Fiery_penguin_of_doom Posts

We're fucked. Not saying how but, we are totally fucked

The "Moveon.org" crowd will be the ones to call you that but, who cares about what they think. They are two degrees away from pants on head stupid. Good intentions but, extremely misguided in the execution of those intentions.

I agree but, you know those silly Christians "god made them like that for a reason and this is their trial". They think its a better idea to let someone lose their arms and legs then be struck blind deaf and dumb before considering a mercy killing.

I think mandatory service is a good idea. The only idea to know what the servicemen/women are going through is to have served yourself. Personally, I would hate military service (I'd get pissed for having the drill sergeant yell at me).

When a country is at war (I'll use the U.S. for example) people who disagree with it usually say horrible things like the fighting personnel are killing women in children in the night. Mandating military service (even if just for two years) would make these people ashamed of what they have said. They put their lives on the line for us (the people) and yet some of the very people they protect call them murderers, rapist,etc.

I just had a thought. Taking over the world is possible without military action. There are two routes you can take

1) Religious conversions: (like most of the radical Muslim groups have been doing in France and Britain). They pocket together and use their religious laws to effectively make a state within a state. In France there are certain "no go" zones or "hot beds" that the police don't enter due to the violence it would cause. Massive religious immigration into a country is a slow process but, eventually you turn an entire state over to the control of your religious group.

2) Economic: Corner the world energy market. Control the energy the world uses and you can hold the world hostage and at a whim you can shut down entire economies. Such as with oil, if lets say OPEC decided it would cut off all supply to the world (except the opec nations themselves) the entire world would collapse in a matter of days. Though super powers like China and America would immediately launch a military strike to secure resources but, they would only have shale to oil practices and that would be just enough to make the military run. The citizens would be helpless and the war effort would eventually crumble.

Compulsory military service? I thought only Israel was the one that did such a thing. What other countries mandate military service?

You seriously need to read more of my posts. I'm hardly the sympathetic type as you think I am. My comment was directed towards those idiots that think it needs to live just because it was born. The people who want it to live have a flaws logic and are truly cruel people.



You and I are in agreement. Just so you know, I don't value human life so never accuse me of being soft like that.

Yes, lets "pray". The only excuse to do nothing to help and still have the arrogance to say you were.

I'm with Purifier on this. Just kill it. There is no way that child will have a decent life. Considering its appearance people will treat as some sort of monster. People will avoid it and such. Letting it live is only forcing it to suffer though what will be a terrible life.

Shame on you people thinking it should live. In my opinion you are horrible people. :evil:

Yes, that's it exactly. Peace and war are cycles. You want ever lasting peace? Destroy all individual thought and replace it with a single consciousness. There can be no disagreements or conflicts when there is but one single entity doing all the thinking.

Hey, give me some slack. Lack of sleep and such.

To correct my fail:
Complete control over the world is possible but, impractical. Everyone from Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Hitler, etc have all tried and have failed with Napoleon and Alexander being the closest to ever succeeding in their individual times. Nowadays it would be impossible to militarily take over the world. No single country could manufacture the arms and supply the manpower to put on such an effort.

The only way I see that happening is something like the U.N. convincing the leaders of every nation to turn over its sovereignty to it. One of the "Goals" of the U.N. is to have every member nation disarm and only allow the U.N. to have a standing army (thus removing the ability of a country to resist taxes or whatever). So only giving more power to the U.N. will there ever be a possibility for one man to control the whole world.

There. I think I made up for my fail.

In every peace are sown the seeds of war and vice verse.

War an peace come about like the seasons. Trying to stop the cycle is like trying to stop summer from turning to fall or fall into winter.

Countries are competing for limited resources and competition leads to conflicts. Conflicts can not be avoided unless you wish to leave as a servant to the ambitious. War is simply more than population control its a law of nature like gravity. There will be conflicts and they will escalate not matter what they are about, resources, land, ideals,etc.

I think controlling the weather on earth is a bad idea. Other weather is a regulatory system just like the warming and cooling of the earth. We hardly know anything about the weather as a whole and I doubt that with our fraction of knowledge of the subject that it would be a wise idea to put someone (or worse a politician) in control of such a thing)

Same here. I have used the phrase for years and nobody has ever even made a comment about "that's British" or anything

Bluntly stating what we have already said. Good work. You have to be blunt and to the point to get a point across. +rep because I'm in a good mood.

Problem with that is, you can't do that. People will continue to make guns after you destroy the factories and everything. Some radical country like Iran or whatever will just make guns after the rest of the world is disarmed.

It would solve overpopulation problems in the future.

Leave that to the U.N. types and want to make everyone a "global citizen", remove a countries sovereignty to place a large governmental body as head of everything.

On the U.S. invading canada. The two countries have a relationship similar to college age roommates.

Canada: Dude, do you have any condoms? I'm going to tap some chicks ass.
USA: Sure dude, bottom of the sock drawer.
Canada: Thanks. Hey wanna drink Tequila with Mexico later?
USA: Awesome.

In America the voting public are the sheep. They go where ever the shepherd (media) tells them to go. The average American or as I prefer average idiot doesn't do any research on the candidate they are supporting. Most support by a party basis. "He's republican I'm a republican he's got my vote,etc". They don't check voting records, look into the groups they have supported or receive support from, or check the laws they have tried to pass or signed onto. Because of the ignorance they have about something so important is why I consider a majority of my fellow Americans to be idiots.

I agree. It also doesn't help when people will vote any idiot that promises something they like. "He said he would lower taxes, I'm voting for him". They are a fucking politician, its their job to lie to you.

That is how my "dream" will be. I'll have an apartment above or near my tavern. Similar to how Lewis & Oswald from The drew Carey show had an apartment above their favorite bar.

Left sided

logic vs feeling: Logic
detail vs big picture: Big Picture
facts vs imagination: Facts
language vs images: Language
past/present vs present/future: Past/present (I dwell on past mistakes)
math/science vs philosophy/religion: Math/science (I suck at math though)
comprehend vs meaning: Comprehend
knowing vs believe: Knowing
acknowledges vs appreciates: appreciates
order/pattern vs spatial perception: Order/pattern
object name vs function: Split
reality vs fantasy: reality
strategies vs possibilities: Strategies
practical vs impetious: practical
safe vs risk taking: split usually safe but, occasionally takes huge risks which is usually the head on approach.