powder (or later on no one did too) and the world we live in today was still steel and bow then all the americans woulda been slaughtered
Because an american with out a gun is pretty much a cowardly terrorist with out c4 so they would just run away cause the romans woulda chop em up specially if Japan came in samurai style.
Please no we surrender have a free mcdonalds meal on me (stab)
Please spell "American" with a capital A please, ok thanks, now back to enjoying my super greasy McDonalds double cheeseburger, mmm, so greasy. Wow all this grease all over, I'm gonna slurp it all up. I love America, mmmmm.
My words speak the truth thats why you and the rest of the americans get so upset its not you're fault you cant help you're 4 year old mentality problems.
Maybe you should downgrade to a happy meal like the insects you are / eat
Maybe you should downgrade to a happy meal like the insects you are / eat
atlvolunteer, I was talking to jarhedch, and would like him to present HIS sources.
More, irrefutable, proof of warming:
For an overview, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
Or if you want proof NOW:
Proof that the warming trend is recent and due to the revolution:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Inst … Record.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:2000 … arison.png
Proof that CO2 levels are rising and have an effect on Global temperatures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Co2- … e-plot.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Carb … 0kyr-2.png (sorry if you've seen before)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Carb … Flux-2.png
More proof that ALL Greenhouse gases are on the rise
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Majo … trends.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Glob … y_Type.png
Proof that the ozone layer is thinning (and that I'm gonna need more sunscreen)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ozon … ecline.png
Remember what I said about temps? That a 5C degree increase in global temperatures was enough to trigger a mass extinction?
Well,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Glob … ctions.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Glob … ns_Map.jpg
Proof that the ice caps are melting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Arct … ckness.gif
Need More?
--
Ok, Beserk_Vampire, that's just strange...
More, irrefutable, proof of warming:
For an overview, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
Or if you want proof NOW:
Proof that the warming trend is recent and due to the revolution:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Inst … Record.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:2000 … arison.png
Proof that CO2 levels are rising and have an effect on Global temperatures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Co2- … e-plot.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Carb … 0kyr-2.png (sorry if you've seen before)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Carb … Flux-2.png
More proof that ALL Greenhouse gases are on the rise
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Majo … trends.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Glob … y_Type.png
Proof that the ozone layer is thinning (and that I'm gonna need more sunscreen)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ozon … ecline.png
Remember what I said about temps? That a 5C degree increase in global temperatures was enough to trigger a mass extinction?
Well,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Glob … ctions.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Glob … ns_Map.jpg
Proof that the ice caps are melting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Arct … ckness.gif
Need More?
--
Ok, Beserk_Vampire, that's just strange...
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Yeah sure, your words speak the truth, you sir, have the mentality of a 4 year old. Yes I can get as upset as I want to when some dumbass canadian like you starts talking shit about my country, because we are going to be Number 1 forever, bitch. Case closed.Berserk_Vampire wrote:
My words speak the truth thats why you and the rest of the americans get so upset its not you're fault you cant help you're 4 year old mentality problems.
Maybe you should downgrade to a happy meal like the insects you are / eat
Ok, this is getting dumb...AirForce2076 wrote:
Yeah sure, your words speak the truth, you sir, have the mentality of a 4 year old. Yes I can get as upset as I want to when some dumbass canadian like you starts talking shit about my country, because we are going to be Number 1 forever, bitch. Case closed.Berserk_Vampire wrote:
My words speak the truth thats why you and the rest of the americans get so upset its not you're fault you cant help you're 4 year old mentality problems.
Maybe you should downgrade to a happy meal like the insects you are / eat
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
2 words for u american haters:
FUCK YOU!
FUCK YOU!